Fallacy of the "job for life" argument

flogen

Sorry if this is too close to an existing thread topic - feel free to merge if it is.

The majority of my income is currently as a public servant so I'm going to be effected by the pension levy when it comes in. I don't mind paying the bit extra because I'll still have far more than I did this time last year and I currently don't have a mortgage to pay or kids to feed. I know others aren't so lucky.

I would like there to be more detail on the levy - like what criteria will be met for it to be revoked, if it will lead to stronger public service pensions as a pension contribution should and what will it be spent on (I thought it was impossible under current Irish law to use the pension fund for day-to-day spend). But anyway...

My main problem with this debate is the argument used to bolster the Government's case - that the levy is a premium public servants pay for the safety their job offers.

In my opinion it's a stupid argument for two reasons:

Firstly, the public sector should not be a job for life and if it is it's the Government's fault. They've created contracts that make it so hard to sack incompetent or surplus workers in the public sector and the issue of quality is still not being dealt with.

Secondly, and perhaps most importantly, it's simply not true that public sector workers are safe. Hundreds of teachers are expected to lose their jobs in September (having paid their pension levy from now or whenever on). Dublin Bus workers are losing their jobs (I know it's semi-state but they're public servants really) and I'm sure there are other examples out there.

Has anyone pointed out that the public service is 1) not always a job for life and 2) has only developed a reputation for such because of successive Governments' unwillingness to have quality assurances and accountability?

NewDubliner

There's a lot of misinformation out there.

Fact is, if the government can cut salaries at the behest of Independent News and Media and IBEC, it's just a matter of time, having tasted blood, they'll cut deeper. Nothing is safe, the government has crossed the line.

One thing that's constantly mis-stated: that is that private sector workers have no pensions whatever and that public sector workers do. This conveniently overlooks the Contributory Social Welfare Pension which both private and public sector workers receive and for which both pay the same contributions. In both cases, the pension is worth much more than the contributions, which themselves are not invested anywhere.

The pension top-up that PS workers get is equal to the better schemes in the private sector. Many people in the private sector have pension schemes that are still quite generous, but are keeping quiet while the mob's attention is directed away from the 7bn bailout and onto the public sector workers.

Hillel

NewDubliner wrote: »

There's a lot of misinformation out there.

Fact is, if the government can cut salaries at the behest of Independent News and Media and IBEC, it's just a matter of time, having tasted blood, they'll cut deeper. Nothing is safe, the government has crossed the line.

One thing that's constantly mis-stated: that is that private sector workers have no pensions whatever and that public sector workers do. This conveniently overlooks the Contributory Social Welfare Pension which both private and public sector workers receive and for which both pay the same contributions. In both cases, the pension is worth much more than the contributions, which themselves are not invested anywhere.

The pension top-up that PS workers get is equal to the better schemes in the private sector. Many people in the private sector have pension schemes that are still quite generous, but are keeping quiet while the mob's attention is directed away from the 7bn bailout and onto the public sector workers.

Many, but by no means all, private sector workers qualify for a Contributory Social Welfare Pension. For most, this will be the only part of their pension that will be index linked. This is in stark contrast to the pension of permanent/established public servants where all their pension is not only index linked but where any additional increases for a grade (aka benchmarking) are automatically applied to pensioners, also. There is nothing remotely comparable for workers in the private sector.

This topic has been extensively covered in the thread "Public Sector Unions to Take Action" and I would refer interested parties to the post below:

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Hillel

flogen wrote: »

My main problem with this debate is the argument used to bolster the Government's case - that the levy is a premium public servants pay for the safety their job offers.

In my opinion it's a stupid argument for two reasons:

Firstly, the public sector should not be a job for life and if it is it's the Government's fault. They've created contracts that make it so hard to sack incompetent or surplus workers in the public sector and the issue of quality is still not being dealt with.

Secondly, and perhaps most importantly, it's simply not true that public sector workers are safe. Hundreds of teachers are expected to lose their jobs in September (having paid their pension levy from now or whenever on). Dublin Bus workers are losing their jobs (I know it's semi-state but they're public servants really) and I'm sure there are other examples out there.

A small proportion of workers in the Public Sector are unestablished (i.e. not yet permanent) or on contract. These workers do not have the same conditions as their co-workers and are in a similar situation to workers in private industry. It is a near certainty that most will lose their jobs and I agree that it is grossly unfair that they are being asked to pay the "Pension Levy". The public sector unions would be far better employed fighting for this constituency who have no muscle or resources to represent themselves.