Can it get any better?

[Bkkbound04]

I've worked in public services (healthcare) most of my working life and been able to manage myself into a fairly respectable position as far as status and salary goes. I'm not ambitious, I just do the trouble shooting or stick with jobs that no one else can be bothered doing.

Recently I have been making it clear that I was looking at alternative career moves in a different direction, the response? well change my hours and take more time off; today I was given a new contract giving me 50 days paid annual leave per year.

 

I think I'll leave the retirement plan for a while longer.

 

JP

[Nervous_Dog]

Well done, when you Bkkbound Bkk bound?

 

DOG

[gobbledonk]

today I was given a new contract giving me 50 days paid annual leave per year.

 

Read my lips, BKKBoy - I fucking hate you. ::

 

Seriously, all power to you - most healthcare workers in Oz are very, very unhappy - lack of funding, an aging population - you name it, and the poor bastards have to deal with it.

[Nervous_Dog]

The health carre workers have to deal with aging population?

 

I can understand the bad pay etc, but surely old farts is part of the job? More old farts, more helth workers even?

 

DOG

[samak]

50 days paid leave? are you leaving in a socialist country or is your employer so dependent on you?

[Bkkbound04]

Samak,

 

If I was that important to the organisation I'd be looking for hard cash :: but I'm in Blairs Britain and its part of new labours new world, in public services we're into work life balance issues in a big way, the current fad is annualised hours contracts, hence my 50 days paid AL.

I had 41 days already but by agreeing to work an additional 2 hours over 34 days I add another 9 !! As I have been working far more than this for many years its payback time

 

The downside of this current liberal approach to managing staff is a fairly ruthless attack on what was a great pensions scheme which see's my retirement age raised from 55 to 65 ::

 

JP

[billywan]

Congratulations, good for you. I have just moved here to Biloxi and am looking for a job here. Am going to BKK for 7 weeks in October and 1 week in Jakarta to see my best friend there. When I start working here, I know my employer is not going to be too happy when I ask for 2 months vacation later this year. If he refuses, I will tell him quote "I'm just telling you of my vacation plans as a matter of formality, it's going to happen." Of course he may say "don't come back to work tomorrow." Too bad, I'm going anyway, luckily I have my military pension to fall back on so it's not as if I HAVE to work for him. Planning on 3 months next year and moving there for at least 1 year the next year, maybe more if I like it there all the time. Not sure if I want to stay in Thailand all year. Lived in Kuala Lumpur 4 years and liked it there. Time will tell.

[Khun_Kong]

Bkkbound04 said:

Samak,

 

If I was that important to the organisation I'd be looking for hard cash :: but I'm in Blairs Britain and its part of new labours new world, in public services we're into work life balance issues in a big way, the current fad is annualised hours contracts, hence my 50 days paid AL.

I had 41 days already but by agreeing to work an additional 2 hours over 34 days I add another 9 !! As I have been working far more than this for many years its payback time

 

The downside of this current liberal approach to managing staff is a fairly ruthless attack on what was a great pensions scheme which see's my retirement age raised from 55 to 65 ::

 

JP

 

Short answer: yes, it CAN be better!

 

Damn- that's a hell of a trade-off!

 

Personally, I would "settle" for 7 weeks paid holiday that you already had and keep the opt-out at 55 plan. Can you do that?

 

Don't know your age, but...

I'm 53 in 2 weeks. Looking at 2 years to retirement vs. 12 years is a huge difference.

 

Even if you're 40 now, 9 extra days/year would only give you 135 extra days until the 55 pension and 225 to the 65 pension, but...10 extra years? TEN?! And, it's not like that's the only penalty- you still have to do an extra 2.5 days work per year to "pay" for it. That knocks about 25% off your "bonus".

 

Scenario: for the next 15 years (if you're 40), you torture your knowledgable co-workers with your extra 9 days of sanuk every year.

 

Then, for the next ten years after that, they torture you about their extra 365 days of sanuk every year!

 

 

Off course, if you just sit at home and wank-off for those extra 2 hours every 34 days, then maybe you should go for it! ::

[Zorro]

I take two months off a year and i reckon that is the bare minimum anyone needs to lead a balanced life.

I think i would rather take my two months a year than retire earlier. I am not sure that i would want to retire at 55 in any case. I could retire today if i wanted to live in Thailand but I think at 47 being fit and healthy it would be silly.

As it is i have plenty of time for sanuk now. A couple of months a year in Thailand and plenty of P4P here in Bahrain on the weekends.

In fact i already have too much free time.

I would probably drink and shag myself to death if i was retired now.

[gobbledonk]

More old farts, more helth workers even?

 

Therein lies the crux of the problem. When health is largely funded by the state, more (ailing) older people doesnt translate to an increase in the number of people / beds / hospitals etc : it translates into feeble attempts to prop up a health system that is groaning from the imbalance between supply and demand.

 

Imagine if your boss said to you, 'Good news ! We expect demand to double next year !', you'd probably be happy until he told you that he couldnt afford to hire the additional staff needed to meet that demand.