Readers' Letters: Holyrood must rethink its approach to public sector pay demands


With news of a new pay offer to council workers, I am writing to express concern over the ongoing demands from public sector workers in Scotland. While I respect the dedication of many in these sectors, the demands are unsustainable and reflect outdated practices that fail to adapt to modern economic realities.
ScotRail, for example, is already heavily subsidised by taxpayers, yet it clings to inefficient, working practices from the past. Compounding this is the persistent union militancy that often prioritises disruption over dialogue, further eroding public trust in the service. It’s troubling that such outdated practices and militant attitudes are being rewarded with calls for even higher pay, despite the ongoing strain on public finances.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdThe Scottish Government’s decision to settle strikes last year has only emboldened unions, setting a dangerous precedent that they can hold the country to ransom.
What is particularly frustrating for the public is that they are being asked to pay more through taxes, fares, and other costs, yet receive worse services in return. Whether it’s longer waits in the NHS, underperforming schools, or increasingly unreliable trains, the gap between what people pay and what they get in return is widening.
Holyrood must rethink its approach to public sector pay. Any above inflation increases must be linked to genuine improvements in service delivery and efficiency, not simply granted in response to union pressure.
James Lawson, Edinburgh
Taxing question
Many, many years ago as a first year economics student I was taught economics meant ‘the art of good housekeeping’ where the house is the nation or indeed the planet. ‘Good ‘ also implies moral soundness. It is clear then that to help fund the economy Chancellor Reeves should tax vices such as conspicuous consumption like expensive cars, homes, flights, holidays, jewellery, schools, drink and food; ephemeral clothing fashions, and second homes; and also heavily tax fossil fuels, gambling, junk food, annual earned incomes of over half a million a year, and annual unearned incomes of over quarter of a million pa as further examples.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdIn returns and because in a decent society honest hard work is a virtue to be encouraged there should be no tax on earnings under a £250k pa. Taxable incomes may be reduced to below that tax threshold where the balance has been handed without strings to approved charities and for good works.
By encouraging virtue and discouraging vice a more egalitarian and happy society should emerge – which is what most of us would welcome.
Tim Flinn
Child poverty
I welcome the government’s formation of a ministerial taskforce for child poverty strategy. The issue is multifaceted and deserves better than the sledgehammer approach of throwing Child Credit at an unlimited number of children which many on the left have set their hearts upon.
One of the many avenues which needs to be explored (though it may seem too traditional for their liking) is improving the contribution from absent fathers. From their rhetoric and the case studies they offer, one might imagine that fathers and the notion of any financial support from them had been abolished. There seems to be a dearth of information on what single mothers are receiving in maintenance.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdIt may be that the system is failing to set maintenance at an optimum level: sometimes securing less for the mother by demanding too much. Over the years a woman might have a number of relationships in which children could be conceived. The question of which man or men actually father her children may and indeed should depend upon which are willing to take on this role. Defining the required payment as a percentage of the absent parent’s gross income may be skewing the pool of willing men towards those of lower income.
If our focus is on taking as many children as possible out of poverty then our priority will be to have more children receiving sufficient maintenance rather than chasing a much higher level for a fortunate few. Prospective mothers who might lose out through this would be free to seek a contract giving them more than the default amount. It could be that marriage is viewed as being such a contract, moving us away from the simplistic ‘one size fits all’ formula applied at present.
Beginning our study on improving a child’s welfare and prospects in life after the point where that child has already been conceived is too late. Some might reject the alternatives as falling short of our ideal, but that would be to make the perfect the enemy of the significantly improved.
John Riseley, Harrogate
Seagull attacks
I really feel for the thoughtful St Andrews cafe owners who are losing money daily over seagull attacks on their customers (10 August 2024). I’m writing to suggest an urgent review of the Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act, 2004 in relation to the protection of these birds that are fast becoming a danger to people after moving into established inland residential areas.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdAlthough we live three miles from the sea in houses over 30 years old, we have been plagued by aggressive seagulls only in the past two years. Residents and delivery workers alike have regularly been dive-bombed in the street, workers maintaining the local play park have been attacked, and people have been targeted in their own gardens. The problem is worsening - we had more nests this year than last - and locals are being forced to avoid the nest areas where possible or stop walking locally.
It is only a matter of time before someone, possibly a child on our playpark, is badly harmed by these invasive birds. They have brought fear and anxiety into our community. Other housing areas nearby are similarly affected. It’s those of us who live where the birds are trying to settle who need protection, not the birds themselves. If action is taken now, perhaps the law could be changed before the next seagull breeding season.
Lesley Milne, Dunfermline
Write to The Scotsman
We welcome your thoughts – NO letters submitted elsewhere, please. Write to [email protected] including name, address and phone number – we won't print full details. Keep letters under 300 words, with no attachments, and avoid 'Letters to the Editor/Readers’ Letters' or similar in your subject line – be specific. If referring to an article, include date, page number and heading.