Would you be pissed off?

meditraitor

My beautiful daughter is in a creche........ no different than any other couple who both work but here is the thing.


The creche has a dual price list.....

Apparently the county council (fingal) had some part in the setting up of the creche and the public servant who work in the local council offices get better rates because apparently they had a say in the setting up of the creche.


We pay €997

they pay €770

Am I right to be annoyed that public servants are getting better rates because my tax money was used to set up a creche close to a county council office?

Feelgood

Well its annoying alright, but its the same as any other line of business meditraitor. Is just the way the world works. Discounts for family members and friends, tis the same anywhere really.


Are you more annoyed with the fact that its a public servant thats getting the better rate?. Maybe they had more than just a say in setting it up, maybe they are good friends with the owner?

Dr_Phil

Damn, my wife is a CS we have overpaid!!!

On a serious note, I'm not sure how it's possible, haven't heard of any rules or regulations and its a first time I hear about it. NOT a first time I hear though, that a family with a similar or slightly smaller income (+- all beneftis, medical card, rent supplement, heating and myriads of other as well as free cash every week) got from a Social Welfare has 80% things free farting in the sofa every day, while I and my wife work our arses off. Yeah, that's what pisses me off alright.

twowheelsonly

Not really if it works out that they negotiated a group rate which is a strong possibility.
Fair chance that the owners set up in that particular area on account of having a busy Council Office (and possibly others) in the area and the Council workers negotiated a rate. Smart thinking on their behalf really.

meditraitor

Dr_Phil wrote: »

Damn, my wife is a CS we have overpaid!!!

On a serious note, I'm not sure how it's possible, haven't heard of any rules or regulations and its a first time I hear about it. NOT a first time I hear though, that a family with a similar or slightly smaller income (+- all beneftis, medical card, rent supplement, heating and myriads of other as well as free cash every week) got from a Social Welfare has 80% things free farting in the sofa every day, while I and my wife work our arses off. Yeah, that's what pisses me off alright.

If you don't believe me then PI me and I will send you the details! I will gladly enlighten you!

meditraitor

Feelgood wrote: »

Are you more annoyed with the fact that its a public servant thats getting the better rate?.

Of course man, why shouldnt I be..... I pay tax......why should the recipients of my tax have benefits that outstrip mine?

Dr_Phil

meditraitor wrote: »

If you don't believe me then PI me and I will send you the details! I will gladly enlighten you!

Having a choice of being enlightened and going for a leak I am choosing the leak. And bed follows.

See you around, comrades.

Uriel.

As other posters have said, group rates can lead to discounts for members of that group. Happens in all walks of life, not something that is specific to the PS. Happens with health insurance and other services for large organisations. ALSAA had (maybe still do) discount rates for priviliged members.

Your post appears to be some sort of crusade to highlight perceived (even if not always true) issues with PS privilges. This is all well in good if it is relevant. but it is not in this case.

Uriel.

meditraitor wrote: »

Of course man, why shouldnt I be..... I pay tax......why should the recipients of my tax have benefits that outstrip mine?

This is a really stupid and ignorant post.

At least I know to disregard any future debate/points that you make.

meditraitor

Dr_Phil wrote: »

Having a choice of being enlightened and going for a leak I am choosing the leak. And bed follows.

See you around, comrades.

Not so machiavelian as that brother I promise....... I am proud of my dignity/ethical/moral standards and as such resent that point.

meditraitor

Uriel. wrote: »

This is a really stupid and ignorant post.

At least I know to disregard any future debate/points that you make.

Look man, you can of course put me on ignore but I would prefer a proper debate rather than a cowardly accusation!

Jesus Wept

Should not be legal. Tell them you are taking the child out/going to make all parents aware of it. Call Joe Duffy too, I dunno.

meditraitor

The-Rigger wrote: »

it. Call Joe Duffy too, I dunno.

Ahhh jasus! the call Joe duffy post........ I didn't think I was making such a bad point....

Jesus Wept

Uriel. wrote: »

As other posters have said, group rates can lead to discounts for members of that group. Happens in all walks of life, not something that is specific to the PS. Happens with health insurance and other services for large organisations. ALSAA had (maybe still do) discount rates for priviliged members.

Your post appears to be some sort of crusade to highlight perceived (even if not always true) issues with PS privilges. This is all well in good if it is relevant. but it is not in this case.

With regard to health insurance:
If they offer a policy to somebody, they must offer it to everybody.

You can view all policies on the health insurance authority website.
You can call up your insurance provider and insist to be put on any policy, nurses, guards, teachers, company policies, whichever.

Uriel.

meditraitor wrote: »

Look man, you can of course put me on ignore but I would prefer a proper debate rather than a cowardly accusation!

I highly doubt it would be possible to have a "proper" debate with you.

Say for example a gym has a standard membership rate of €800p.a.

You as an individual walk in and you are told €800 please for 1 year.

Next an organisation (public of private) down the road with say 100 members says - hey a number of our members might be interested in joining, can you do a special deal. The gym says to itself... hmmm if we do a deal we might get 10 subscriptions or more. so they say cool we'll do a deal were your members get a reduced rate of €750 per annum.

That's good business sense and it's win/win for both the gym and the organisation's members.

How you see that is an issue is beyond me.

I was groomsman at a wedding recently. Being part of the wedding party I got a 50% discount on a hotel room in the hotel due to a deal done to get the business of the wedding. Other "normal" hotel guests had to pay full rates. Do you see a problem with this?

taking your very ignorant previous post of someone who gets paid with exchequer money who has "priviliges" which "outstrip" yours.

OAP widow(er) living alone on the basic OAP pension. "(your)" taxes pay that individual's pension payments - so they shouldn't receive any other assistance such as - a medical card if you don't receive the same? Are you expecting me to take you seriously?

Uriel.

The-Rigger wrote: »

With regard to health insurance:
If they offer a policy to somebody, they must offer it to everybody.

You can view all policies on the health insurance authority website.
You can call up your insurance provider and insist to be put on any policy, nurses, guards, teachers, company policies, whichever.

That's fair enough in relation to health insurance if people outside of an organisation know about a group scheme that said organisation is availing of.

But there are plenty of other groups schemes out there that are not regulated by national authorities

meditraitor

Uriel. wrote: »

I highly doubt it would be possible to have a "proper" debate with you.

Say for example a gym has a standard membership rate of €800p.a.

You as an individual walk in and you are told €800 please for 1 year.

Next an organisation (public of private) down the road with say 100 members says - hey a number of our members might be interested in joining, can you do a special deal. The gym says to itself... hmmm if we do a deal we might get 10 subscriptions or more. so they say cool we'll do a deal were your members get a reduced rate of €750 per annum.

That's good business sense and it's win/win for both the gym and the organisation's members.

How you see that is an issue is beyond me.

I was groomsman at a wedding recently. Being part of the wedding party I got a 50% discount on hotel room in the hotel room due to a deal done to get the business of the wedding. Other "normal" hotel guests had to pay full rates. Do you see a problem with this?

taking your very ignorant previous post of someone who gets paid with exchequer money who has "priviliges" which "outstrip" yours.

OAP widow(er) living alone on the basis OAP pension. "(your)" taxes pay that individual's pension payments - so they shouldn't receive any other assistance such as - a medical card if you don't receive the same? Are you expecting me to take you seriously?

As public bodies are they legally allowed to engage in contracts that artificially increase service costs to the average(me) taxpayer?

Uriel.

meditraitor wrote: »

As public bodies are they legally allowed to engage in contracts that artificially increase service costs to the average(me) taxpayer?

I don't know what you mean ?

Feelgood

meditraitor wrote: »

As public bodies are they legally allowed to engage in contracts that artificially increase service costs to the average(me) taxpayer?

I think your beef is the fact that its a member of the public service and yeah given the history of the last couple of years I can see why you are annoyed about it.

Uriel's post is on the money though, its just the way the world works. Its not just a creche its a business. Establishments offer incentives and discounts to groups to entice them to use their service. Then there is the standard family/friends benefits.

To be honest my beef would be why the hell am I paying 1000 in childcare!, what kinda country am I living in. Thats just ridiculous. Crazy money.

btard

The-Rigger wrote: »

Should not be legal. Tell them you are taking the child out/going to make all parents aware of it. Call Joe Duffy too, I dunno.

I lol'd

meditraitor

Uriel. wrote: »

I don't know what you mean ?

Ok..... as an explanation I will throw some figures at you

50 kids in this creche

the cost should be (on my costs, rounded up to 1,000)

costs, only 20 of the kids are in 1k per month(none ps workers) and 30 are on €0.75k per month(ps workers).

Total
42.5k per month

The council workers are no different so if the costs and profit are as above then each indidual child should be charged at €850 (fairness) saving me €150 per month or €1,800 per year?

Am I right to be annoyed?

Uriel.

meditraitor wrote: »

Ok..... as an explanation I will throw some figures at you

50 kids in this creche

the cost should be (on my costs, rounded up to 1,000)

costs, only 20 of the kids are in 1k per month(none ps workers) and 30 are on €0.75k per month(ps workers).

Total
42.5k per month

The council workers are no different so if the costs and profit are as above then each indidual child should be charged at €850 (fairness) saving me €150 per month or €1,800 per year?

Am I right to be annoyed?

No you're not right to be annoyed.

You don't grasp how the business world works.

Perhaps, for example, without the group scheme discount to the local council workers, only 5 children from the council would be in the creche. Where would prices be then? These are sounds business decisions made by the creche (and other service/product providers) and have absolutely nothing to do with private versus public issues.

Jeez seriously man, I can buy 1000 pillows (example) a month from a supplier. I could get a discount of 30% on each unit. Another customer could buy 500 pillows a month from the same supplier and only get 20% discount. It's an effective business strategy that makes use of economies of scale, loyalty etc... ensures recurring sales.

In the instance of the creche, they may save on advertising costs, internal council memo's on the group scheme providing free advertising to all the employees of the creche.

You are not paying more because other are receiving discounts. You are paying the price the creche sees as being sustainably profitable (depending on their business acumen). The creche may make additional profit by offering the said group scheme prices

Feelgood

meditraitor wrote: »

Ok..... as an explanation I will throw some figures at you

50 kids in this creche

the cost should be (on my costs, rounded up to 1,000)

costs, only 20 of the kids are in 1k per month(none ps workers) and 30 are on €0.75k per month(ps workers).

Total
42.5k per month

The council workers are no different so if the costs and profit are as above then each indidual child should be charged at €850 (fairness) saving me €150 per month or €1,800 per year?

Am I right to be annoyed?

Right but on that logic, say Im the creche owner.

If you turn around to 30 public service workers in a group scheme and say hey we are increasing your fees to 850...

Mr. public service goes to the creche down te road and says hey I have 30 guys here looking for childcare who will happily try and accomodate him.

As a business man, why would I risk losing 30 customers and regular business just to save one individual money?.

Jesus Wept

Uriel. wrote: »

I highly doubt it would be possible to have a "proper" debate with you.

Say for example a gym has a standard membership rate of €800p.a.

You as an individual walk in and you are told €800 please for 1 year.

Next an organisation (public of private) down the road with say 100 members says - hey a number of our members might be interested in joining, can you do a special deal. The gym says to itself... hmmm if we do a deal we might get 10 subscriptions or more. so they say cool we'll do a deal were your members get a reduced rate of €750 per annum.

That's good business sense and it's win/win for both the gym and the organisation's members.

How you see that is an issue is beyond me.

I was groomsman at a wedding recently. Being part of the wedding party I got a 50% discount on a hotel room in the hotel due to a deal done to get the business of the wedding. Other "normal" hotel guests had to pay full rates. Do you see a problem with this?

taking your very ignorant previous post of someone who gets paid with exchequer money who has "priviliges" which "outstrip" yours.

OAP widow(er) living alone on the basic OAP pension. "(your)" taxes pay that individual's pension payments - so they shouldn't receive any other assistance such as - a medical card if you don't receive the same? Are you expecting me to take you seriously?

None of these examples are comparable.
This is the public sector, it's a large group of people employed by the state. Giving them discounts on private child care facilities over private sector workers (whose wages contribute to the first groups) is just wrong, wrong, wrong.
Any non biased person would see that.

It is creating a two tier society.
Public sector workers and their kin really are completely lose all reason and logic.
Do you actually believe the tripe?
Have you convinced yourself of it or do you realise it's nonsense but long may it last?
I can understand the latter, but the former is just disturbing.

Uriel. wrote: »

That's fair enough in relation to health insurance if people outside of an organisation know about a group scheme that said organisation is availing of.

But there are plenty of other groups schemes out there that are not regulated by national authorities

Yes, but there ought to be. It is not different at all.
It is there because of EU law (because they recognise that it is flat out wrong), but it is still kept hush hush and quiet here.

Welease

As with most complaints.. the devil will be in the detail..

If the discount is applied as part of a group discount scheme, then its legal, above board and common place.
If the discount is being applied as part of some deal which granted a licence to operate etc. then it is an abuse of powers.

ninty9er

The-Rigger wrote: »

With regard to health insurance:
If they offer a policy to somebody, they must offer it to everybody.

You can view all policies on the health insurance authority website.
You can call up your insurance provider and insist to be put on any policy, nurses, guards, teachers, company policies, whichever.

Sure you can :rolleyes:

You don't seem to have the grasp on the difference between a policy and a price card.

For example:
Me ringing VHI and getting a quote for First Plan Plus with Day to Day level 2 is €940.

Me ringing VHI and getting a quote for First Plan Plus with Day to Day level 2 and stating that I am an eligible member of my local credit union's group scheme is €890

The policy isn't different, the price is, so you have a massive logic fail.

Liam Byrne

meditraitor wrote: »

The council workers are no different so if the costs and profit are as above then each indidual child should be charged at €850 (fairness) saving me €150 per month or €1,800 per year?

OK - let's say there were 5 children.

Heating, food, light, insurance, not to mention the core wages etc = divided by 5 subscribers.

Now let's say that (because of the group rate, 10 of a particular organisation (be it PS or not) join.

All of the above costs are down roughly divided by 15.

So there isn't "a straight cost per child".

I will point out that you are still getting the rate that you agreed to, aren't you ?

By all means, point out the above when you are signing up for the next year and ask if loyal customers can get a discount, but don't go in all guns blazing!

Jesus Wept

ninty9er wrote: »

Sure you can :rolleyes:

Yes... you can.
Stop talking out your hole.

I don't understand it because I didn't make mention of it?
What I talked about is perfectly valid.
I said that everybody is entitled to the same level of cover, the policies and their prices are listed on the website.
It's upto you whether you can wrangle a discount on them.
This allows people to call up and get a better level of care for the same price.

Why do you take issue with this?
Are you a public sector worker or is there just no helping you?

HEADHUNTER1980

PUBLIC SERVANTS AND THE GOVERNMENT NEED TO WAKE UP THERE IS NO REASON WHY PEOPLE SHOULD BE GETTING CHEAPER RATES ON ANYTHING JUST BECAUSE THEY WORK IN PUBLIC SECTOR ITS NOT A BUSINESS AND OVER THE LAST TEN YEARS GOD KNOWS IT HASN'T BEEN RUN LIKE ONE OTHERWISE IF WOULD HAVE GONE BUST YEARS AGO.FROM MY EXPERIENCE PRIVATE SECTOR WORKERS WORK LONGER AND HARDER THAN MOST PUBLIC SECTOR WORKERS AND THEY NEED TO REALISE THAT THE GRAVEY TRAIN HAS RUN OUT OF TRACKS

spurious

Kill Frankenstein!!!

happylarry5000

PUBLIC SERVANTS AND THE GOVERNMENT NEED TO WAKE UP THERE IS NO REASON WHY PEOPLE SHOULD BE GETTING CHEAPER RATES ON ANYTHING JUST BECAUSE THEY WORK IN PUBLIC SECTOR ITS NOT A BUSINESS AND OVER THE LAST TEN YEARS GOD KNOWS IT HASN'T BEEN RUN LIKE ONE OTHERWISE IF WOULD HAVE GONE BUST YEARS AGO.FROM MY EXPERIENCE PRIVATE SECTOR WORKERS WORK LONGER AND HARDER THAN MOST PUBLIC SECTOR WORKERS AND THEY NEED TO REALISE THAT THE GRAVEY TRAIN HAS RUN OUT OF TRACKS

I have a co worker whose husband works in a loss making semi state who goes to the same gym as me. Their visit costs them a subsidised 1.50euro each whereas my visit costs 8.50euro. They tell me that the company is subsidising the employee's. When I put it to them that the company was making a loss they were completely oblivious to this and didnt care either. As far as I'm concerned I'm subsidising said companies staff members gym visits.

Dr_Phil

I don't understand your point: do you agree to pay your rate or not? If not, then go somewhere else or give up, if you do - what's the problem? I don't think it is your business to look into someone's expenses. Do you get panic attack every time you hear that someone, somewhere got something at better price that you agreed to pay? FFS at least you can afford the gym these days so stop whinging!

Uriel.

happylarry5000 wrote: »

PUBLIC SERVANTS AND THE GOVERNMENT NEED TO WAKE UP THERE IS NO REASON WHY PEOPLE SHOULD BE GETTING CHEAPER RATES ON ANYTHING JUST BECAUSE THEY WORK IN PUBLIC SECTOR ITS NOT A BUSINESS AND OVER THE LAST TEN YEARS GOD KNOWS IT HASN'T BEEN RUN LIKE ONE OTHERWISE IF WOULD HAVE GONE BUST YEARS AGO.FROM MY EXPERIENCE PRIVATE SECTOR WORKERS WORK LONGER AND HARDER THAN MOST PUBLIC SECTOR WORKERS AND THEY NEED TO REALISE THAT THE GRAVEY TRAIN HAS RUN OUT OF TRACKS

I have a co worker whose husband works in a loss making semi state who goes to the same gym as me. Their visit costs them a subsidised 1.50euro each whereas my visit costs 8.50euro. They tell me that the company is subsidising the employee's. When I put it to them that the company was making a loss they were completely oblivious to this and didnt care either. As far as I'm concerned I'm subsidising said companies staff members gym visits.

Ease off on the caps lock.

What you describe is completely different to the example outlined in the OP and in this thread so far.

In the OP employees of an organisation are receiving a discount (as provided by the service provider [creche]) due to a group scheme which was a business strategy of the creche in order to tap a large resource where economies of scale and more business could be generated.

What you describe is a semi state organisation paying a proportion of a member's (one of their employees) fees to a service provider. That is totally different. It is also a much more complex issue. As a loss making company (as you state), strategic decisions should be made to cut the level of loss the company faces. One of those decisions could definitely be to cut the subsidy for their employees gym fees

Uriel.

The-Rigger wrote: »

None of these examples are comparable.
This is the public sector, it's a large group of people employed by the state. Giving them discounts on private child care facilities over private sector workers (whose wages contribute to the first groups) is just wrong, wrong, wrong.
Any non biased person would see that.

It is creating a two tier society.
Public sector workers and their kin really are completely lose all reason and logic.
Do you actually believe the tripe?
Have you convinced yourself of it or do you realise it's nonsense but long may it last?
I can understand the latter, but the former is just disturbing.



Yes, but there ought to be. It is not different at all.
It is there because of EU law (because they recognise that it is flat out wrong), but it is still kept hush hush and quiet here.

You haven't a clue what you are talking about.

This has absolutely nothing to do with the Public Service.

In the case in point, the WHOLE public service is not getting a discount. A group scheme is offered by the creche to a local organisation with a large number of employees as part of group scheme, where I assume the creche hopes to gain more business and save on costs (economies of scale) by employing the group scheme. Word of mouth, internal advertising within the organisation could generate more business for the creche and reduce advertising costs etc... It is irrelevant that the local company is a public body.

The public body is not paying for the discount received by it's employees.

The Government is not paying for the discount of it's employees.

The Tax payer is not paying for the discount of it's employees.

This is simply a business strategy (and a sensible one) adopted by a private sector body.

My previous examples explain - such as the recent wedding I was at. This happens in all walks of life, across all industries, for a multitude of reasons.

It is your own bias (against the public sector) that is clouding your sense of reality.

goat2

Uriel. wrote: »

As other posters have said, group rates can lead to discounts for members of that group. Happens in all walks of life, not something that is specific to the PS. Happens with health insurance and other services for large organisations. ALSAA had (maybe still do) discount rates for priviliged members.

Your post appears to be some sort of crusade to highlight perceived (even if not always true) issues with PS privilges. This is all well in good if it is relevant. but it is not in this case.

from what i am reading.this has nothing to do with public servece workers, more to do with, why one price for one and a whold different story for the other, or did someone help someone in the past and this is payback time

ninty9er

The-Rigger wrote: »

Are you a public sector worker or is there just no helping you?

No. I'm a private sector worker who has such benefits available to me. Why should it be any different for the public sector.

You're not going to create a public v. private divide arguing with me, because it's not a public v. private issue.

View

meditraitor wrote: »

My beautiful daughter is in a creche........ no different than any other couple who both work but here is the thing.


The creche has a dual price list.....

Apparently the county council (fingal) had some part in the setting up of the creche and the public servant who work in the local council offices get better rates because apparently they had a say in the setting up of the creche.


We pay €997

they pay €770

Am I right to be annoyed that public servants are getting better rates because my tax money was used to set up a creche close to a county council office?

A 227 Euro difference in price? Would that qualify as Benefit-in-Kind in the eyes of Revenue? After all, it is a clear benefit to pay 227 Euro less for the same service...

I wonder did Fingal CC notify Revenue about this arrangement in case there were possible tax implications?

Liam Byrne

I just spotted that Sky are offering new customers a few months completely free, and - shock, horror - some of those new customers are public service workers!!!!

I'm fuming that I'm paying more than them simply because I agreed to!

Jesus Wept

ninty9er wrote: »

No. I'm a private sector worker who has such benefits available to me. Why should it be any different for the public sector.

You're not going to create a public v. private divide arguing with me, because it's not a public v. private issue.

:rolleyes:

Public sector employees getting discounts because they are part of of the public sector over employees of the private sector is not a public sector v private sector issue?

It is a public sector v private sector issue, a specific one, not a general one.

Uriel.

The-Rigger wrote: »

:rolleyes:

Public sector employees getting discounts because they are part of of the public sector over employees of the private sector is not a public sector v private sector issue?

It is a public sector v private sector issue, a specific one, not a general one.

Hmmmm. I really don't get what you are seeing here.

In this matter, the people getting the discount aren't getting it because they work for the public service. It's irrelevant where they work or who they work for.

I really don't get where u are coming from

Focalbhach

The-Rigger wrote: »

:rolleyes:

Public sector employees getting discounts because they are part of of the public sector over employees of the private sector is not a public sector v private sector issue?

Right. Except that public sector employees are not getting discounts because they are part of the public sector.

These particular workers are getting a discount, as a group, because their local creche has made the business decision to offer them one, as a group. The source of those workers' income is entirely, completely, stupendously irrelevant.

mikemac

I enjoy a good rant
And OP, this is not a rant at all, it's a nonsense thread

As posted many times before, the local public service office does a lot of business with the creche so they get a group rate.

If that was a large accountancy office or factory or whatever, they would also get a group rate if they can give lots of custom to the creche.

You agreed to your rate so pay it , move elsewhere or try to negotiate it

We pay €997

they pay €770

Met the manager and do your best. If you are cannot get more money off you're not much of a negotiator tbh. Send your partner in to do it for you

martian1980

The-Rigger wrote: »

:rolleyes:

Public sector employees getting discounts because they are part of of the public sector over employees of the private sector is not a public sector v private sector issue?

It is a public sector v private sector issue, a specific one, not a general one.

right. Let's say I run a sandwich bar. I normally charge 3 quid for sandwiches. There's a big office next door with 200 staff. I may have worked out over time that when I charge them 2.50 for a sambo, 175 of them buy lunches every day, while when I charge 3 quid, only 100 of them buy sandwiches from me. I may therefore worked out that I make more money overall from offering them the lower price - I might be making less money off them individually, but the volume of business I get as a result makes it more than worth my while.
It makes NO difference whether they are public sector, private sector, accountants, nurses or mechanics. Their employer has not paid in money to subsidise the deal, it's a pure business decision by me based on making the most most money I can.