Town Centre Manager

bencooke · Post by **bencooke** » 26 Jan 2010 15:06

Does anybody know exactly what Julie Sutch our "town center manager" does to improve the high street and surrounding area in Sydenham because it remains a complete mystery to me 22 months after moving down here. Take behind Somerfield and the carpark area for example...rubbish stacked up everywhere like a scene ot of slumdog millionnaire and the battered road signage and dented litter bins and uneven pavements and zero proper sweeping of the road and pavement and no salt when its icy and plenty more, what the hell does she do? Can't we employ someone who actually improves the environment?

stuart · Post by **stuart** » 26 Jan 2010 15:38

Ben - this has been debated many times before. The problem with keeping our streets clean is the responsibility of Environmental Services - not Julie. She, SydSoc and half the population nag Environmental and sometimes with a result. But, sadly, their best is always exceeded by people in dumping more and making the place look a heap.

Blame those responsible for littering and nag the people who are supposed to clear. Scapegoating the TCM really doesn't get us anywhere.

Stuart

goonerchamp · Post by **goonerchamp** » 26 Jan 2010 16:38

I can't answer your question Ben - but from what I can see she probabaly does quite well for going not much (that we can actually see in our town centre)
http://jobs.lewisham.gov.uk/jobs/local- ... 011-re1118

Chazza · Post by **Chazza** » 26 Jan 2010 19:55

I don't want to pass comment on our current TCM, as I think it has been done to death, but this caught my eye in the above ad: "final salary pension scheme". Shame us poor sods in the private sector can't join this great Ponzi scheme. It's a joke that our council tax is going toward supporting a final salary pension scheme. They don't need to offer this to attract applicants.

bensonby · Post by **bensonby** » 26 Jan 2010 21:53

Chazza wrote: Shame us poor sods in the private sector can't join this great Ponzi scheme. It's a joke that our council tax is going toward supporting a final salary pension scheme. They don't need to offer this to attract applicants.

So you resent people for having employers decent enough to offer a respectable retirement package - rather than resent the employers too greedy and mean to offer one. That's the right attitude!

And of course you have the option to join a job with decent packages. Apply for one! Both in the private and public sector. I've got friends with even more generous pensions than my (public sector one) in the private sector...who started around about the same time.

Chazza · Post by **Chazza** » 26 Jan 2010 22:40

Sigh. Yes, I can confirm that I do resent the council offering a pension which would not be sustainable in the private sector. A pension which can only be funded by either increasing taxation or diverting money away from public services. It's not a question of attitude or even of political inclination; it's a question of maths.

My employer happens to make pretty good pension provisions, but stops short of offering a final salary scheme. This isn't because they are mean or greedy. It is because a final salary scheme is no longer affordable. There are demographic reasons for this; I'll leave you to conduct some Google searches on macroeconomics.

digime2007 · Post by **digime2007** » 27 Jan 2010 09:23

C'mon chazza, get real.

In general private sector pay is more than the equivalent in the public sector. When you decide if you want to go for a job you balance up the pros and cons. Some people are happy to earn less given the pension scheme is relatively attractive.

Also, in the good times private sector staff can enjoy decent pay rises. The same isn't generally true for public sector staff. When times get tough you can also bet that public sector pay will be hit harder.

Given this I think it's pretty ugly to resent people a decent pension for the trade off they make and the years of public service they put in.

Chazza · Post by **Chazza** » 27 Jan 2010 10:50

digime2007 wrote:In general private sector pay is more than the equivalent in the public sector.

Official stats say otherwise:
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=285 - median earnings of £539 per week in the public sector against £465 in the private sector.

digime2007 wrote:Given this I think it's pretty ugly to resent people a decent pension for the trade off they make and the years of public service they put in.

What exactly is ugly about it? Please explain to me why I should feel happy that the council still offers a final salary pension scheme. I would be interested to see some stats on what proportion of public sector employees are there because they have a vocation to provide a service to the public.

digime2007 · Post by **digime2007** » 27 Jan 2010 11:30

So that's a comparison of median earnings across the whole of each sector. Doesn't tell us a thing about like for like comparisons.

I don't understand this selfish attitude. It's not as if public sector workers are bathing in champagne and buying up warehouse conversions is it?

Anyway, if you think public sector workers have it so good why don't you get a public sector job? You might not find the terms so generous. Especially once you have your pay cut to help bail this country out of its financial hole.

digime2007 · Post by **digime2007** » 27 Jan 2010 11:43

To illustrate my point regarding your meaningless statistics:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... rivate-pay

Including the quote:

Steve Tatton of Incomes Data Services (IDS), the pay monitor, finds virtually every category of public sector worker would be better paid if they worked in the same job in the private sector.

You'll find the rest of the article interesting reading too. Not that you'll agree of course but hopefully other people won't get the wrong idea from your misleading attitudes.

Wispy Wonder · Post by **Wispy Wonder** » 27 Jan 2010 13:41

TCM aside, the answer to the specific question about dumping rubbish would be to install a camera and actually prosecute those filmed leaving their junk. Unfortunately, the council is more interested in providing play mats for under empowered girls than meeting the needs of the majority of it's taxpayers.

As for the TCM, it's a pity her pay and pension aren't performance-related, she wouldn't be costing us a penny.

Robin Orton · Post by **Robin Orton** » 27 Jan 2010 14:52

Almost as importantly, is there any way the spelling of the title of this thread could be changed to British English? I give an involuntary shudder every time I visit.

Center now centred - Admin

stuart · Post by **stuart** » 27 Jan 2010 15:03

Except that performance related implies how well the Council's objectives are being met - not ours! There may be a very big difference.

It comes down to accountability. This and the previous TCM have none to us, but everything to them. So do you favour, as Kent, to have high flying drones watching us all in case we may be fly-tipping: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/jan/2 ... lan-drones

Stuart (edited to correct link)

Wispy Wonder · Post by **Wispy Wonder** » 27 Jan 2010 15:08

Wispy Wonder · Post by **Wispy Wonder** » 28 Jan 2010 13:25

I can't see why my last reply was deleted - moderate, inoffensive, no naughty words, oh well.

Anyway - all it would take would be a simple cctv camera that could be used to play back footage when an offence is reported. How tricky/costly would that be?

Funnily enough though - I believe Lewisham already employs some high flying drones.

Sydenham Town Forum

The Community Voice for London SE26 since 2004

Town Centre Manager

Town Centre Manager