DSS are striking tomorrow
Discussion
And HMRC.
And it's not about a payrise, it's mainly about changes to the compulsory redundancy scheme and the voluntary severance schemes, which have hardly ever been needed in the past (naturally wastage, redeployment, etc), so havent been needed. But it's fairly clear that they'd only be trying to halve these contractual agreements because cuts are coming, they must think civil servants are stupid. Difference probably none, you piss and moan about the french blockading things on here, and then complain about fuel prices, the uncomfortable British way sheep of do nothing. Well no one will listen, even though it will go unreported. But this not about pay, it's about contractual agreements (you know like bankers bonuses) going back decades that they never expected to need, like one could argue HMG never bothering to set up a civil service fund, it was always going to be taken care of out of taxation or so they HMG said. That's what terms civil servants used to sign on for but never expected to need, most of these schemes have been closed to new employees for years, now there's a real possibility
of redundancies they (HMG) are trying to rewrite the contracts.
The shame of it is the younger civil servants, don't realise they are still the cheaper ones to get rid of, so will still be first out the door. So even though they are affected least by the changes they'll be the first to go. Additionally he's some numbers for you pre banking disaster DWP had i think I read 62,000 whole (full) time equivalent posts, this was due for cuts, pre banking crisis, but it has since ballooned to 84,000 to cope with the downturn to deal with the extra claims, etc. Most of these extra posts are fixed term contracts and are feared will not be renewed post election, fair enough. Then the cuts begin. Changes to terms and conditions also mean while benefits are reduced, they also make it easy and cheaper for privatisation, you'll like that I'm sure.
Oh, as a civil servant I can say, I too haven't had a payrise for 2 years, not bleating about it, I'm lucky I managed to play the property casino in my spare time, and have a proto part time business as an extra income.
Nonegreen will along shortly to shoot his load, well you can guess what you can do...
And it's not about a payrise, it's mainly about changes to the compulsory redundancy scheme and the voluntary severance schemes, which have hardly ever been needed in the past (naturally wastage, redeployment, etc), so havent been needed. But it's fairly clear that they'd only be trying to halve these contractual agreements because cuts are coming, they must think civil servants are stupid. Difference probably none, you piss and moan about the french blockading things on here, and then complain about fuel prices, the uncomfortable British way sheep of do nothing. Well no one will listen, even though it will go unreported. But this not about pay, it's about contractual agreements (you know like bankers bonuses) going back decades that they never expected to need, like one could argue HMG never bothering to set up a civil service fund, it was always going to be taken care of out of taxation or so they HMG said. That's what terms civil servants used to sign on for but never expected to need, most of these schemes have been closed to new employees for years, now there's a real possibility
of redundancies they (HMG) are trying to rewrite the contracts.
The shame of it is the younger civil servants, don't realise they are still the cheaper ones to get rid of, so will still be first out the door. So even though they are affected least by the changes they'll be the first to go. Additionally he's some numbers for you pre banking disaster DWP had i think I read 62,000 whole (full) time equivalent posts, this was due for cuts, pre banking crisis, but it has since ballooned to 84,000 to cope with the downturn to deal with the extra claims, etc. Most of these extra posts are fixed term contracts and are feared will not be renewed post election, fair enough. Then the cuts begin. Changes to terms and conditions also mean while benefits are reduced, they also make it easy and cheaper for privatisation, you'll like that I'm sure.
Oh, as a civil servant I can say, I too haven't had a payrise for 2 years, not bleating about it, I'm lucky I managed to play the property casino in my spare time, and have a proto part time business as an extra income.
Nonegreen will along shortly to shoot his load, well you can guess what you can do...
Edited by Northern Munkee on Sunday 7th March 21:29
Northern Munkee said:
And HMRC.
And it's not about a payrise, it's mainly about changes to the compulsory redundancy scheme and the voluntary severance schemes, which have hardly ever been needed in the past (naturally wastage, redeployment, etc), so havent been needed. But it's fairly clear that they'd only be trying to halve these contractual agreements because cuts are coming, they must think civil servants are stupid. Difference probably none, you piss and moan about the french blockading things on here, and then complain about fuel prices, the uncomfortable British way sheep of do nothing. Well no one will listen, even though it will go unreported. But this not about pay, it's about contractual agreements (you know like bankers bonuses) going back decades that they never expected to need, like one could argue HMG never bothering to set up a civil service fund, it was always going to be taken care of out of taxation or so they HMG said. That's what terms civil servants used to sign on for but never expected to need, most of these schemes have been closed to new employees for years, now there's a real possibility
of redundancies they (HMG) are trying to rewrite the contracts.
The shame of it is the younger civil servants, don't realise they are still the cheaper ones to get rid of, so will still be first out the door. So even though they are affected least by the changes they'll be the first to go. Additionally he's some numbers for you pre banking disaster DWP had i think I read 62,000 while time equivalent posts, this was due for cuts, it has since ballooned to 84,000 to cope with the downturn to deal with claims, etc. Most of these extra posts are fixed term contracts and are feared will not be renewed post election, fair enough. Then the cuts begin. Changes to terms and conditions also mean while benefits are reduced, they also make it easy and cheaper for privatisation you'll like that I'm sure.
Oh, as a civil servant I can say, I too haven't had a payrise for 2 years, not bleating about it, I'm lucky I managed to play the property casino in my spare time, and have a proto part time business as an extra income.
Nonegreen will along shortly to shoot his load, well you can guess you can do...
Awww diddums did oo not get a payrise?And it's not about a payrise, it's mainly about changes to the compulsory redundancy scheme and the voluntary severance schemes, which have hardly ever been needed in the past (naturally wastage, redeployment, etc), so havent been needed. But it's fairly clear that they'd only be trying to halve these contractual agreements because cuts are coming, they must think civil servants are stupid. Difference probably none, you piss and moan about the french blockading things on here, and then complain about fuel prices, the uncomfortable British way sheep of do nothing. Well no one will listen, even though it will go unreported. But this not about pay, it's about contractual agreements (you know like bankers bonuses) going back decades that they never expected to need, like one could argue HMG never bothering to set up a civil service fund, it was always going to be taken care of out of taxation or so they HMG said. That's what terms civil servants used to sign on for but never expected to need, most of these schemes have been closed to new employees for years, now there's a real possibility
of redundancies they (HMG) are trying to rewrite the contracts.
The shame of it is the younger civil servants, don't realise they are still the cheaper ones to get rid of, so will still be first out the door. So even though they are affected least by the changes they'll be the first to go. Additionally he's some numbers for you pre banking disaster DWP had i think I read 62,000 while time equivalent posts, this was due for cuts, it has since ballooned to 84,000 to cope with the downturn to deal with claims, etc. Most of these extra posts are fixed term contracts and are feared will not be renewed post election, fair enough. Then the cuts begin. Changes to terms and conditions also mean while benefits are reduced, they also make it easy and cheaper for privatisation you'll like that I'm sure.
Oh, as a civil servant I can say, I too haven't had a payrise for 2 years, not bleating about it, I'm lucky I managed to play the property casino in my spare time, and have a proto part time business as an extra income.
Nonegreen will along shortly to shoot his load, well you can guess you can do...
digimeistter said:
Eric Mc said:
Does the DSS still exist?
My apologies it's now the DWP i'm told, god knows what pensions have got to do with it?Happy to explain some of the uses you believe your taxes are being wasted on.
nonegreen said:
Northern Munkee said:
And HMRC.
And it's not about a payrise, it's mainly about changes to the compulsory redundancy scheme and the voluntary severance schemes, which have hardly ever been needed in the past (naturally wastage, redeployment, etc), so havent been needed. But it's fairly clear that they'd only be trying to halve these contractual agreements because cuts are coming, they must think civil servants are stupid. Difference probably none, you piss and moan about the french blockading things on here, and then complain about fuel prices, the uncomfortable British way sheep of do nothing. Well no one will listen, even though it will go unreported. But this not about pay, it's about contractual agreements (you know like bankers bonuses) going back decades that they never expected to need, like one could argue HMG never bothering to set up a civil service fund, it was always going to be taken care of out of taxation or so they HMG said. That's what terms civil servants used to sign on for but never expected to need, most of these schemes have been closed to new employees for years, now there's a real possibility
of redundancies they (HMG) are trying to rewrite the contracts.
The shame of it is the younger civil servants, don't realise they are still the cheaper ones to get rid of, so will still be first out the door. So even though they are affected least by the changes they'll be the first to go. Additionally he's some numbers for you pre banking disaster DWP had i think I read 62,000 while time equivalent posts, this was due for cuts, it has since ballooned to 84,000 to cope with the downturn to deal with claims, etc. Most of these extra posts are fixed term contracts and are feared will not be renewed post election, fair enough. Then the cuts begin. Changes to terms and conditions also mean while benefits are reduced, they also make it easy and cheaper for privatisation you'll like that I'm sure.
Oh, as a civil servant I can say, I too haven't had a payrise for 2 years, not bleating about it, I'm lucky I managed to play the property casino in my spare time, and have a proto part time business as an extra income.
Nonegreen will along shortly to shoot his load, well you can guess you can do...
Awww diddums did oo not get a payrise?And it's not about a payrise, it's mainly about changes to the compulsory redundancy scheme and the voluntary severance schemes, which have hardly ever been needed in the past (naturally wastage, redeployment, etc), so havent been needed. But it's fairly clear that they'd only be trying to halve these contractual agreements because cuts are coming, they must think civil servants are stupid. Difference probably none, you piss and moan about the french blockading things on here, and then complain about fuel prices, the uncomfortable British way sheep of do nothing. Well no one will listen, even though it will go unreported. But this not about pay, it's about contractual agreements (you know like bankers bonuses) going back decades that they never expected to need, like one could argue HMG never bothering to set up a civil service fund, it was always going to be taken care of out of taxation or so they HMG said. That's what terms civil servants used to sign on for but never expected to need, most of these schemes have been closed to new employees for years, now there's a real possibility
of redundancies they (HMG) are trying to rewrite the contracts.
The shame of it is the younger civil servants, don't realise they are still the cheaper ones to get rid of, so will still be first out the door. So even though they are affected least by the changes they'll be the first to go. Additionally he's some numbers for you pre banking disaster DWP had i think I read 62,000 while time equivalent posts, this was due for cuts, it has since ballooned to 84,000 to cope with the downturn to deal with claims, etc. Most of these extra posts are fixed term contracts and are feared will not be renewed post election, fair enough. Then the cuts begin. Changes to terms and conditions also mean while benefits are reduced, they also make it easy and cheaper for privatisation you'll like that I'm sure.
Oh, as a civil servant I can say, I too haven't had a payrise for 2 years, not bleating about it, I'm lucky I managed to play the property casino in my spare time, and have a proto part time business as an extra income.
Nonegreen will along shortly to shoot his load, well you can guess you can do...
Northern Munkee said:
nonegreen said:
Northern Munkee said:
And HMRC.
And it's not about a payrise, it's mainly about changes to the compulsory redundancy scheme and the voluntary severance schemes, which have hardly ever been needed in the past (naturally wastage, redeployment, etc), so havent been needed. But it's fairly clear that they'd only be trying to halve these contractual agreements because cuts are coming, they must think civil servants are stupid. Difference probably none, you piss and moan about the french blockading things on here, and then complain about fuel prices, the uncomfortable British way sheep of do nothing. Well no one will listen, even though it will go unreported. But this not about pay, it's about contractual agreements (you know like bankers bonuses) going back decades that they never expected to need, like one could argue HMG never bothering to set up a civil service fund, it was always going to be taken care of out of taxation or so they HMG said. That's what terms civil servants used to sign on for but never expected to need, most of these schemes have been closed to new employees for years, now there's a real possibility
of redundancies they (HMG) are trying to rewrite the contracts.
The shame of it is the younger civil servants, don't realise they are still the cheaper ones to get rid of, so will still be first out the door. So even though they are affected least by the changes they'll be the first to go. Additionally he's some numbers for you pre banking disaster DWP had i think I read 62,000 while time equivalent posts, this was due for cuts, it has since ballooned to 84,000 to cope with the downturn to deal with claims, etc. Most of these extra posts are fixed term contracts and are feared will not be renewed post election, fair enough. Then the cuts begin. Changes to terms and conditions also mean while benefits are reduced, they also make it easy and cheaper for privatisation you'll like that I'm sure.
Oh, as a civil servant I can say, I too haven't had a payrise for 2 years, not bleating about it, I'm lucky I managed to play the property casino in my spare time, and have a proto part time business as an extra income.
Nonegreen will along shortly to shoot his load, well you can guess you can do...
Awww diddums did oo not get a payrise?And it's not about a payrise, it's mainly about changes to the compulsory redundancy scheme and the voluntary severance schemes, which have hardly ever been needed in the past (naturally wastage, redeployment, etc), so havent been needed. But it's fairly clear that they'd only be trying to halve these contractual agreements because cuts are coming, they must think civil servants are stupid. Difference probably none, you piss and moan about the french blockading things on here, and then complain about fuel prices, the uncomfortable British way sheep of do nothing. Well no one will listen, even though it will go unreported. But this not about pay, it's about contractual agreements (you know like bankers bonuses) going back decades that they never expected to need, like one could argue HMG never bothering to set up a civil service fund, it was always going to be taken care of out of taxation or so they HMG said. That's what terms civil servants used to sign on for but never expected to need, most of these schemes have been closed to new employees for years, now there's a real possibility
of redundancies they (HMG) are trying to rewrite the contracts.
The shame of it is the younger civil servants, don't realise they are still the cheaper ones to get rid of, so will still be first out the door. So even though they are affected least by the changes they'll be the first to go. Additionally he's some numbers for you pre banking disaster DWP had i think I read 62,000 while time equivalent posts, this was due for cuts, it has since ballooned to 84,000 to cope with the downturn to deal with claims, etc. Most of these extra posts are fixed term contracts and are feared will not be renewed post election, fair enough. Then the cuts begin. Changes to terms and conditions also mean while benefits are reduced, they also make it easy and cheaper for privatisation you'll like that I'm sure.
Oh, as a civil servant I can say, I too haven't had a payrise for 2 years, not bleating about it, I'm lucky I managed to play the property casino in my spare time, and have a proto part time business as an extra income.
Nonegreen will along shortly to shoot his load, well you can guess you can do...
Without exception though they have never done a hard days work in their lives, but nice people nonethelessThe problem with making so many redundant from DWP is that it's not a top-heavy department, i.e. a large proportion of the total staff number are engaged with the customer interface.
This not only means it is likely to affect Joe Public more, but as the average salary of local office staff is generally lower than central office, more will need to go, making things even worse.
Regardless of whether you have sympathy for DWP staff, it's shame a service is being reduced just when so many people might need it most.
This not only means it is likely to affect Joe Public more, but as the average salary of local office staff is generally lower than central office, more will need to go, making things even worse.
Regardless of whether you have sympathy for DWP staff, it's shame a service is being reduced just when so many people might need it most.
Northern Munkee said:
Work because they run jobcentres dealing with labour Market activities - getting people into jobs
Are you sure? 
I've tried to recruit through Jobcentres / DWP, at no point did I ever get the impression that they were working to get people into job, pissing me off, yes, wanting to ask inane questions and demand I fill out diversity and stupidity questionnaires, yes, help find qualified / suitable candidates, noFourWheelDrift said:
digimeistter said:
DSS are striking tomorrow
Will anyone actually notice?Doesn't seem to have hit the news radar, I can't find any link to it at all.
some of the great work achieved giving away our money lol...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1256175/Ca...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1256175/Ca...
Sticks. said:
The problem with making so many redundant from DWP is that it's not a top-heavy department, i.e. a large proportion of the total staff number are engaged with the customer interface.
This not only means it is likely to affect Joe Public more, but as the average salary of local office staff is generally lower than central office, more will need to go, making things even worse.
Regardless of whether you have sympathy for DWP staff, it's shame a service is being reduced just when so many people might need it most.
Out of projects I have worked on for DWP, DfES & NHS I can honestly say that the DWP had the greatest number of wasters by far. They worshipped the grade structure where as a consultant you were awarded a symbolic grade. In line with their policies you could only directly contact people a certain number of grades above or below you. JFDI was not in their vocabulary. This not only means it is likely to affect Joe Public more, but as the average salary of local office staff is generally lower than central office, more will need to go, making things even worse.
Regardless of whether you have sympathy for DWP staff, it's shame a service is being reduced just when so many people might need it most.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff