The Student Room Group

Civil Service Fast Stream 2023 CANCELLED!

Civil Service fast-stream cancelled for *at least* a year from 2023.

I worked in the CS for a pretty short period but all the fast stream people seemed great. Don't have a clue how cutting the recruitment of the best and brightest will help improve the quality of the CS....

Thoughts?

Link: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/05/30/civil-service-fast-track-graduate-scheme-close-least-year/
Very silly. The continued vendetta against technocrats and experts is very sad.
The conservatives continue their relentless and calculated war of annihilation on UK public services
I think they have to cut 92k jobs!
Original post by Kutie Karen
I think they have to cut 92k jobs!

Issue is they're targeting headcount rather than money. You'd have to cut a dozen fast-streamers for a couple of grade 7 civil servants.

Rip to all the people currently finishing their first and second year of uni and were hoping to join the fast-stream
Original post by BenRyan99
Issue is they're targeting headcount rather than money. You'd have to cut a dozen fast-streamers for a couple of grade 7 civil servants.

Rip to all the people currently finishing their first and second year of uni and were hoping to join the fast-stream

What is a grade 7 job?
Original post by Kutie Karen
What is a grade 7 job?

Well it's generally someone who's been there around 5yrs or so but the gradings and names change across different departments. In the Government Economic Service at HMT, a grade 7 was a senior economist so had done the grad scheme as an assistant economist and then had been promoted to economic advisor and then promoted to senior economist. So had generally been there from 4-8yrs depending on how good they are. Point is, the grade 7 people were on at least double the fast-streamers so cutting tonnes of the cheapest people isn't the way to make cuts in the civil service
Read the first post in the thread.....
Reply 8
Will this year's cohort starting sep/Oct be unaffected? Are they stopping new recruits from next year or are they pausing the whole scheme including those already on it?
The article says the 2022 intake is unaffected.
Reply 10
Original post by infp2019
The article says the 2022 intake is unaffected.

thank you, i cant read the article without signing up.
Reply 11
Original post by BenRyan99
Civil Service fast-stream cancelled for *at least* a year from 2023.

I worked in the CS for a pretty short period but all the fast stream people seemed great. Don't have a clue how cutting the recruitment of the best and brightest will help improve the quality of the CS....

Thoughts?

Link: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/05/30/civil-service-fast-track-graduate-scheme-close-least-year/


Well the comments are pretty hilarious - seems Telegraph readers are anti PPE grads.

I'm pretty suprised. The scheme wasn't even paused/canned in the 2010-2012 'austerity period'.

Feels like to shot across the bow at Perm Secs but dunno what its supposed to achieve.
Reply 12
Original post by BenRyan99
Issue is they're targeting headcount rather than money. You'd have to cut a dozen fast-streamers for a couple of grade 7 civil servants.


Maths goes a bit wonky there. I started on that fast stream on £28k, on promotion to grade 7 I was on just shy of £50k. But yeah, your jist isn't so far off.

It mucks up an internal pipeline, but I suspect that's the motivation.
Original post by Ytfc
thank you, i cant read the article without signing up.

I did put the title as 2023, but yeah the 2022 cohort is fine as the other poster says. Article says it's cancelled for at least a year so it may stretch to the 2024 cohort too
Original post by Quady
Maths goes a bit wonky there. I started on that fast stream on £28k, on promotion to grade 7 I was on just shy of £50k. But yeah, your jist isn't so far off.

It mucks up an internal pipeline, but I suspect that's the motivation.

Think the pay scales vary widley by department, location and area of the fast-stream (e.g. generalist, economist, diplomatic, digital, etc). For example, for grade 6 economists at HMT the average pay is about 50k but grade 6 economists the MoD can earn 65-70k, so it varies widely based on how desirable the roles are and how short staffed they are.

Main issue is that all these tools like recruitment freezes, promotion freezes and voluntary redundancies all have an inverse effect where the most productive and competitive workers leave first as they can more easily find alternatives. Leaves you with the lower quality civil servants in a given batch. Obviously some will still stay but if you're good and there's no prospect of a promotion and your pay is frozen.... drives out the best leading to lower quality policy advice and implementation
Reply 15
Original post by BenRyan99
Think the pay scales vary widley by department, location and area of the fast-stream (e.g. generalist, economist, diplomatic, digital, etc). For example, for grade 6 economists at HMT the average pay is about 50k but grade 6 economists the MoD can earn 65-70k, so it varies widely based on how desirable the roles are and how short staffed they are.


Yup, but that be grade 6 rather than grade 7.

In Scottish Government the grade six scale is £65-75k base. As I'm at the max of the scale with a digital allowance I'm on a few hundred quid under £80k.

You say that's due to demand/supply. I'm pretty unconvinced. From what I've seen pay differentials have been due to historic pay negotiations/policy differences being amplified over time. DWP ended a three year pay deal in 2009/10 and went into a pay freeze. Whereas MoJ still had time to run on theirs and DFID unlike MoJ and DWP deemed pay progression was contractual. Allowances are supposed to compensate for skills, but there is no rhyme or reason to them. SG give me a £4k market allowance that DFID would not for the same role in the same location.
Original post by Quady
Yup, but that be grade 6 rather than grade 7.

In Scottish Government the grade six scale is £65-75k base. As I'm at the max of the scale with a digital allowance I'm on a few hundred quid under £80k.

You say that's due to demand/supply. I'm pretty unconvinced. From what I've seen pay differentials have been due to historic pay negotiations/policy differences being amplified over time. DWP ended a three year pay deal in 2009/10 and went into a pay freeze. Whereas MoJ still had time to run on theirs and DFID unlike MoJ and DWP deemed pay progression was contractual. Allowances are supposed to compensate for skills, but there is no rhyme or reason to them. SG give me a £4k market allowance that DFID would not for the same role in the same location.

I'm sure what you say is indeed part of the story but I can give you an example of what I meant. So the treasury has pretty much the lowest pay out of all government departments for economists. Seems weird given it's a very prestigious department, especially for economists.

Issue is, the vast majority of economists, given the option of equal pay and any department, would pick HMT. This is because firstly there's just a lot more economists so the department leans on your advice more, secondly, you're dealing with issues that are more of a natural fit for economists, but also quite a big reason is the exit opportunities. HMT economists can walk into roles at the Bank of England, banking, consulting, etc with far far greater ease than economists from most other departments.

So in some cases there definitely is a supply and demand thing, every GES member I know has a list of the departments they'd want to work for (very few) and a much longer list of ones that they'd have to be paid a lot more to work in (e.g. MoD, HMRC, etc). But you're definitely right in that another big reason is legacy agreements over pay. I imagine the S&D aspect is more of a thing for non-generalist civil servants though
Are the Civil Service Summer internships still going ahead, like the SDIP?
Just the possibility of a graduate jobs from it seems unlikely?
Reply 18
Original post by BenRyan99
I'm sure what you say is indeed part of the story but I can give you an example of what I meant. So the treasury has pretty much the lowest pay out of all government departments for economists. Seems weird given it's a very prestigious department, especially for economists.

Issue is, the vast majority of economists, given the option of equal pay and any department, would pick HMT. This is because firstly there's just a lot more economists so the department leans on your advice more, secondly, you're dealing with issues that are more of a natural fit for economists, but also quite a big reason is the exit opportunities. HMT economists can walk into roles at the Bank of England, banking, consulting, etc with far far greater ease than economists from most other departments.

So in some cases there definitely is a supply and demand thing, every GES member I know has a list of the departments they'd want to work for (very few) and a much longer list of ones that they'd have to be paid a lot more to work in (e.g. MoD, HMRC, etc). But you're definitely right in that another big reason is legacy agreements over pay. I imagine the S&D aspect is more of a thing for non-generalist civil servants though


Depends on ones profession. In my own, IT rather than economics, HMT would be one of the last places to go. Pretty much non-existant in terms of complexity. HMRC is far more interesting and has higher pay.

Go somewhere sexy like GCHQ and you get paid a mint.

Quick Reply

Latest