Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Public Sector Workers are preparing for 8% paycut - where did this info come from?

Options
2

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 313 ✭✭LordDorington


    RMDrive wrote: »
    It's something that leads to some confusion IMO.
    When someone in the private sector says that they are on a pay freeze, then that simply means that their wages will not increase.
    PS workers who state that they are on a pay freeze do not include increments.
    Increment = Pay increase!


    So they say they are not getting an increase even though they are? There does see to be a lot of dancing around the subject to be honest. its hard to get a straight answer from anyone. They will select choice snippets of stats or surveys to further their own agenda but at the end of the day its true what they say about stats - they reveal nothing and hide everything.

    I remember a few weeks ago there was something in the papers about the poor public sector and something about "well a third of them are on less than 40k a year" (poor sods) - nobody seemed to clock that this also meant two thirds are on MORE than 40k a year. Baffling. BTW IMO 40k is a very respectable salary, and I know of people in the private sector living on just over half of that.


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,089 ✭✭✭✭P. Breathnach


    pwd wrote: »

    It's still not true. The government is arranging borrowing to fund NAMA. That's not the same as giving money to the banks.


  • Registered Users Posts: 438 ✭✭Diom


    There are no low-paid workers in the public service. Librarians, for example, get 24k starting out! That's silly, anyone can do that job, it's like stacking shelves at a supermarket.
    8% of 24k = 1,920 and so our shelve stacker is getting €22,080. That's plenty. Plus that salary increases to over €45k... which is beyond ridiculous.

    Sources:
    http://www.careerdirections.ie/CDW3C/AccessDBAllCareerDetails.jsp?id=151
    http://www.dit.ie/media/documents/humanresources/salaryscales/Scales200803200809Web.pdf


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 39,338 Mod ✭✭✭✭Gumbo


    Diom wrote: »
    There are no low-paid workers in the public service. Librarians, for example, get 24k starting out! That's silly, anyone can do that job, it's like stacking shelves at a supermarket.
    8% of 24k = 1,920 and so our shelve stacker is getting €22,080. That's plenty. Plus that salary increases to over €45k... which is beyond ridiculous.

    Sources:
    http://www.careerdirections.ie/CDW3C/AccessDBAllCareerDetails.jsp?id=151
    http://www.dit.ie/media/documents/humanresources/salaryscales/Scales200803200809Web.pdf

    from YOUR LINK -

    Pay and Opportunities
    Opportunities exist with county council libraries or school, third level institutions or government departments. In the private sector financial institution, law firms, publishers and the media are potential employers. Part time work is common. Library assistants, with experience and qualifications, often become librarians. See www.publicjobs.ie for information on public sector salaries. Library assistants can earn from EUR22k per year to EUR37k per year. A senior library assistant can earn more than this.

    http://www.careerdirections.ie/CDW3C/AccessDBAllCareerDetails.jsp?id=151#5


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,375 ✭✭✭kmick


    People keep mentioning the 7% pay cut. Was that not a pension contribution?


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,271 ✭✭✭irish_bob


    techdiver wrote: »
    It does not count against are current deficit or our national debt figure. If NAMA did not happen the cuts in the budget would still have to be made. We are basically running the county on the credit card at the moment and we are going close to maxing it out at this stage. When that happens we have no other avenue to generate borrowing and the country goes bankrupt.

    If this happens the ECB will dictate terms (as I don't think the IMF will be invited into a Euro zone country), in the harshest possible way quite similar to the way the IMF would. They are not answerable to unions and will make unilateral cuts across the boards in pay/pensions/social welfare and no amount of striking or moaning about it will make the slightest bit of difference.

    +1 , everything we see now can be traced back to the collapse of the property boom , the banking crisis has only compounded our problems , with a huge loss in revenue from property related transactions , we no longer have the money to fund europes highest paid public sector , it was not conventional income tax receipts which funded our public sector wage bill at the level its at and it wont be income tax receipts which fund it at this level now so their has to be cuts

    as for the money lenders in europe who are keeping the country afloat , they dont give a rats ass who causes the mess , they didnt offer us terms , they gave us orders to get our house in


  • Registered Users Posts: 438 ✭✭Diom


    kceire wrote: »
    from YOUR LINK -

    Pay and Opportunities
    Opportunities exist with county council libraries or school, third level institutions or government departments. In the private sector financial institution, law firms, publishers and the media are potential employers. Part time work is common. Library assistants, with experience and qualifications, often become librarians. See www.publicjobs.ie for information on public sector salaries. Library assistants can earn from EUR22k per year to EUR37k per year. A senior library assistant can earn more than this.

    http://www.careerdirections.ie/CDW3C/AccessDBAllCareerDetails.jsp?id=151#5
    Yes?

    Look at the actual figure from DIT.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,097 ✭✭✭Darragh29


    Some absolute clown from the INTO just said on the news, "We've no company car's, we've no bonuses"...

    FACTS:

    (1) If you have a company car in the private sector, you get hit for no less than 200 Euro a month in BIK (Benefit in Kind). A company car is a tool of your job as opposed to a perk of your job in the vast majority of cases.

    (2) If you get a bonus in the private sector, you had to work for it and damn hard in the current climate. If you get a bonus, it's usually on the basis of a provable and verifiable improvement in productivity or performance.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,361 ✭✭✭Boskowski


    It's still not true. The government is arranging borrowing to fund NAMA. That's not the same as giving money to the banks.

    Not seeing the wood from the trees and splitting hairs are also two different things...


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,476 ✭✭✭ardmacha


    If you get a bonus in the private sector, you had to work for it and damn hard in the current climate. If you get a bonus, it's usually on the basis of a provable and verifiable improvement in productivity or performance.

    What sort of performance exactly? Many large bonuses were paid out on banks on foot of loans being "sold" to people who are never going to pay them back. These bonuses were paid to people who have destroyed their shareholders capital and who have precipitated the current crisis by requiring the taxpayer to bail them out.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,271 ✭✭✭irish_bob


    Darragh29 wrote: »
    Some absolute clown from the INTO just said on the news, "We've no company car's, we've no bonuses"...

    FACTS:

    (1) If you have a company car in the private sector, you get hit for no less than 200 Euro a month in BIK (Benefit in Kind). A company car is a tool of your job as opposed to a perk of your job in the vast majority of cases.

    (2) If you get a bonus in the private sector, you had to work for it and damn hard in the current climate. If you get a bonus, it's usually on the basis of a provable and verifiable improvement in productivity or performance.

    public sector workers are given a vocabulary of slogans to use ( pull at heartstrings ) by thier unions , by and large , they are well briefed and seem to be on message , very little of what is said is not union indoctrinated rhetoric

    WE DIDNT CAUSE THE MESS
    THE BANKS , THE DEVELOPERS
    THE PRIVATE SECTOR ALL GET BONUSES
    I STARE DEATH IN THE FACE ON A DAILY BASIS
    ALL PUBLIC SERVANTS HAVE TAKEN A PAY CUT , ALL PRIVATE SECTOR WORKERS HAVE NOT

    shallow rhetoric but effective none the less once you wash , rinse and repeat


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,089 ✭✭✭✭P. Breathnach


    realcam wrote: »
    Not seeing the wood from the trees and splitting hairs are also two different things...

    That's no answer.

    The simple fact is that the government is not giving $54bn of taxpayers' money to the banks.


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,089 ✭✭✭✭P. Breathnach


    irish_bob wrote: »
    public sector workers are given a vocabulary of slogans to use ( pull at heartstrings ) by thier unions , by and large , they are well briefed and seem to be on message , very little of what is said is not union indoctrinated rhetoric

    WE DIDNT CAUSE THE MESS
    THE BANKS , THE DEVELOPERS
    THE PRIVATE SECTOR ALL GET BONUSES
    I STARE DEATH IN THE FACE ON A DAILY BASIS
    ALL PUBLIC SERVANTS HAVE TAKEN A PAY CUT , ALL PRIVATE SECTOR WORKERS HAVE NOT

    shallow rhetoric but effective none the less once you wash , rinse and repeat

    I ask again (because you post the same stuff again): who briefed them?


  • Registered Users Posts: 16,666 ✭✭✭✭astrofool


    I wish the public sector would realise that one of the side effects of job security is that they all have to take a cut when the income (tax) drops. In a private company, they can reduce staff, if you cannot reduce staff, then all staff have to take a pay cut.

    The maths is very simple.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 313 ✭✭LordDorington


    kmick wrote: »
    People keep mentioning the 7% pay cut. Was that not a pension contribution?

    thank you!!! God I thought I was the only one who noticed that. Telling you, if a private pension fund was offering the same rates we would be looking for the catch! :D


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 313 ✭✭LordDorington


    Diom wrote: »
    There are no low-paid workers in the public service. Librarians, for example, get 24k starting out! That's silly, anyone can do that job, it's like stacking shelves at a supermarket.
    8% of 24k = 1,920 and so our shelve stacker is getting €22,080. That's plenty. Plus that salary increases to over €45k... which is beyond ridiculous.

    Sources:
    http://www.careerdirections.ie/CDW3C/AccessDBAllCareerDetails.jsp?id=151
    http://www.dit.ie/media/documents/humanresources/salaryscales/Scales200803200809Web.pdf

    Ha laughable. I started on 24k with an honours degree in Chemistry. So I could have forfeited the degree and just stacked shelves...hmmm


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,560 ✭✭✭Wile E. Coyote


    kmick wrote: »
    People keep mentioning the 7% pay cut. Was that not a pension contribution?

    Thats something that really annoys me aswell. A pension levy is not a paycut. And it's only a 7% LEVY if your earning over €45k!

    Can someone please tell me if paying into a pension in the public service is mandatory? In other words if they feel so hard done by with the levy can they opt out and simply not pay into one in the same way that most private sector workers who can't afford to?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,650 ✭✭✭ssaye


    Public Sector Pensions are mandatory for full time staff. If you are in certain departments you have to pay an additional mandatory spouse and child pension. So there are c50000 people paying 2 pensions per week. Anyway, I have worked in 4 different departments in the Public Sector and I am very thankful for the work. The dirty little secret as I see from the National Debts is that its not next months budget thats the killer, its the next 5 budgets, no matter what government is voted in. December 09 cuts (c6.9%), April 10 (c2.5%), December 10(c7.5%), April 11 (c3%), December 11 (c7.9%)

    So if you were on 500 per week take home, you will be on c360-400 in 2 years.

    Social Welfare needs to be cut too obviously but staggered 204 down to 175 over 2 years. If you are out of work for over 10 years and have no medical complaint, it has to be halved, there are 25000 thousand people on the dole for over 25 years in Ireland and under the age of 50.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 313 ✭✭LordDorington


    Thats something that really annoys me aswell. A pension levy is not a paycut. And it's only a 7% LEVY if your earning over €45k!

    Can someone please tell me if paying into a pension in the public service is mandatory? In other words if they feel so hard done by with the levy can they opt out and simply not pay into one in the same way that most private sector workers who can't afford to?

    I thought of that before, if they really dont want to pay it then why not give them an opt out clause where they dont pay a contribution and then they can just get the same as the rest of us - 204 per week? Its NOT ROCKET SCIENCE. Why do people want to have their cake and eat it.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 313 ✭✭LordDorington


    ssaye wrote: »
    Public Sector Pensions are mandatory for full time staff. If you are in certain departments you have to pay an additional mandatory spouse and child pension.


    So their spouses and children will receive some benefit form this I am sure? They are hardly paying it for nothing - we would have heard all about it by now :D
    So if you were on 500 per week take home, you will be on c360-400 in 2 years.

    Social Welfare needs to be cut too obviously but staggered 204 down to 175 over 2 years. If you are out of work for over 10 years and have no medical complaint, it has to be halved, there are 25000 thousand people on the dole for over 25 years in Ireland and under the age of 50.

    Well this I do agree with to some extent. Long term welfare recipients should be looked at, but only to free up more money for those recently unemployed and struggling with mortgages. The difference between 175 and 204, if not put back into the welfare "pot" for those who genuinely need it, would be deemed "penny pinching" if used to try to solve the countrys economic crises.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 4,049 ✭✭✭gazzer


    Personally as a CS I know that cuts have to be made. So far this year in my department a good few staff have taken early retirement and also availed of the Career Break incentive. Id say the amount of staff in my area has fallen by 20% in the last 11 months. It has meant that the remaining staff have taken on a fair bit of extra work. Thats fair enough though. I dont mind being busy.

    I think what should happen is that all staff are told they have to take 10 extra days unpaid leave each year. At least that way the pay cut we are goign to get wont have as much of assting if we get the advantage of having a day off.


  • Registered Users Posts: 201 ✭✭Mcloke


    Thats something that really annoys me aswell. A pension levy is not a paycut. And it's only a 7% LEVY if your earning over €45k!

    Can someone please tell me if paying into a pension in the public service is mandatory? In other words if they feel so hard done by with the levy can they opt out and simply not pay into one in the same way that most private sector workers who can't afford to?

    As a non public sector worker I can tell you that yes the pension is mandatory and I know several public sector workers who would opt out if given the option (for several different reasons) but that is not offered. The pension levy was nothing more than the governments words for an indirect paycut...it can also be known as the save the banks levy as the government said they would use the pension reserve for this purpose and hey presto the pension levy was introduced :rolleyes:
    If as a private sector worker you paid into a pension and suddenly the company you paid said that's grand but now you have to pay more and we will only give you back what we set out originally you would be pretty annoyed or at least you should be ;)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 313 ✭✭LordDorington


    Mcloke wrote: »
    As a non public sector worker I can tell you that yes the pension is mandatory and I know several public sector workers who would opt out if given the option (for several different reasons) but that is not offered. The pension levy was nothing more than the governments words for an indirect paycut...it can also be known as the save the banks levy as the government said they would use the pension reserve for this purpose and hey presto the pension levy was introduced :rolleyes:
    If as a private sector worker you paid into a pension and suddenly the company you paid said that's grand but now you have to pay more and we will only give you back what we set out originally you would be pretty annoyed or at least you should be ;)

    OK so now its a case of you being asked to contribute MORE to a pension that you will benefit from? Thats still NOT a paycut, its a bigger pension contribution. Of course if the same thing happened in the private sector people would be peeved, but the fact is nowhere in the private sector will you find a pension deal as good as that set out for public servants, and are they all forgetting about the thousands who DID pay into pension funds which have now been completely depleted?


  • Registered Users Posts: 24,993 ✭✭✭✭Wishbone Ash


    kmick wrote: »
    People keep mentioning the 7% pay cut. Was that not a pension contribution?
    I'm paying 10% on income which is not pensionable. How then is that a 'pension levy/contribution'?
    Darragh29 wrote: »
    A company car is a tool of your job as opposed to a perk of your job in the vast majority of cases
    If it is a tool of the job, why are employees allowed to use it for social, domestic and pleasure reasons. I don't know anyone with a company car who uses it solely for work. Even those with commercial company vehicles can be seen using them as a form of transport when not at work.
    Darragh29 wrote:
    If you get a bonus in the private sector, you had to work for it and damn hard in the current climate. If you get a bonus, it's usually on the basis of a provable and verifiable improvement in productivity or performance.
    Those of us in the Public Sector who show a provable and verifiable improvement in productivity or performance cannot get a bonus.
    can they opt out and simply not pay into one in the same way that most private sector workers who can't afford to?
    You can't opt out. It mandatory and part of one's contract.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,271 ✭✭✭irish_bob


    Mcloke wrote: »
    As a non public sector worker I can tell you that yes the pension is mandatory and I know several public sector workers who would opt out if given the option (for several different reasons) but that is not offered. The pension levy was nothing more than the governments words for an indirect paycut...it can also be known as the save the banks levy as the government said they would use the pension reserve for this purpose and hey presto the pension levy was introduced :rolleyes:
    If as a private sector worker you paid into a pension and suddenly the company you paid said that's grand but now you have to pay more and we will only give you back what we set out originally you would be pretty annoyed or at least you should be ;)

    ive never heard of a pay cut which is tax deductable like the pension levy is , perhaps it happens , ive just never heard of it


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,089 ✭✭✭✭P. Breathnach


    irish_bob wrote: »
    ive never heard of a pay cut which is tax deductable like the pension levy is , perhaps it happens , ive just never heard of it

    You mean all those private sector workers who have suffered pay cuts are still paying tax on what their pay used to be?


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,476 ✭✭✭ardmacha


    ive never heard of a pay cut which is tax deductable like the pension levy is , perhaps it happens , ive just never heard of it

    You've obviously lived a sheltered life. Every paycut is tax deductable. If I was earning €70000 year and now I earn €60,000 year then the government is down as much as I am, why do you think that tax revenues are down?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,361 ✭✭✭Boskowski


    That's no answer.

    The simple fact is that the government is not giving $54bn of taxpayers' money to the banks.

    The banks have 'bad business' worth more than 54 billions in their books. The government allows the banks to shift said 'bad business' over into a state backed scheme for which ultimately the taxpayer will be liable. NAMA.
    If NAMA was likely to retrieve 54 billions or more the banks wouldn't shift said business. The banks consider this a good deal for themselves, the conclusion can only be it is a bad one for the taxpayer.

    So we're buying a bad bet and the worst possible outcome is 54 billions worth of red figures. While it won't be a total write-off I imagine we should not be surprised if between the actual losses and the costs of the scheme its going to be billions in the double figures.

    Nevertheless within a year we're making 54 billions available to the banks. 54 billions for which the taxpayer will be liable. Therefore I consider it a simplified but still reasonable statement to make saying 'the government is giving the banks 54 billions from the taxpayer'.


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,089 ✭✭✭✭P. Breathnach


    realcam wrote: »
    The banks have 'bad business' worth more than 54 billions in their books. The government allows the banks to shift said 'bad business' over into a state backed scheme for which ultimately the taxpayer will be liable. NAMA.
    If NAMA was likely to retrieve 54 billions or more the banks wouldn't shift said business. The banks consider this a good deal for themselves, the conclusion can only be it is a bad one for the taxpayer.

    So we're buying a bad bet and the worst possible outcome is 54 billions worth of red figures. While it won't be a total write-off I imagine we should not be surprised if between the actual losses and the costs of the scheme its going to be billions in the double figures.

    Nevertheless within a year we're making 54 billions available to the banks. 54 billions for which the taxpayer will be liable. Therefore I consider it a simplified but still reasonable statement to make saying 'the government is giving the banks 54 billions from the taxpayer'.

    NAMA will purchase assets with a current value of far less than the price being paid. How much less is unknown. Some will be worth as close to nothing as makes no appreciable difference, while a few may be worth more than the price being paid for them; it's a mixed lot.

    Yes, I believe that at the shakeout NAMA will probably cost us a large amount, but nothing like the scale of €54bn. And I don't accept that your simplified statement is accurate and, if it is not accurate, it cannot be reasonable either.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 254 ✭✭turly


    Yes, I believe that at the shakeout NAMA will probably cost us a large amount, but nothing like the scale of €54bn. And I don't accept that your simplified statement is accurate and, if it is not accurate, it cannot be reasonable either.

    So what is "nothing like the scale of €54bn?" What's that, an order of magnitude less?
    Go on, tell us how much you think it will cost us. Perhaps your enlightened guess will be more "reasonable" and "accurate"?


Advertisement