I hate to say but most of the incompetent work places I've worked for have been public sector. And certainly there was a tendency to hire in people from the private sector for anything difficult.
I think there's a balancing needed.
Strikes and such like Page 2
Quote: sootyj @ December 4 2011, 7:03 AM GMTThat may well be true.
But often it's the only way to get people to pay attention or hurt the government enough to listen (eg become less popular)
The public sector has been fighting a long retreat since the 70s/8os. And they hve been pushed hard before taking this action.
Ask yourself what would it take for you to pay attention?
As I mentioned in my post, I can understand that's why they strike, to get the Government to listen. I guess my point was just that I don't have a say in if they get what they want.
Personally if my operation got cancelled, or couldn't get to work becuase the transport workers went on strike causing me to miss pay etc, it's not going to make sympathetic to your situation.
Maybe we just need nicer politicians 
Quote: sootyj @ December 4 2011, 8:51 AM GMTmost of the incompetent work places I've worked for have been public sector.
You sir, are an arse with very little experience.
Given that Capitalism effectively died in 2008; I think that those who worked in the UK banking sector are far more incompetent than those in the UK public sector, given the bredth and depth of the failure as well as the lack of professionalism.
And as such desrve their bonus's, large golden handshakes etc. for excelling in f**king-up.
Foot note: Note the use of the word incompetent, rather than competent. This is done for comical affect.
I meant in the sector I work which is care management
With all the downsizing that has happened in the last decade there are a lot less places for wasters to hide than there used to be. In terms of management practices the public sector is generally about ten years behind the private sector - which twenty years ago had no shortage of wasters of its own. For good or bad a lot of private sector management practices have been imported into the public sector, and I know plenty of stressed conscientious public sector workers.
There is a problem though that staff can be hard to sack; mainly because the public sector tend to be more chary of employment tribunals. Not to put to fine a point on it, trying to take disciplinary or inefficiency action against anyone, but particularly anyone other than an able-bodied white male, is inviting a world of grief, so as a manager you are going to think long and hard before going down that route.
Thats what I meant.
Quote: Timbo @ December 4 2011, 5:27 PM GMTThere is a problem though that staff can be hard to sack; mainly because the public sector tend to be more chary of employment tribunals. Not to put to fine a point on it, trying to take disciplinary or inefficiency action against anyone, but particularly anyone other than an able-bodied white male, is inviting a world of grief, so as a manager you are going to think long and hard before going down that route.
Absoeffinlutely !
What are the historical facts? What is the tax burden on citizens now as compared to the past? How does public sector job growth/loss compare to the private sector over the last few decades? In this country we have things like this that point to a bloated, overpaid government:
While overall payroll employment in the United States has fallen by nearly five percent since the official start of the recession in December 2007, there are 12 percent more federal workers today than there were when the downturn started, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
http://sysc.msnbc.msn.com/id/45135375/ns/politics/
Federal employees earn higher average salaries than private-sector workers in more than eight out of 10 occupations, a USA TODAY analysis of federal data finds.
Accountants, nurses, chemists, surveyors, cooks, clerks and janitors are among the wide range of jobs that get paid more on average in the federal government than in the private sector.
Overall, federal workers earned an average salary of $67,691 in 2008 for occupations that exist both in government and the private sector, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics data. The average pay for the same mix of jobs in the private sector was $60,046 in 2008, the most recent data available.
These salary figures do not include the value of health, pension and other benefits, which averaged $40,785 per federal employee in 2008 vs. $9,882 per private worker, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-03-04-federal-pay_N.htm
Care management? where does it begin? this is a Major issue with a an ageing population.
I am also concerned with unemployed youth, really tough out there, the 'Education Support Allowance' has gone?... what is the sense in that?
ESA is crazy, it's half JSA.
And most of the people on it wouldn't be getting jobs anyway.
As for care management this whole personalisation agenda is allowing provision to be continually salami sliced thinner and thinner.
This and more!
Quote: DaButt @ December 4 2011, 9:57 PM GMTWhat are the historical facts? What is the tax burden on citizens now as compared to the past? How does public sector job growth/loss compare to the private sector over the last few decades?
Don't know exactly but very roughly speaking, we have a totally different industrial landscape to the one we had 40 years ago. 1971 might as well be 1871 because we have seen huge change in that 40 years, due mainly to Thatcher but also the faults of the increbibly inept govts of the 70s which brought the woman in.
What's left of the public sector has been devalued and run down by the Tory govts and New Labour didn't do anything to redress the balance, execpt renationalise what used to be British Rail, because the private owners were killing too many passengers. Now the Tory 'coalition' 
govt is attacking the public sector again and trying to soften it up for an expected new bout of privatisations.
Tax has generally fallen for the most wealthy in that period.
[quote name="dellas" post="827130" date="December 5 2011, 5:34 AM GMT
I am also concerned with unemployed youth, really tough out there, the 'Education Support Allowance' has gone?... what is the sense in that?[/quote]
Yep. When I was 20 I tried to find a job after getting some certificate level qualifictians. However no one would employ in that field becuase I didn't have experience. I then aimed for a jobs that required no qualifications and still had trouble to some degree, again because of no experience. How on earth people expect you to have experience when you're so young I'll never know.
OH dear disenfranchised youth = violence, mark my words, a bit nippy now, but springtime we will all be revolting!
Quote: dellas @ December 5 2011, 11:47 AM GMTOH dear disenfranchised youth = violence, mark my words, a bit nippy now, but springtime we will all be revolting!
The youth are alreay revolting, have you heard what they listen to.
*pauses*
Anyway, the reason why pensions in the public sector are unaffordable is because the public aren't going to able to pay much tax, as they'll be too busy paying off all their debts.
*rolls eyes*
The obvious solution to smaller pensions is reduced living costs.