tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2712759979636807139.post2604907748699544012..comments2022-11-09T10:45:10.272+00:00Comments on A view from Union Street: Is Lansley telling porkie pies?Andy DMhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03762009221456303236noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2712759979636807139.post-65587476897340550792009-11-16T13:50:25.479+00:002009-11-16T13:50:25.479+00:00Does Lansley mean "salary costs" not &qu...Does Lansley mean "salary costs" not "salary levels". A single salary comparison is not meaningful as there has been a major increase in staff.<br /><br />From March this year:<br /><br />"After a dip in overall numbers in the previous two years, the annual census showed staffing levels recovered to reach a peak of 1,368,200 in September 2008.<br /><br />The figure is a 2.8 per cent increase on the previous year and a 27.7 per cent increase compared to 1998. The census covers hospital, community, general and personal medical services. It shows that in September 2008 the NHS employed:"<br /><br />http://www.ic.nhs.uk/news-and-events/press-office/press-releases/archived-press-releases/april-2008--march-2009/nhs-staffing-levels-recover-to-reach-all-time-high<br /><br />The one group that perhaps have had an increase of 228% or more may be GPs,bearing in mind the 50% hike in roughly 2004-6.<br /><br />General incomes are up by around 60-65%% since 1998 in real terms.Matt Wardmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04326720801362744582noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2712759979636807139.post-9907502420685478232009-07-05T12:02:02.539+01:002009-07-05T12:02:02.539+01:00You're perhaps not measuring the package well ...You're perhaps not measuring the package well enough.<br /><br />A package is, salary + pension.<br /><br />What is the 1996 S + P for your starting role. What is the present S + P, under current known actuarial expectations for future costs, then deflating back to 1996 £<br /><br />I am not an actuary, but I have read actuarial reports stating that some present NHS pensions (e.g. nurses) are equivalent to 30% tax free contribution rates on those salaries.<br /><br />Also, the average public sector salary (S) has now matched the private sector salary from that last data I saw.<br /><br />To contrast, in private industry, it's rare to see employer contributions above 10%, and Gorgon taxes the investment's dividend returns. Furthermore, private sector people commonly have to assume the investment failure risk, and actually do their own investment assessment (e.g. selecting funds/asset classes etc.). How much does that "cost" c.f. NHS pensions, who will get all that paid for.<br /><br />I'm not saying NHS employees don't deserve these things, it's a contract, we can all choose NHS versus private. But your post selectively compares only part of the package in 1996 with now, which might just not reflect the full accounting.<br /><br />Finally, two data points an argument makes not :-). Really you need to dig out NHS accounts and see if salary costs are split off, take 2002->2009 (which is what I suspect the period Lansley is referring to) and see if the salary costs have increased at the same rate as the funding increases. My memory of newspaper articles suggests this is what would be the case, but I could be mis-remembering.David Crookeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01960065976714910365noreply@blogger.com