But Bloggo, NICK CARTER said in APRIL that he was looking to cut 150 jobs. Is it right that in October, these people are still waiting to see where those cuts will come? These decisions yesterday potentially increase the uncertainty. My argument is that next week, the council is meeting with unions to discuss the CSR. Let's hope that when it takes place, there is a very clear plan regarding where these jobs are under review, and which jobs are safe. It's only fair that people should know if they are at risk, rather than worrying even if their job is safe and they just haven't been told.

Example: Care worker feels she is going to lose her job, yet department is still recruiting. Manager says all jobs are going to be part of the review process, but surely if they are recruiting new staff that department must be safe??? Just doesn't make any sense to me.

Isn't this what I have been saying. Once all of the negotiations, including those with the union, have been completed and an understanding of how the cuts will affect services and the workforce then people can be advised whether or not their jobs are at risk or not.
How can anyone know what the outcome will be until this process is completed.

You know as well as I do that there is a legal requirement on the employer to adhere to a procedure regarding redundancy. If there is an anomally here that does not comply with the legal requirements then employees have the right to consult with the union.
You seem to be quite close to this situation as you have mentioned it twice. Why don't you advise the care worker of her rights if they are being abused.

Not "close" to anyone who works in the care department, have just bothered to talk to them. Many senior officers at wWest Berks would do well to do the same. Can you confirm that you think it is acceptable for West Berks to say that they will axe 150 jobs in April this year, and still not act on those comments.

Yes, me too.

I'll say this again. Whether WBC axe 150 jobs or 1500 jobs the process is controlled by law and as such the Union will be representing it's members in these negotiations assuring that everyone involved will get a fair hearing and if necessary the appropriate exit package.

Apparently, 70 have gone already.

"...West Berkshire Council has already axed 70 jobs this year, and the leader of West Berkshire Council, Graham Jones (Con, Lambourn), said he could not rule out the possibility of more..."

http://www.newburytoday.co.uk/News/Article...articleID=14884

I believe that those 70 were the result of WBC trying to claw back the £1.4m deficit which was discovered prior to the latest published financial cuts. Apparently adhereing to budgets is not one of the Council's greatest skills.

West Berkshire Council employs approximately 6500 staff (5000 of whom are employed in schools)

70/6500=1.08% of staff. Hardly savage cuts and cuts that could be met I am sure through voluntary redundancy and retirement.

A lot of Mr Garvie's comments border on Scaremongering.

Hardly scaremongering. Are those figures you quote accurate, or just a stab in the dark?

Fast facts
Customer: West Berkshire Council
Web site: westberks.gov.uk
Number of employees: 6,500
Country or region: United Kingdom
Industry: Local government
Customer profile
West Berkshire Council serves a population of
150,000 and employs 6,500 staff – 5,000 of
whom are based in schools. Its remit includes
health and social care, education and transport.

It's about time a lot of public sector workers were thrown out. Lets see if anyone notices any difference.

Please don't keep on about front line care workers/emergency services just to make anyone with similar views as my own look heartless, it won't be these people who go - unless they are under-performing, in which case fair enough.

Those that loose their jobs will surely be those that are incapable, this happens all the time in the private sector - cutbacks or not. In the private sector you rarely get notice about redundancies - you just turn up and find the doors locked, or told to go home. At least these public sector workers have been given notice, even if they don't know exactly who is going (if you are worried it would probably suggest you are a bit of a slacker and a prime target though).

To all you in the public sector - WELCOME TO THE REAL WORLD

What an ahssole! Being private or public makes no difference to your statutory redundancy entitlement. At the end of the day, we are talking about people's lives being pissed about with. For the sake of a few pounds a week to the tax payer.

Please try not to swear it's not big and certainly not clever

The reason all these jobs are going is because they were "created" by Labour and excess to requirements. In the private sector you have to get on with it and find another job, just because it's public sector jobs there seems to be sympathy that is not there for the private sector - why is that?

I've been made redundant in the past - got another job, no big deal and I didn't expect special treatment or sympathy it's just life - get on with it. That is what I find amusing, all the "oh it's so terrible" no it's not we have all been there.

Oh you obviously don't understand about redundancy - if the private sector you can turn for work and find the doors shut - yes you get your redundancy but no notice. The public sector have had months of notice this was going to happen.

I was wondering which "bleeding heart" it would be first - you or user23!!

Please don't keep on about the private sector being all ruthless, as if there's some sort of black and white division between the two.... Bank workers and those decidedly dodgy money gamblers in The City are in the 'private sector' aren't they? Eye watering bonus payments as a reward for persistent failure? WHICH 'REAL WORLD' are you referring to?



There are plenty of us out here who work in the private sector but who are just as worried about the public sector cuts. A large number of the contracts which are put out to tender for private companies are to support projects created for these public sector departments. If THEY go or the money has dried up, we may ALSO go....

Agree Spartacus - the Banks should have gone under or been 100% government controlled, not just bailed out. Even worse RBS still paying out massive bonuses yet 80% state owned - who allowed that to happen?

Yes, the job losses can and will effect the private sector, not just with contracts but it could also hit retail.

The "real world" I'm referring to is the one in which the majority of people work - no pensions, no security, have to actually work, redundancy always a possibility i.e the shop workers, production line workers etc

I'll say it again - job losses effect everyone at some point, public or private sector. It just seems all sorrow and sympathy when it's Public sector - that is the problem, as I see it anyways!

OK, Dr Pepper, you are coming across as the self-proclaimed 'oracle' on redundancy and it is quite clear to me that you know hardly anything about redundancies. Your comments on redundancies in the "private sector" and the "public sector" are at best inaccurate and at worst totally inaccurate. There are laws in this country regulating redundancies and these vary only where the employer has special exemptions for example the armed forces.

The internet is a wonderful thing and you would be well advised to consult it in order to publish more accurate statements in the future!

That might be true, but it might also be true that they are in legitimate jobs, but we are not prepared to pay the taxes to pay for them.


I see no difference. We've heard of large redundancies all over the place in the last few years, Cadburys anyone? I'd like to think that most decent people don't gloat when people are made redundant.


So have I, but with every redundancy, the chances of being put back in the same position, especially when people reach a certain age, falls every year!!! Presumable you don't live in Wales, the North East, etc?

Again, I see no one getting special treatment, explain what you mean?


What a load of tosh. Sure companies fold, but that isn't the norm. In any case, there are statutory requirements for notice in private and public sector employment.

I have never worked for the public sector, but I have worked all my life in the private sector. I have been made redundant several times, so I can speak from experiences.

Most people with their ear to the ground can tell when things aren't right with a company.


While my 'ahssole' comment might not be big and cleaver, it was bloody-well accurate. I'm someone who doesn't find great delight in gloating at other's miss fortunes; I'll leave that to 'people' like you!

The people who are angered by the loss of 500,000 jobs in the public sector do feel sympathy for the public sector yes, but by voicing their anger they were trying to protect your job. Council workers have known for months that they may be made redundant and therefore the sensible majority have been holding back on their spending and hoarding their money. The knock-on effect of this is that other businesses suffer and redundancies will be made in the private sector. Take one of our biggest employers, Vodafone. If all the people working in the public sector in Newbury, changed from contract phone to PAYG to save money in case they get made redundant, Vodafone will have to make even more redundancies than it already has. It is not, or shouldn't be, a them and us attitude. When it comes to being made redundant we are truly 'all in this together' and I have true sympathy for anyone who even thinks they may be in line.

I'm not sure if forums like this bring out the worst in people but in the last few days we've seen someone moaning there's not enough news about stabbings (when it seems there weren't actually any stabbings to report) and now someone else gloating over half a million people losing their jobs.

Maybe I misunderstood, but I thought that figure was spread over 4 years, with a lot of it being taken up by natural wastage and vacated posts not being filled again.

Yes, you misunderstood. A lot of it will not be taken up by natural wastage. I would class "a lot" as around 80% and I'm sure there's not that level of staff turnover in the public sector over four years.