Evo1883
Well-Known Member
The councils wages are below the market rate , it's quite simple , we are fighting to get to the market rate ..whilst retaining our working conditions
Not just you I guess but if others can't feed their families, why wouldn't they go straight to a job for 10k more a year?
I'm confused. If you are getting better benefits, full sick pay, better pension from the council then why are temps wages being compared?
Also mate , there are many many HGV jobs available, mostly paying more money than the council .. if every driver left CCC they would find it incredibly hard to fill all the vacancies on the current rate and they would have to raise the wages ( like they are doing for these agency drivers now that are filling in )
The councils wages are below the market rate , it's quite simple , we are fighting to get to the market rate ..whilst retaining our working conditions
Again though, you are comparing the hourly rate an agency driver gets that is higher which is normal.
Its just got very real for labour .. and shes correct View attachment 23795
What makes the council so special though that people would want to stick around rather than just walk away into a new job on much more money? This is what I can't get my head round.
Why go through the stress of it all when you could be in a new job by Monday on more money?
I'm not , I'm comparing permanent salaries .. the council pay below the market rate .
The only way the council could get workers was to pay them the market date
I've already told you I wish to retain my pension , which is good
But you are saying you don't want to leave the council for much more than market rate so surely they would still get staff?
Not just you, other people who are striking. Why aren't they walking into much better paid driving jobs?
Takes me 11 years to get to what somebody who started after me gets
I agree with you on that point by the way.
It should be identical for starters.
Pensions , work life balance etc .. many reasons..
The starting rate is around 5000 below the market rate .. the council cil have spent 1.8 million during this whole charade , could have been resolved with 250k
It's not quite the sob story made out by some of the other people then? (you haven't given one so not aimed at you).
If I couldn't feed my daughter I'd be straight out the door into a new job on more money.
I'm still confused though, you are saying the normal rate is £5k less with the council but people won't go to a new job because of the pension and work life balance. Are they not the same in jobs for £5k more?
I've driven for many companies , most take the piss out of their workforce pushing them to the very limit of their driving hours , which in itself is wrong .. they do get more money than the council , several pounds an hour more , they work more hours , pull in more money but have a worse work life balance
While I don't agree with colleagues being paid more for doing the same for less time there, not sure it can be compared to jobs with more hours, less benefits and a worse work life balance. That's why you get paid more for it.
What's that thing about more money for working near Christmas? Or was that bollocks from the council?
Agree it should've been resolved by now but even if the reported 1.8m is accurate that's a one off charge. 250k is per year so 7 years to recover and if they simply caved in at the start, it's a bad precedent for any others considering action or the next time the same decision makers are in happy and think it will be easy, so whilst we'll past that point now, I'd assume initially at least, some of it is deterrent.The starting rate is around 5000 below the market rate .. the council have spent 1.8 million during this whole charade , could have been resolved with 250k
Agree it should've been resolved by now but even if the reported 1.8m is accurate that's a one off charge. 250k is per year so 7 years to recover and if they simply caved in at the start, it's a bad precedent for any others considering action or the next time the same decision makers are in happy and think it will be easy, so whilst we'll past that point now, I'd assume initially at least, some of it is deterrent.
The council have had Christmas week off for over 30 years , the council offered a 3.5k payemnt to take that away from workers for life .
Unfortunately , seems many workers enjoy a week at home with their families at Christmas so declined it.
Which is understandable
So a much better pension than other jobs, a week off at Christmas, working less hours, full sick pay and wondering why it pays less than other driving jobs?
Surely it should be like for like, if you want the 5k more to take it to other jobs then you have the same working hours, pension etc as other jobs?
Sounds cushty. No wonder people don't just go and get a new job on 10k more.
Think this is being overcomplicated. If they are having to pay new recruits a higher rate because nobody will take the job then the existing employees should be given, at minimum, the same.
Not sure many people would be happy if they'd spent a decade in the job to find out newly qualified people were coming in on substantially more money than them.
Yeah I agree with that.Think this is being overcomplicated. If they are having to pay new recruits a higher rate because nobody will take the job then the existing employees should be given, at minimum, the same.
Not sure many people would be happy if they'd spent a decade in the job to find out newly qualified people were coming in on substantially more money than them.
Yeah I agree with that.
So are the new recruits striking too?
I'm really confused, so they get a far better pension but paid less now which is why he won't leave to a job paying 10k more a year.
Are the new recruits receiving the same gold plated pension is the real question here.
Yep, stick to the argument about new starters coming in on more, that one runs!
Unless I'm missing something the confusion is because some people are comparing the council to private employers where there are different terms and conditions.I'm really confused, so they get a far better pension but paid less now which is why he won't leave to a job paying 10k more a year.
Unless I'm missing something the confusion is because some people are comparing the council to private employers where there are different terms and conditions.
The strikers aren't asking for pay to be matched to that offered by private employers, they're asking it to be matched to what the council is already paying new recruits and will have to pay to their replacements if the strikers were all to leave and work elsewhere.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?