Morning Line: why the unions should agree to public sector pay cuts

Unions exist because there was need for them in the pre-minimum wage pre-health and safety era. There is now little use for them other than to kick up a fuss and blow out of date socialist drivel on the flames of any progress in the reduction of our deficit.

Why not simply ban unions in times of economic harship so they can't make situations any worse with their short-sighted mischief?

I may be a nasty right wing axeman but I find the comment by Anonymous 1 positively frightening.

Once you start banning organisations with whom you disagree where do you stop?

Would you ban say the Catholic Church to prevent child abuse and indiscriminate breeding owing to their views on contaception?---probably not!!!

Difficult as it may be the unions need to be educated as to where their members long term interests lie and this won't be done unless you actually talk to them.

I've noticed that punching someone in the face because you don't agree with them to be rather self-defeating as they usually take a dim view of your actions and retaliate in kind

The comment from Anonymous is utter tripe - listen to Mr Lacy.

Unions do have a role in society.

Cutting the pay of higher paid public employees is one thing, cutting pay for the vast majority of lowly paid public service workers and those (genuinely) on benefits is quite another. Instead of cuts shouldn't this government be looking at increasing income tax for the better off, particularly those who got us into this mess in the first place, the greedy bankers?

The public sector work force expanded by around 1,000,000 under New Labour and this was probably intended to mask the massive job losses in manufacturing and other worthwhile sectors. I worked in the public sector 20 years ago and it was grossly over staffed then. The governemnt should be seeking to remove more than 1,000,000 people who are "employed" in the public sector as part of a general restructure of the state which is long over due. The unions will not like this but neither do I like paying excessive amounts of tax to fund civil servants who sit around half the day staring out of the window.

The problem with the unions is that the majority of their leadership unfortunately still think its the 1970's and they should fight or die. Bob crow quite frankly is an idiot. Unions do have a role in modern society in supporting their members and negotiating settlements with a balanced view. The problem they have is that if somone who in a resonable world should be made redundant or compromise (all non dom BA cabin crew) is a mmeber of the union then they are duty bound to represnet them no matter how illogical it seems. e.g. I'm earning £100k plus aand they want to cut my terms I'm going to the union with this. I think its called self interest/greed.

Happy Days Are Here Again! The Unions - and Labour - are back in their comfort zone, railing against a (largely) Tory Government and threatening civill disobedience, etc. It certainly beats working hard for their members to minimise or even avoid the loss of jobs in the unionised sector.

How about an attack on the private sector where salaries can be grossly more excessive than in the public sector? If the obscene payments to gambling bankers, and chief and senior executives were reined in, the prices of the products of their companies (whether things that one buys or chrages that are imposed) could be reduced for consumers. All consumers (and remember that the public sector is a consumer also) would see their expenses reduced and their ability to consume increased.

Only a small fraction of public sector workers are on £50k, and they are not the people threatening to go on strike. As for the rest, if they have industrial muscle they will inevitably use it.

The headline in today’s paper is “Unions plan wave of civil disobedience”. The article continues with the lurid threats emanating from the Trades Unions.

If this is so might I suggest the Government puts in an early order for water canon, brings back all troops so that we have a standby. Other voluntary workers could assist where needed. Transport difficulties could be ameliorated if employers provided laptops and broadband. We would all cheer if HMRC went on strike.

All in all it looks like we are back to the bad old days. We can only hope that the Libcondems will stand firm à la Thatcher. The less sensible and transient of the current unions may then end up like the NUM.

This is Nibyism at its very worst. If they can’t see the need for retrenchment – PARTICULARLY in the over bloated public sector, then they have proved that they are blind as well as obdurate.

I must say I agree with the general argument of the article, but I also have some sympathy with Franco Bristolian. It is clearly unfair and socially divisive that sections of our society earn 70 or more times those of others.

We would all be happier if things were a little more equal.

Having said that I still believe that the relative job security (we are all at risk - but some more than others) of the Public sector and the pension benefits they enjoy, are hugely more valuable that Public workers (and certainly Unions) acknowledge!

Most comments so far as expected.

They live on the same cloud, as the clown who coind the phrase "We are all in this together" He and they seem to have no idea that a cut in pay of 5% in the earnings of a hard working manual employee could well mean hardship for the employee and his/her family. whereas a same % pay ( I do not use the word earnings here for it would suggest that their pay is earned) for many highly paid people would not be felt at all.

yes cut the made up jobs for the boys . like training instructers for daft health and safty that has gone daft . stop imigration and make the places like fast food out lets employ students who want part time work or older people who who want a top up to there pensions even if they are under 65.

we dont need all these pen pushes in the work place and silly things like art gallerys in every town that dont get used ,only by the schools to get numbers through the doors, send the asylum seekers home quickly and save some money and silly jobs .america and australia can do it so why cant we oh sorry i forgot the weak and the do gooders will stop it.every person on the dole who cant find a job should be offered the jobs first through the job centres even in ware houses and that includes every big suppermarket and food outlet. and if they cant fill it with a full time worker from england then the should be made to fill in two halfs part time, there should be no more reason for imigration as people cant even get jobs after uni and cant even get in university.

O dear! It is disheartening to see and hear the rehetoric that surrounds anything to to with the traditional posturing of the Trades Unions - whichever side of the centre line you may stand.

I am afraid I strongly disagree with Atheist's comment that suggests some are are in this rather more than others. If you extend the analogy of the hard working manual worker and his family to the whole of the UK then the same set of circumstances exists if there is no (or less) income to provide for the family. So we are all in this together - whether we like it or not - and we should all bear the consequences.

Arguing about who is to blame and suggesting that the solution lies in one sector or another is a sterile argument. We have to get on and deal with the issues in a sensible and considered way.

I do not want to see public services cut any more than the next person. But we have to live in the real world and can only buy the services we can afford. I have not seen any noticeble improvement in services resulting from the employment of an additional 1 million public sector positions. In fact things have probably gone backwards. Had the 1 million positions been created in manufacturing industries we might be looking at a different picture.

We need to create the environment where hard work and endeavour at any level in our society is rewarded as appropriate - and what is the approporiate level is not for me to say. And an environment that will encourage peope to take responsibility for themselves rather than relying on the state to provide cradle to grave

Thanks to Ian for his view. I happen to work very hard for my salary, and I do not, or know of anyone else in my dept. that stare out the window all day.

Just as well we are talking about this over the internet, because there would be another strike going on if we were face to face.

#David Glynn

You make it sound as if only the centre line know what is right, not so.

Strange as it may seem to you, I am probably on the same side of the fictitious center line that you appear to stand.

However I would suggest that I take a more common sense and even handed

point of view, and realise where the greatest suffering, if there is suffering will be felt.

#Anonymous 3

Take heart, it is always the fellow or lass who has no idea what the other person does or is doing who makes the most noise about what they think the person should be doing, and not taking the trouble or effort to become enlightened.

Worked in a London local authority for 9 years. Some staff worked very hard but most did the minimum necessary to keep out of trouble. One of the main problems in the public sector is that it is almost impossible to sack anybody, even if they have little or no work to do, unless they commit fraud, steal from their employer or assault someone.

Managers need to be given the power to manage staff properly and remove the lazy, the underemployed and the incompetent - the public sector has more than its fair share because this sort of thing isn't much tolerated in the private sector.

A 15% pay cut for the highly paid public servants would be almost universally welcomed - apart from the crass HMRC boss, whose immediate early retirement without a payoff would be celebrated throughout the land.

The private sector has and is still facing cuts of jobs and salaries, but the unions say that just because the private sector has suffered and is suffering it is not fair that their members should also suffer and be given the same treatment.

The wage bill is too high and we cannot afford the to pay the pensions.

Hey, unuions, wake up and join the real world.

LIFE AIN'T FAIR, it never was and never will be, we have to make the best of what we have, fair or otherwise.

The figure of 6.1 million public servants must include the NHS, Local Authorities, Teachers and Civil Servants. "25,000 earn over £100,00" must include the GPs, Dentists, Senior Hospital consultants, Council Chief Executives, and Departmental Heads in the Civil Service. Some of these are managing budgets far in excess of even some FTSE 100 companies and people might even agree that some of the rest are worth the money. I wonder how many FTSE100 CEOs have taken a REAL pay cut.

Dave T,

Whilst I would agree that FTSE chiefs are overpaid they manage organisations

that operate mostly in a competitive market. This doesn't apply in the public sector, where its almost impossible to get fired however incompetent - witness the antics of the GMC in relation to Chapman and Patel recently.

#Whitegates

" Managers need to be given the power to manage"

IT is no different in the Private sector than it is in the Public.

Management has already the power to manage, the problem is they do not know how to use it.

Their worst failing is they have no idea about Man Management, if they did they would not complain about --not being able to sack anyone--as far as I am aware all companies and that includes the Public sector have Disciplinary Procedures, but it would seem that Managers at all levels do not know how to use it.

They complain to Human Resources, about an employees conduct for whatever reason, saying we should get rid of hin/her. Human Resources consult the employees file only to find that no warnings have ever been givento the employee about anything. Conclusion The Supervisor or Manager of the department likes the job, the power, the pay, but does not like to be the bad guy to tackle the employee about the employees behaviour.

Well said whitegates.

Isn't it ironic how Gordon Brown is hardly heard of nowadays. Such was his miserable legacy that now results in the present Gov having to take such radical and necessary action. The so called Public Sector covers a wide diversity of jobs, but surely Civil servants are underemployed and overpaid and should be the first to have radical cuts.

As to the Unions response.........well its what they get paid for, but as has been said previously, we are not in the 70's now. We have a crisis that has to be tackled and may be painful, so get real.

This government is not doing the right thing in the right way. There is a better way to deal with the cuts. My concern is the vicious attack on welfare benefits affecting the vulnerable groups ( I know how this is blow is dealt in practice). Its Ok to criticise unions if you are well to do. I agree this is absolutely a demolition coalition. Yuk! It pays to remind one that the majority did NOT create this country's debt and I see no reason why the poorer sections should pay for the woes of the few. I don't give a damn if one reader thinks life is unfair because that is just another lame excuse to accept crap policies from a hideous government.

The Unions are only protecting the rights of the public servants who have signed up to pension plans funded by the tax payer. Why should they give them up just because people in the private sector can't afford to pay for their own? The pubic sector workforce signed onto a guaranteed role, and cradle to grave income protection. So why shouldn't the Unions stand up and protect it? We have our rights you know!

#snoekie

Typical enough comment from somebody who probably thinks he/she is sitting quite comfortable, but beware your time of hardship may come.

You don't have to tell people how life is not fair, it is well known.

But it does not prevent many of us striving to make life more equitable for others and having opinions of and even pitty for thoes who do not.

But nevertheless I am sure you sleep well, thoes of little feeling for others usually do.

Atheist, I have nevertheless been right royally scr**** by Bliar/Brown Balls, becuase of thei raid, my pension pot was down 50% and that had a few 0s in it , and what was fair about that? Browns pension was unaffected.

Funny, he did the scr***** but didn't suffer one bit, but happily allowed others to suffer. Yes I am better off than some, but why is it that those doing the scr**** never have to suffer, even abide by the law.

Now how did you suffer, if at all?

Oh btw, why should I suffer and the bar steward elevated to the Lords does not and the civil service still happily collect their platinum plated pensions without so much as a sou loss?

Do please explain, and in detail.

#snoekie

Yes I at times have felt unfairly Taxed---Who hasn't---I am sure all taxes appear unfair to someone.

Consider this:- I was fortunate not only to be in a Company with a Pension Scheme but also be in a position to save. A very good friend was with a Company where there was no Pension Scheme however he was also able to save, so he put aside savings especially for his retirement, the interest on his savings were Taxed. Along comes a Chancellor who thinks this is not reasonable so he Taxes the interest paid on my Pension Scheme, now there were many people who did not like this Tax, but bearing in mind those who at that time were unable to join a Pension Scheme at least it was equitable.

Now there you are without a rude word in sight.

Oh my good friend and I are both 85 and still "managing" reasonably well despite the Taxes

#snoekie

Your request

Please explain and in detail.

It was you who did the explaining when you wrote:-LIFE AIN'T FAIR

Atheist, anybody who wants to (and is a relevant UK tax paying individual /even not to a certain extent) can put money into a personal pension and receive tax relief, it is not a 'perk' at all although employers can contribute to if that is a facility they offer.

The bloke who saved instead of putting money into a pension (as per your example) could have put his money into a personal pension contract himself, the pension tax raid of 1997 was in no way shape or form 'equitable' it was a complete scandal that applied to every private pension whether Defined Benefit or Defined contribution. By your logic, what would now be 'equitable' would be for every single public sector pension to have its benefits cut by 10%, that money could even make a significant dint in the deficiet...the look on Bob Crow's wobbly face would be worth seeing too

Well said Lorna, agree with every word of this article.

P.S. Did you ever recover the 200 cigs??

Not all the public sector is unnecessary, but great swathes of it are. It was a fundemental plank of the Socialists unemployment policy. Alright when the City was paying shed loads of revenue to pay for it. That has come to an end and they the Socialists are casting around for the next pile of Gold they can alight upon. This time I fear they are NOT going to find it. It is quite laughable to watch these Union people that still think money grows on trees. Waiting for them to demand more and more for less and less. They are in reality driving Private Enterprise out of Britain, and their only sanctuary is the Public Sector, which they know does not have the discipline of profit to sustain its existence. They will want the bulk of the remaining pot in the end. I for one will not be contributing.. British Business will be long gone, and it will be just the revenue to be collected from the non productive taxpayer, pensioners and public sector employees.