300 civil servants are paid more than €165,000 per year

jimmmy

It was reported on RTE radio this morning that over 300 civil servants "earn " over € 165,000.00 per year. On retirement they are entitled to the "gratuity" and a pension of over € 80,000.00 per year. It implied the figure was civil servants only and did not include hospital consultants etc.

It would be interesting to find out the number of civil servants further down this colossal pyramid eg those earning between 120,000 and 165,000 per year ?

joolsveer

Anybody being paid this amount or more should be named!

P. Breathnach

joolsveer wrote: »

Anybody being paid this amount or more should be named!

Get yourself a copy of the IPA Yearbook.

eman66

I know two of them, working in the same county, on €250,000. No fantastic qualifications, promotions and length of service got them this nice fat salary. I think a quarter of a million is silly money.

Darragh29

The more I hear about the PS Gravy train in Ireland, the less I wonder now why the country hasn't got a pot to p*ss into. How in the name of all that is holy can these salaries be justified??? :mad::mad::mad:

Darragh29

eman66 wrote: »

I know two of them, working in the same county, on €250,000. No fantastic qualifications, promotions and length of service got them this nice fat salary. I think a quarter of a million is silly money.

And the remarkable thing is, the fact that they were promoted was probably based exclusively on length of service, consistent with the backwards workplace promotional structures endorsed by public sector vested interest unions. None of these people were probably promoted on merit or ability. If you're in the job 10 years and opposing change and I'm in the job 9 years and embracing change, you'll get the job and that will be that. After ten odd years of benchmarking, the rules for handling promotions are still coming from somewhere back in the 1950's, you couldn't make it up.

Alcatel

Our PS is overpaid, inefficient, and not likely to change thanks to the monopoly of serior civil servants, politicians and unions. The bureaucracy must grow in order to facilitate the growing bureaucracy.

In other news, it's sunny out.

Darragh29

Alcatel wrote: »

Our PS is overpaid, inefficient, and not likely to change thanks to the monopoly of serior civil servants, politicians and unions. The bureaucracy must grow in order to facilitate the growing bureaucracy.

In other news, it's sunny out.

The best thing we could do for ourselves now is let the government throw more money at them, let the inefficiencies bed in further and further and the cost of the PS rise and rise. There is no way that a country with our current income can actually survive as an economic entity with the PS burden that it has currently saddled itself with. So something will have to give somewhere, you can't continue spending nearly 60 Billion Euro when you are taking in around 30 Billion Euro a year.

Then the day will sooner come when we will be bankrupt as a country and someone else will have to come in and sort it all out for us right and proper.

joolsveer

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Get yourself a copy of the IPA Yearbook.

Will that cover the non public service too?

Alcatel

Darragh29 wrote: »

The best thing we could do for ourselves now is let the government throw more money at them, let the inefficiencies bed in further and further and the cost of the PS rise and rise. There is no way that a country with our current income can actually survive as an economic entity with the PS burden that it has currently saddled itself with. So something will have to give somewhere, you can't continue spending nearly 60 Billion Euro when you are taking in around 30 Billion Euro a year.

Then the day will sooner come when we will be bankrupt as a country and someone else will have to come in and sort it all out for us right and proper.

That's the general idea. We can't fire people because of the unions, and we can't let the right people go and bring in the right organisational structures because we're incapable.

Why did we set up the QUANGO's? Because our politicians needed to shuffle responsibility for some issue or other.

Why can't we roll all PS spending into one organisation, handling all HR, payroll, IT, purchasing and corporate services in one? Because we'd not be capable of doing it. There are companies with more people on the books than our PS, and we really couldn't organise a piss up in a brewery by comparison.

jimmmy

Darragh29 wrote: »

The best thing we could do for ourselves now is let the government throw more money at them, let the inefficiencies bed in further and further and the cost of the PS rise and rise. There is no way that a country with our current income can actually survive as an economic entity with the PS burden that it has currently saddled itself with. So something will have to give somewhere, you can't continue spending nearly 60 Billion Euro when you are taking in around 30 Billion Euro a year.

Then the day will sooner come when we will be bankrupt as a country and someone else will have to come in and sort it all out for us right and proper.

Do you know, thats the best suggestion I have heard in a while. You are right, the sooner we will be bankrupt as a country the better, and someone else will have to come in and sort it all out for us right and proper. Would anyone else help us at that stage though ?

Darragh29

jimmmy wrote: »

Do you know, thats the best suggestion I have heard in a while. You are right, the sooner we will be bankrupt as a country the better, and someone else will have to come in and sort it all out for us right and proper. Would anyone else help us at that stage though ?

To be honest, I've lost faith in the ability of this government to run this country. They can't put their hands up and say they made a b*lls of it and that major major changes are needed and if strikes are the outcome, then to be it, upwards and onwards.

Best thing we can do now for ourselves is let them dig us further and further into the sh*ts, help them to do it quicker and quicker, encourage the government to give more payrises to the PS and to continue on the path of pursuing less efficiencies and keep paying more bonuses and more money into PS pensions. "There yiz go lads, keep horsin' and shovelling the cash in there!" Instead of Biffo sacking 5 junior ministers, we should be encouraging him to add another ten junior ministers, but not before he sacks the five today and throws 50K each at them in severance pay. After he wastes that money 250K of taxpayers money, he should hire the same 5 back next week and then hire another ten on top of that. More military helicopters for Martin Cullen & Noel Dempsey, more e-voting machines that will never be used along with the obligitary 25 year legally binding lease with your local FF supporter to store them. More more more more more.

Then some day soon, the pot will be empty and that will be the end of that particular problem.

P. Breathnach

Darragh29 wrote: »

And the remarkable thing is, the fact that they were promoted was probably based exclusively on length of service...

Not so. Jobs at that level are filled by competitve process operated by the Top Level Appointments Commission.

... you couldn't make it up.

You just did.

P. Breathnach

joolsveer wrote: »

Will that cover the non public service too?

The IPA deals with the public service. It's the Institute of Public Administration. So you should be able to figure out its main focus. See http://www.ipa.ie/content.asp?id=65 .

Sleepy

300 odd quangos would obviously require 300 odd 'top men' to do... well I'm not sure what most of them actually do...

stevoman

another public service bashing thread. who would have thought. :rolleyes:

mathie

"300 civil servants are paid more than €165,000 per year"

And how many private sector workers earn more than 165K a year?

jonsnow

no great surprise here.TDs and ministers salarys are benchmarked against senior civil servants.If they get paid the politicos get paid.But while there salarys are certainly impressive its the perks and benifits that these guys get which is truly mindblowing.I f a regular garda gets a 28 euro food voucher daily to feed himself at an airport for example- what do you think these guys can claim.

anonymous_joe

For the love of God...

We can all agree that certain aspects of the Civil Service are poorly run, but for fúck's sake, people are bitter.

The 300 here are clearly those at the top of the Civil Service, if they were in private industry and at similar levels they'd earn far in excess of €165,000.

Begrudgery knows no limits. :rolleyes:

Rob_l

jonsnow wrote: »

no great surprise here.TDs and ministers salarys are benchmarked against senior civil servants.If they get paid the politicos get paid.But while there salarys are certainly impressive its the perks and benifits that these guys get which is truly mindblowing.I f a regular garda gets a 28 euro food voucher daily to feed himself at an airport for example- what do you think these guys can claim.

Compare like with like please, so compare an oridinary garda to an ordinary Public servant, I dont think the ehad of an garda siochana is restricted to a €28 voucher

Darragh29

anonymous_joe wrote: »

For the love of God...

We can all agree that certain aspects of the Civil Service are poorly run, but for fúck's sake, people are bitter.

The 300 here are clearly those at the top of the Civil Service, if they were in private industry and at similar levels they'd earn far in excess of €165,000.

Begrudgery knows no limits. :rolleyes:

If you were in the private sector, you'd be seriously worried about losing your job right now, if you haven't already and I imagine you'd be taking a hefty wage cut to counteract any possibility of that. The whole system is f*cked when it comes to PS pensions for a start. Someone retiring on 80K a year and then before that kicks in, a massive tax free lump sum/handshake!?!?! Who's paying for it???

jhegarty

mathie wrote: »

"300 civil servants are paid more than €165,000 per year"

And how many private sector workers earn more than 165K a year?

I hope there are lots of them , we need their tax money.

Unless you are shareholder in the company , I don't see how it would matter to you.

Gumbo

jhegarty wrote: »

I hope there are lots of them , we need their tax money.

Unless you are shareholder in the company , I don't see how it would matter to you.

the point being, you dont see new threads started everyday to announce that a chairman in AIB is being paid 400k per year!

if a thread is started on 300PS workers being paid 165k, then there should be a thread started that just as many of private sector workers are being paid 165k

delop

kceire wrote: »

the point being, you dont see new threads started everyday to announce that a chairman in AIB is being paid 400k per year!

Thats not comparing like with like, The chairman of AIB is paid that because the company makes a profit, and are still doing so... but he is no mate of mine, dont get me started...

IMO all CS & PS contracts should be canceled , and they can all reapply for their jobs in an open market, under more sensible conditions and it they don't like the new condition they don't have to apply...

jimmmy

kceire wrote: »

the point being, you dont see new threads started everyday to announce that a chairman in AIB is being paid 400k per year!

ah but there are not 300 chairmen of AIB being paid over 165k per year. I can choose to support AIB or not. I can do business with them or not...they have plenty of competition, and if you or I or joe soap thinks they can run a business better than AIB or make more money than them then we can try to prove it. We have no choice however in the govt....its not like a business we can support or not. Public servants are just that.

I have tried briefly to find out how many earn between 120,000 and 165,000 per year but cannot find the figure.

Boskowski

Now lads. I'd usually be the first to join in on the bashing of waste in the public service, but ...

Running a big company with a few thousand employees surely requires a few top jobs and nobody would think twice about the fact that there would be people in such a company on that kind of money.

So what about running a country? Is that all done by clerks behind counters or what?

I know there is a awful lot of stuff in PS that isn't up to scratch, but sometimes it gets just silly. And the media home in on it as it seems to be the thing that people want read about these days. Irresponsible actually that.

P. Breathnach

jimmmy wrote: »

ah but there are not 300 chairmen of AIB being paid over 165k per year. I can choose to support AIB or not. I can do business with them or not...they have plenty of competition, and if you or I or joe soap thinks they can run a business better than AIB or make more money than them then we can try to prove it. We have no choice however in the govt....its not like a business we can support or not. Public servants are just that.

So can you guide me to a bank where the chief executive is paid less than €165k pa?

And let's not pretend that remuneration committees in plcs are influenced by price competition between candidates for the position of chief executive. The processes in that area are far from transparent (even to shareholders, to whom directors are accountable). But it's not public sector, so you excuse it.

Darragh29

P. Breathnach wrote: »

So can you guide me to a bank where the chief executive is paid less than €165k pa?

And let's not pretend that remuneration committees in plcs are influenced by price competition between candidates for the position of chief executive. The processes in that area are far from transparent (even to shareholders, to whom directors are accountable). But it's not public sector, so you excuse it.

Any lads that I know who are running their own businesses, employing between 10 and 30 people, are paying themselves no more than 50K. I know of one who was paying himself 100K and that's been slashed down big time very recently. This notion that the entrepreneurs/business people of Ireland are paying themselves 165K a year is a complete fallacy. Maybe in the cosetted semi state environment, and I'd argue that they are closer to public sector than private sector jobs, you might have folks running departments or organisations that are getting 165K a year if not a lot more. Where most of the jobs are created, which is the small and medium enterprise sector, people running their own companies are not paying themselves 165K a year or anywhere near it.

P. Breathnach

Darragh29 wrote: »

Any lads that I know who are running their own businesses, employing between 10 and 30 people, are paying themselves no more than 50K. I know of one who was paying himself 100K and that's been slashed down big time very recently. This notion that the entrepreneurs/business people of Ireland are paying themselves 165K a year is a complete fallacy. Maybe in the cosetted semi state environment, and I'd argue that they are closer to public sector than private sector jobs, you might have folks running departments or organisations that are getting 165K a year if not a lot more. Where most of the jobs are created, which is the small and medium enterprise sector, people running their own companies are not paying themselves 165K a year or anywhere near it.

You totally avoided my challenge. We were dealing with a comparison of pay at the highest levels in the public with pay at the highest levels in the private sector. Now you throw in the lower levels of the private sector.

If you want an anecdotal approach: most of the very wealthy people I know are in the private sector (including some in SMEs). What does that prove? Nothing much.

Darragh29

P. Breathnach wrote: »

You totally avoided my challenge. We were dealing with a comparison of pay at the highest levels in the public with pay at the highest levels in the private sector. Now you throw in the lower levels of the private sector.

If you want an anecdotal approach: most of the very wealthy people I know are in the private sector (including some in SMEs). What does that prove? Nothing much.

I'm not getting into a completely useless comparison you are trying to make between a handful of fat cats that you could count on one hand and the majority of employments in this country that are managed by entrepreneurs who are employing under 30 people, who are responsible for the majority of economic activity in this country and have created the majority of jobs.

There's no point in pointing the finger at a handful of fat cats and telling everyone that on the basis of what they earn, it's grand that there are public sector workers on over 150K a year. It's a f*cking disgrace that people who do nothing but organise bullsh*t meetings, media photo calls and pedal bullsh*t from one end of the day to the other are being paid these kind of salaries.

I say keep paying it to them, double their salaries, throw whatever expenses they want at them, then we'll go broke as a country and we'll finally get all this messing sorted out for once and for all. 165K a year is no use to you if your employer cannot afford to pay it to you and that's where we're heading to at the moment...

Cardinal Blue

jimmmy wrote: »

On retirement they are entitled to the "gratuity"

As far as i know gratuity is usually 1.5 times your wages(based on service).
A lump sum of up to €247500 tax payers money,very nice!.Were do I sign up?.

Darragh29

Cardinal Blue wrote: »

As far as i know gratuity is usually 1.5 times your wages(based on service).
A lump sum of up to €247500 tax payers money,very nice!.Were do I sign up?.

Don't forget the 80K a year pension on top of that 250K odd "gratuity" lump sum. Absolutely outrageous.

P. Breathnach

Darragh29 wrote: »

I'm not getting into a completely useless comparison you are trying to make between a handful of fat cats that you could count on one hand and the majority of employments in this country that are managed by entrepreneurs who are employing under 30 people, who are responsible for the majority of economic activity in this country and have created the majority of jobs...

I see. You prefer your even more useless comparison.

There are far more than a handful of fat cats in the private sector. I'm not so intemperate as to suggest that all those at the top in the private sector are overpaid, but there are many thousands in the private sector earning seriously large amounts on the scale you complain about when they are paid in the public sector.

guinnessdrinker

Cardinal Blue wrote: »

As far as i know gratuity is usually 1.5 times your wages(based on service).
A lump sum of up to €247500 tax payers money,very nice!.Were do I sign up?.

Where did you hear this?

P. Breathnach

guinnessdrinker wrote: »

Where did you hear this?

It's well-known. the retirement package for most categories of PS employee who have completed 40 years of service is 150% of final pay and a pension of half of final pay.

I am told (but haven't verified it) that when the scheme was introduced a choice was offered between the arrangement summarised above and a pension of two-thirds of final pay. Given life expectancies at the time, the choice of the lump sum and lower pension was the better one.

djpbarry

I just saw this headline on a news-stand and thought “Wow… that means absolutely nothing.”

mathie wrote: »

"300 civil servants are paid more than €165,000 per year"

And how many private sector workers earn more than 165K a year?

I see you’re new to the public servant-bashing game.

delop wrote: »

IMO all CS & PS contracts should be canceled...

Ah yes, because obviously all public servants are overpaid and are terrible at their jobs. Of course, everyone in the private sector is paid exactly what they deserve and they got where they are today purely on merit.

Darragh29

P. Breathnach wrote: »

I see. You prefer your even more useless comparison.

There are far more than a handful of fat cats in the private sector. I'm not so intemperate as to suggest that all those at the top in the private sector are overpaid, but there are many thousands in the private sector earning seriously large amounts on the scale you complain about when they are paid in the public sector.

The MAJORITY of people who CREATE employment in this country are extremely hard working people who are very moderately paid. We can argue all day here over a form of words, but they are not fat cat bankers. I know many entrepreneurs in my line of work, I'm an entrepreneur myself and it is very rare that I see someone paying themselves 165K a year or anywhere even remotely close to it.

gazzer

Why is this such a big story in the papers? There are almost 40,000 people in the civil service and so less that 1% of them earn this figure. That means that 99% of the CS DO NOT earn that figure. Approx 60% of the CS are in the clerical grade so therefore earn below the average industrial wage. Funny that that wasnt a headline in the paper.

Maybe the papers would be better served in highlighting the fact that temporary staff in the Public Service have to pay the pension levy even though they will never get a pension from the Public Service.

Darragh29

P. Breathnach wrote: »

I see. You prefer your even more useless comparison.

There are far more than a handful of fat cats in the private sector. I'm not so intemperate as to suggest that all those at the top in the private sector are overpaid, but there are many thousands in the private sector earning seriously large amounts on the scale you complain about when they are paid in the public sector.

If I start up a business and am lucky enough to be able to pay myself 200K a year after I've toiled with the business, if I've risked my own money to bring that situation about and have basically invested in myself so that my innovation, experience and pure hard work produces me a business that can afford to pay me 200K a year, that fact has absolutely nothing to do with any PS worker who might feel that they are entitled to "benchmark" their own income to mine.

If you want to earn 200K a year, go out and start up a business and deal with the CRO, Revenue, Co. Councils and a hundred PS muppets who are going to be pulling you backwards before you even get out of the trap!

There is a world of difference between the effort required to start up a successful business in Ireland or anywhere for that matter, and the effort required to find a cushy PS number once you are in the system.

If you want to be well paid, then be prepared to take on risk and sacrifice. If risk and sacrifice doesn't sit well with you, then by all means take a PS job, but please don't expect to be earning outrageous salaries such as 150K a year for doing absolutely sweet f*ck all and spending a whole lifetime hiding behind your union while opposing any and all change!

guinnessdrinker

gazzer wrote: »

Maybe the papers would be better served in highlighting the fact that temporary staff in the Public Service have to pay the pension levy even though they will never get a pension from the Public Service.

If this is true they should be entitled to get that money back.

P. Breathnach

Darragh29 wrote: »

... If you want to be well paid, then be prepared to take on risk and sacrifice. If risk and sacrifice doesn't sit well with you, then by all means take a PS job, but please don't expect to be earning outrageous salaries such as 150K a year for doing absolutely sweet f*ck all and spending a whole lifetime hiding behind your union while opposing any and all change!

I'll ignore the fact that you lace almost every remark you make about the public service with pejorative epithets, and simply point out that you appear to know little about the workload of those at the top level in the public service.

jimmmy

gazzer wrote: »

Why is this such a big story in the papers?

I guess its because those 300 people are entitled to higher government pensions than many other Prime Ministers get paid around the world...that is how much we as a country have lost control of public spending. Oh, and don't forget that 250K odd "gratuity" lump sum on top of the 82.5K a year pension. The P.M. of New Zealand ( a country not unlike Ireland in terms of population size ) is only paid the equivalent of 80 something k a year during his / her term as prime minister, not his / her retirement !

jimmmy

P. Breathnach wrote: »

the workload of those at the top level in the public service.

I know people at all levels in the public service, and they all - without exception - are not exactly stressed out compared to their private sector counterparts. Why would they be, with secure employment, better pensions, generally better pay, flexitime, plenty of days off ( more than most private sector people I know ) , plenty of tea + coffee breaks etc. No comparison.

Gumbo

jimmmy wrote: »

I know people at all levels in the public service, and they all - without exception - are not exactly stressed out compared to their private sector counterparts. Why would they be, with secure employment, better pensions, generally better pay, flexitime, plenty of days off ( more than most private sector people I know ) , plenty of tea + coffee breaks etc. No comparison.

in my private sevtor job i could make a cup of tea whenever i wanted. in my PS job i have to pay one euro for a cup of tea or provide my own tea bags and milk at my desk, which is not the end of the world imo, but why bring it up in the first place?

guinnessdrinker

jimmmy wrote: »

I know people at all levels in the public service, and they all - without exception - are not exactly stressed out compared to their private sector counterparts. Why would they be, with secure employment, better pensions, generally better pay, flexitime, plenty of days off ( more than most private sector people I know ) , plenty of tea + coffee breaks etc. No comparison.

Jimmmy, you started this thread saying 300 civil servants are paid more than €165,000 per year. Now you are complaining about all civil servants. What is your argument? Are you lumping all civil servants together or distingushing between the different types of civil servants?

ixoy

kceire wrote: »

in my private sevtor job i could make a cup of tea whenever i wanted. in my PS job i have to pay one euro for a cup of tea or provide my own tea bags and milk at my desk, which is not the end of the world imo, but why bring it up in the first place?

Because the CS is "known" for its coffee/tea breaks in the morning/afternoon. I know people who abuse the priviledge and vanish for 30 mins - ain't something I'd believe would be tolerated in the private sector. To be fair the majority just take the allocated 15 mins but is seen as half an hour of the day that you're clocked in and paid for. Now it happens in the private sector too and doesn't happen in all the public sector but I'd hazard a guess it's more common in the public sector (or, more particularly, the civil service).

Celticfire

Cardinal Blue wrote: »

As far as i know gratuity is usually 1.5 times your wages(based on service).
A lump sum of up to €247500 tax payers money,very nice!.Were do I sign up?.

http://www.publicjobs.ie/

P. Breathnach

jimmmy wrote: »

I know people at all levels in the public service, and they all - without exception - are not exactly stressed out compared to their private sector counterparts. Why would they be, with secure employment, better pensions, generally better pay, flexitime, plenty of days off ( more than most private sector people I know ) , plenty of tea + coffee breaks etc. No comparison.

You're making it up again. Either that, or the people you know in the public service are an oddly unrepresentative sample. And, unsurprisingly, you say nothing that indicates that you know anything about their workload.

I do not say that everything about the public sector is good. But it is far from being as bad as you characterise it. And those in senior positions, with very few exceptions, do have to work hard for their money. That includes putting in a lot of hours, far more than the nominal working week, and usually not being in a position to take all the annual leave permitted.

Fergus08

What is the point of this thread?? People in top public sector jobs get paid a reasonably, for the public sector high salary. Big deal! So what!

The public-sector bashers need to face up to the fact that The-Public-Sector-Are-Keeping-This-Country-Going!! Public sector workers, who are almost to a man and woman pay income income (unlike the 800,000 odd low paid private sector workers) out of all proportion to the their percentage of the workforce.

The so-called entrepreneurs who claim every last penny they spend as company expenses and then (the martyrs!) pay themselve ONLY 30k are, in many instances, dependent on public sector contracts or business that originated in the public sector. Or on spending by public sector workers, or on spending by social welfare receipients etc, etc. I work in the public sector in purchasing. Everything, and I mean EVERYTHING, we buy comes from the private sector - I'm talking millions. So, to listen to jumped up 'entrepreneurs', most of who are as dependent on state expenditure as people on social welfare, makes me angry. But, I suppose, some people feel the need to growl at the hand that feeds them. Private sector contractors get a VERY easy ride from the public sector: nice margins, public sector overseers who aren't too pushy, none too onerous conditions etc, etc.

Much of the public sector bashing you see on boards.ie is SO deluded, ill-informed and dangerous.

And, YES!, when we're bailing out the banks and the developers (who ARE the private sector in Ireland) to the extent that the survival of the state is at stake, the salaries of public servants are well down the list of priorities and worries. But again, prejudice is easy to indulge in than rational thought and fair-minded analysis. There is scope for reform in the public sector but if you think you're going to get it ridiculing and harassing public sectors then you are truly, sadly deluded. Rant over!

ixoy

Fergus08 wrote: »

The public-sector bashers need to face up to the fact that The-Public-Sector-Are-Keeping-This-Country-Going!! Public sector workers, who are almost to a man and woman pay income income (unlike the 800,000 odd low paid private sector workers) out of all proportion to the their percentage of the workforce.

Firstly: LOL.

Secondly: Aren't you inadvertently admitting that public sector workers are being very well paid compared to private-sector workers by virtue of the fact they're paying more income tax?

You are also aware of how the public sector worker is paid right? They're generally, from a budget perspective, a net loss to the government. Now that's okay theoretically as they're there to provide a public service - hence being in the... public service. However, it'd be wrong to claim that this expenditure is what's keeping the economy going. It's laughable, not laudable, to infer the PS is "the hand that feeds them" - it's only true in the case of some companies. Many do not have contracts with the State or have diverse interests.

Private sector contractors get a VERY easy ride from the public sector: nice margins, public sector overseers who aren't too pushy, none too onerous conditions etc, etc.

Evidence for this? Statistics?

Much of the public sector bashing you see on boards.ie is SO deluded, ill-informed and dangerous.

Dangerous? We're not exactly talking about handling nuclear waste here. There's some that are ill informed but there's others who are informed but you just fundamentally disagree with.

the salaries of public servants are well down the list of priorities and worries. But again, prejudice is easy to indulge in than rational thought and fair-minded analysis.

Well they shouldn't be well done on the list of priorities though. The bill is circa 20bn. As we reduce income via taxes, we've less money to fund this c. 20bn so therefore we need to lower the 20bn bill.
The bailout money in theory could result in profit so it's not quite fair to compare (although the potential for profit is questionable).

There is scope for reform in the public sector but if you think you're going to get it ridiculing and harassing public sectors then you are truly, sadly deluded. Rant over!

Actually most posters here are engaged in debate, rather than ridicule. We need to debate these costing issues before the imbalance of income vs. outgoings on issues like PS/CS wage bills tips us the scales too far and plunges us into a very dark place.

OhNoYouDidn't

Sleepy wrote: »

300 odd quangos would obviously require 300 odd 'top men' to do... well I'm not sure what most of them actually do...

Then they aren't civil servants, are they?

This refers to senior politicians, judges and the heads of government departments. All of whose names are in the public domain.

There are more than 300 of the 400,000 public servants (inclusive of civil servants) on 165k a year. Then we are into hospital consultants etc.