The years of discontent, 2022/23

[vikingTON]

10 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

Seriously, what's your point here?

Surely the question of what has happened to pay, can only properly be considered in real terms. No?

Of course they've risen in absolute terms, but that hardly merits observing.

Erm of course it merits observing, as other public sector salaries have in fact been frozen in absolute terms at various times since the financial crash and austerity drive in the UK.

That's the context for all public sector pay awards. Nearly 15 years of dismal economic stagnation, with no substantial increase in productivity to afford ever and ever increasing spending on public sector salaries. 

Just now, Loonytoons said:

Public sector workers should be happy getting less and less in real terms seems to be the vibe.

Many public workers are suffering from pay freezes, non-replacement of staff, increased workload and now in fact compulsory redundancy across the country. And one of the reasons for that is the enormous financial pressure on local authorities and other public sector organisations caused by giving large pay rises to teachers. 

That teachers cannot see the absolute nick of the crumbling social infrastructure around them without mewling about 'mah real terms wage!' and how much more they'll pay in tax after their latest rise says a lot about them quite frankly. 

[DeeTillEhDeh]

28 minutes ago, virginton said:

 

 

Yep. 

My pay rise isn't actually much because I'll pay some of it back in tax is utterly laughable stuff. 

It is if you are a promoted member of staff - I pay 51.2% if my salary in taxes and NI - if you are an unpromoted member of staff it will be around 20% lower.

That's because of tax allowances and tax rate bands.

[DeeTillEhDeh]

28 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

I didn't mention tax, so why you're quoting me here, I don't know.

He quoted me then for some reason hauled you in as if to discredit you.

[Monkey Tennis]

3 minutes ago, DeeTillEhDeh said:

It is if you are a promoted member of staff - I pay 51.2% if my salary in taxes and NI - if you are an unpromoted member of staff it will be around 20% lower.

That's because of tax allowances and tax rate bands.

In fairness, being in that bracket isn't the strongest argument for the necessity of a substantial pay rise.

[Monkey Tennis]

11 minutes ago, virginton said:

Erm of course it merits observing, as other public sector salaries have in fact been frozen in absolute terms at various times since the financial crash and austerity drive in the UK.

That's the context for all public sector pay awards. Nearly 15 years of dismal economic stagnation, with no substantial increase in productivity to afford ever and ever increasing spending on public sector salaries. 

Many public workers are suffering from pay freezes, non-replacement of staff, increased workload and now in fact compulsory redundancy across the country. And one of the reasons for that is the enormous financial pressure on local authorities and other public sector organisations caused by giving large pay rises to teachers. 

That teachers cannot see the absolute nick of the crumbling social infrastructure around them without mewling about 'mah real terms wage!' and how much more they'll pay in tax after their latest rise says a lot about them quite frankly. 

Teachers absolutely see the nick of the crumbling social infrastructure and it impacts their working life daily.

Non replacement of staff, alongside increased workload are definite features of the job.

[vikingTON]

2 minutes ago, DeeTillEhDeh said:

It is if you are a promoted member of staff - I pay 51.2% if my salary in taxes and NI - if you are an unpromoted member of staff it will be around 20% lower.

That's because of tax allowances and tax rate bands.

What's your point? You (as a profession) can't voice mealy-mouthed platitudes about workers' rights and solidarity every single time you go on strike, only then gurn about the redistributive principle of any even remotely progressive society as soon as you have to fork out for it following yet another pay rise. 

[DeeTillEhDeh]

8 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

In fairness, being in that bracket isn't the strongest argument for the necessity of a substantial pay rise.

I just worked out what it would be for me personally.

I didn't actually use it as an argument for higher pay.

My own view is that this is as good as settlement for all staff that you will get.

Edited March 5, 2023 by DeeTillEhDeh

[DeeTillEhDeh]

1 hour ago, virginton said:

What's your point? You (as a profession) can't voice mealy-mouthed platitudes about workers' rights and solidarity every single time you go on strike, only then gurn about the redistributive principle of any even remotely progressive society as soon as you have to fork out for it following yet another pay rise. 

The point being that headline figures aren't what any employee (and that's in any sector) and every employee gets. 

I've no issue with paying tax - but if I'm looking at a pay deal in terms if my personal circumstances then it’s always going to be in terms of my net income.

As for the comment regards "mealy-mouthed platitudes" - I think you'll struggie to find any comment from me in the curent dispute regards that.  I can't speak for colleagues but for me this strike was clearly not for any altruistic reasons.  

As I said above that wasn't an argument for an even higher award - I think in the circumstances our award is extremely generous - even after taxes the lowest rise is more than  pre-tax headline figures in other sectors.

Edited March 5, 2023 by DeeTillEhDeh

[BFTD]

10 hours ago, Gaz said:

Then perhaps those jobs should get their unions fighting for them. It's not a race to the bottom.

Some jobs have people working 18 hours a day in sweatshops. It's not an excuse to settle for poor pay / conditions in other jobs.

You sure about that, chief? Employers and government ministers clearly disagree, and it's worrying how many members of the public seem less concerned with improving their own pay and conditions than being annoyed that other workers aren't being brought down to their level.

[Aufc]

Surely almost all normal salaried jobs have some degree of unpaid overtime? It’s all about give and take. I work about an extra 10 hours a week which I don’t get paid for but when I need to go for an appointment then there is no issue. Same if I want to f**k off at 2pm on a Friday as I have a weekend away then it’s never questioned. 
 

Personally it felt like the teachers/union became greedy as f**k towards the end. However, I am glad it looks like it’s getting sorted and can get some normality back for the kids. 

[Jambomo]

21 minutes ago, Aufc said:

Surely almost all normal salaried jobs have some degree of unpaid overtime? It’s all about give and take. I work about an extra 10 hours a week which I don’t get paid for but when I need to go for an appointment then there is no issue. Same if I want to f**k off at 2pm on a Friday as I have a weekend away then it’s never questioned. 
 

Personally it felt like the teachers/union became greedy as f**k towards the end. However, I am glad it looks like it’s getting sorted and can get some normality back for the kids. 

No? Maybe it’s just luck but I’ve never worked in any job that required unpaid overtime and I don’t think I know of anyone who does overtime that’s unpaid. Either you do your correct hours or if you do extra you get paid for it. 

Edited March 6, 2023 by Jambomo

[GTG_03]

8 hours ago, BFTD said:

You sure about that, chief? Employers and government ministers clearly disagree, and it's worrying how many members of the public seem less concerned with improving their own pay and conditions than being annoyed that other workers aren't being brought down to their level.

I absolutely agree with this. The amount of oil and gas workers whose opinion is "I've had a paycut so why the f*ck should they get a payrise" is depressing. Seems to be creeping in more and more.

36 minutes ago, Aufc said:

Surely almost all normal salaried jobs have some degree of unpaid overtime? It’s all about give and take. I work about an extra 10 hours a week which I don’t get paid for but when I need to go for an appointment then there is no issue. Same if I want to f**k off at 2pm on a Friday as I have a weekend away then it’s never questioned. 
 

Personally it felt like the teachers/union became greedy as f**k towards the end. However, I am glad it looks like it’s getting sorted and can get some normality back for the kids. 

Why on earth would anyone work for free? I'm not surprised your employer has no issue when you want to go away for a couple of hours for an appointment every now and again when you're giving them an extra day every week for nothing. I value myself and my skills too much to work for nothing.

[hk blues]

18 minutes ago, GTG_03 said:

Why on earth would anyone work for free? I'm not surprised your employer has no issue when you want to go away for a couple of hours for an appointment every now and again when you're giving them an extra day every week for nothing. I value myself and my skills too much to work for nothing.

It may well be the case that the salary being offered reflects the expectation that some level of additional hours is required. 

Nobody is working for nothing.

[GTG_03]

34 minutes ago, hk blues said:

It may well be the case that the salary being offered reflects the expectation that some level of additional hours is required. 

Nobody is working for nothing.

You are working for nothing if you are doing additional hours outwith your contract hours for no additional money.

There was a guy in our office who used to come in early and stay late most days, sending emails at 7pm sometimes. When the downturn came, he was told by the manager that he was one of the ones being let go; he argued his case that he worked hard and had put loads of extra hours in. The managers response was that they hadn't asked him to do that.

There is no grey area, if you are 'expected' to work additional hours then you get paid them. it really is that simple. If you're giving an employer hours for free without them asking just to look good then you're a fanny.

[scottsdad]

1 hour ago, Aufc said:

Surely almost all normal salaried jobs have some degree of unpaid overtime? It’s all about give and take. I work about an extra 10 hours a week which I don’t get paid for but when I need to go for an appointment then there is no issue. Same if I want to f**k off at 2pm on a Friday as I have a weekend away then it’s never questioned. 
 

Personally it felt like the teachers/union became greedy as f**k towards the end. However, I am glad it looks like it’s getting sorted and can get some normality back for the kids. 

This is true in my case. Working the odd Saturday for an open day, for instance. But the flip side for me is that I don't really have set hours. If I want to head off for the afternoon and sit in the pub, I can. All that matters is my outputs. 

My wife works in HR for the same employer and has set hours. If she wants to change them there are procedures she has to follow. 

[coprolite]

15 hours ago, DeeTillEhDeh said:

It is if you are a promoted member of staff - I pay 51.2% if my salary in taxes and NI - if you are an unpromoted member of staff it will be around 20% lower.

That's because of tax allowances and tax rate bands.

If you earn over & 150,000 you'll pay 48% marginal tax and NI (with a lower average rate) in Scotland. 

Are you including pensions, student loan repayments and child benefit clawback? 

[hk blues]

2 minutes ago, GTG_03 said:

You are working for nothing if you are doing additional hours outwith your contract hours for no additional money.

There was a guy in our office who used to come in early and stay late most days, sending emails at 7pm sometimes. When the downturn came, he was told by the manager that he was one of the ones being let go; he argued his case that he worked hard and had put loads of extra hours in. The managers response was that they hadn't asked him to do that.

There is no grey area, if you are 'expected' to work additional hours then you get paid them. it really is that simple. If you're giving an employer hours for free without them asking just to look good then you're a fanny.

No grey area - in many jobs/roles your are expected to work additional hours without any overtime payments as the salary being offered reflects this.  For the past 15 years in the UK I never received overtime for additional hours as it was both explicit and implicit that this was required.  Everybody knows the score and there is a common understanding.  

As for your colleague - was it implied or stated that he was expected to do additional hours without payment?  If no, then he is indeed a fanny.

  

[GTG_03]

Just now, hk blues said:

No grey area - in many jobs/roles your are expected to work additional hours without any overtime payments as the salary being offered reflects this.  For the past 15 years in the UK I never received overtime for additional hours as it was both explicit and implicit that this was required.  Everybody knows the score and there is a common understanding.  

As for your colleague - was it implied or stated that he was expected to do additional hours without payment?  If no, then he is indeed a fanny.

  

I don't know anyone who does this, what would happen if you got injured/killed at work and it was outwith your scheduled hours. Do you think your employer would honour any payments insurance wise? "But it's a common understanding that we work additional hours, your honour" probably wouldn't hold up in court. Seems to me that folk accepting that are leaving themselves open/being taken advantage of.  If additional hours may be required then they should be paid as overtime. The closest thing I've seen to this is having every second saturday morning written into a contract but even then it stated the amount of hours and the times expected to work.

No, my former colleague was just trying to climb the ladder. It's a large company I work for and we really are just numbers which he found out when he was told he was surplus to requirements. 

[coprolite]

21 minutes ago, GTG_03 said:

You are working for nothing if you are doing additional hours outwith your contract hours for no additional money.

There was a guy in our office who used to come in early and stay late most days, sending emails at 7pm sometimes. When the downturn came, he was told by the manager that he was one of the ones being let go; he argued his case that he worked hard and had put loads of extra hours in. The managers response was that they hadn't asked him to do that.

There is no grey area, if you are 'expected' to work additional hours then you get paid them. it really is that simple. If you're giving an employer hours for free without them asking just to look good then you're a fanny.

Putting hours for no extra pay doesn't mean there's no reward for it. 

I wouldn’t put extra in just to get through more day job, except where there's peaks and troughs and i know fine i'll get the time back. 

But if something comes up that's an opportunity to do what i want to be doing and shape my role how i want i'll happily put in extra. 

Even if it doesn't lead to promotion or pay rises, it still leads to more opportunities for more interesting work and makes 1/2 of my waking weekday less shit. 

[Aufc]

1 hour ago, Jambomo said:

No? Maybe it’s just luck but I’ve never worked in any job that required unpaid overtime and I don’t think I know of anyone who does overtime that’s unpaid. Either you do your correct hours or if you do extra you get paid for it. 

 

1 hour ago, GTG_03 said:

I absolutely agree with this. The amount of oil and gas workers whose opinion is "I've had a paycut so why the f*ck should they get a payrise" is depressing. Seems to be creeping in more and more.

Why on earth would anyone work for free? I'm not surprised your employer has no issue when you want to go away for a couple of hours for an appointment every now and again when you're giving them an extra day every week for nothing. I value myself and my skills too much to work for nothing.

Yeah my salary is pretty good so i dont mind working the extra hours. Plus, as i said, i then get a lot of flexibility in what i do. So it works both ways. As someone says above, working these extra hours doesnt always relate to an immediate financial benefit. Surely if you are wanting paid for every hour you work then what happens if you have to take an afternoon off for an appointment? I am not talking about working weekends. I just come in earlier than im supposed to as it also means i dont get bugged by phone calls. 

With my team, i dont expect/want them to work extra and happy for them to work their contracted hours. However, i expect a bit of give and take whereby if they need to fu*k off for some appointment then i would hope they, at least, look like they are making the time up.