Spare a thought for Barry

recedite

P. Breathnach wrote: »

It's called the race to the bottom.

Some people call it restoring competitiveness.

Head The Wall

P. Breathnach wrote: »

And equally would be happy to take a private sector job at less than the current rates of pay. It's called the race to the bottom.

They have obviously come around to the idea that most people were living beyond their means, have made changes to their life and realised that this lower salary is enough for them to survive on. These changes may not have been voluntarily.

This is the crux of the issue that Public sector people are not willing to accept, they are going to have to make life changing decisions, they can whinge all they want now but what will happen when interest rates start going up. Will they go on strike again!!!

WalterMitty

P. Breathnach wrote: »

And equally would be happy to take a private sector job at less than the current rates of pay. It's called the race to the bottom.

"the race to the bottom" is a term used by economic illiterate union heads. What is wrong with pay levels falling to reflect the new economic , unions try to stop this but it's like trying stop the tide coming in. we are a small open econmy and wage levels are by in large set by international competition. Unions know this and thats why they dont even bother trying to get established in the foreign multinational sector here. Public sector workers and union hold disproportionate power to disrupt country and use this power to extract above market rates of pay which the rest of society must pay for.
What i think is happening in this country is not a race to the bottom but a race to the middle/median/average. That is what you would expect in medium to long term in a monetary union. If our wages raced too far "to the bottom" companies would increase investment here to take advantage of lower labour costs and emplyment would rise and wages pushed back up towards Eurozone average for those particualr jobs.
We cant decide what our rates of pay our in anything other than short term with the exception of the highly unionsied and powerfull public sector. As the public sector is paid for (in net terms) by the private sector then ultimately private sector wages (set by almost purely international labour market forces) will dictate how much can be spent on public services . Assuming the amount we have to spend on public services is fixed, more people can remain employed in a public sector when pay levels(pay+pension) are lowered.

Head The Wall

Well Put WalterMitty

waster81

WalterMitty wrote: »

Theres a large section of those unemployed now who would be qualifed and capable of doing public sector jobs and would take those jobs even if pay was 30% less than current rates. Every year the recession goes on more and more capable intelligent young people leave school and colleges and cant get jobs in private sector let alone the cosseted public sector.

Why when the private sector were doing extremely well was everyone not looking to get into the public service. Everyone had a free choice whether they took a public or private sector job.
Now when people in private sector are losing the jobs they all want to be in the public sector.
Everything that was given to the public sector has been more or less clawed back through pay cuts, pension levy

WalterMitty

waster81 wrote: »

Why when the private sector were doing extremely well was everyone not looking to get into the public service. Everyone had a free choice whether they took a public or private sector job.
Now when people in private sector are losing the jobs they all want to be in the public sector.
Everything that was given to the public sector has been more or less clawed back through pay cuts, pension levy

Ah that old chestnut. People didnt join for numerous reasons like still in college, the job they wanted/were qualified to do doesnt exist in public sector, they were away travelling when tests were on etc.
Everything has not been clawed back. those public servants in CSO have produced the stats showing the public sector is well ahead of private sector equivalent(in terms of age, qualifications,gender etc). A big premium existed BEFORE crash in favour of public sector workers(in general) and everyone got hit with taxes and levies (except pension levy) and incomes are falling faster in private sector now as is employment levels. The more detailed stats on price rises in public and private over past deacde are available from cso website. Overall public sector paybill has mroe than doubled in a decade and the cuts and levies have only cut a few billion back off that.

waster81

Originally Posted by WalterMitty
Theres a large section of those unemployed now who would be qualifed and capable of doing public sector jobs and would take those jobs even if pay was 30% less than current rates
My point is where were all of these people who now want to get into the public service 5 or 6 years ago.

Every year the recession goes on more and more capable intelligent young people leave school and colleges and cant get jobs in private sector let alone the cosseted public sector

Well there is an embargo on recruitment, suppose they could go and train in nursing college, teaching if they really do want to enter public service.

Everything has not been clawed back

Never said that, I said the majority has been clawed back.

Of course the public service paybill doubled, the numbers combined with benchmarking increased the paybill .

stepbar

What's even more shocking is that based on the amount Barry quoted as his contribution to the pension levy (€2,200), I would put his wage at (before the cuts) c35k. Aside of all that, based on a wage of 35k (lets assume his salary was the same in 2006), to be able to buy an apt @ 11 times his salary is utterly shocking. But I suspect he's not telling the full story and that in fact, he purchased the apt with a partner / wife. None the less, even dividing 375 / 2 amounts to 187.5k, which is c5.4 times his salary (And I'm not even taking into account a deposit or anything). It was probably fairly low considering some banks (NIB from recollection) were offering some customers 7 times their gross salary.

waster81

stepbar wrote: »

What's even more shocking is that based on the amount Barry quoted as his contribution to the pension levy (€2,200), I would put his wage at (before the cuts) c35k. Aside of all that, based on a wage of 35k (lets assume his salary was the same in 2006), to be able to buy an apt @ 11 times his salary is utterly shocking. But I suspect he's not telling the full story and that in fact, he purchased the apt with a partner / wife. None the less, even dividing 375 / 2 amounts to 187.5k, which is c5.4 times his salary (And I'm not even taking into account a deposit or anything). It was probably fairly low considering some banks (NIB from recollection) were offering some customers 7 times their gross salary.

Is the €35k net or gross?
Yeah banks were crazy lending they would throw everything in to increase what they could loaon out, overtime, bonuses etc. absolute madness.

Head The Wall

waster81 wrote: »

Never said that, I said the majority has been clawed back.

Of course the public service paybill doubled, the numbers combined with benchmarking increased the paybill .

Coud you define what this majority claw back is made up of please? We are now at 2003 tax levels but expenditure is up 70% since then. So in a simple way we should cut our expenditure by 70%. This in reality won't happen but thats the measure of savings that need to be made. Those 2003 levels wouldn't even include the social welfare bill we have now.

What did we receive as a country for all the extra staff numbers. Makes me laugh when a short while ago Prof Drumm said we are on our way to having a World Class Health Sevice. Thats the words of someone trying to justify his bonus

From my own experiences the best run departments in the public sector are both to do with collecting money e.g Revenue and Motortax/VRT

Makes you wonder how they can make vast improvements here when it suits them but yet feck all improvements nearly everywhere else

Head The Wall

waster81 wrote: »

Is the €35k net or gross?
Yeah banks were crazy lending they would throw everything in to increase what they could loaon out, overtime, bonuses etc. absolute madness.

Salary is supposedly around 53K going on calculations here from Nidot

Lets work through Barrys circumstances for a moment:

1. Net Pay down down 2,200:

- Now assuming that Barry was paying tax at the higher level i.e. 41% and was paying health levy at 2% and income levy at 2% in addition to PRSI at 4% then Barry had a effective tax rate at the margin at 49% so that means Barry took an overall paycut of 4,313 (2,200 / .51)

- This means that pre pension levy we can assume that Barry was earning 55,000 annually (56,000 * 7.7% = 4,312)

2. Annual income reduced by 3,200:

- This is a much easier calculation now, if Barry was, as I calculated, earning 56,000 based on his own admission of pension levy leaving him down 2,200 then his paycut as a percentage pay is only down 5.7% (3,200 / 56,000).

- Now this is a much lower cut in gross earnings than the amount I suspect he has taken but we'll move on.

3. Low to Middle Ranking Public Servant after 8 years leaving college

- If it is the case that Barry is earning 56,000 8 years after leaving college and he still considers himself to be below average then I seriously need to reconsider my careers prospects as this would put him 49% higher earnings then the average industrial wage (56,000 / 37,500)

- This type of wage would I am sure be considered a very good wage by most people

- His post paycut wage of 52,800 (based on my own calculations) is still 40% higher than the average industrial wage ( 52,800 / 37,500)

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=64293070&postcount=29

ardmacha

Makes you wonder how they can make vast improvements here when it suits them but yet feck all improvements nearly everywhere else

Unions are widely blamed here in this forum, yet the unions in the Revenue or the Motortax are pretty much the same unions and union agreements that are in other less efficient departments. The difference is not the unions but the management and the government interest in ensuring change.

waster81

Head The Wall wrote: »

Coud you define what this majority claw back is made up of please? We are now at 2003 tax levels but expenditure is up 70% since then. So in a simple way we should cut our expenditure by 70%. This in reality won't happen but thats the measure of savings that need to be made. Those 2003 levels wouldn't even include the social welfare bill we have now.

What did we receive as a country for all the extra staff numbers. Makes me laugh when a short while ago Prof Drumm said we are on our way to having a World Class Health Sevice. Thats the words of someone trying to justify his bonus

From my own experiences the best run departments in the public sector are both to do with collecting money e.g Revenue and Motortax/VRT

Makes you wonder how they can make vast improvements here when it suits them but yet feck all improvements nearly everywhere else

Made up of pension levy and pay cuts.

Well we would need extra numbers due to the increase in population.

Thats simple cut expenditure by 70%, cut social welfare by 70%, pay by 70% - would this 70% cut to private sector pay and the price of services.

Not only public service that is bad, look at the private sector ( eircom terrible broadband service that improved greatly when in private control!).

waster81

Head The Wall wrote: »

Salary is supposedly around 53K going on calculations here from Nidot

Lets work through Barrys circumstances for a moment:

1. Net Pay down down 2,200:

- Now assuming that Barry was paying tax at the higher level i.e. 41% and was paying health levy at 2% and income levy at 2% in addition to PRSI at 4% then Barry had a effective tax rate at the margin at 49% so that means Barry took an overall paycut of 4,313 (2,200 / .51)

- This means that pre pension levy we can assume that Barry was earning 55,000 annually (56,000 * 7.7% = 4,312)

2. Annual income reduced by 3,200:

- This is a much easier calculation now, if Barry was, as I calculated, earning 56,000 based on his own admission of pension levy leaving him down 2,200 then his paycut as a percentage pay is only down 5.7% (3,200 / 56,000).

- Now this is a much lower cut in gross earnings than the amount I suspect he has taken but we'll move on.

3. Low to Middle Ranking Public Servant after 8 years leaving college

- If it is the case that Barry is earning 56,000 8 years after leaving college and he still considers himself to be below average then I seriously need to reconsider my careers prospects as this would put him 49% higher earnings then the average industrial wage (56,000 / 37,500)

- This type of wage would I am sure be considered a very good wage by most people

- His post paycut wage of 52,800 (based on my own calculations) is still 40% higher than the average industrial wage ( 52,800 / 37,500)

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=64293070&postcount=29

You are free to enter the public service and earn such a salary.

Head The Wall

ardmacha wrote: »

Unions are widely blamed here in this forum, yet the unions in the Revenue or the Motortax are pretty much the same unions and union agreements that are in other less efficient departments. The difference is not the unions but the management and the government interest in ensuring change.

Exactly, makes you think that they don't want to reform other sections, only the ones to do with collecting money. Reforms in other sections would probably involve redundancies and they don't want to lose votes.

waster81 wrote: »

Made up of pension levy and pay cuts.

Well we would need extra numbers due to the increase in population.

Thats simple cut expenditure by 70%, cut social welfare by 70%, pay by 70% - would this 70% cut to private sector pay and the price of services.

Not only public service that is bad, look at the private sector ( eircom terrible broadband service that improved greatly when in private control!).

Pension Levy and paycuts didn't make but a small dent in the deficit. It is in no way the majority of it clawed back

waster81

Head The Wall wrote: »

Exactly, makes you think that they don't want to reform other sections, only the ones to do with collecting money. Reforms in other sections would probably involve redundancies and they don't want to lose votes.



Pension Levy and paycuts didn't make but a small dent in the deficit. It is in no way the majority of it clawed back

Never said it would make a large dent in deficit, I said majority of the benchmarking increase.

Head The Wall

waster81 wrote: »

You are free to enter the public service and earn such a salary.

I have motivation and ambition and want to be in charge of my career progression. I have always had my own salary reviews so I am in charge of my own career direction.

I don't want to be getting increases the same as the lazy bum that may work beside me.

That is how the public sector works and it is demoralising. It drags good people down in the majority of cases I have come across

The_Honeybadger

WalterMitty wrote: »

Ah that old chestnut. People didnt join for numerous reasons like still in college, the job they wanted/were qualified to do doesnt exist in public sector, they were away travelling when tests were on etc.
Everything has not been clawed back. those public servants in CSO have produced the stats showing the public sector is well ahead of private sector equivalent(in terms of age, qualifications,gender etc). A big premium existed BEFORE crash in favour of public sector workers(in general) and everyone got hit with taxes and levies (except pension levy) and incomes are falling faster in private sector now as is employment levels. The more detailed stats on price rises in public and private over past deacde are available from cso website. Overall public sector paybill has mroe than doubled in a decade and the cuts and levies have only cut a few billion back off that.

This is a bit anecdotal but every recruitment campaign that I remember was massively oversubscribed. I left university in 04 and half heartedly did the AO exam that year, exam hall was jammed to the rafters and there were three sittings that day, and that was only in that exam station. I also have a few friends in the Gardai and they have often told me how difficult it can be to get in, people have set up companies tutoring applicants before the exam and interview process. Have no wish to be a public servant as I love what I do even though I know I'd be earning more if I had become a teacher or a guard or whatever, but I don't agree when people say nobody wanted to join the PS in the boom, maybe the very lower CA grades had trouble getting people but I seriously doubt it, the numbers swelled considerably during the last decade and that wouldn't have happened if the job was so undesireable, lots of people applied and didn't get in, of course I have no figures to back any of this up but that's my take on it.

The_Honeybadger

waster81 wrote: »

( eircom terrible broadband service that improved greatly when in private control!).

You must be joking :eek: What part of the county do you live in!!

stepbar

I'm basing my calculation on this

http://www.rte.ie/business/2009/0203/pay.html

Considering Barry said first that his pay was cut c2.2k, my initial calculation would work out about right. Then there was a 9% paycut after that (can anyone confirm that for me?). He doesn't say what levy he is paying now. So he could have been on c35k before any cuts at all.

Head The Wall

waster81 wrote: »

Everything that was given to the public sector has been more or less clawed back through pay cuts, pension levy

waster81 wrote: »

Everything has not been clawed back

Never said that, I said the majority has been clawed back.

waster81 wrote: »

Never said it would make a large dent in deficit, I said majority of the benchmarking increase.

Stick to your first statement - EVERYTHING is what you said

soden12

Head The Wall wrote: »

They have obviously come around to the idea that most people were living beyond their means, have made changes to their life and realised that this lower salary is enough for them to survive on. These changes may not have been voluntarily.

This is the crux of the issue that Public sector people are not willing to accept, they are going to have to make life changing decisions, they can whinge all they want now but what will happen when interest rates start going up. Will they go on strike again!!!

What about the Bankers ?

When times were good they wanted "The Market" to regulate itself and sort itself out.

Now when times are bad they want the Government and us taxpayers to pay for their sheer bloody incompetence, greed and fraud.

waster81

mickeyk wrote: »

You must be joking :eek: What part of the county do you live in!!

You feel eircom provide a good broadband service?

waster81

Head The Wall wrote: »

Stick to your first statement - EVERYTHING is what you said

OK dont get your point. You can join the public service if your not happy with your pay or working conditions.

Head The Wall

stepbar wrote: »

I'm basing my calculation on this

http://www.rte.ie/business/2009/0203/pay.html

Considering Barry said first that his pay was cut c2.2k, my initial calculation would work out about right. Then there was a 9% paycut after that (can anyone confirm that for me?). He doesn't say what levy he is paying now. So he could have been on c35k before any cuts at all.

You're just doing a straight calculation on his gross pay. The OP has it down as net pay and the pension levy is tax deductable also. See Nidots post again - it's all explained there

The_Honeybadger

waster81 wrote: »

You feel eircom provide a good broadband service?

Maybe in the cities but definately not where I live (and i don't exactly live in the middle of nowhere), I admit it has improved but to nowhere near the standard it should be at. I suppose it depends on where you live but certain parts of the country are chronically underserviced

waster81

mickeyk wrote: »

Maybe in the cities but definately not where I live (and i don't exactly live in the middle of nowhere), I admit it has improved but to nowhere near the standard it should be at. I suppose it depends on where you live but certain parts of the country are chronically underserviced

Oh I was been sacrcastic I think their broadband network is extremely poor, there was not enough spent on infrastructure but then private companies wanto to make as much money as they can. Just making the point that the private sector can provide equally as bad a service as some people here feel the public service do.

soden12

stepbar wrote: »

What's even more shocking is that based on the amount Barry quoted as his contribution to the pension levy (€2,200), I would put his wage at (before the cuts) c35k. Aside of all that, based on a wage of 35k (lets assume his salary was the same in 2006), to be able to buy an apt @ 11 times his salary is utterly shocking. But I suspect he's not telling the full story and that in fact, he purchased the apt with a partner / wife. None the less, even dividing 375 / 2 amounts to 187.5k, which is c5.4 times his salary (And I'm not even taking into account a deposit or anything). It was probably fairly low considering some banks (NIB from recollection) were offering some customers 7 times their gross salary.

If only Barry had the benefit of a bank subsidised loan. Then imagine what ratios he would have got from the banks.

Actually what am I saying ? - we the taxpayer are now subsidising all those cheap loans and mortgages given to bankers.

Oh yes and what part of the Public Service got a payrise in 2009 ? The Bankers.

Folks, it's time we stopped targetting just the public service and remembered that the banks are also a major drain on our finances. At least with the public service we have documentation on salaries and budgets but the banks are such a mire of falsified documentation (best case) that none of us taxpayers can ever figure out how much they will actually screw us for.

Head The Wall

waster81 wrote: »

OK dont get your point. You can join the public service if your not happy with your pay or working conditions.

I was just highlighting your backtracking.

Head The Wall wrote: »

I have motivation and ambition and want to be in charge of my career progression. I have always had my own salary reviews so I am in charge of my own career direction.

I don't want to be getting increases the same as the lazy bum that may work beside me.

That is how the public sector works and it is demoralising. It drags good people down in the majority of cases I have come across

Maybe you missed this post, I have no problem with my pay and working conditions. Seems to be all the Public sector that have issues with their Pay and working conditions!!

The_Honeybadger

waster81 wrote: »

Oh I was been sacrcastic I think their broadband network is extremely poor, there was not enough spent on infrastructure but then private companies wanto to make as much money as they can. Just making the point that the private sector can provide equally as bad a service as some people here feel the public service do.

My bad read your post again LOL:D Just saw that sentence and it jumped out at me and I went WTF is this guy on!