Public sector 'workers'? (update)

On Saturday I blogged about the extraordinary working arrangements of many public sector worker. My post attracted a rather indignant response from 'The Rev' which I quote in full here:

'I would advise anyone reading this extraordinary piece of propaganda in the Failygraph to also read the comments section on the website. Here you will learn that this "perk" has actually existed since 1973. Scarcely a current news item! Why haS this suddenly become "controversial" after 40 years? 

The article has been so phrased as to give the impression that we Civil Servants are being given three free days off a month. Hardly.

All flexitime means is that we can take up to three "flexi" days a month off if we have worked that extra time over and above our contracted hours. What on earth is wrong with that? If you worked overtime would you not expect either to be paid for it or given time off in lieu?

It is one of the few remaining privileges in a Civil Service which is completely unrecognisable from the tea-swilling days of the past. Our call centres operate until 8pm each evening not 5.30 and are extremely pressured environments in which to work. And anyone taking more than 8 days sick a leave in my department would likely be disciplined. Notch that up to 12 and you have a good chance of being out of the door.

I wouldnt mind following a Failygraph journalist around for a day to find out how stressful his job truly is...'

Good grief.... OK so the perks have existed for even longer than I thought, that makes it worse not better that they exist at all. But the passage that annoyed me most was this one:

'All flexitime means is that we can take up to three "flexi" days a month off if we have worked that extra time over and above our contracted hours. What on earth is wrong with that? If you worked overtime would you not expect either to be paid for it or given time off in lieu?'

In the private sector I know people who regularly (more than twice a week) work more than an hour extra a day. They do not get paid overtime or receive time off in lieu. In the private sector we have to work hard to try and keep our jobs, in the public sector the position is somewhat different.



Likewise regarding the sick leave point. Eight days sick a year is the cut-off for reasonableness? You might be sacked for taking for than 12 in a year? In my experience, in the private sector any more than three or four a year is looked at with suspicion.

As to your call centres point, are these the same people working from 8 to 8 or are there two shifts?

I really don't care what you claim, we know the facts: much of the public sector in this country is mollycoddled, overpaid, massively over pension funded and less interested in the people they should be serving than in protecting their perks.

Bonus culture

There have been many attacks by Labour ministers and others on the Banks paying their chiefs large bonuses. Less publicity has been given to the bonuses being paid to leading civil servants. The Mail reports that:

"Cabinet Office mandarins were given almost £1 million in bonuses last year, it has emerged.

A total of 105 payouts totalling £972,500 were given to senior civil servants in 2008 - an average bonus of almost £9,300.

That compared to 123 payments worth £895,000 spent on bonuses in 2007."

Why so much money given as bonuses to Cabinet Office chiefs? Here may lie the explanation (my emphasis):

"According to the Cabinet Office website, the department has "an overarching purpose of making government work better" by supporting the Prime Minister, supporting the Cabinet and strengthening the civil service.

The average salary of a civil servant is £40,000 but permanent secretaries can earn anything up to £200,000.

A spokesperson for the Taxpayers' Alliances said: 'It defies belief that while the economy falters and tens of thousands of people in the private sector have been losing their jobs, the big bonus culture continues as normal in Whitehall.'"

Ah so might they be getting bonuses for supporting Gordon Brown and his Cabinet?

Following Digby Jones' recent comments, I wonder which half of these senior officials should be sacked?