HR must lead from the front during public-sector cuts

Earlier this month, John Denham, the communities secretary, commented that “cuts in front-line services would not be necessary if councils made efficiency savings elsewhere”. He has overlooked the fact that for years the majority of public-sector organisations have been required by the government to make 2 or 3 per cent efficiency gains year on year. His comments were in response to local council’s fears, expressed in a BBC survey, that the cuts in public-service spending could result in the loss of 25,000 jobs in the next three to five years - a figure that Tony Travers, of the London School of Economics, believes will be nearer to 100,000. We should remember that these spending cuts are being made in response to the unprecedented level of borrowing by the government. We are not talking about efficiency savings; we are talking about budget cuts anywhere between 15 and 30 per cent over the next decade. It is inevitable that cuts on this level will result in a reduced workforce, but these cuts also come at a time when the expectation of public-service delivery is at an all-time high after successive government promises.
 

It’s untenable to have a normal retirement age in public-sector schemes that is significantly different from the state retirement age

Brian Bailey, Director of pensions, West Midlands Pension Fund and member of High Pay Commission