Should NHS workers get a pay rise?

nheather

They may not have created them but they certainly have a lot of control over them - as a Minister of Education who tried to reform them would soon find out.

Cheers,

Nigel

rustybin

They have ZERO control. If they did I'd be driving a Ferrari. They have influence.

As I've stated, Private schools pay the same, often a little bit more than State schools - why would that be the case? It's supply and demand.

ChuckMountain

Since when did I leave quality out of it, have a read of my posts.  People might have more than one goal, wow incredible .

I gave a stereotypical example of a goal that might be relevant to some industries, say manufacturing applied to the NHS, because yes that's unfortunately what is happening in some sectors.

And as to the emotional "deserve" that I used, that was the original question and you used it prior to my post so obviously not rationale there either.

Bl4ckGryph0n

Since your own memory is lacking, this is what you replied with in response no mention about other goals. I'm glad you see sense and that you admit what you road was not really appropriate;

exhibit 1....

ghrh

Are you saying that the salary differences between higher and lower paid staff in the private sector are that same as the public sector?

Enki

I don't, many are like myself look beyond pay increases and look at the cost of living as a bigger problem, happy to see reduction in house wealth despite the adverse effects on my personal circumstances and tackle that culture corporate greed of CEOs and shareholders that seeps into the top end of the NHS.
Or is it we are always told that those who work in the finance sector require large amounts of pay to retain their skills in the UK, surely paying well in the health sector attracts even better staff? Markets crash you get paid well, people die you get paid well, it's the risk.

nheather

Sorry I clipped your quote too short.

You were saying that eventually there will be teachers who are lowered paid than my wife but who were better than her.  Not arguing with that because that is what happens in the Public Sector.

What I was saying is that is less likely to happen in the private sector.  It isn't perfect but Private Sector is more likely to identify and reward talent.  Of course you do get anomalies in the Private Sector - but when they do get identified there are mechanisms to address them.

Cheers,

Nigel

Toko Black

I think that pretty much sums up your approach and attitude to the public sector, pay and society as a whole .... "my money" not "our money".

If everything were so simple and relatively straight forwards, we could all see the same spread sheet and there would be little room for argument between anyone, especially amongst economists.

However, looking at the economy and society as a whole like an accountant gives a very limited, black and white or black and red if you will, narrow and restricted view.
It fails to 'account' for motivations, feedback and variables that are not purely or intrinsically monetarily based, but none the less can and do have significant impacts on our quality of life and ability to function now and in the future.

Just for example, if wages don't increase with inflation or the cost of living, in real terms, people get less for what they do and essentially get a pay decrease.
If a particular role or job gets constantly devalued in this way relative to inflation and the cost of living, you get people not wanting to work in that role for relatively less and less.
That leads to either:

People staying in the role but being more unhappy, which leads to less productivity, more sickness and higher absences.
or
Those that can do better go elsewhere to get better renumeration and it becomes a race to the bottom with less and less skilled and talented people. Either the roles are filled by ever less and less competent, less worthy employees, they are left empty and that creates more stress and problems for the current staff, or you have to fill those roles with temps and outside contracts at higher costs.

Might be fine for part time workers stacking shelves or collecting trolleys, but when it comes to doctors, nurses, firemen, the police, teachers etc .... the last thing we can 'afford' as a society is an unhappy, less productive workforce and/or staffed by those that couldn't do better.

"Your" productivity will suffer if you have to live in a society where their is poorer education, health services, security and general wellbeing ...

.... unless you take the attitude and have the ability to earn significant amounts of money to be able to be in the minority of those able to afford private security, health care, education etc while living inside gated communities while crime and poverty soar all around you.

ChuckMountain

Again my point which you decided to miss is that's one simplistic example goal a very quantitative example easy to measure goal.  I wouldn't set it but these are making it into the NHS and education ...

You mean I can have more than one goal at work, amazing, times have changed

exhibit 2...  first page

third page
You brought the irrational in

Clearly your memory is also lacking, maybe we should both go down to the NHS and get checked out

Bl4ckGryph0n

Me too, hence we should stop perpetuating that problem...

Same here; no issue with that at all. I think it would be good

I have no issue with profits....

Fully agreed with that as well; bit different though to giving everyone a blanket increase...

You only get paid well if you placed your "bets" correctly....Unfortunately for some professions when people die you get paid well as well, not those whose job it is to prevent deaths however...