Why is public sector pay such a big issue now?

994

Been hearing a lot about how - apparently - the public sector is overstaffed and overpaid. But why did Fianna Fail not make an issue of this over their last 12 years in office? It´s ridiculous to say "we need to cut down on waste" - cutting down on waste is ALWAYS necessary, not just in lean times. To me it's a crude method of setting workers against each other so that they ignore the massive payouts to banks and the elites. EU countries on average secured their banks for 7.5% of GDP. Malta gave no security at all. Ireland - 214%.

eoinbn

Sorry, but that is just nonsense. How are tax increases and pay cuts going to get peoples focus off the massive bail for the banks? What would get our minds off the bailouts would be tax CUTS and wage INcreases, but that is what FF have been doing for the last 12 years- hence why we overlooked the flaws in their 'economics'.

Your 214% of GDP comes from Gene Kerrigan? During the bernie years he was one of the only people worth reading in the Sunday Indep, but he really has gone way too left lately. I assume the 214% is the bank guarantee, where as the projected cost of the bailout is somewhere between 20-50% of GDP, and 50% is only if NAMA is a total failure.

edit: And yes ideally countries/companies are constantly trying to improve, but often it's either ignored(because it's not popular), or rejected because the workers don't see why it's needed when the company/country is making profit/surplus. Good examples of this would be General Motor's where the company wanted to reduce costs(wages, pensions, healthcare) but the staff refused because the company was making big profit's from the SUV fad. Oil prices jumped, SUV fell GM went backrupt and the japanese companies that had already finished their restructuring profited.

gurramok

FF bought off the public sector with generous benchmarking and the rest of populace did't care as they believed the con that 'we were wealthy'

Darragh29

994 wrote: »

Been hearing a lot about how - apparently - the public sector is overstaffed and overpaid. But why did Fianna Fail not make an issue of this over their last 12 years in office? It´s ridiculous to say "we need to cut down on waste" - cutting down on waste is ALWAYS necessary, not just in lean times. To me it's a crude method of setting workers against each other so that they ignore the massive payouts to banks and the elites. EU countries on average secured their banks for 7.5% of GDP. Malta gave no security at all. Ireland - 214%.

Because "waste" can buy votes!

irish_bob

the source of revenue that made it possible to make our public sector the highest paid in europe is gone and isnt coming back , thats the crux of the matter

newname

Irish begrudgery is the reason why its such a big issue now.

Some people are down money so everyone else has to be down money too - share the pain and all that :rolleyes:

On principle why aren't the public sector bashers chasing down the super rich to pay their fair share of tax and for the political elite to take proper wage cuts. Thats the sort of gesture we need to see before they come looking for us to share this so called pain.

ART6

If cuts in wages and many redundancies are now necessary in the public sector, then so be it. But for those who work for the public sector losing one's job in difficult times is just as bad as it is for someone in the private sector. They also have families and mortgages, and mostly have even less chance of another job than, say, a motor mechanic or a builder. The reality is that the government should never have hired them in the first place and should never have allowed salaries to get utterly out of control. Unfortunately it's true that in the boom years no-one noticed the crass incompetence of ministers.

Sconsey

newname wrote: »

Irish begrudgery is the reason why its such a big issue now.

Some people are down money so everyone else has to be down money too - share the pain and all that :rolleyes:

On principle why aren't the public sector bashers chasing down the super rich to pay their fair share of tax and for the political elite to take proper wage cuts. Thats the sort of gesture we need to see before they come looking for us to share this so called pain.

I disagree with almost everything you say, it's not begrudgery it's plain and simple accounting, there is insufficient funds to pay their over-inflated salaries. Yes they are over-inflated salaries, they are far above the average private sector wage, and above the average in other EU countries. I'd be more inclined to think that you are the begrudger.

hobochris

newname wrote: »

On principle why aren't the public sector bashers chasing down the super rich to pay their fair share of tax and for the political elite to take proper wage cuts. Thats the sort of gesture we need to see before they come looking for us to share this so called pain.

Because the super rich don't get their cash from the public coffers.. And the super rich pay their relative proportion of tax already, asking them for more because they have more is unfair. the percentage system we currently use is a fair system.

Public sector workers are however paid through taxes on the private sector,
Its part of the governments job to see that this money is spent effectively and efficient services are provided without overspending. The problem is that their is to much being spent in the public sector finances,a lot of which is down to benchmarking if public sector workers were paid the same salary package that they would receive for down the equivalent private sector job then public sector pay would not be such a high priority issue in the public domain.

As for the propping up the banks issue that gets raised so much, If the banks collapse, so does our economy! WHICH MEANS WE ALL LOSE! despite the **** ups of the bankers, keeping the banks going was necessary for us all.

Spudmonkey

Just as a matter of interest, which would a public servant prefer?

- To have your wage cut by a large amount 25%/30%
- The possibility of losing your job?

If/When the IMF come in, wages could be slashed by up to 50%... To avoid this, the Irish government will have to do one or the other. I'm just wondering would people rather risk being un-employed than see their wage go down.

irish_bob

ART6 wrote: »

If cuts in wages and many redundancies are now necessary in the public sector, then so be it. But for those who work for the public sector losing one's job in difficult times is just as bad as it is for someone in the private sector. They also have families and mortgages, and mostly have even less chance of another job than, say, a motor mechanic or a builder. The reality is that the government should never have hired them in the first place and should never have allowed salaries to get utterly out of control. Unfortunately it's true that in the boom years no-one noticed the crass incompetence of ministers.

ah shur the public servants that are let go can look back and say , i had a good run

irish_bob

Spudmonkey wrote: »

Just as a matter of interest, which would a public servant prefer?

- To have your wage cut by a large amount 25%/30%
- The possibility of losing your job?

If/When the IMF come in, wages could be slashed by up to 50%... To avoid this, the Irish government will have to do one or the other. I'm just wondering would people rather risk being un-employed than see their wage go down.

public sector wages will not need to be cut by 30% in order for the country to get back on track although hospital consultants salarys should be cut by around 40% , so too judges and politicians , nurses , teacher , police , around 15% to start with and we will see what way the country is in a years time , if this happens , their will be no need to cut social wellfare which although high is the most sensitive area up for cuts , the public as a whole do not want cuts in wellfare , i believe they as a whole are up for public sector pay cuts

btw , i dont consider the pension levys already enforced to be a pay cut

Spudmonkey

irish_bob wrote: »

public sector wages will not need to be cut by 30% in order for the country to get back on track although hospital consultants salarys should be cut by around 40% , so too judges and politicians , nurses , teacher , police , around 15% to start with and we will see what way the country is in a years time , if this happens , their will be no need to cut social wellfare which although high is the most sensitive area up for cuts , the public as a whole do not want cuts in wellfare , i believe they as a whole are up for public sector pay cuts

btw , i dont consider the pension levys already enforced to be a pay cut

I don't either, I think this should be scrapped and an actual paycut put in place. It's nice to think it would as small as that, but even if everything in board snip was implemented, it will still only save 5 bn. There is still a shortfall of ~15 bn. This seems to be a herd of elephants in the room that no-one is talking about. And as many posts I've read here have said you wouldn't be able to keep up borrowing to run your household, why would the country be any different.

Whats more but if un-employment continues to rise, the tax intake will fall and expenditure will increase further. And this gap of 15 will increase further. But likewise, you can't tax those on the lower wages to the point where the they would be better off on welfare.

irish_bob

Spudmonkey wrote: »

I don't either, I think this should be scrapped and an actual paycut put in place. It's nice to think it would as small as that, but even if everything in board snip was implemented, it will still only save 5 bn. There is still a shortfall of ~15 bn. This seems to be a herd of elephants in the room that no-one is talking about. And as many posts I've read here have said you wouldn't be able to keep up borrowing to run your household, why would the country be any different.

Whats more but if un-employment continues to rise, the tax intake will fall and expenditure will increase further. And this gap of 15 will increase further. But likewise, you can't tax those on the lower wages to the point where the they would be better off on welfare.

you cant compare running a country to a household for the simple reason that politicians ( as useless as they are ) rely on the electorate to hold on to thier job and if the cuts are too severe , the electorate would simply not stand for it and the politicans would be out of a job , i realise the present goverment is going to loose the next election anyhow but whoever replaces them will still have to make unpopular descisions with most people , if they can save 5 billion in the next 18 mths , id be happy , as i said in my last post, judging from the reaction on radio and tv , cuts in social wellfare are the biggest NO NO , oh and i also think they should not cut the REPS scheme in agriculture , i know farmers are whingers but the west of ireland will be decimated if that goes, the west of ireland has feck all other than an agri based economy and the reps scheme was an integral party of farming in connaught , they have no dairying industry worth talking about in the west and no wheat or barley whatsover , mainly small sheep farmers , farmers in other parts of the country are better off but the west is an entriely different ball game

ps , im not from the west

markpb

newname wrote: »

Irish begrudgery is the reason why its such a big issue now. Some people are down money so everyone else has to be down money too - share the pain and all that :rolleyes:

Wrong. The government hired tens of thousands of extra public and civil servants while simultaneously agreeing to large(-ish) pay rises. Now the country is sinking rapidly so that expansion needs to be reversed. It's nothing to do with sharing the pain and everything to do with balancing the budget.

On principle why aren't the public sector bashers chasing down the super rich to pay their fair share of tax and for the political elite to take proper wage cuts. Thats the sort of gesture we need to see before they come looking for us to share this so called pain.

My boss pays almost five times more on the income levy than I do. He also pays more tax in a month than I do in a year. When the company started performing badly, my last boss was fired. What makes you think the well-paid in this country aren't being taxed enough?

newname

What makes you think the well-paid in this country aren't being taxed enough?

I said nothing about the well paid I was refering to the super rich - Billionaires paying a pittance in tax.

Its understandable when companies raise wages in good times and depress them in bad times -taking risks for profit etc. But a government should be more responsible and only pay what it believes it can sustain over the longer term.

Spudmonkey

irish_bob wrote: »

you cant compare running a country to a household for the simple reason that politicians ( as useless as they are ) rely on the electorate to hold on to thier job and if the cuts are too severe , the electorate would simply not stand for it and the politicans would be out of a job , i realise the present goverment is going to loose the next election anyhow but whoever replaces them will still have to make unpopular descisions with most people , if they can save 5 billion in the next 18 mths , id be happy , as i said in my last post, judging from the reaction on radio and tv , cuts in social wellfare are the biggest NO NO , oh and i also think they should not cut the REPS scheme in agriculture , i know farmers are whingers but the west of ireland will be decimated if that goes, the west of ireland has feck all other than an agri based economy and the reps scheme was an integral party of farming in connaught , they have no dairying industry worth talking about in the west and no wheat or barley whatsover , mainly small sheep farmers , farmers in other parts of the country are better off but the west is an entriely different ball game

ps , im not from the west

Are you sure

Yeah I get that, thats fair enough. I also would not be against cutting that towards agriculture, not because I have any alligance with it, rather that I don't see the point in cutting industries that have the potential to get us out of this situation.

I know a household is not comparable to a country, I was merely using the analagy to point out that you can only borrow for so long, eventually it has to be seriously curtailed!

Spudmonkey

newname wrote: »

Its understandable when companies raise wages in good times and depress them in bad times -taking risks for profit etc. But a government should be more responsible and only pay what it believes it can sustain over the longer term.

The problem is they didn't, instead they bought votes!

irish_bob

Spudmonkey wrote: »

Are you sure

Yeah I get that, thats fair enough. I also would not be against cutting that towards agriculture, not because I have any alligance with it, rather that I don't see the point in cutting industries that have the potential to get us out of this situation.

I know a household is not comparable to a country, I was merely using the analagy to point out that you can only borrow for so long, eventually it has to be seriously curtailed!

agree

diverdriver

It's pretty simple, newname, there are not enough billionaires in the country to fund this disastrous situation. Beside being billoinaires they would leave the country in the private jets if they get too much hassle. On top of all that you forget that for the most part it's billionaires and millionaires that run companies that provide employment for the private sector that provide the taxes to pay far too many public sector employees their inflated wages.

You seem to forget too that most if not all of the half million on the dole used to pay taxes to fund the public sector, now they contribute nothing. The companies that closed down don't pay any tax either. The people on the dole don't buy things anymore so no tax comes from that direction either. No one is buying cars, houses or anything else that generates tax revenue.

Therefore there is no longer the money to pay for it all. Something has to give.

This is a complete mess, almost entirely of Fianna Fail's making. It's tough for public servants, actually it isn't yet. But it will be.

Zambia

I sat in a lecture by Eddie Hobbs in 2006 , he stated and I quote
"We have a public sector wage bill that will cripple us"

In essence no-one cared when times where good

amacca

hobochris wrote: »

Because the super rich don't get their cash from the public coffers.. And the super rich pay their relative proportion of tax already, asking them for more because they have more is unfair. the percentage system we currently use is a fair system.

Not sure this is accurate at all, at least not according to a recent revenue commissioners report.
According to that report someone earning between 250k and 500k could shelter their income in such way that they only paid an effective rate of 5% in 2007 and previous years!


New measures introduced since 2007 mean that those on 500k+ still are only liable for about the minimum tax rate of 20%

earners between 250k and 500k have only seen their tax liability rise to about 14% since 2007

so maybe newname has a point?

if public sector conditions and wages are to be targeted (and there are valid arguments for this) then its not good enough for someone to make a blanket statement that the richest pay their fair share, from the above they certainly don't appear to.

I find it amazing that this gets brushed under the carpet when private sector groups are calling for public sector cuts etc

begrudgery or not, if someone on a wage alreading paying 21% on a portion and 42% on higher earnings + new income levy + additional pension deduction on top of that paid from 95 onwards in public sector (which Im not necessarily against) then why shouldnt earners on 250k-500k+ contribute similar proportions or at least something more than 14%.

They are all going to leave the country, to me this just seems like scare tactics? how many of these people are actually creating employment and not just exploiting this country. If this is all of the tax burden they are willing to shoulder then maybe we would be better off without them To me it seems they could just as easily be described as leeches as the antos and decos of this world who dont want to work and wont work as social welfare has become a right and entitlement handed down to them.

We wont ask them to pay because they are creating jobs? lets face it with a burden of only 14% since the changes I think they are having it very good indeed and increasing this wouldn't necessarily provoke a mass migration of benevolent billionaires whose sole purpose is giving jobs to poor witless paddy.


Besides, I presume and maybe Im wrong that people on 250k + are not michael dell types and may actually have roots here, would find it hard to just down tools and go, are embedded to some degree in the country therefore would have to shut up and put up with a rise and if they had any conscience wouldnt object to paying a bit more than what is effectively the minimum rate considering how much those lower paid than them contribute as a proportion of their income.


roll on commission on taxation report.

Shan75

Public sector pay is a big issue now because people have finally woken up to the fact that we cannot afford all the extra public servants added over the last 10 years and that some of them are being paid a salary well in excess of what they should be entitled to under normal circumstances.The problem is that people do not differentiate between those in the public sector earning well below the average industrial wage and those who are being paid a small fortune because they have climbed a couple of rungs up the ladder.There are quite simply too many rungs on the ladder and a lot of dead wood populating management positions or in departments which are unecessary.

We need to offload a sizable percentage of public servants but these must be the bureaucrats rather than the people actually doing the work.Of course we all know it will be the wrong people who are targetted as most of the bureaucrats have friends in low places looking after them.Same old story.We keep voting in the same clowns and we get what we deserve.

nesf

gurramok wrote: »

FF bought off the public sector with generous benchmarking and the rest of populace did't care as they believed the con that 'we were wealthy'

This is it in a nutshell. It doesn't matter what party you look at or what country you examine, if given an option a party in power will buy votes for the next election. Public sector workers and pensioners traditionally vote in high numbers, look at the increases in spending from the past 15 years and you'll see both these groups doing well along with others like parents etc.

nesf

994 wrote: »

EU countries on average secured their banks for 7.5% of GDP. Malta gave no security at all. Ireland - 214%.

This statistic is relatively meaningless given the huge disparity between countries over the effect of the credit crunch on their financial sectors. It's one of those nonsense numbers tossed out by one side of the debate despite it's lack of meaning. Malta didn't have to give security because its banks weren't badly effected. Spain also largely escaped problems, as did Italy etc etc.

dresden8

Zambia232 wrote: »

I sat in a lecture by Eddie Hobbs in 2006 , he stated and I quote
"We have a public sector wage bill that will cripple us"

In essence no-one cared when times where good

Was he trying to convince you to invest in property at the time?

thebman

lol TBH a lot of people in the public sector are still living in la la land and don't understand the real world or something because they don't seem to be living in the same country I am.

This isn't an attack but an observation of the people I know that work in or for the public sector that still seem to think the economy is doing fine in general and there are just minor problems going on.

The nation is bankrupt, any cuts politicians make will not be enough as they will make the bare minimum and borrow as much as possible to try to get themselves re-elected. As was said on another thread (maybe a quote from a paper), be glad its the politicians making the cuts.

We are basically crippling future generations with debt so we don't have to take the punishment now. Its actually disgraceful when you think about it and this is before and after these cuts which just won't be enough.

NatKingColeslaw

Why is everyone saying no one cared when the times were good?

It has been an issue for the last 6 or 7 years but the Unions managed to threaten their way to higher pay. Ireland Inc. is in dire trouble and the staff of Ireland Inc. will have to take their pain along with the rest of us. There used to be five people in my department and now there is just me. Me being in the private sector.

thebman

Exactly but that is why people say nobody cared. What they really mean is nobody cared enough to make it worth politicians while fighting pay increases.

Zambia

dresden8 wrote: »

Was he trying to convince you to invest in property at the time?

Actually no.

It was a financial health check talk the firm I was with paid him to do in regards to what you could do with your SSIA.

givyjoe81

dresden8 wrote: »

Was he trying to convince you to invest in property at the time?

What on earth has that got to do with a startlingly accurate prediction made 3 years ago?

Why dont we just continue to pay PS wages that the country can no longer afford, and then stick just our heads in the sands and carry on living in la la land.

Problem solved.

dresden8

givyjoe81 wrote: »

What on earth has that got to do with a startlingly accurate prediction made 3 years ago?

Why dont we just continue to pay PS wages that the country can no longer afford, and then stick just our heads in the sands and carry on living in la la land.

Problem solved.

The public sector didn't cripple us, the private sector did.

Property spivs did the damage. And continue to do so.

thebman

dresden8 wrote: »

The public sector didn't cripple us, the private sector did.

Property spivs did the damage. And continue to do so.

No both crippled the economy.

Public sector pay increases pushed up wages and the cost of doing business in the private sector.

Public bodies supposed to be monitoring the economy and regulating areas like finance messed up big time.

Politicians were let create a property bubble.

Sure there are innocent parties but everyone has to take part of the burden of fixing the problem because the world isn't fair and the country will be bankrupt otherwise.

dresden8

thebman wrote: »

Public bodies supposed to be monitoring the economy and regulating areas like finance messed up big time.

That fncker Neary should have been sacked, not let retire.

No, he should be strung up by his balls. The whole public sector is taking the flak for that tosser.

Anybody got stats on the costs to businesses of public sector pay? As far as I recall they were raking it in until people stopped spending.

And a lot of businesses are being crippled by their rent and upwards only rent reviews. Spiv types again.

Fulton Crown

Look! Dosn't matter who did the damage - fact is we are all living beyond our collective means.

Aherne has done some good things in fairness re the Northern Peace process ..but he has continuously rolled over to the trade unions and shamefully beefed up politicians pay and perks so that as a small country our polls are among the best paid in Europe.

Now that is all very well in a booming economy..but in a recessionary one.....nooooo...no pal...not a runner.

I know the public service did not cause the recession ..but I believe on good evidence that it is in good need of radical overhall..in term of pay and particularly productivity.

Look ! The fcuk ups in the public service over the past few years have been ..well obscene..

Even the recent child abuse report ...the departmental "inspectors" where were they ? Leas cross ...where were they ?

Overpaid ..underproductive ..lads yov'e been rumbled ....fcukin pay up ..

ronbyrne2005

The public service were happy to take the unsustainable tax revenues from building on the way up so they can take the lack of them on the way down. Few people didnt play a role in the bubble from receiving massive pay rises that were unsustainable to buying multiple properties, to over borrowing etc.

miju

newname wrote: »

Irish begrudgery is the reason why its such a big issue now.

Some people are down money so everyone else has to be down money too - share the pain and all that :rolleyes:

On principle why aren't the public sector bashers chasing down the super rich to pay their fair share of tax and for the political elite to take proper wage cuts. Thats the sort of gesture we need to see before they come looking for us to share this so called pain.

this is it in a nutshell really. the people who ""bought the dream" and believed the bull**** who are now jobless and / or down a serious chunk in their weekly income are looking to drag down others with them.

it's the old Irish bedgrudgery thing alright coupled with the reverse form of "keeping up with the jone's" that went on during the "celtic tiger" era.

at the end of the day ALOT of the increase in public servant numbers was down to public opinion such as we need more Garda so the government promised more and followed through with increasing Garda numbers by 1000 odd each year for example.

thebman wrote: »

No both crippled the economy.

Public sector pay increases pushed up wages and the cost of doing business in the private sector.

so it was public service who pushed up commercial rents, food prices, insurance prices , fuel prices and so on ?

thats were the MAIN increase of costs of doing business in this country came from and that was all private sector

gurramok

You missed health, edcuation, water, electricity, public transport, TV licence services & the lovely council sourced costs like waste disposal & business rates there.

jimmmy

hobochris wrote: »

Public sector workers are however paid through taxes on the private sector,
Its part of the governments job to see that this money is spent effectively and efficient services are provided without overspending. The problem is that their is to much being spent in the public sector finances,a lot of which is down to benchmarking if public sector workers were paid the same salary package that they would receive for down the equivalent private sector job then public sector pay would not be such a high priority issue in the public domain.

True, except I would say that not only are " Public sector workers paid through taxes on the private sector,", but they - our public service which is the highest paid / most ovrerpaid in the whole world - are paid by the country borrowing over 30 million per day at high interest rates. This is unsustainable.

thebman

miju wrote: »

so it was public service who pushed up commercial rents, food prices, insurance prices , fuel prices and so on ?

thats were the MAIN increase of costs of doing business in this country came from and that was all private sector

Never said anything about commercial rents, try to read what I post please. I never said they were responsible for everything, that would be stupid as is suggesting that is what I meant because you know it isn't. I said high wages pushed in the public sector meant the private sector had to offer high wages to get good people too. This increases the cost of doing business here.

Bob Z

thebman wrote: »

No both crippled the economy.

Public sector pay increases pushed up wages and the cost of doing business in the private sector.

Public bodies supposed to be monitoring the economy and regulating areas like finance messed up big time.

Politicians were let create a property bubble.

Sure there are innocent parties but everyone has to take part of the burden of fixing the problem because the world isn't fair and the country will be bankrupt otherwise.

When you think about they just pissed it against the wall.

K4t

hobochris wrote: »

Because the super rich don't get their cash from the public coffers.. And the super rich pay their relative proportion of tax already, asking them for more because they have more is unfair. the percentage system we currently use is a fair system.
.

Extortionate prices in pubs, hotels, rental accomm, supermarkets etc. No? Ok.

nesf wrote: »

This is it in a nutshell. It doesn't matter what party you look at or what country you examine, if given an option a party in power will buy votes for the next election. Public sector workers and pensioners traditionally vote in high numbers, look at the increases in spending from the past 15 years and you'll see both these groups doing well along with others like parents etc.

LOL. Oh dear. Go back to the conspiracy theory forum, man. And I'd be very curious to know where you got info that suggests the majority of PS workers voted for FF in the last general election. Ever heard of secret ballot?

Sand

Public sector payrises, which were exceptionally generous, didnt help cool inflation or profiteering. The same for social welfare increases.

I really get sick and tired of the "I didnt do it!" type ****. No one is saying the public sector was caught at the crime scene standing over the body of the celtic tiger, their hands covered in blood with a knife in their hands.

What were saying is... you creamed it during the good times with benchmarking and Fianna Fail buying your votes and everyone with their snout in the trough. Grand. Everyone was creaming it.

Now the good times are over.

The Private Sector which pays the taxes in this country ( yes, public sector pays tax but thats just recycling the cash inside the public sector - "new" cash comes from the private sector taxes) is absolutely decimated. Its not that you deserve job losses or reduced conditions ( though, on a value for money basis...you really do) so its a redundant argument to claim I dont deserve this, I didnt do anything, blah blah. No one gets what he deserves. Neary didnt get what he deserves. Bertie didnt get what he deserves.

We cannot afford it anymore. There is going to be job losses. There is going to be paycuts. There is going to be reduced conditions. There is no money to keep the gravy train going.

Sorry. Really, from the bottom of our hearts, we in the private sector have failed you. And we are truly, truly sorry for having let you down and not making more money to try keep you in the fashion to which you have become accustomed.

But please, man the **** up, stop whining and accept that we do not have the money anymore so youre just going to have to accept conditions based on *current* reality as opposed to whatever perceived conditions existed 3 or 4 years ago.

Thank you.

newname

There is going to be job losses. There is going to be paycuts. There is going to be reduced conditions.

Job losses, paycuts and reduced conditions have already begun.

Lots of temporary staff have been let go (temporary staff generally served 3 to 4 years and were entitled to permanency thereafter).

Willie O'Dea was gloating on questions and answers a few months ago calling the pension levy a paycut (which it is because its going straight into the dept of finance).

Conditions have already been reduced, T & S has been cut, its near impossible to get so much as a new mouse for your computer in the PS now, offices scrimping on heating, electricity, stationary etc.

I know people working at desks and on chairs deemed unsuitable by Occupational Therapists and they are being refused suitable replacements.

Fulton Crown

newname wrote: »

Job losses, paycuts and reduced conditions have already begun.

Lots of temporary staff have been let go (temporary staff generally served 3 to 4 years and were entitled to permanency thereafter).

Willie O'Dea was gloating on questions and answers a few months ago calling the pension levy a paycut (which it is because its going straight into the dept of finance).

Conditions have already been reduced, T & S has been cut, its near impossible to get so much as a new mouse for your computer in the PS now, offices scrimping on heating, electricity, stationary etc.

I know people working at desks and on chairs deemed unsuitable by Occupational Therapists and they are being refused suitable replacements.

My brown goooved bollix !

What the fcuk are you on about..that is just typical about the public service...cutbacks mean that some dumb fcuker cannot have a proper chair ?

Says it all really ..jeeze I fcukin despair ...:eek:

newname

Fulton

Its one example at the bottom of a list of examples. An example about some of the changes in conditions that are happening every day (one of many) or does everything have to be a dramatic OMG change before it can be brought to this debate.

By the way I have worked half my adult life in the private sector and half in the public sector and i've been unemployed before.
I'm not some lifelong insulated PS worker who has no idea about the difficulties people face on the dole and the uncertainty some people experience working in areas of the private sector.

I can't help but notice in discussions like this on public sector pay vs private sector pay. Nobody ever mentions the hospital consultants (€25000 pay rise), nobody talks about the lawyers getting massive money at the states expense, not much mention of the political elite, the super rich or even the property developers etc - the elite in general don't get slated in these discussions - Its a class thing.

I'd guess the people getting most vexed about the issue are ordinary low to medium earners in the private sector - i'd guess nobody posting regularly on this subject are among the elite.

It reeks of begrudgery - the people in the private sector who are struggling or lost their job can't bear the thought that the guard down the road or the nurse across the street isn't feeling the same pain as them. So they want them brought down a peg or 2.

Spudmonkey

dresden8 wrote: »

The public sector didn't cripple us, the private sector did.

Property spivs did the damage. And continue to do so.

Yeah private companies like Element 6 caused this... :rolleyes:

Spivs? Is this your own invention?

newname wrote: »

Job losses, paycuts and reduced conditions have already begun.

Lots of temporary staff have been let go (temporary staff generally served 3 to 4 years and were entitled to permanency thereafter).

This kind of hacking method is not going to solve anything, I'd imagine that those on temporary contracts would probably be the ones that would work harder in order to keep their job.. The last last in, first out is not the way to clean the dead flesh from the Public Service...

newname wrote: »

It reeks of begrudgery - the people in the private sector who are struggling or lost their job can't bear the thought that the guard down the road or the nurse across the street isn't feeling the same pain as them. So they want them brought down a peg or 2.

Stool water of the highest kind. Read Sands post, its not begrudgery... The money isn't there. This is what people don't seem to accept. They do accept there should be cuts... just as long as it doesn't affect them...

Try running a household on 60k a year when you are only bringing in 37k.. See how long the bank, credit union, etc will leave you keep borrowing!!

newname

Stool water of the highest kind. Read Sands post, its not begrudgery... The money isn't there. This is what people don't seem to accept. They do accept there should be cuts... just as long as it doesn't affect them...

If this is strictly true then why no mention of anyone in the elite - its always about the guard, the teacher, the nurse, administrators etc.

Its emotionally driven by begrudgery - many of the posts I read on the subject of public sector wages are anything but a rational analysis of our economy.

Sand

If this is strictly true then why no mention of anyone in the elite - its always about the guard, the teacher, the nurse, administrators etc.

Its emotionally driven by begrudgery - many of the posts I read on the subject of public sector wages are anything but a rational analysis of our economy.

Uh, do you honestly believe anyone cares less about Guards/Nurses/Administrators making less than 40K ( on the assumption that their pay is reasonably in line with their experience/performance)? People dont mind paying for a required service for policing or front line health or the basic organisation thereof.

People are enraged by the likes of Neary, or the deadweight admin and middle management in bloated, inefficient quangos and consultants all on 70,000 - 250,000 euro a year or more. Plus expenses. Plus pensions. Plus jobs for life mentality.

This is the thing I see from Begg and his cronies in the unions. They wave about the front line Garda on 25K a year as a shield shouting "dont hurt the poor Garda...bless him", when its all to protect Begg and his mates on 200K a year for doing **** all. Its blatant manipulation. Look at the public sector levies - the way they were implemented was ridiculous, with situations where lower paid were being hit harder than higher paid when it should have been the reverse.

Again, to clarify, no body wants to cut the pay of lower paid public service in any serious fashion...its the guys on ridiculous contracts for doing nothing that will need to burn.

newname

People are enraged by the likes of Neary, or the deadweight admin and middle management in bloated, inefficient quangos and consultants all on 70,000 - 250,000 euro a year or more. Plus expenses. Plus pensions

I've been waiting a long time and reading alot of debate on this subject and your the first person I've seen mention the consultants.

Take a look back through some of the posts and you'll see nurses and teachers getting hammered.

nesf

K4t wrote: »

LOL. Oh dear. Go back to the conspiracy theory forum, man. And I'd be very curious to know where you got info that suggests the majority of PS workers voted for FF in the last general election. Ever heard of secret ballot?

Eh, you misread my post. Funds being directed at a group to buy votes doesn't mean that the votes are bought, only that a Government is trying to do that.