Nurses move closer to strike action as record numbers reject pay offer
Nurses have inched closer to strike action after a record number rejected the Government’s pay offer.
More than nine in 10 nurses rejected their 3.6 per cent pay rise for this year in a fresh blow to Wes Streeting, the Health Secretary.
The Royal College of Nursing (RCN) has threatened a strike ballot unless the union’s demands are met this summer.
12 comments:
They should go on strike like those junior doctors, and demand 25% rise.
Anon - and call it parity.
I wonder how many hundreds of hard-working, decent, caring, underpaid nurses are looking for every excuse to use a sharpened, rusty 1920's enema tube on this repulsive character...
I'm old enough to remember years of strikes when trade unions egged their members on to strike:
a) to overcome inflation
b) to maintain parity with another group of workers
c) to maintain differentials with another group of workers
What trade unions are reluctant to say is that the only reliable way to gain better pay is for enough ordinary workers to resign and seek jobs elsewhere.
Scrobs - they may not like it, but if they think they are underpaid they may as well move on or aim higher.
DJ - I agree, if recruitment isn't a problem then neither is the pay.
If medical staff believe it's acceptable for them behave like other workers and blackmail the public by striking they shouldn't be surprised if the public starts treating them like bar staff, shop workers or any other service provider.
Don't know why but the comments section won't let me log in, keeps reverting back to anonymous.
Anyway, it's curious how all those whining about the horribly undercompensated WahNHS! workers, never consider the cost of the two tier pensions the ex state employees get:
"PUBLIC SECTOR PENSIONS COST £57BN PER YEAR MORE THAN IS DECLARED, FINDS NEW RESEARCH
Government is misleading Parliament and the public over the cost to the taxpayer of public sector pensions.
Members of Parliament and the public are only told the discretionary cost, rather than the official cost – and the difference between the two is significant.
The author estimates the unreported annual cost at £57bn in 2020-21, or some 30 per cent of the public sector payroll."
https://iea.org.uk/media/public-sector-pensions-cost-57bn-per-year-more-than-is-declared-finds-new-iea-research/
Vatsmith - I agree, a change in that direction seems likely as almost everyone knows they could be affected, perhaps seriously.
Anon - I don't know why comment issues occur. I don't see them if I try to test it, but the system seems to know who I am anyway.
Thanks for the link, it's one of those opaque issues which MPs ought to be briefed on, but it would be no surprise if they aren't. Some public sector pensions are funded from a pension fund but others are unfunded, especially in the Civil Service I believe, but that too seems opaque.
,
I am a former public sector worker now living in retirement and in receipt of a public sector pension. I have no idea if there is in existence a specific fund to pay my pension or if it comes out of general taxation. What I do clearly remember is that a considerable percentage of my salary was deducted at source as my contribution to a "pension fund". I suspect this is the case with all public sector workers in every department.
The BMA and doctors complain about their erosion of pay since 2008 but I don't hear them mentioning that this has also happened to large parts of the rest of the population. How very 'socialist' of them. What they really mean is that they deserve more pay because they are more important than most others, which may be true. They are certainly not open and honest.
John - if your pension is from a fund, I'd expect you to receive annual reports about fund performance, but I don't know that for sure, it may vary.
Tammly - I believe 2008 was a high point so that's why they choose it, but their importance may be eroding as people become better informed about health issues. They may not be as important as they assume and even less important in the future.
John,
As regards public sector pensions, you are absolutely correct, deductions to your pay were made with the promise that you would get a pension of "x" at the end.
There are many problems illustrated by the two tier reporting in the report linked to above.
A typical teachers pension retiring after 30 years service at 57 say, would require a fund of 2-3 million to obtain privately, how many DCS schemes reach that level?
It's not that you didn't contribute, it's that what you contributed and what the politicians say public sector pensions cost is hugely less than what they actually cost.
Yes I know - politicians & promises.
More generally a public awareness of a two tier pension system with a nomenklatura on public sector pensions and the general public on DCS pensions which even though they make the same contributions have no chance of reaching the same benefits is another spoke in the wheel of a healthy unified society
Post a Comment