Re: Social Care : Thu Mar 12, 2020 5:36 pm  

Sal Paradise wrote:

so where do the improvements come to the service if all you do is use the money to increase the costs of the existing services?

So you don't think salaries in social care are too low?

Surely thats the whole point of the points-based system for immigration, to stop cheap labour from overseas coming over and allow our hard working British care workers to get a proper wage.

Re: Social Care : Thu Mar 12, 2020 6:33 pm  

sally cinnamon wrote:

So you don't think salaries in social care are too low?

Surely thats the whole point of the points-based system for immigration, to stop cheap labour from overseas coming over and allow our hard working British care workers to get a proper wage.

I dont think it's that simple
Sadly if wages are to rise, so will the cost of EVERYTHING that we consume, stoking further increases and further wage demands, just like the 70's.
Inflation - wage increases - inflation - wage increases and so it goes on
The key is to increase productivity in as many areas as possible, which in theory at least would allow us all to earn more (or line the pockets of those in charge).
High productivity and low inflation would make the stronger ecconomy but, it's an extremely difficult balancing act.

Re: Social Care : Thu Mar 12, 2020 7:09 pm  

Scarlet Pimpernell wrote:

IR80 I know it is unlikely but do you have children, have you used the NHS because if you have my taxes have been used towards these. If I had a choice for you I would happily say no but I don’t so you benefit from my taxes.

You do make me laugh with attempted insults, you keep posting your piffle if it gives you some solace in your self righteous tiny mind.

Re: Social Care : Thu Mar 12, 2020 7:12 pm  

wrencat1873 wrote:

Should we have a discussion about tax avoidance as well.
You do seem utterly incapable of reasoned discussion, which although not a surprise, is still a shame.

I am perfectly capable and happy to have reasoned, intelligent, discussion. unfortunately your left wing politics of envy preclude such possibilities.

Tax avoidance you say, who is avoiding tax, breaking the law, and not being prosecuted.....?

Re: Social Care : Fri Mar 13, 2020 7:59 am  

IR80 wrote:

I am perfectly capable and happy to have reasoned, intelligent, discussion. unfortunately your left wing politics of envy preclude such possibilities.

Tax avoidance you say, who is avoiding tax, breaking the law, and not being prosecuted.....?

You call it envy, I call it looking after "the many".
I'm happy to be up here on the moral high ground, while you look after yourself and stuff the rest

Re: Social Care : Fri Mar 13, 2020 8:27 am  

sally cinnamon wrote:

So you don't think salaries in social care are too low?

Surely thats the whole point of the points-based system for immigration, to stop cheap labour from overseas coming over and allow our hard working British care workers to get a proper wage.

If by increasing pay you encourage additional interest in the sector - great thing, if you simply increase the cost with no other benefit where does that leave you - a service in crisis would you not agree?

I ask you how does simply increasing pay improve the ability of the system to deal with increased volumes?

Re: Social Care : Fri Mar 13, 2020 8:30 am  

wrencat1873 wrote:

You call it envy, I call it looking after "the many".
I'm happy to be up here on the moral high ground, while you look after yourself and stuff the rest

I think those of us "higher earners" contribute significantly more to the many - especially company owners with significant workforces. I don't mind it called doing my bit - so why having done that all my working life should I be further penalised when I need the very system that I have contributed to well above the norm for c45 years?

Re: Social Care : Fri Mar 13, 2020 9:23 am  

Sal Paradise wrote:

I think those of us "higher earners" contribute significantly more to the many - especially company owners with significant workforces. I don't mind it called doing my bit - so why having done that all my working life should I be further penalised when I need the very system that I have contributed to well above the norm for c45 years?

Ultimately, because you can afford to, when others cannot or, are less able to do so.
This is what would happen in a fully functioning family. However, in a fully functioning society, we prefer to have a few with plenty and the majority with a whole lot less and a system that propagates that situation.
It's designed to keep the masses "where they belong".

Re: Social Care : Fri Mar 13, 2020 9:50 am  

Sal Paradise wrote:

I ask you how does simply increasing pay improve the ability of the system to deal with increased volumes?

I've explained this to you before - the H&S Care sector is currently running at 100,000 vacancies, and recruiting to those vacancies is a nightmare; every single provider is grappling with it on a day to day basis. So whilst we might have 600 beds for example, I can only occupy 450 of them, because I don't have the staff to provide care for the other 150; so before you even consider increasing volume - we need to be able to use our existing capacity. And the main issue with recruitment is pay - because LA's don't pay us enough (because the H&S Care settlement from central govt has been cut by £3 billion since austerity was imposed) for the work we do, the sector is stuck on NLW, or thereabouts.

Re: Social Care : Fri Mar 13, 2020 10:09 am  

bren2k wrote:

I've explained this to you before - the H&S Care sector is currently running at 100,000 vacancies, and recruiting to those vacancies is a nightmare; every single provider is grappling with it on a day to day basis. So whilst we might have 600 beds for example, I can only occupy 450 of them, because I don't have the staff to provide care for the other 150; so before you even consider increasing volume - we need to be able to use our existing capacity. And the main issue with recruitment is pay - because LA's don't pay us enough (because the H&S Care settlement from central govt has been cut by £3 billion since austerity was imposed) for the work we do, the sector is stuck on NLW, or thereabouts.

It does seem obvious that if you increase pay in a certain sector and not in others, more people will chose to work in the higher paid sector.
I think Sal is worried about having to break open his piggy bank