What sort of deal would stop the current industrial action/strikes?

changes

Hi,

What sort of agreement between unions and the government would halt the industrial action/strikes?

What do the general public think would be acceptable?

What do other public servants think would be an acceptable compromise?

Personally speaking as a public servant. I would probably be willing to accept the current paycuts and cooperate with new reforms in exchange for a promise of no more paycuts and a change to the pension levy - so it applies to income in excess of €30,000 rather than €15,000.

Danbo!

PERCENTAGES!!!

I dont see why there should be any lower limit on pay cuts/levies. Does nobody understand percentages? Take the same percent from everyone and everyone pays according to their salary. Lets say theres a 10% cut on all salaries above 30k. The guy on 29k stays on 29k and the guy on 30k ends up with 27k. That sounds fair :rolleyes:

In short a 10% paycut for someone on 30k is not "the exact same pay cut" as a 10% cut for someone on 100K.

And for the record, no, Im not a public servant, nor am I on what would be considered a large salary.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

deise blue

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Well I can certainly refute the absolutely no sympathy comment.

I am Private Sector and unequivocally support the stance the Public Sector unions as mandated by their members have taken as do quite a number of colleagues and friends who are in the private sector.

In any event it may now all be academic as the Government seems to have blinked first when faced with the proposed escalation and have invited the unions back to the table

changes

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Donegalfella who exactly have you appointed yourself to speak for? Thats your opinion.
I work in the PS and I am on the phones everyday. There is indeed sympathy from the public, certainly not everyone.
Nobody has given me grief over the work to rule but some have given their support.

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

The question was asked on the basis that the strikes and industrial action are happening so what do people think would form part of an agreement.

Its not just going to stop without some form of agreement.

rightwingdub

Cut their pay even further and seize all financial assets held by the trade unions, I'm sick and tired of the public sector unions holding the country to ransom.

Count Dooku

changes wrote: »

Hi,

What sort of agreement between unions and the government would halt the industrial action/strikes?

What do the general public think would be acceptable?

Reversal of paycuts with reduction of welfare benefits by 50%
And government should start explain that FF cannot afford reduction of living standards of most vulnerable members of society (public servants)....

ixoy

I don't think it matters what the general public thinks is fair - it's not the unions jobs to give a crap (they clearly don't) or even look at a long-term picture (they definitely don't do this).

What I'd imagine we'd see is that we'll see no more pay cuts, in return for promises of reforms and a timeframe, or clauses, for reversal. They'd also have some in-fighting to try and re-organise the cuts. I'd think they'd want to see different percentages levered against different wages. The "lower paid" (but by no means lowly paid!) CS/PS workers would see their levy reduced.

Let's not forget that the levy was slightly re-adjusted in the Budget at a cost of €250m! So there's already been some back-tracking and scope for more.

Paulzx

rightwingdub wrote: »

and seize all financial assets held by the trade unions, .

Great idea. It could be used to help the bank bailout. Problem solved.:rolleyes:

What country do you think we live in?

rightwingdub

Paulzx wrote: »

Great idea. It could be used to help the bank bailout. Problem solved.:rolleyes:

What country do you think we live in?

The trade unions can't be allowed to hold the country to ransom, draconian measures are sometimes necessary in order to bring industrial peace.

ei.sdraob

ixoy wrote: »

I don't think it matters what the general public thinks is fair - it's not the unions jobs to give a crap (they clearly don't) or even look at a long-term picture (they definitely don't do this).

sadly the above is true

Paulzx wrote: »

Great idea. It could be used to help the bank bailout. Problem solved.:rolleyes:

What country do you think we live in?

typical unionist bull****, pointing the finger at the banks when cant win an argument

well i tell you something

two wrongs dont make a right

and no the banks shouldnt have got any money either

Euro_Kraut

rightwingdub wrote: »

Cut their pay even further and seize all financial assets held by the trade unions, I'm sick and tired of the public sector unions holding the country to ransom.

Damm right. Any organized opposition to the Government must be destroyed!

Paulzx

ei.sdraob wrote: »

sadly the above is true



typical unionist bull****, pointing the finger at the banks when cant win an argument

well i tell you something

two wrongs dont make a right

and no the banks shouldnt have got any money either

The comment about the bank was tongue in cheek to address the stupidity of the comment about seizing union assets.

Well i'll tell you something. "Unionist" bull**** refers to an issue on another part of this island. I've never been accused of been an Orangeman before:D


I'm going to interpret your "unionist" comment as presuming i'm some sort of brain washed socialist. I am neither brain washed nor socialist. Senior union figures have let the country and their membership down as much as the politicains have.
They have more in common with the ministers they sit across the negotiating table from than the people they are supposed to represent.


Don't presume that every one that has different views to you is some sort of union flunkey.

Unfortunately looking at some of the crazy right wing stuff i've seen spouted on boards there is always going to be a place for trade unions

Paulzx

rightwingdub wrote: »

The trade unions can't be allowed to hold the country to ransom, draconian measures are sometimes necessary in order to bring industrial peace.

Seizing all their assets will bring industrial peace!!!! Thats an interesting strategy

rightwingdub

Paulzx wrote: »

Seizing all their assets will bring industrial peace!!!! Thats an interesting strategy

It would mean that they won't ba able to pay their members if they go on strike, also stop the tax credit for trade union subscriptions.

Tora Bora

deise blue wrote: »

Well I can certainly refute the absolutely no sympathy comment.

I am Private Sector and unequivocally support the stance the Public Sector unions as mandated by their members have taken as do quite a number of colleagues and friends who are in the private sector.

In any event it may now all be academic as the Government seems to have blinked first when faced with the proposed escalation and have invited the unions back to the table

If you post once more in defence of public servants, we will make sure Davy FitzGerald, takes on Deise citizenship, and becomes a freeman of Waterford. That will soften your cough :eek:

BeardyFunzo

rightwingdub wrote: »

It would mean that they won't ba able to pay their members if they go on strike, also stop the tax credit for trade union subscriptions.

They wouldn't be able to pay their members for more than a day or two with their 50million fund anyway, so I wouldn't lose any sleep over it.

Can i take all your assets because i feel like it?

ei.sdraob

@Paulzx

me bad my it was late in evening

Paulzx

rightwingdub wrote: »

It would mean that they won't ba able to pay their members if they go on strike, also stop the tax credit for trade union subscriptions.

Right, so you want to steal legally held assets from an organisation just because you feel like it. Assets which are probably in theory owned by the membership.

The unions won't be in a postion anyway to pay striking members for any length of time if a strike occurs.

Whats your next suggestion? Euthanaise old people so the state can seize their assets.

Man, there some seriously messed up people posting on here nowdays.

ixoy

Paulzx wrote: »

Right, so you want to steal legally held assets from an organisation just because you feel like it. Assets which are probably in theory owned by the membership.

It's no worse than those proposing "make the fat cats pay". How exactly:
Do you create some new financial laws and retro-actively apply them? The EU would love that. Law suits here we come.
Say though that you do seize all their assets. Those assets will generally not be hard cash, but could be the likes of property, etc whose value is tenuous. In fact offloading it could cause financial hardship elsewhere (i.e. dump stock tied up and a company could end up liquadated).
It's important that such militant ideas on both sides are examined a bit more rationally!

Paulzx

ixoy wrote: »

It's no worse than those proposing "make the fat cats pay". How exactly:
Do you create some new financial laws and retro-actively apply them? The EU would love that. Law suits here we come.
Say though that you do seize all their assets. Those assets will generally not be hard cash, but could be the likes of property, etc whose value is tenuous. In fact offloading it could cause financial hardship elsewhere (i.e. dump stock tied up and a company could end up liquadated).
It's important that such militant ideas on both sides are examined a bit more rationally!

I've no idea whether you are agreeing or disagreeing with me

Smiegal

rightwingdub wrote: »

The trade unions can't be allowed to hold the country to ransom, draconian measures are sometimes necessary in order to bring industrial peace.

Who gave you a keyboard?

Smiegal

Euro_Kraut wrote: »

Damm right. Any organized opposition to the Government must be destroyed!

You forget that The Unions are not an "organized opposition to the Government" but an organized opposition to an employer - who just happen to be the government...

Public Sector workers are not second class citizens who dont have the right to be part of a Union. The fact that many on Boards feel that they are is justification alone for the presence of Unions now and in the future. I am not 100% pro-union but as long as there are those who are willing to make hardline/degrading comments against PS workers or workers in general for that matter Unions must and always will exist as a result!!

changes

I'd be interested to know what other public servants would find acceptable?

rightwingdub

Smiegal wrote: »

Who gave you a keyboard?

Reagan fired the air traffic controllers in 1981 and after the trade unions behaved more responsibly in America. The unions are the biggest impediment to private sector practices been applied in the public sector. Can I ask you do you believe it is right for social welfare offices to remain closed.

Smiegal

rightwingdub wrote: »

Reagan fired the air traffic controllers in 1981 and after the trade unions behaved more responsibly in America. The unions are the biggest impediment to private sector practices been applied in the public sector. Can I ask you do you believe it is right for social welfare offices to remain closed.

Look, of course any service that the taxpayer has payed for and is now not recieving is wrong, be it social welfare or revenue services etc..

But the point is that for those working within these offices to take industrial action will ultimately effect those people who avail of these services... Unfortunately that is the nature of industrial action. Its not meant to be nice...

doc_17

rightwingdub wrote: »

Cut their pay even further and seize all financial assets held by the trade unions, I'm sick and tired of the public sector unions holding the country to ransom.

After you strip them of their property and assets maybe you could brand all the members of the PS unions as well with some sort of mark so that we'd know who they are and treat them accordingly?

Drumpot

I have no problem with people being unhappy about taking pay cuts and looking to protect their wages. .Nor do I disagree with the general consensus that the people who caused the countries problems have been let off scot free for the tragedy they have forced on our economy.


However, I think I speak for a majority of the lower paid in the private sector (certainly the ones I know) when I say that I am disgusted with the way the unions try to put their case forward, as if they are representing the little man of the country . . If you are pushing a cause to get accountability for those responsible for the mess then you have the support of the entire country. Why not drop the pay cut demands and just work to rule or strike to demand proper accountability/fairness? You would have the backing of everybody and would get great support for this noble cause . . By constantly suggesting that they are on some crusade in the name of fairness , the unions are simply wagging the dog to keep the focus on the bankers and Government to disguise the fact that they are simply trying to squeeze more money out of a near bankrupt society . . .


As a private sector employee who never saw the benefits of the Celtic tiger (that apparently everybody in the private sector enjoyed) I simply cannot understand how the public service feel that they have somehow been targeted. Nobody has been targeted, everybody has been hit in this crisis, because the Public service Unions have the loudest voice it seems their members believe themselves to be the worst hit victims of the crisis. The unions seem to ignore the fact that the government is also an employer and like every other employer in this country, they have to readjust their finances accordingly. The only people the Union’s refer to (when suggesting that some members of society have not felt real pain) represent probably less than 3% of the working population.


There are so many reasons why pay cuts in the public sector have to happen, which from an economic perspective the unions cannot justify. These have been mentioned and ignored by the unions who only acknowledge or discuss points that further their cause. . From my perspective if the pay cuts aren’t maintained I will have to pay more to subsidise public servants pay . . My wife just lost her job and I have nobody to protect my wages or my job so I cannot understand how the unions can be so bold and matter of fact when they protest the pain their members feel. . Pain seems to be felt on different levels depending on your perspective. In the private sector, when your boss calls you into his office, keeping your job is your only concern. Public servants don’t have that worry therefore from my (and a majority of private sector employees) perspective they have the luxury of ignoring the irrefutable advantage (and reduced stress that comes with it) that job security provides in this current climate.


Would I feel disgusted and upset if I was in the public service ? Most definitely . . However, it wouldn’t change the fact that these cuts have to happen whether or not the people who got us into this mess are held accountable or not. From an international perspective alone, we have a lot of goodwill for the actions that our government have taken in applying these paycuts (while other governments procrastinate over what they need to do). Remember the reason that pay rises were possible in the public service was because of the property bubble and financial success thats burst and the quickest way out of the recession is to attract foreign investment while enhancing our image abroad. It is vital that the people who screwed our country are dealt with properly and by the letter of the law. However it is even more vital that we get our house in order first.

doc_17

Euro_Kraut wrote: »

Damm right. Any organized opposition to the Government must be destroyed!

Yeah we could have hearings, which yer man McCarthy (who did that report last year) could chair, and then we'd get them all and could put them in gulags!!

ParkRunner

Drumpot wrote: »

Would I feel disgusted and upset if I was in the public service ? Most definitely . . However, it wouldn’t change the fact that these cuts have to happen whether or not the people who got us into this mess are held accountable or not. From an international perspective alone, we have a lot of goodwill for the actions that our government have taken in applying these paycuts (while other governments procrastinate over what they need to do). Remember the reason that pay rises were possible in the public service was because of the property bubble and financial success thats burst and the quickest way out of the recession is to attract foreign investment while enhancing our image abroad. It is vital that the people who screwed our country are dealt with properly and by the letter of the law. However it is even more vital that we get our house in order first.

There will be a reduction in the overall cost to the exchequer of the public sector paybill over the coming years that's a guarantee. But there seems to be have been a lack of willingness to explore other options for reducing the cost to the exchequer of the public sector pay and pensions bill and Im sure most private sector workers would feel equally aggrieved if they had identified savings that could be made but they were then ignored and the workers pay was cut instead.

Is it really that important how the cost saving measures are achieved, so long as they are achieved?

Drumpot

EF wrote: »

There will be a reduction in the overall cost to the exchequer of the public sector paybill over the coming years that's a guarantee. But there seems to be have been a lack of willingness to explore other options for reducing the cost to the exchequer of the public sector pay and pensions bill and Im sure most private sector workers would feel equally aggrieved if they had identified savings that could be made but they were then ignored and the workers pay was cut instead.

Is it really that important how the cost saving measures are achieved, so long as they are achieved?

Its not simply a lack of willingness to explore other ideas as the unions keep spouting . . Its that cuts have to be made immediately aswell as the long term. Whats funny is that there seems to be a belief that our government had loads of options on the table. You forget that the unions proposals had nothing to do with what was in the best interests of the country, simply what was in the best interests of their members.

Most private sector employees live in a differant world to private sector ones . . We dont have much of a choice (look at Aer Lingus workers!).

What the unions like to suggest is that there are other ways of cutting costs which is true. However what they refuse to elaborate and discuss is how much it will cost us in implementing longer term cost saving initiatives (in place of immediate cost cutting measures).

The credibility and goodwill that the irish Government got from their sharp public service cuts speak for themselves . . Unions ignore this very important fact. It is not in the interest of the country to maintain a high level of public service costs under the current climate. .

Quite simply, I think that the unions (and people who follow or believe them) are either very poorly educated or deliberately ignoring the fact that the advantages of the cuts have been far more beneficial for the country, then had they not made the cuts.

I could go on and on and on about the advantages to the country of the cuts, but to be honest anybody in the public service who doesnt know them, simply doesn't want to hear anything that doesn't massage their belief that they are the victims of unfairness . .

Heres some questions to get you thinking -

How would the rollback of wage cuts affect the goodwill or credibility earned by the Irish Government abroad ?

How much will that cost us ? (there are so many different areas we could discuss on this one question alone).

How does Ireland PLC benefit by rolling back paycuts ?

rightwingdub

Smiegal wrote: »

Look, of course any service that the taxpayer has payed for and is now not recieving is wrong, be it social welfare or revenue services etc..

But the point is that for those working within these offices to take industrial action will ultimately effect those people who avail of these services... Unfortunately that is the nature of industrial action. Its not meant to be nice...

Well the government should hire people who are registered with recruitment tyo work in social welfare offices same with catering, porters and cleaners in the HSE, the government could hire replacement labour while the social welfare staff and the catering, porters and the cleaners are on strike.

ParkRunner

Drumpot wrote: »

Heres some questions to get you thinking -

How would the rollback of wage cuts affect the goodwill or credibility earned by the Irish Government abroad ?

How much will that cost us ? (there are so many different areas we could discuss on this one question alone).

How does Ireland PLC benefit by rolling back paycuts ?

The immediate rollback of wage cuts would affect the credibility of the government alright but even the unions aren't fighting for that anymore. Over time as the economy begins to grow again progress towards rolling back the paycuts is achievable and affordable if the revenue streams start flowing again.

How much it will cost is dependant on whether savings are achieved elsewhere which could mean they are cost neutral and how quickly the social welfare bill can be brought down/job creation occurs. A non-functioning public service though could be equally damaging to governments credibility as a turnabout on the cuts would be though.

Drumpot

EF wrote: »

The immediate rollback of wage cuts would affect the credibility of the government alright but even the unions aren't fighting for that anymore. Over time as the economy begins to grow again progress towards rolling back the paycuts is achievable and affordable if the revenue streams start flowing again.

How much it will cost is dependant on whether savings are achieved elsewhere which could mean they are cost neutral and how quickly the social welfare bill can be brought down/job creation occurs. A non-functioning public service though could be equally damaging to governments credibility as a turnabout on the cuts would be though.

I agree . . The point was just making was that the paycuts had to happen for an immediate reduction of our public expenses.

The biggest question is what are the people of this country willing to sacrifice to get the country back on track ? What I do know is that the more pain we take now, the quicker the problem will be solved . . Thats just a given, but of course what does this entail ?

I wont pretend to understand everything that has happened or that I have all the answers. . But I know that the pain that is being felt by a majority of the people in this country is not over yet . . I cannot see how the government can even guarantee that further pay cuts will not happen . .

Depending on what viewpoint you take, the options to the government are varied but limited in most cases, but lets not forget that the people giving us the funds (or the loans) will have a huge say in what we have to do. .

I agree that we cannot continue to have a non functioning public service, but if it achieves a more realistic understanding of our countries situation, it will of been for the greater good of the country . .

If our government stands firm, there will be far greater confidence from international markets that our government is determined to make difficult decisions for the greater good of the country . .

ParkRunner

Drumpot wrote: »

The biggest question is what are the people of this country willing to sacrifice to get the country back on track ? What I do know is that the more pain we take now, the quicker the problem will be solved . . Thats just a given, but of course what does this entail ?
.

We need jobs really, simple as. Until the banks have returned to some form of stability then the dogfight will continue though unfortunately. We need better leadership too as you wont sell cuts when the highest paid are getting payrises, multiple pensions, holidays for the other half etc. Union leadership needs improvement also because walking into that meeting this morning we saw the finest suits and expensive grooming rather than people who can relate to being a member of the working poor.

bryaner

Boo feckin hoo why did ye not apply for these alleged massive paying public service jobs 10 years ago if they were so good?? Answer too busy making a G a week in the private sector..

Drumpot

bryaner wrote: »

Boo feckin hoo why did ye not apply for these alleged massive paying public service jobs 10 years ago if they were so good?? Answer too busy making a G a week in the private sector..

This is simply the narrow minded ill educated view that I expect from Union officials . .

Couple of points.

• There are only so many public service jobs, not everybody can be in the public service.
• A majority of people in the private sector weren't and never have made big "G"s you speak of
• From your attitude, to hell with the rest of us, we deserve it! why should we have any sympathy or understanding of anybody with such ignorant views ?
• The people you (and unions) speak of represent a small minority of the private sector & are used simply to convince yourselves that you are being treated "unfairly"
• The money that was used to increase public service pay came from private sector profits and successes (along with Property Bubble). Public service unions wanted to be part of the celtic tiger (and used this to justify pay increases), its only fair that they should be part of the recession.

I can only speak for myself and the people I know. I applied for 3 jobs in the public service in 2003 (peak of boom) when I was out of college. I was up against hundreds of people for 10-15 positions. Did the aptitude tests in Croker . .

I know many people who didn't make the €000s in the celtic tiger (in fact I dont have a friend who isnt in some way struggling) . . Your point is the lamest and most embarrassing arguement put across in these whole discussions (hence the reason the unions dont say it anymore) . .

bryaner

Drumpot wrote: »

This is simply the narrow minded ill educated view that I expect from Union officials . .

Couple of points.

• There are only so many public service jobs, not everybody can be in the public service.
• A majority of people in the private sector weren't and never have made big "G"s you speak of
• From your attitude, to hell with the rest of us, we deserve it! why should we have any sympathy or understanding of anybody with such ignorant views ?
• The people you (and unions) speak of represent a small minority of the private sector & are used simply to convince yourselves that you are being treated "unfairly"
• The money that was used to increase public service pay came from private sector profits and successes (along with Property Bubble). Public service unions wanted to be part of the celtic tiger (and used this to justify pay increases), its only fair that they should be part of the recession.

I can only speak for myself and the people I know. I applied for 3 jobs in the public service in 2003 (peak of boom) when I was out of college. I was up against hundreds of people for 10-15 positions. Did the aptitude tests in Croker . .

I know many people who didn't make the €000s in the celtic tiger (in fact I dont have a friend who isnt in some way struggling) . . Your point is the lamest and most embarrassing arguement put across in these whole discussions (hence the reason the unions dont say it anymore) . .

Lol I'm on the dole

Easy on the pot buddy you seem to be another lamb to have taken the governments bait, ( I'm thinking you didn't do that well in the aptitude test)

lily lou

I work as an SNA and noone in my school has taken part in the work to rule, it just wouldn't be possible and noone wanted the children to suffer. SNA's are one section of the public sector that don't have job security, 1200 lost their jobs in February and the reviews are still ongoing.

changes

lily lou wrote: »

I work as an SNA and noone in my school has taken part in the work to rule, it just wouldn't be possible and noone wanted the children to suffer. SNA's are one section of the public sector that don't have job security, 1200 lost their jobs in February and the reviews are still ongoing.

This is another example that people working in the public sector are losing their jobs. Thousands of staff have not had their contracts renewed. They may not have been on permanent contracts but they were in employment with a reasonable expectation of remaining in their job.

We've also had quite a few staff retire or leave and not be replaced.
I hope this point is made clear in the talks.... savings are being made.

danman

But the problem with giving SNA's as an example, is that the very nature of their jobs are temperary.

A school might need 5 one year, the following year they may only need 1.

It can go the other way of course. But a school cannot employ SNA's on a permenant basis.

BeardyFunzo

rightwingdub wrote: »

Well the government should hire people who are registered with recruitment tyo work in social welfare offices same with catering, porters and cleaners in the HSE, the government could hire replacement labour while the social welfare staff and the catering, porters and the cleaners are on strike.

But what if they join a union? You'll only have made them stronger! NNNOOOOOOOO!!!!!

BeardyFunzo

changes wrote: »

We've also had quite a few staff retire or leave and not be replaced.
I hope this point is made clear in the talks.... savings are being made.

I wonder what proportion of the PS are due to retire in, say, the next three years? Assuming they won't be replaced then you can factor the increased workload on remaining staff.


To answer the OP's question:
I'm assuming that the majority of the PS would be happy enough to maintain current pay levels and have their workloads increased as staff retire and temporary contracts were not renewed. You could have they much discussed public sector reform happen naturally.

rightwingdub

bryaner wrote: »

Boo feckin hoo why did ye not apply for these alleged massive paying public service jobs 10 years ago if they were so good?? Answer too busy making a G a week in the private sector..

Bryaner do you believe the fabrications that the unions are coming out with, a mate of mine went for the civil service in 1999 and he didn't even get called for an interview, he did the civil service exams or aptitude tests and he got a letter in the post stating that he was unsucessful on this occasion, also in 2006 there over 24,000 applicants for clerical positions in the civil service for just over 2,000 positions.

I went for an admin role back in 2004 there were over 60 applicants and the salary was about €25k per year.

danman

I applied for 2 seperate positions in 2003 and again in 2005.

rightwingdub

BeardyFunzo wrote: »

But what if they join a union? You'll only have made them stronger! NNNOOOOOOOO!!!!!

Make them sign a contract forbidding them to go on strike, there are over 400,000 people unemployed and I'm sure some of these unfortunate people would be willing to work in exchange for a no strike clause as well as not joining a union.

danbohan

rightwingdub wrote: »

Make them sign a contract forbidding them to go on strike, there are over 400,000 people unemployed and I'm sure some of these unfortunate people would be willing to work in exchange for a no strike clause as well as not joining a union.

no , let them go on strike , the army have no overseas operations at the moment let them shoot them off the streets !

rightwingdub

danbohan wrote: »

no , let them go on strike , the army have no overseas operations at the moment let them shoot them off the streets !

Thats a bit extreme, bring in a no strike clause for anyone in the public sector, if they go on strike than fire them and deprive them of the right to social welfare.

Tail Wagger

changes wrote: »

Hi,

What sort of agreement between unions and the government would halt the industrial action/strikes?

What do the general public think would be acceptable?

What do other public servants think would be an acceptable compromise?

Personally speaking as a public servant. I would probably be willing to accept the current paycuts and cooperate with new reforms in exchange for a promise of no more paycuts and a change to the pension levy - so it applies to income in excess of €30,000 rather than €15,000.

Except the 10% cut like everyone else, or re locate the job's to people who are prepared to have a job with the cut's. We all need to take a little bit of pain together..!...

changes

Tail Wagger wrote: »

Except the 10% cut like everyone else, or re locate the job's to people who are prepared to have a job with the cut's. We all need to take a little bit of pain together..!...

What is this 10% cut you speak of?

I am willing to accept a level of pain as it happens. But is everyone? i'm not sure the big landlords are willing, or the senior public servants or the BOI staff with their payrise last year or the semi state companies.

If were all supposed to be socially conscious and not just me feiners then shouldn't everyone be expected to yield a little.

bryaner

rightwingdub wrote: »

Bryaner do you believe the fabrications that the unions are coming out with, a mate of mine went for the civil service in 1999 and he didn't even get called for an interview, he did the civil service exams or aptitude tests and he got a letter in the post stating that he was unsucessful on this occasion, also in 2006 there over 24,000 applicants for clerical positions in the civil service for just over 2,000 positions.

I went for an admin role back in 2004 there were over 60 applicants and the salary was about €25k per year.

I know the unions leave little to be desired and fully understand that the PS needs a major overhaul and has done for some time, what i don't understand (1) how they can cut the tits out of people on 30k down who are the most needy (2) even with the PS being so inefficient they did not break the country (3) how so many people have fallen into the governments trap and jumped on board and help them drive the wedge between the two sectors, when it is biffo and bertie bonehead who have blown our billions of capital on serious waste and non functioning banks..