Public v Private sector jobs compared

[Mojooo]

A hot topic on this forum. Who is going to chip in first with the opinion that the BBC has purposefully skewed it?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/8549380.stm

[nonegreen]

What a load of clap trap. In the private sector you are at the mercy of shareholders and jobs are only there for the period of time you make a financial contribution to the organisation. This will be at least 3 times your salary and a profit margin. Jobs are not secure and redundancy terms are usually crap. Public sector jobs are not performance related at all. If you are in a government established post then your attendance is all that is required and only of swinging cuts are made will you ever lose that position. Even then the severance terms are invariably 3 or 4 weeks pay for every year of service including holiday and pension contributions and often enhanced and early retirement schemes for those over 50 or suffering from long term illnesses. Its the severance terms that really are incomparable. Sure some good private sector companies have long term sickness insurance which can be very good if you have a debilitating disease which means you are likely never to return to work, but the public sector really provides a safety net that covers all eventualities.

As for the working environment they are both unsatisfactory in many ways and equally they have their good points. The private sector can often be very dynamic and allow creative people to really achieve. Individuals make a huge contribution to an overall team effort that can clearly be understood. In contrast in the public sector often there is a sense of achieving nothing and being unable to change a failing system or set of procedures. If the terms of reference are correct then a sense of public good maybe vaguely present but the terms of reference are rarely well thought out and usually the public sector achieves a mediocre result. Conversely , when the private sector gets it wrong, usually by creating unrealistic expectations for the customer, the result is anxiety, stress and desperation for the employees and in extreme cases a loss of humanity among the senior management.

In terms of organisational behavior there are few similarities between the 2 factions. Private sector responds to change often too quickly, sometimes getting caught out by sudden changes in events or economic conditions. The public sector is slow and plodding which means movers and shakers often leave because the sheer effort needed to change the way the organisation behaves is just so monumental. The only real similarity I can spot is the damage empire builders can cause. Classically the once huge strategic planning department of the Rank Xerox Corporation is no more as it nearly killed the company. Similarly the bureaucratic nonsense that has spawned the plethora of speed humps, traffic lights and other associated waste throughout the UK is a classic example of empires, rule books, guidance and procedural lunacy in the pursuit of imaginary goals both signifying and achieving nothing, except perhaps yet another serious threat to the success of UK PLC.

In fact such are the differences between the two sectors, it is probably inapropriate to ever make direct comparisons. certainly the BBC have skewed nothing they have merely skimmed the surface of the issue. Holidays and working time practices are as irrelavent as union membership when purposes of the organisations are so completely different.

Interestingly there is a 3rd sector namely the charitable trust or company limited by guarantee not share. This often combines the best and worst of the public and private sector. It has no finanacial drive so often fails to perform as well as the private sector, yet it often seeks to perform a public service. Charities are certainly in my experience far nicer places to work than either of the other 2 sectors. They are prone however to get stuck if the world changes because their purpose is often set in tablets of stone. Ie where would cancer research be if someone invented the teleport and as an aside the machine could detect, process and remove all cnacerous cells?

[10 Pence Short]

nonegreen said:

Public sector jobs are not performance related at all. If you are in a government established post then your attendance is all that is required and only of swinging cuts are made will you ever lose that position.

I don't know how much work you've done in the Civil Service, but that's not my experience.

My OH has had to jump through many difficult hoops just to achieve the targets she needed to to get a whopping £600 pay rise this year. Notwithstanding she spent nearly a year doing a job she is supposed to be paid another salary grade up for as well as her own, seeming her predecessors were not replaced.

In fact, the only way she could keep a job at all this year, despite being the only one in the Environment Agency in our region capable of doing what she does, was to agree to a 6 month 'assignment', at the end of which she was told it most likely she would have to rely on securing a job full time by interviewing for the post. A fixed points based interview system means shoeing people into posts is no longer possible, btw.

It was only in the past week she's had confirmation she's got a job at all, all for the measly sum of £20k per annum.

[davido140]

nonegreen said:

What a load of clap trap. In the private sector you are at the mercy of shareholders and jobs are only there for the period of time you make a financial contribution to the organisation.

Nail... Head...

[nonegreen]

10 Pence Short said:

. Notwithstanding she spent nearly a year doing a job she is supposed to be paid another salary grade up for as well as her own, seeming her predecessors were not replaced.

Thank you I rest my case.

[Mojooo]

davido140 said:

nonegreen said:

What a load of clap trap. In the private sector you are at the mercy of shareholders and jobs are only there for the period of time you make a financial contribution to the organisation.

Nail... Head...

Maybe but the point of the article is comparing the working conditions of employees.

I doubt most private sector employees are at the sharp end of feeling like they have to make money for the company or get sacked every day.

Likewise, Public sector employees will/should have some accountability as well.

[nonegreen]

Mojooo said:

davido140 said:

nonegreen said:

What a load of clap trap. In the private sector you are at the mercy of shareholders and jobs are only there for the period of time you make a financial contribution to the organisation.

Nail... Head...

Maybe but the point of the article is comparing the working conditions of employees.

I doubt most private sector employees are at the sharp end of feeling like they have to make money for the company or get sacked every day.

Likewise, Public sector employees will/should have some accountability as well.

hmmmmm My experience of the private sector is exactly that all employees are very aware of their contribution to the bottom line or they most certainly get sacked. There are some exceptions but these are a dying breed of ex nationalised industries with the remains of monopoly present to this day. There is accountability in the public sector but the this is only in pockets and at the delivery end. Proper civil servants have power without responsibility or accountability. ALL the civil service departments have only the vaguest concept of accountability. I know this as I have worked for almost all of them.

[Mojooo]

hmm, well I have worked in both sectors, and whilst yes I would agree that there is definitley more chance of getting canned in the private sector I cant help but wonder if people overyhpe the 'dangers' of it a bit much

that said all of the companies I have worked for previous were all fairly large so I probably enjoyed a bit more job security than I would get at an SME where your contribution is a bit more direct.

[Sticks.]

I can't remember exactly when performance related pay was introduced into the civil service, but it must have been about 20 years ago. And yes, it'd include a lot of targets, agreed under the JFDI principle familiar to private sector, for less than £10 a week perhaps.

Generally, I'd think that when the economy is doing well you're better off in the private sector, and when it's not, public sector is a bit more secure.

What I don't understand is why prople who say how easy life is in the public sector never apply when there are vacancies. Don't bother now though, thousands of civil servants being made redundant for several years now.

[10 Pence Short]

nonegreen said:

10 Pence Short said:

. Notwithstanding she spent nearly a year doing a job she is supposed to be paid another salary grade up for as well as her own, seeming her predecessors were not replaced.

Thank you I rest my case.

So you are agreeing that some Public Sector Workers are being paid less than market value for doing the jobs of two people? Good.

[nonegreen]

10 Pence Short said:

nonegreen said:

10 Pence Short said:

. Notwithstanding she spent nearly a year doing a job she is supposed to be paid another salary grade up for as well as her own, seeming her predecessors were not replaced.

Thank you I rest my case.

So you are agreeing that some Public Sector Workers are being paid less than market value for doing the jobs of two people? Good.

Ha ha no I am suggesting that the kind of language used in that statement is unique to the public sector. Statements like that were never made by my people when I worked in the private sector as it would have been a sacking offence, alongside statements like "Thats not my job".

Universally there are perhaps 3 types of employee. This was illustrated by an advertisement for the Royal Mail that landed on my desk a few years ago. It was a dead carnation beutifully packaged with the slogan "On your desk today, on your customers desk tommorrow". It occured to me that as the flower was well and truly dead someone had made a mess. Type 1 employee is often found in the public sector they would see the flower in its box dead or dying and ensure that the form accompianing had been ticked and stamped in the right places before allowing it to be dispatched. Type 2 employee often found in the large heavily unionised private organisation would see the dead flower and think "Look what the silly bds have done" (referring of course to the management) A type 3 employee would see the dead flowerand then tenaciously visit each and every level of the organisation until he or she got a satisfactory result.

Its a type 1 employee that speaks of having to do 2 peoples jobs and not being paid etc. The type 2 would simply pretend to be unable to do the extra work and the type 3 would gain the experience then demand the additional remuneration, if the employer refused they would simply move on because they are confident of their skills.

[rypt]

nonegreen said:

Its a type 1 employee that speaks of having to do 2 peoples jobs and not being paid etc. The type 2 would simply pretend to be unable to do the extra work and the type 3 would gain the experience then demand the additional remuneration, if the employer refused they would simply move on because they are confident of their skills.

Nail -> Head

It is the age old saying, if you are unhappy with your job then move. This is what most private sector people do if they are being to do work they should not be doing, or if they are being underpaid and so on.

[Mojooo]

rypt said:

nonegreen said:

Its a type 1 employee that speaks of having to do 2 peoples jobs and not being paid etc. The type 2 would simply pretend to be unable to do the extra work and the type 3 would gain the experience then demand the additional remuneration, if the employer refused they would simply move on because they are confident of their skills.

Nail -> Head

It is the age old saying, if you are unhappy with your job then move. This is what most private sector people do if they are being to do work they should not be doing, or if they are being underpaid and so on.

Is it really though?

[rypt]

Mojooo said:

rypt said:

nonegreen said:

Its a type 1 employee that speaks of having to do 2 peoples jobs and not being paid etc. The type 2 would simply pretend to be unable to do the extra work and the type 3 would gain the experience then demand the additional remuneration, if the employer refused they would simply move on because they are confident of their skills.

Nail -> Head

It is the age old saying, if you are unhappy with your job then move. This is what most private sector people do if they are being to do work they should not be doing, or if they are being underpaid and so on.

Is it really though?

Is what really?

[Mojooo]

rypt said:

Mojooo said:

rypt said:

nonegreen said:

Its a type 1 employee that speaks of having to do 2 peoples jobs and not being paid etc. The type 2 would simply pretend to be unable to do the extra work and the type 3 would gain the experience then demand the additional remuneration, if the employer refused they would simply move on because they are confident of their skills.

Nail -> Head

It is the age old saying, if you are unhappy with your job then move. This is what most private sector people do if they are being to do work they should not be doing, or if they are being underpaid and so on.

Is it really though?

Is what really?

True that private sector people move jobs (relative to public) when they are being overworked. If anything is to be believe Private sector people are the ones being overworked in comparison to public sector employees AND i am always hearing about people being overworked, wanting toleave, but not leaving for whatever reason.

[rypt]

Mojooo said:

rypt said:

Mojooo said:

rypt said:

nonegreen said:

Its a type 1 employee that speaks of having to do 2 peoples jobs and not being paid etc. The type 2 would simply pretend to be unable to do the extra work and the type 3 would gain the experience then demand the additional remuneration, if the employer refused they would simply move on because they are confident of their skills.

Nail -> Head

It is the age old saying, if you are unhappy with your job then move. This is what most private sector people do if they are being to do work they should not be doing, or if they are being underpaid and so on.

Is it really though?

Is what really?

True that private sector people move jobs (relative to public) when they are being overworked. If anything is to be believe Private sector people are the ones being overworked in comparison to public sector employees AND i am always hearing about people being overworked, wanting toleave, but not leaving for whatever reason.

It's no secret that private sector people are expected to do more than public, and have tighter deadlines - so naturally people will complain. The point is that if they were truly being overworked and had some decent qualifications and experience in a decent sector then they would move.

[Deva Link]

rypt said:

It's no secret that private sector people are expected to do more than public, and have tighter deadlines - so naturally people will complain. The point is that if they were truly being overworked and had some decent qualifications and experience in a decent sector then they would move.

My missus is in a public sector job and her work has tight legally binding deadlines which *have* to be adhered to. So she's often late home and always has masses of flexitime, which she can never seem to take.

Despite the workload, which is recession related and still increasing, her department is in the process cutting 10% of staff. Questions about how they're supposed to cope with less staff and increasing work and met with the response that the department has to be seen to be doing its bit.

They do get little individual "well done" bonuses from time to time though (£50 shopping vouchers etc) - she's worked in several other departments and never had any kind of bonus before.

[DSM2]

10 Pence Short said:

nonegreen said:

Public sector jobs are not performance related at all. If you are in a government established post then your attendance is all that is required and only of swinging cuts are made will you ever lose that position.

I don't know how much work you've done in the Civil Service, but that's not my experience.

My OH has had to jump through many difficult hoops just to achieve the targets she needed to to get a whopping £600 pay rise this year. Notwithstanding she spent nearly a year doing a job she is supposed to be paid another salary grade up for as well as her own, seeming her predecessors were not replaced.

In fact, the only way she could keep a job at all this year, despite being the only one in the Environment Agency in our region capable of doing what she does, was to agree to a 6 month 'assignment', at the end of which she was told it most likely she would have to rely on securing a job full time by interviewing for the post. A fixed points based interview system means shoeing people into posts is no longer possible, btw.

It was only in the past week she's had confirmation she's got a job at all, all for the measly sum of £20k per annum.

What's amazing it that she had the opportunity to achieve any sort of pay rise.

Basically the organisation she works for is bankrupt and any form of pay increase should be impossible, as it would be in any private sector business.

[nonegreen]

DSM2 said:

10 Pence Short said:

nonegreen said:

Public sector jobs are not performance related at all. If you are in a government established post then your attendance is all that is required and only of swinging cuts are made will you ever lose that position.

I don't know how much work you've done in the Civil Service, but that's not my experience.

My OH has had to jump through many difficult hoops just to achieve the targets she needed to to get a whopping £600 pay rise this year. Notwithstanding she spent nearly a year doing a job she is supposed to be paid another salary grade up for as well as her own, seeming her predecessors were not replaced.

In fact, the only way she could keep a job at all this year, despite being the only one in the Environment Agency in our region capable of doing what she does, was to agree to a 6 month 'assignment', at the end of which she was told it most likely she would have to rely on securing a job full time by interviewing for the post. A fixed points based interview system means shoeing people into posts is no longer possible, btw.

It was only in the past week she's had confirmation she's got a job at all, all for the measly sum of £20k per annum.

What's amazing it that she had the opportunity to achieve any sort of pay rise.

Basically the organisation she works for is bankrupt and any form of pay increase should be impossible, as it would be in any private sector business.

I question the need for an environment agency at all. To be frank there is a dire need of roadbulding in the UK. We are not doing it. Instead we have "Agencies" hardly any of which are needed. Surely the staff could be redeployed roadbulding. They would be happier, fitter, healthier and have job satisfaction that they were making a real contribution to socciety, the economy and humanity, rather than just being a cost burden.

[Mojooo]

course we do - only the other day someone was telling me their worries about pollution affecting their flat block - i told them to call the EA.

just because you might not get direct use out of them doesnt mean they are not there for a reason.