Spare a thought for Barry

SkepticOne

waster81 wrote: »

IM sure you could find someone in the private service who feels the same, maybe even a bank employee who received a pay increase.

The topic of the thread is Barry and his overpaying for property and how we should feel sorry for him.

waster81

SkepticOne wrote: »

The topic of the thread is Barry and his overpaying for property and how we should feel sorry for him.

Oh ok cant argue with that one!

soden12

musiknonstop wrote: »

Obviously it would vary from company to company, but in any of the companies I've worked in, the answer is no.

Bankers do - they get a yearly increment for turning up. If they feck up bigtime they get a whopping golden handshake.

They also get a nice subisidised pension that the taxpayer will have to fork out for (as well as having to fork out for the public service).

Strange really - despite what they say the banks are an arm of the public service - heavily unionised, largely incompetent, un-customer friendly etc etc

ei.sdraob

soden12 wrote: »

Bankers do - they get a yearly increment for turning up. If they feck up bigtime they get a whopping golden handshake.

They also get a nice subisidised pension that the taxpayer will have to fork out for (as well as having to fork out for the public service).

Strange really - despite what they say the banks are an arm of the public service - heavily unionised, largely incompetent, un-customer friendly etc etc

yes because one group is screwing us its ok for another group to screw us :rolleyes:

lets not forget that it was the govt who are public servants who decided to hand money over to bankers despite widespread protests from the public and media

ParkRunner

ei.sdraob wrote: »

lets not forget that it was the govt who are public servants who decided to hand money over to bankers despite widespread protests from the public and media

Did they really have a choice when the chiefs of the 2 main banks sought to meet with Lenihan with the message if the Government did not act immediately, the whole financial system could be brought down.

ei.sdraob

EF wrote: »

Did they really have a choice when the chiefs of the 2 main banks sought to meet with Lenihan with the message if the Government did not act immediately, the whole financial system could be brought down.

1. where were Lenihan's advisers?
2. what where the people in dept of finance doing? the regulator? the CB?
3. why did Lenihan not ask for larger shares in these companies? or at least when and how will the money be paid back?


once again just because we got robbed by one group (the bankers) doesnt mean we should continue to be robbed by another group (the unions)

2 wrongs dont make a right

waster81

ei.sdraob wrote: »

1. where were Lenihan's advisers?
2. what where the people in dept of finance doing? the regulator? the CB?
3. why did Lenihan not ask for larger shares in these companies? or at least when and how will the money be paid back?


once again just because we got robbed by one group (the bankers) doesnt mean we should continue to be robbed by another group (the unions)

2 wrongs dont make a right

Where were the banks advisors when they were lending?

your comparison between the banks robbing us and the unions robbing us, how do you equate those?

Head The Wall

waster81 wrote: »

No will look at the link now.

How would a guard, teacher, nurse job role change ( they adapt to changes in scoiety) they will be doing the same job for their entirity in public service.

Cant comment on inflationary pay rise, dont know whether or not nurses, guards teachers receive pay increase or whether they just recieve increase in pay through increments. How else can their pay rise other than through increments, or should we just keep them on their starting salaries for life.

All PS sector staff have been getting increments plus inflationary wage agreement payrises and on top of that benchmarking to bring their pay inline with Private sector.These wage agreements should now be reduced to account for the drop in the cost of living and benchmarked again to bring them to the level of the private sector

People in the private sector only received The inflationary wage agreement. If they got payrises it was because they worked for them and their company agreed with it, something that doesn't happen in the public sector

waster81 wrote: »

You can have same arguments in private sector, do we say that every private sector employee is improving their standard of service, level of customer care I feel has dropped, you can see that when you cross the border and the difference in customer care is black and white.

You have a choice in the private sector, don't go there again. Go somewhere where you get value for money. Look at Mary Harney getting a discount in the medicines bill this year, why was this not done years ago (everyone knew we were getting ripped off) but now it's a news flash because now someone finally is doing their job. A couple of billion euros late:(:(

waster81 wrote: »

I think whats maddening is the lending policies of banks both to individuals who if properly stressed tested should never have been given a mortgage and then to developers who were it seems given loans to buy development land over the phone!

True, but they made the choice themselves to accept the risk. Many people didn't and I wouldn't blame the bank for approving me for a mortgage, it's my problem when I sign the paperwork

waster81 wrote: »

Where were the banks advisors when they were lending?

your comparison between the banks robbing us and the unions robbing us, how do you equate those?

Companies - public sector included will always do what the law lets them get away with, in this case where were the regulators and what were they doing

ei.sdraob

waster81 wrote: »

Where were the banks advisors when they were lending?

good question, yet another reason why the banks should have been left to their own devices (or at least have been nationalised in exchange for bailout)

one thing that people here dont mention, if that these banks would have been such danger to economy by collapsing then that would have also negatively affected the euro, and then the ECB would have had to bail them out not us, as they are now planning to bail out greece

waster81 wrote: »

your comparison between the banks robbing us and the unions robbing us, how do you equate those?

Bank bailouts (A) => paid for by the taxpayer an/or debt taken on in taxpayers name (X)

Public Spending (B) which has mushroomed out of all proportions during the boom => paid for by the taxpayer an/or debt taken on in taxpayers name (X)

do you spot a pattern now :rolleyes:

A are shafting X

and

B are shafting X

hence

A & B are shafting X (now the question is who is shafting X more, bank bailouts are once off while the public spending is recuring)


and there is your comparison


QED


if you accept that A shafting X is "wrong" then same applies for B shafting X? no??

why cant public spending and welfare go back to the 2004-2005 levels? tax revenue and the private sector have gone that far back, so has the cost of living and property

waster81

ei.sdraob wrote: »

good question, yet another reason why the banks should have been left to their own devices (or at least have been nationalised in exchange for bailout)

one thing that people here dont mention, if that these banks would have been such danger to economy by collapsing then that would have also negatively affected the euro, and then the ECB would have had to bail them out not us, as they are now planning to bail out greece




Bank bailouts (A) => paid for by the taxpayer an/or debt taken on in taxpayers name (X)

Public Spending (B) which has mushroomed out of all proportions during the boom => paid for by the taxpayer an/or debt taken on in taxpayers name (X)

do you spot a pattern now :rolleyes:

A are shafting X

and

B are shafting X

hence

A & B are shafting X


and there is your comparison


QED

Dont disagree that they should have been nationalised.

Ultimately we would be paying for ECB to bail out the banks, its the citizens of the EU that will be bailing them out.

Eh public servants are also taxpayers, everything mushroomed out of control it wast just the public sector

waster81

Head The Wall wrote: »

All PS sector staff have been getting increments plus inflationary wage agreement payrises and on top of that benchmarking to bring their pay inline with Private sector.These wage agreements should now be reduced to account for the drop in the cost of living and benchmarked again to bring them to the level of the private sector

People in the private sector only received The inflationary wage agreement. If they got payrises it was because they worked for them and their company agreed with it, something that doesn't happen in the public sector



You have a choice in the private sector, don't go there again. Go somewhere where you get value for money. Look at Mary Harney getting a discount in the medicines bill this year, why was this not done years ago (everyone knew we were getting ripped off) but now it's a news flash because now someone finally is doing their job. A couple of billion euros late:(:(




True, but they made the choice themselves to accept the risk. Many people didn't and I wouldn't blame the bank for approving me for a mortgage, it's my problem when I sign the paperwork



Companies - public sector included will always do what the law lets them get away with, in this case where were the regulators and what were they doing

Wage agreements have finished.

I agree people have to take responsibility for their decisions whether its banks, private, public sector. There has to be some moral hazard that you make a wrong decision you suffer the consequences dont start blaming your next door neighbour for decisions you made.

BeardyFunzo

I'll bet that someone with an anti-public sector bias wrote the letter in the OP with the specific intent of making the average public sector worker look like a snivelling moron. And then probably contribute to the inevitable boards.ie post about it.

My circumstances are similar to his but I just get on with it.

Oh and how come there isn't a bit long thread about what a gob****e the guy who's letter claimed that the average public servant was on 120 euro an hour?

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/le...e-2031327.html

Yeah, we don't want anyone outside of the public sector look like eejit now do we?

ei.sdraob

waster81 wrote: »

Eh public servants are also taxpayers.

yes they are taxpayers, but they dont directly create wealth, the taxes collected from the public sector obviously enough cant sustain the public sector alone, that requires also taxing the private sector who do create wealth

as we have painfully learned real wealth creation is based on exports, thats something the public sector dont do, since public servants (its in the name) are there to serve the public and help facilitate wealth creation via exports in the private sector

no im not saying there isnt a need for the public sector, thats just daft, but there is a need for the public sector to return back to reality and shrink back to 2004 or so levels since the rest of the economy has already done that, same applies to welfare too and other expenditure which has ballooned out of proportion

it really is not complicated at all, and failure to cutback to reflect the new reality will only result in a situation countries like Greece are finding themselves now, where these cuts get imposed by another body (EU or/and IMF)

.

changes

Out of interest how do people think these increments work?

Do they think that someone starts on x salary and works for 40 years collecting a yearly increment as each year passes?

Count Dooku

waster81 wrote: »

Eh public servants are also taxpayers

If government told to civil servant that he will be paid 50K gross, but he will get 40K, it means that government has to pay only 40K.
Extra 10K will be used to artificially increase tax take

Count Dooku

waster81 wrote: »

your comparison between the banks robbing us and the unions robbing us, how do you equate those?

Banks and public services are using importance of their institutions to protect pay of top management and reduce cuts on unionized staff
What is the difference between Rody Molloy and Pat Neary from one side, and Sean Fitzpatrick from another?
Wha is the difference between 600 top PS servants, who lost only bonuses and “poor” AIB/BOI directors, who have their salary capped by 500,000?

recedite

waster81 wrote: »

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

They are not recruiting, and anyway the PS has always been seen as a good safe plum job, even during the boom.

The only way to measure whether a job pays over the odds is to freeze or cut pay and then see at what point people start to leave and seek employment elsewhere. This takes account of all factors including stress, workload, working hours, job security, bonuses, any other perks etc.

To look at your question from another angle; Why wasn't there a mass exodus of public servants out into the marketplace during the boom?

How much would their skills be valued at in the real world?

Leave aside specialists who can't easily transfer their skills such as gardai for the moment.

Head The Wall

True it was only in December the Greek government passed their new budget. Look at the position they are in now. They followed what the unions were proposing here

I have highlighted the important bits in Bold. Read on Unions


From Reuters

"UPDATE 1-Greek parliament passes key 2010 budget
Wed Dec 23, 2009 6:26pm EST


ATHENS, Dec 24 (Reuters) - Greece's parliament passed early on Thursday the socialist government's 2010 budget, which aims to cut the public deficit to single digits as a first step toward pulling the indebted nation out of its fiscal crisis.

All three major credit rating agencies have downgraded Greece since the 2010 draft budget was unveiled last month, on concerns over the country's fiscal deterioration and worsening debt dynamics.

Despite an economic slump, the government expects ordinary budget revenues to increase by 9 percent next year. Spending before debt service payments is seen shrinking by 3.8 percent.

Papandreou, who won Oct. 4 elections on a promise to tax the rich and help the poor, has refused to take drastic measures, such as across-the-board public sector wage cuts, to shore up Greece's battered finances.


Greek bonds, stocks and credit default swaps have been pressured in the past weeks over fears the country's bonds may not make it as acceptable collateral in European Central Bank repurchase funding operations.

Rating agencies have warned they may cut Greece's rating further if the government fails to win public support for tougher, long-term fiscal measures.

Public sector trade union ADEDY has already threatened to hold a 24-hour strike by early February to protest against budget reforms, which it claims are imposed by the markets.



http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSLDE5BM1L820091223

waster81

recedite wrote: »

They are not recruiting, and anyway the PS has always been seen as a good safe plum job, even during the boom.

The only way to measure whether a job pays over the odds is to freeze or cut pay and then see at what point people start to leave and seek employment elsewhere. This takes account of all factors including stress, workload, working hours, job security, bonuses, any other perks etc.

To look at your question from another angle; Why wasn't there a mass exodus of public servants out into the marketplace during the boom?

How much would their skills be valued at in the real world?

Leave aside specialists who can't easily transfer their skills such as gardai for the moment.

I know they are not recruiting I said that, they are not recruiting because they want to cut down on the public secctor which is what everyone is giving out about.


Do they same in the private sector, cut bonuses, perks etc,

There wasnt exodus for a number of reasons people chose to go into public service, enjoy their job etc.

How valued would the private sector be in public sector world?

waster81

Head The Wall wrote: »

True it was only in December the Greek government passed their new budget. Look at the position they are in now. They followed what the unions were proposing here

I have highlighted the important bits in Bold. Read on Unions


From Reuters

"UPDATE 1-Greek parliament passes key 2010 budget
Wed Dec 23, 2009 6:26pm EST


ATHENS, Dec 24 (Reuters) - Greece's parliament passed early on Thursday the socialist government's 2010 budget, which aims to cut the public deficit to single digits as a first step toward pulling the indebted nation out of its fiscal crisis.

All three major credit rating agencies have downgraded Greece since the 2010 draft budget was unveiled last month, on concerns over the country's fiscal deterioration and worsening debt dynamics.

Despite an economic slump, the government expects ordinary budget revenues to increase by 9 percent next year. Spending before debt service payments is seen shrinking by 3.8 percent.

Papandreou, who won Oct. 4 elections on a promise to tax the rich and help the poor, has refused to take drastic measures, such as across-the-board public sector wage cuts, to shore up Greece's battered finances.


Greek bonds, stocks and credit default swaps have been pressured in the past weeks over fears the country's bonds may not make it as acceptable collateral in European Central Bank repurchase funding operations.

Rating agencies have warned they may cut Greece's rating further if the government fails to win public support for tougher, long-term fiscal measures.

Public sector trade union ADEDY has already threatened to hold a 24-hour strike by early February to protest against budget reforms, which it claims are imposed by the markets.



http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSLDE5BM1L820091223

BUt in Ireland the government havent followed what the unions wanted and have implemented pay cuts, pension levies.

waster81

Count Dooku wrote: »

Banks and public services are using importance of their institutions to protect pay of top management and reduce cuts on unionized staff
What is the difference between Rody Molloy and Pat Neary from one side, and Sean Fitzpatrick from another?
Wha is the difference between 600 top PS servants, who lost only bonuses and “poor” AIB/BOI directors, who have their salary capped by 500,000?

You are equating the top people not the average.

No one disagrees that the top people in the public and private sector are taking advantage of the oridinary

ei.sdraob

waster81 wrote: »

BUt in Ireland the government havent followed what the unions wanted and have implemented pay cuts, pension levies.

paycuts and levies which the unions want to reverse and are striking/working to rule over

ei.sdraob

waster81 wrote: »

You are equating the top people not the average.

No one disagrees that the top people in the public and private sector are taking advantage of the oridinary

as per IMPACTs own admission (see earlier in thread) 2/3rds of the public sector earn above 40K, industrial average being 36K btw

recedite

waster81 wrote: »

do we say that every private sector employee is improving their standard of service, level of customer care I feel has dropped, you can see that when you cross the border and the difference in customer care is black and white.

I wonder if Barry does his shopping in the North too?
Does he understand that businesses here used to be able to pay for his salary (now it's mainly government borrowings).
Would he feel a little bit guilty that he is forwarding money (collected as VAT in the Republic) on to H.M. Goverment?

waster81

ei.sdraob wrote: »

as per IMPACTs own admission (see earlier in thread) 2/3rds of the public sector earn above 40K, industrial average being 36K btw

Ok and??

waster81

recedite wrote: »

I wonder if Barry does his shopping in the North too?
Does he understand that businesses here used to be able to pay for his salary (now it's mainly government borrowings).
Would he feel a little bit guilty that he is forwarding money (collected as VAT in the Republic) on to H.M. Goverment?

Yeah thats right its only public sector that go up north to shop.

waster81

ei.sdraob wrote: »

paycuts and levies which the unions want to reverse and are striking/working to rule over

But thats not going to happen so ....

ei.sdraob

waster81 wrote: »

But thats not going to happen so ....

.. so why are they wasting their time and hurting the public?

P. Breathnach

recedite wrote: »

I wonder if Barry does his shopping in the North too?
Does he understand that businesses here used to be able to pay for his salary (now it's mainly government borrowings).
Would he feel a little bit guilty that he is forwarding money (collected as VAT in the Republic) on to H.M. Goverment?

So you move seamlessly from wondering if he shops in NI to condemning him for doing it? Do you wonder why people in the public service feel put upon?

BeardyFunzo

recedite wrote: »

I wonder if Barry does his shopping in the North too?
Does he understand that businesses here used to be able to pay for his salary (now it's mainly government borrowings).
Would he feel a little bit guilty that he is forwarding money (collected as VAT in the Republic) on to H.M. Goverment?

yawn. Change the record, son. This one's been played to death. Loads of people shop up north, not just some of the public service. You're boring me.