View Single Post
Old 26-03-2012, 10:19   #66
nomadking
cf.mega poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Northampton
Services: Virgin Media TV&BB 350Mb, V6 STB
Posts: 7,865
nomadking has a bronze arraynomadking has a bronze arraynomadking has a bronze array
nomadking has a bronze arraynomadking has a bronze arraynomadking has a bronze arraynomadking has a bronze arraynomadking has a bronze arraynomadking has a bronze arraynomadking has a bronze arraynomadking has a bronze array
Re: National pay rates may be scrapped for public workers

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chrysalis View Post
by increase the private sector pay rates?

adding a postcode lottery to job pay in the public sector is bad for growth but I do also agree with the point its bad as well for other reasons already stated such as.

attracting decent staff to poor areas, like good GPs and teachers.
people doing the same work but for different levels of pay based on where they live. I think its more likely to be based on the companys address tho, so it may be possible someone will live in an expensive area but travel to a poor located workplace. So it may force people to move to poorer areas.

So in affect it will make rundown areas even worse and good areas better widening poor/rich gap.
And reduce competitiveness in those areas? That would lead to massive closures and job losses.

Why is it a postcode lottery? If there are variations in the private sector, why can't those variations be reflected in the public sector. Having higher effective rates of pay doesn't guarantee better GPs and teachers. Why should those in the more expensive areas lose out on the supposedly better staff? Why should someone in the PUBLIC SECTOR be subsided to live in a more expensive area and yet work in a cheaper area?

How could it make run-down areas worse? If more people with jobs move into those areas, wouldn't that reverse any decline?
nomadking is offline