PSEU: No cuts to public pay or staffing levels

zootroid

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/0424/1224245295398.html

Given that we are now borrowing 20 billion a year just to run the country, how can unions make these demands? The country simply cannot afford its current levels of expenditure, cuts have to come from somewhere. So its basically a choice between social welfare, public sector pay or capital investment. This type of hardline approach unions sometimes take really annoys me.

Boskowski

zootroid wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/0424/1224245295398.html

Given that we are now borrowing 20 billion a year just to run the country, how can unions make these demands? The country simply cannot afford its current levels of expenditure, cuts have to come from somewhere. So its basically a choice between social welfare, public sector pay or capital investment. This type of hardline approach unions sometimes take really annoys me.

Since public service wages had a good bit of a cut already I think it's about time to look at the amount of free money doshed out. Meaning welfare benefits. Eligibility, amounts - everything. Also the ridiculous consultancy contracts that are given in the public sector to the legal and medical profession going under scrutiny would save a fortune me thinks. How come in Europe they just pay senior hospital doctors very decent/serious wages whereas we have to create a loophole? for them under which they can work for the public sector but claim private sector senior consultancy rates which brings them to three times the money their European counterparts are on? Is that because we are a small country but found ourselves that business niche that makes us filthy rich compared to everyone else or is that because the Irish taxpayers stocked up on vaseline a long time ago?

Alcatel

realcam wrote: »

Since public service wages had a good bit of a cut already I think it's about time to look at the amount of free money doshed out. Meaning welfare benefits. Eligibility, amounts - everything. Also the ridiculous consultancy contracts that are given in the public sector to the legal and medical profession going under scrutiny would save a fortune me thinks. How come in Europe they just pay senior hospital doctors very decent/serious wages whereas we have to create a loophole? for them under which they can work for the public sector but claim private sector senior consultancy rates which brings them to three times the money their European counterparts are on? Is that because we are a small country but found ourselves that business niche that makes us filthy rich compared to everyone else or is that because the Irish taxpayers stocked up on vaseline a long time ago?

I think we need to look at all solutions. Welfare is 20bn, pay bill is 20bn, to round figures up. Rest of the budget we'd allotted for in good times came to about 60bn, so another 20bn on top of those two runs the rest of the country.

And we're talking about cuts of 3.5bn with a shortfall of more than 20bn.

It's not the real world.

LoLth

will the halt on PS employment coupled with the early retirement not in effect reduce the PS employment levels? Especially if they announce that they are going to tax the lump sum PS workers receive at retirement.

hopefully the lower staffing levels can be re-distributed to increase efficiency and not result in letting a service go to pot just to make a point that more staff is needed.

As for consultancy rates: I have to agree, they really do need to be looked at. Perhaps, in order to retain a medical license in the state, all medical staff have to provide 1 year of public healthcare service (at public sector wages) for every ten years of private work ? or something along those lines.

gurramok

As much as I hate Thatcher, we need a Thatcherite style breakage of these out of touch unions who are willing to bankrupt the country for their own greed.

Alcatel

LoLth wrote: »

will the halt on PS employment coupled with the early retirement not in effect reduce the PS employment levels? Especially if they announce that they are going to tax the lump sum PS workers receive at retirement.

hopefully the lower staffing levels can be re-distributed to increase efficiency and not result in letting a service go to pot just to make a point that more staff is needed.

As for consultancy rates: I have to agree, they really do need to be looked at. Perhaps, in order to retain a medical license in the state, all medical staff have to provide 1 year of public healthcare service (at public sector wages) for every ten years of private work ? or something along those lines.

The joke being that with retirement, people taking 3 year breaks, short working years and the like, we're essentially saying "We don't need you, we can survive without you, but we don't have the balls to fire you."

Also, attrition can leave blanks in an organisation that should be filled - what if all the vets quit the department of agriculture and we were left with a self administrating administration? Extreme example of a real concept.