Setting an example on pay

January 30, 2012 12:14 pm

Author:

Tags:

Share this Article

It’s ironic that, despite the Coalition Government’s deafening silence on the pay of bankers, they have been very quick to raise the temperature on public sector pay. Plenty of accusations of fat cat public sector managers have been thrown around by Ministers who have been far less condemnatory of the telephone number salaries of those in the private sector. 

Labour values give us a desire to increase the standard of living for everyone but in tough economic conditions we have to make difficult choices. As the largest employer in Newcastle, the Council has a major influence on the economic wellbeing of the city, and can have a direct impact on levels of inequality. We want to do all in our power to make Newcastle a fairer city. Over a number of decades income inequality in the UK has increased and pay inequality has become a national issue.

 

At a recent policy Cabinet meeting local people made it clear that inequality is an issue of concern in our City today. And instead of just talking about the issue, we are acting to close the gap between the lowest paid and the highest paid within the Council.

 

We are doing this because, while pay is important to individuals, it is fairness of pay overall which is of most importance. The Council’s ratio of pay at the top to pay at the bottom is currently 1:13. This is below the national average of 1:15 in the public sector and 1: 262 in the private sector. We are committed to further reducing this ratio where possible in the future, by introducing a Living Wage to boost the pay of those who are on the lowest salaries. Not only is this a way of helping people at a time when living costs are escalating, it’s a great way of making sure more money goes into the local economies where such low paid workers live.

What the debate has revealed in Newcastle, however, is that average Council pay is lower than that the average pay of the city as a whole. Many staff I have spoken to about this say that pay is only part of the reward for working at the City Council. The Council offers a whole range of benefits including family friendly and flexible working, learning and development opportunities, holiday buy-back, alongside schemes such as car and bike salary sacrifice arrangements. Many people choose to work in the public sector because they believe in public service and pay is only one element of their remuneration, alongside job satisfaction.

This week I am delighted to publish our pay policy, and in doing so make a firm statement about our commitment to reducing inequality and how we are leading by example in the way we run the Council. But the danger is that those organisations who are most open about their policies come under the greatest scrutiny. We need a national debate around the most appropriate way to judge pay and remuneration, according to responsibility and job satisfaction. A greater understanding of the pay differentials that operate in different sectors is a good place to start.

Nick Forbes is the Leader of Newcastle City Council

  • http://twitter.com/Old_Holborn Old Holborn

    Nick Forbes earns £160500 per annum, after helping himself to a £5K pay increase. Nearly £20K MORE than the Prime Minister of Great Britain. Up the workers, eh, Nick?

    • Guest

      Nick Forbes isn’t the CHIEF EXECUTIVE of Newcastle City Council. So he doesn’t get the £165500 you refer to. The last leader of the council got £23,750.47. 

      At least get the facts right…

    • Dave Postles

      Oops – eight idiots – anyone else?

  • http://twitter.com/_eorge George Powell

    Please don’t forget Nick, you don’t add value.

  • living on the bread line

    As long as there are 10+ applicant for every job the inequality will remain. with the unions crippled by legislation the only thing stopping wages gowing even lower is the minimum wage. I for one have my fingers and toes crossed that this government doesn’t remove this legislation  in an attempt to ‘boost’ the private sector and reduce the unemployment figures.

  • Anonymous

    Well  labour had this idea about cutting poverty   for the middle class.

  • GuyM

    Public sector pay is in the hands of the government and local authorities.

    Private sector pay is nothing to do with government and local authorities.

    You have two options, let the market decide on pay rates for skills, or centrally mandate pay rates. I doubt most of the population would like the latter option in practice.

    You list reasons why people work in the public sector. May I list one reason why I and others work in the private sector? The reason is that it isn’t the public sector.

  • Anonymous

    Excellent piece- especially first part.

    Thanks, Jo.

  • charles.ward

    The ratio is not 1:262 in the private sector, that is the estimated ratio from incomplete data from the FTSE 100, the 100 biggest companies in the country. 

    I would guess that the ratio in the whole of the private sector might be lower than the public sector.  There are a lot of small businesses where the ratio would be small and, of course, for the self employed the ratio would be 1:1.  Anyone have data for the whole of the private sector.

  • JC

    Why not take it a little further and abolish the national pay levels by paying local rates? You’d be able to reduce unemployment by taking on more staff, or reduce the council tax.

  • Pingback: Weekly Round up 02/02/2012 « North East Child Poverty

Latest

  • Comment As the PPC in Iain Duncan Smith’s constituency, Ed has taught me two important lessons

    As the PPC in Iain Duncan Smith’s constituency, Ed has taught me two important lessons

    Ed Miliband has tackled the issue of his perceived image problem. Rather than embarrassingly excuse himself or convince the public he is something he is not, he has embraced his own persona, accepting it in order to extinguish the ongoing media analysis of who he is rather than what he stands for. This move shows courage, political prowess and most of all, it’s set the stage for next year’s election to be about policy rather than personalities. I cannot tell […]

    Read more →
  • Featured Cameron condemned for immigration PR stunt

    Cameron condemned for immigration PR stunt

    Yesterday, David Cameron offered an ominous threat to people who are deemed to be ‘illegal immigrants’, when he said “we will find you and make sure you are sent back to the country you came from.”  Who knew he meant this literally?  This announcement was worrying enough in itself – such a threat demonises immigrants and ignores the many reasons people might be in the UK illegally – but the PM decided to take his intimidating statement one step further. Cameron, […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Cameron dropped Gove, now Labour must drop his policies

    Cameron dropped Gove, now Labour must drop his policies

    Fireworks, champagne corks popping and rare mashups of Hallelujah and Ode to Joy were heard echoing down the corridors from staffrooms across England and Wales in response to the news that Michael Gove had at long last been sacked as Secretary of State for Education. Forget the unpopularity of his policies, his mishandling of the scandal over suspected attempts to indoctrinate Birmingham’s children to Islamic extremism or his inability to work with anyone from teachers to the Home Secretary – […]

    Read more →
  • News Labour outraised the Tories in 2013, but financial worries still remain

    Labour outraised the Tories in 2013, but financial worries still remain

    The Electoral Commission’s annual report of party finances has been published for 2013, and it turns out that Labour actually raised more money than the Conservatives last year – by almost £8 million. Labour raised £33.4m, while the Tories raised just £25.4m. As George Eaton points out, over at the New Statesman, much of Labour’s advantage comes from short money (the money opposition parties receive from the state). However, this only amounts to £6.9m, meaning Labour still raised roughly an […]

    Read more →
  • Comment We need a Mayor who offers London serious alternatives

    We need a Mayor who offers London serious alternatives

     Speaking at the launch of Labour’s summer campaign last week Ed Miliband said “We need a new leadership: Leadership that thinks deeply and offers creative, new ideas. Leadership that seeks to be faithful to principle, even when it’s hard to do. Leadership that listens and cares.” His eyes, of course, are set on the general election but he could have been talking about the London mayoral campaign. This time next year a very short primary season will be in full […]

    Read more →