Todays' strike - Food for thought

[alex-adam]

Regardless of the merits (or otherwise) of todays strikes, here's something to consider:

About 2 million public servants, financed by the council tax and income tax payers have withdrawn their services - should we taxpayers be offered a reduction in council and income tax equivalent to one days contribution against services not received?

Also consider this, the 2 million strikers will of course not be paid by their employers. Lets assume that the average wage these days is about £25k per annum, which is £96.13p per day. my simple mathematics makes that about £193,300,000.00 which the public sector employers have saved.

[DGoulston]

my simple mathematics makes that about £193,300,000.00 which the public sector employers have saved.

Sounds like the people at the top are going to be getting bigger bonuses this year :P

[Two_Sheds]

Public sector workers are taxpayers

[alex-adam]

Public sector workers are taxpayers

Yes, you are quite correct. - They pay tax on the salary which is provided by all the other taxpayers.

But, you seem to have missed the point I was making, namely, why should one pay for a service which is not being provided.

[Potstubsdustbins]

Public sector workers are taxpayers

Yes they are but they pay their tax with money from the public purse. The only true revenue comes from private industry tax payers.

I heard one argument today that it would be cheaper to pay them unemployment benefits than to employ them. The two women having the discussion were taking things to the extreme even suggesting that everything they have from the socks on their feet to the cars they drive come from other tax payers.
From some of the conversations overheard today it does seem the strike has cost them some public sympathy.

Colin.

[zazen999]

Yes they are but they pay their tax with money from the public purse.

But money that they earned doing some work.

Just like anyone who earns money doing work.

[zazen999]

But, you seem to have missed the point I was making, namely, why should one pay for a service which is not being provided.

So what happens when there is a snow day and people can't get in? Or an extra bank holiday?

I can't find the thread that was started earlier this year asking this question then, if you could point to it that would be great.

[Snadger]

Regardless of the merits (or otherwise) of todays strikes, here's something to consider:

About 2 million public servants, financed by the council tax and income tax payers have withdrawn their services - should we taxpayers be offered a reduction in council and income tax equivalent to one days contribution against services not received?

Nope,they'll just lop it off our pensions like everything else they want to pillage it for. Thats what the strike is about...........

[SarzWix]

Why don't you go and ask some teachers how many hours they work that are unpaid? I.e., on their own time? And then work out how much it would cost to pay them for those unpaid hours over the course of a year? And do the same for nurses, care-workers, firefighters. And then calculate how much every person would need to pay in tax to cover those extra hours?

Should keep you busy in slightly less pointless calculations, and also provide food for thought.

[northepaul]

Perhaps this analogy'll make you think again:
"A Banker, a School Teacher, a Tory MP and a Daily Mail reader are sat around a table. In front of them is a plate, on which there are ten biscuits. The Banker scoffs nine of the biscuits, then the Tory turns to the Daily Mail reader and whispers in his ear "watch out, that teacher is after your biscuit"

Food for thought....

[singleseeder]

Why don't you go and ask some teachers how many hours they work that are unpaid? I.e., on their own time? ..............

My daughter is a teacher so I am well aware of the out of hours work. However, I used to work up to 65hrs a week for 37.5hrs pay in the private sector. I'm not saying that either is right.

I am surprised that union members don't complain about their union leader's pay and perks though. For example, I believe that Arthur Scargill still has a grace and favour appartment in London paid for by the NUM.

[singleseeder]

Perhaps this analogy'll make you think again:
"A Banker, a School Teacher, a Tory MP and a Daily Mail reader are sat around a table. In front of them is a plate, on which there are ten biscuits. The Banker scoffs nine of the biscuits, then the Tory turns to the Daily Mail reader and whispers in his ear "watch out, that teacher is after your biscuit"

Food for thought....

Aaah, but who bought the biscuits!

I'll get my coat

[alex-adam]

I really think this one has got at some of you.

1 - If you pay for something and you don't get it, why not expect a refund?

2 - The Gov't / Public service employers have trousered £200Million - where is it going?

[zazen999]

Is that all you are concerned about?

How about:
Parents; you may be annoyed that your kids were off school today - if it wasn't for the unions your kids would have been at work.

*stolen from twitter.

[singleseeder]

I really think this one has got at some of you.

1 - If you pay for something and you don't get it, why not expect a refund?

2 - The Gov't / Public service employers have trousered £200Million - where is it going?

Actually, I do get your point and I am not sure of the answer.

Having been a temp in the public sector I have seen horrendous waste; both in time, materials and money. The admin of stopping a day's pay from those who were striking will probably wipe out a chunk of the £200m and I'm guessing that there might be a bit of overtime paid to catch up on work not done. Oh, and were there extra police on a nice little earner today policing the marches?