WBC stress story, Genuine concern or taking the mick? Options

[Strafin]

http://www.newburytoday.co.uk/2012/rise-in...rkshire-council

I have just read this story and a couple of things sprung to my mind. If you're stressed out about losing your job, is it wise to be taking time off? I accept stress can be difficult and cause genuine problems but we all suffer and some need a day off sometimes but that's what holiday time is for.

Do these employees get sick pay? It strikes me that it is one of those things that is difficult to disprove so if you get paid no matter what, an easy way to get some free time off. Does this set of figures only refer to the council itself or it's services as well, schools for example? Only we are all under pressure and it would be interesting to know if the stress was reflected across other council workers. If it is there may be something in this, but I wonder if it could also be a culture that has manifested through more people seeing easy time off as acceptable. And finally how are these absences covered and what is the cost?

[On the edge]

Would that were true! Yes, if a few cases, people have a vocational calling. Its disinjenuos to suggest that this is primarily in the public sector. Certainly, there are engineers, medical people, and others I know who have similar vocational callings and are in the private sector. Going back, John Sainsbury set up his business to provide the populace with unadulterated fresh food, Lever, supplies of cheap soap, etc. etc.

The real test of the 'vocational calling' would be to see what happens when the individual concerned has a big lottery win, or is offered a big wadge to jump ship. In WBCs case - there have been a good few examples in the past, particularly in the higher executives and in fields where 'vocation' might be a factor. Those in paid employment are there for one key reason.

So, the vocational attribute sounds good, but the reality is different and it's far from being just public servants. Lets face it,in past times, it used to be the employers whoi used the 'vocational' excuse for keeping pay low in the public serctor - low pay / reasonable pensions. That isn't the case today.

I think you are right about people wanting to do a good job - and leaving the sector in sheer frustration. Similarly, I've known and interviewed rather too many. My assessment is that the frustration isn't down to policy - in most cases down to bad management and poor leadership.

Similarly, I've also known and worked with people who were employed by firms in liquidation - who have gone on to praise the efforts of the liquidator in saving ands turning the business round - and then appreciating the h e l l of what work was like during that period. Not many, agreed, but it is possible.

I have no issue with the stress related issues the economic challenges we have today bring our workforce. Simply, its no worse or better in any sector and shouldn't be used as a lever to promote other agendas - particularly where that workforce is already thought to be comfortsble to say the least.

Ironically, we had a thread on this forum a short while back - where a privatre sector low level employee was being subjected to some draconian management focus - he was, as I remember, given very little sympathy. No employer paid trades union helping him!

Age and experience has made me very cynical - yes, politicians say they want to 'change things for the better' and 'help the people'. Those who really do are very few and leaving even less who actually can