Debate About Wages

[whhistle]

Some thoughts:

It does seem a bit sad that so many people seem to be so excited about a computer program being able to drive a train far better than a human ever could or has. Just because the DFT or a TOC says its good for us doesnt mean we all have to agree.

But that's what "that generation" is about.
People are greedy. And thus, those who are shareholders in companies, or executives are in the mindset that they must accrue as much money as possible. Get a computer to do the job means you don't need to pay a wage.
Yes, that's a complete generalisation and not everyone from "that" generation is like that. But can you tell me why a head teacher of a school earns more than the prime minister? Or earns more than a fire fighter <-- someone who saves lives? It's not right, but they are from "that" generation who have shaped this country and taken all they can from it since the 60s.

Year 2025-30 train captain sitting in cab as computer drives train. No need for route knowledge or braking points required means £35K a year not £70K.

Jealousy does strange things to people as this post shows.

To be fair though, it's an excessive wage for what is really needed.
But then I don't think absolute route knowledge is needed. Why have speed limit signs if the drivers are supposed to know off by heart? I don't know the angle of the hills I drive up, but I can navigate them safely, so don't understand why drivers need to know this either. A legacy mechanic left over from steam days?
I mean, fire fighters don't earn that much and they are in more danger every day (in real terms).
Hell, even people who work in nuclear power plants don't earn that much!

Do you think its a good idea for a race to the bottom with regards to pay?
A poorer salary pays less tax, less national insurance, stifles economies and growth and has the potential to increase staff turnover.

But why is it a race to the top?
Higher salary creates greed.
Greed feeds tax evasion and higher prices. Hence there's a generation of kids these days who:
1) Don't know who they are.
2) Are highly self-concious.
3) Barely know what gender they are.
4) Will never be able to buy their own home.

I mean, it was almost a right for people in the 50s/60s and early 70s to be able to buy a house. So why now has it been made nearly impossible for younger generations?

Yes people get paid more now than they did but it went up significantly in the 80s and 90s <-- once agian feeding "that" generation.

Such as posts like this:

Unionisation, sorry .
Let us know what it is like at the bottom, survival of the fittest and all that.

And that way of thinking is acceptable/welcomed?

It's like court jesters of yonder years. How they managed to rise to the top and earn over $1 million per episode of a TV series I'll never know. (Lets face it, modern day court jesters are just entertainers.) They read pre-prepared lines. Their salary paid for by advertising by "Choco Bar" or whatever. How does "Choco Bar" pay? By rasing the prices of their products, hurting the masses.

Football players are another example. How does BT Sport pay for rights to the games? By raising prices of landlines and simple broadband. Once again, hurting the masses to feed the wealthy, who don't care about anyone but themselves.

This is not a dig at train drivers, but it's an excellent example given the subject of this forum. You could apply this to pilots, school "business managers", sports men and women, TV Presenters and a variety of other businesses

 

[birchesgreen]

Can you explain how tax evasion has led to gender confusion? To be honest this just sounds like a right wing pub rant.

 

[bb21]

How do you draw a comparison between the pay for a headteacher and a fire fighter? Two completely different jobs and I wouldn't even know where to start drawing similarities. May I suggest that you don't really know what a headteacher's job involves if your principle criteria is whether the job "saves lives"?

I am also at a loss what the "that generation" is supposed to refer to.

 

[whhistle]

Can you explain how tax evasion has led to gender confusion?

Many kids these days don't know who they are and are struggling with identity. The fact they are pushed to be different, when it's totally okay to be the same isn't mentioned.

Parents these days are so concerned with their kids having the "best" life as they didn't. So they force their fixes on to their kids.
Greed encourages thinking about ways to get around paying things like tax, and the government doesn't have the backbone to change it. So, to provide their kids with the best life, there are some who have to be greedy, all health and safety concious, obsessed with using "kills all bacteria" sprays, that then give kids a weak immune system.

You can't lie that there are a generation of people who think it's their right ot be paid highly for something that isn't worth that much and is simply ruining things for future generations. There's loads of examples from this to the use of plastics everywhere.

How do you draw a comparison between the pay for a headteacher and a fire fighter? Two completely different jobs and I wouldn't even know where to start drawing similarities.
I am also at a loss what the "that generation" is supposed to refer to.

A head teacher who earns £160,000 a year or a fire fighter who earns £36,000 a year.
There are no similarities between the roles, but do you really think a head teacher should be paid more than a fire fighter?
The generation that was born in the late 50s/60s/early 70s.

 

[GB]

How do you put a monetary value on someone who’s job involves not only saving lives but significantly risking their own?

 

[Domh245]

A head teacher who earns £160,000 a year or a fire fighter who earns £36,000 a year.
There are no similarities between the roles, but do you really think a head teacher should be paid more than a fire fighter?
The generation that was born in the late 50s/60s/early 70s.

When you look and think about it, the firefighter job (and I'm not trying to be demeaning) is essentially doing manual labour albeit in especially challenging and hazardous conditions. The headteacher however is responsible for the management and operation of a school - they are the ones ultimately responsible for the education of potentially over 200 children, if not more, and the pay reflects that responsibility, as well as a reflection on the wider pay situation as well - those head teachers could easily go into a job at a high management level, so that sort of salary is necessary to retain them.

 

[telstarbox]

From Hampshire Fire Service:

Everyone has their own idea of what the fire and rescue service does. You see the pictures every day on TV of firefighters putting out fires, but that is far from all we do.

The truth is that fighting fires makes up only a small part of the job. Our prevention work to stop fires and accidents from happening in the first place is just as important. Firefighters work in the community, talking to people, listening, teaching, helping, getting involved sharing knowledge and preventing fires before they start in order to save lives.

Firefighters educate people in how to prevent fire, escape in the event of a fire and on fire hazards at home and in business. We visit schools, teach and work with children and the vulnerable to raise awareness of dangers like fireworks and matches. We encourage safety initiatives in businesses and inspect buildings to make sure they meet fire safety regulations.

We also face many different challenges in today's world; unpredictable weather such as floods and storms, transport accidents, unforeseen events like oil spills and the growing threat of terrorism. Helping to protect society against all of these dangers requires an innovative approach and new kinds of skills and knowledge.

 

[telstarbox]

Also worth pointing out that good headteachers (and teachers) in general can have a huge impact on the lives of the children in their care, particularly those children who have a difficult life at home. It's often teachers who are the first to spot signs of abuse or neglect.

 

[Bromley boy]

To be fair though, it's an excessive wage for what is really needed.

On what possible basis can you say this?! How do you know “what is really needed”? Who are you to say the wage of a job you’ve never even done is excessive?

I know quite a few people who earn six figure salaries for office based jobs and indeed earned rather more than the average train driver salary myself in previous roles. Having done the job, considering the enormous responsibility, my view is that the pay is not excessive.

What you probably mean by excessive is that it’s more than you earn.

But then I don't think absolute route knowledge is needed. Why have speed limit signs if the drivers are supposed to know off by heart? I don't know the angle of the hills I drive up, but I can navigate them safely, so don't understand why drivers need to know this either. A legacy mechanic left over from steam days?
I mean, fire fighters don't earn that much and they are in more danger every day (in real terms).
Hell, even people who work in nuclear power plants don't earn that much!

Drivers are required to know linespeeds even if speed boards are missing/defaced.

Those are spurious and irrelevant comparisons. What on earth does being a firefighter have in common with being a traindriver or someone who works in a nuclear power plant.

Who exactly are you talking about? The caretaker, the engineer, the MD? Homer Simpson?!

 

[WelshBluebird]

I mean, it was almost a right for people in the 50s/60s and early 70s to be able to buy a house. So why now has it been made nearly impossible for younger generations?

Because the older generation thought it was a great idea to sell off council houses, use property as an investment / pension rather than a home, allow insane lending that naturally led to higher prices, etc etc. Nothing at all to do with the younger generation thank you very much.

 

[deltic]

The headteacher of my daughter's school not only runs a school which in terms of progress the children make is in the top 1% of the country but has also turned around 2 schools that were failing - so that one is also in the top 1% of the country and the other is on its way. In doing so he has radically improved the outcomes of a couple of thousand young people and probably greatly reducing the chances they get involved in gangs and a life of crime. How much is that worth to society?

Due to the training and safety equipment firefighting is probably a safer job than many others - construction and farming tend to have relatively higher accident rates and are not well paid.

 

[Bletchleyite]

A head teacher who earns £160,000 a year or a fire fighter who earns £36,000 a year.
There are no similarities between the roles, but do you really think a head teacher should be paid more than a fire fighter?
The generation that was born in the late 50s/60s/early 70s.

Employment is by and large a free market (other than a small amount of regulation like the minimum wage). So in principle, the scarcity of employees willing and able to do a specific job dictates the wage, not the amount of effort the job involves.

 

[cactustwirly]

It's called capitalism...

 

[pt_mad]

Employment is by and large a free market (other than a small amount of regulation like the minimum wage). So in principle, the scarcity of employees willing and able to do a specific job dictates the wage, not the amount of effort the job involves.

+1. And the free market does seem to have driven down wages to a fair extent. Which is why realtime comparable wages remain at pre economic crash levels.

And the free market is also responsible for driving up house prices to unreachable levels through the rule of supply and demand.

So many people are paid only the minimum wage simply because companies are forced to pay at least that and cannot pay any less. There are no doubt those in our society who would work for less than minimum wage, but thank goodness they are protected.

 

[Polarbear]

I'd disagree that "all" employments (and wages) are necessarily determined by the "free market". For those working in the public sector, it's very much dictated by government policy (and unfortunately in this country, the ramblings of a right wing press that specialises in distorting facts to suit their own agenda).

As for train drivers, some points were made up-thread about the need to know about speed restrictions & gradients, with comparison being made to driving a car. Given a train is hundreds of times heavier than any car (and most road vehicles), having significantly more mass than most road transport, absolute route knowledge for train drivers will remain a prerequisite for the foreseeable future.

Yes, there are instances where payments for services rendered appear out of kilter, but there's no scale by which to measure this, so it's almost impossible to quantify in my opinion.

 

[Bromley boy]

We can settle this debate about wages quite easily.

1. Did the OP work on the railway? Yes. (I seem to recall he posted about working on the platforms or similar).

2. Was the OP a driver? No.

3. Would the OP consider drivers’ wages “excessive” if he’d been able to achieve them for himself? Unlikely.

4. Does the OP have any real understanding of the responsibility of the driver role (a role he’s never done himself)? Definitely not.

End of discussion.

 

[baz962]

Don't know where the Op got the headteacher salary, my son in laws mum is a headteacher on about the same as a train driver, the pm gets over 100k

 

[yorkie]

Headteachers are more likely to be on about half the salary quoted. It's a ridiculously stressful and responsibile job which very few people would be capable of doing. The hours are probably about double that of a 'normal' office job too, and the pressure would be immense.

 

[Raul_Duke]

We can settle this debate about wages quite easily.

1. Did the OP work on the railway? Yes. (I seem to recall he posted about working on the platforms or similar).

2. Was the OP a driver? No.

3. Would the OP consider drivers’ wages “excessive” if he’d been able to achieve them for himself? Unlikely.

4. Does the OP have any real understanding of the responsibility of the driver role (a role he’s never done himself)? Definitely not.

End of discussion.

I believe the OP is a frustrated potential driver who failed the colour vision test. (But is in no way bitter about it.....)

Also with regards to teaching, my wife is a teacher, and although her salary is, on the face of it, quite good, when you factor in all the work that has to be done at home (which is a lot) and parents evenings, awards evening, sports fixtures, child protection issues etc that happen after school, that are compulsory, the salary isn’t that good at all.

 

[Bromley boy]

Also with regards to teaching, my wife is a teacher, and although her salary is, on the face of it, quite good, when you factor in all the work that has to be done at home (which is a lot) and parents evenings, awards evening, sports fixtures, child protection issues etc that happen after school, that are compulsory, the salary isn’t that good at all.

Teachers definitely seem to work ridiculous hours in exchange for little pay, especially considering the importance of the role. It’s no surprise many of them are leaving the profession.

 

[Raul_Duke]

Teachers definitely seem to work ridiculous hours in exchange for little pay, especially considering the importance of the role. It’s no surprise many of them are leaving the profession.

Very true. Same as police officers.

But we all know it’s the direct fault of greedy train drivers on £50k taking all the money in the economy. At least that’s what the right wing tax-exiles who own newspapers told me.

 

[Dentonian]

Very true. Same as police officers.

But we all know it’s the direct fault of greedy train drivers on £50k taking all the money in the economy. At least that’s what the right wing tax-exiles who own newspapers told me.

Don't know about Police Officers - never see them and are driven by which crimes are acceptable and which aren't.

Going back to train drivers; I suppose this is where the factor of responsibility for lives counts, as against effort/work rate. I remember the comparison of wages and duty hours being made some while ago, where a NIF more familiar with Rail than me, stated that Train drivers were actually in the cab "driving" the train (as against taking mealbreaks and travelling between parts of duty, for an average of 3hrs 20 mins per working day. Which is almost exactly half the amount of time a bus driver is in the cab, but train drivers are on at least double the basic pay of bus drivers.

And going back to public sector roles; Presumably, there are two things two consider here. Well worn (but undeniable) on other threads is he massive gulf in transport spending per tax payer in London compared with the rest of the UK. However, more moderate differentials exist in other public services. I think I read that the average London school pupil has £6,200 a year spent on their education, compared to an average £4,900 elsewhere. Similar gaps are being revealed with Health spending, especially Primary and Secondary Health Care. This shows that both rural areas and London gets much higher spending per "patient" than urban/suburban Britain outside the M25. The rural spend is partly due to economies of scale, where a balance would mean people in such as the Lake District or Cornwall having to travel tens of miles just to find a GP, but in London its partly due to shall we say "creative accounting" with census figures. London has a much more transient population, with people moving there for work from all over the UK (and beyond). What apparently happens is that when the move to London they register with a local GP, bu when they leave again, they are "accidentally" left on the register, so GPs are claiming for non existent patients.
Does this mean that Doctors, Head Teachers etc etc in London get paid more than in the rest of the country, over and above "London weighting". Indeed, is it more evidence that "London weighting" is actually just interference in the market?

As Polarbear says, Public Sector wages are dictated by the Cabinet - although other conditions aren't (eg. Redundancy policy, Deferred Pension access) - so we have had just a 6%* increase over the last decade. *Those on the lowest grades (under about £14,500) have had slightly more.