'Let the elite endure economic pain too'

Tabnabs

I am in absolute agreement with this article. I really cannot see any valid arguments for keeping the status quo especially with regard to senior ranks employed by any branch of the state.

Let us give make a collective bargain: we will make a sacrifice – but we are not prepared to be the sacrifice

IT IS time for the Irish people to plead an inability to pay. We cannot afford to support our governing elite in the style to which it has become accustomed. This is obvious to everyone except those within that elite itself. If, as citizens, we are yet to find our backbone, can we at least agree on some modest civil disobedience to put some manners on our masters?

Who can forget the recent spectacle of Minister after Minister pulling up in their chauffeur-driven black State cars and stopping to throw us a few words through the half-open windows before going in to Farmleigh to discuss savage cuts for the rest of us? What was staggering was not the lack of moral judgment – we’ve come to take that for granted. It was the lack of political nous. It didn’t occur to a single one of these professional politicians to get on their taxpayer-funded mobile phones and say: “Listen, lads, it might look better if we met up in town and took a minibus out to Farmleigh. Just for the optics, like.” It’s bad when politicians care only about public perception. It’s much worse when they don’t even give a damn about public perception.

When people who don’t even notice their own rank hypocrisy talk about making “hard choices”, the whole process of sharing pain is utterly debased.

The late, great historian of modern Europe, Tony Judt, in his last book, Ill Fares the Land, notes the way our leaders paint “a self-satisfied gloss upon crassly utilitarian calculations”: “When imposing welfare cuts upon the poor, for example, legislators . . . have taken a singular pride in the ‘hard choices’ they have had to make. The poor vote in much smaller numbers than anyone else. So there is little political risk in penalising them: just how ‘hard’ are such choices? These days, we take pride in being tough enough to inflict pain on others. If an older usage were still in force, whereby being tough consisted of enduring pain rather than imposing it on others, we should perhaps think twice before so callously valuing efficiency over compassion.”

So, if our leaders want to be seen as tough, let’s see how much pain they can endure. Let’s start with the obvious: high salaries are supposed to be a reward for competence and success. Our political and administrative culture has been, collectively, abysmally incompetent. It was given (partly through its own efforts, partly through sheer luck), a literally unique opportunity to create a sustainably decent society. It managed, not simply to blow that opportunity, but to engineer the deepest economic crisis in the history of the State. If salaries of € 200,000-plus are a reflection of these achievements, is there enough money in the world to pay these people if they had actually done a good job?

The incompetence, let’s remember, is a continuing reality. Almost all of the present Cabinet, and much of the administrative elite, shared in the catastrophic decision to nationalise the debts of Anglo Irish Bank.

And ponder for a moment the following truth: every single significant figure produced by the Government in relation to both the bank bailout and the public finances has been wildly wrong. In what notion of basic competence does the cost of rescuing the banks go from zero to €50 billion and the size of the current budget reduction suddenly double?

Instead of encouraging and rewarding competence, indeed, the effect of very high public salaries has almost certainly been the precise opposite. Their relative wealth encouraged the political and administrative elite to identify with people like themselves – the wealthy, including the bankers and developers. It has created smugness, a sense of entitlement, a narrowness of vision and experience. And it has destroyed something we badly need right now – a sense of pride in public service for its own sake. Put simply, people who have to be paid €200,000 a year to serve their country in the midst of an existential crisis are not fit to serve their country.

There are two other reasons for the elite to endure pain. One is summed up in the song from My Fair Lady: “Sing me no song!/ Read me no rhyme!/ Don’t waste my time!/ Show me!” Don’t tell us we’re broke and must embrace austerity – show us.

Secondly, a simple question: if you can’t live decently on €100,000 a year, it follows that none of your fellow citizens can live on half or a third or a fifth of that. The inescapable implication is that the cuts are unendurable. If that’s the message the Government wants to send, it should say so.

So here’s my modest proposal. Let us at least give ourselves some pride by making a collective bargain. We will pay water and property taxes – if all public salaries come down to €100,000 until 2014. (I do mean all – president, taoiseach, judges, senior civil servants, chief executives of State companies etc.) And if they don’t, we won’t. We are willing, in other words, to make a sacrifice. But we are not prepared to be the sacrifice.

source

ART6

A wonderful thought, but no chance until the country is finally rid of the present incumbents and the so-called opposition parties. Leopards and spots springs to mind.:mad:

ednwireland

waits for a poster to say it wouldnt save that much money so lets not bother

:rolleyes:

dan_d

Read that article earlier and thought it hit the nail bang on the head.

At this stage, it's not relevant how much money it would save. It's the principle of the thing. Firstly we can't afford to maintain this behaviour. And secondly, as the author rightly says - why the hell are we still being told, 2 years after this crisis began, that we have to "take the pain", yet still looking at the same people living the same lifestyle and enjoying the same perks that they were at the start of all this?

We all know we have to take the pain....however it would appear that those who are inflicting it are completely oblivious to that fact. This is not a royal we, this is a collective we.

Nody

dan_d wrote: »

At this stage, it's not relevant how much money it would save. It's the principle of the thing. Firstly we can't afford to maintain this behaviour. And secondly, as the author rightly says - why the hell are we still being told, 2 years after this crisis began, that we have to "take the pain", yet still looking at the same people living the same lifestyle and enjoying the same perks that they were at the start of all this?

We all know we have to take the pain....however it would appear that those who are inflicting it are completely oblivious to that fact. This is not a royal we, this is a collective we.

Because to date not a one of them has been challenged or ousted in any relevant way by the voters and until such a time why would they care to cut their own sugar line of cash and benefits? Seriously, who would seriously stand up and say "I want to be paid less" if they were not forced to (and forced in this case meaning they are ousted for life, which has a snowball chance in hell to happen with the local mentality of voting)?

cleremy jarkson

ednwireland wrote: »

waits for a poster to say it wouldnt save that much money so lets not bother

:rolleyes:

I doubt many here would think that. I'm sure most rational people on here would agree that it does indeed save a negligable amount in the greater scheme of things but that it should be done anyways to save the money and also to make it slightly easier for the whole country to accept cuts.

mac_iomhair

finally some journalists talking sense! Time for change, and from the top down, not the other way around!

angelfire9

I agree with this 110%!!
But also I would make the following additional suggestions:

Firstly, do we really need Garda drivers and Garda protection for Ministers and retired Taoisigh these days? Thankfully peace has been brought to Northern Ireland so i don't see the need for all the expensive security?

And speaking of Ministry’s do we really need 20 Junior Ministers, including 2 each specifically for Agriculture, Fisheries & Food, Environment Heritage & Local Government, and Community & Gaeltacht affairs.

In light of the pension levy i have a suggestion regarding government/ministerial pensions, would it be possible to restrict the number of pensions that former ministers and TD's get, to one pension (whichever is higher) and also the pension that some TD's are getting from former employment, seeing as public servants are paying massive money for their pensions would it not seem fair and equitable to reduce the pension bill emanating from the Dail?

Can we do nothing about the massive "golden handshakes" the bankers and the financial regulator are getting lately, it hardly seems right that they didn't do their jobs properly and are being compensated for it!

And finally... do we really need the Seanad???

mac_iomhair

what you have mentioned above are the tough decisions that this government don't have the balls to make!

angelfire9

I'd love to know how much they would save in a year by implementing even 1 of the ideas I have suggested!

jmayo

Dyflin wrote: »

I am in absolute agreement with this article. I really cannot see any valid arguments for keeping the status quo especially with regard to senior ranks employed by any branch of the state.


source

I do think there is huge merit in chopping politicans, top civil servants, hospital consultants, specialist advisors, judges, state body body CEOs and top executives salaries, but I think everyone knows there is no way that they should all be at 100,000.
(That includes entities such as the ESB who hide behind so called private sector clothes yet whose primary shareholders are us the taxpayer and they report directly to a minister)
Saying 100,000 just reads like a communist manifesto of sorts where we are all equal no matter what we do and is totally unrealistic.

But that does not mean they keep their salaries as is.
They should all face a big cut, lets says 30% or 40% for instance.
That way they are getting a kick in the pocket that even they would notice.
Now the other things that needs to happen is a no lump sum payoff on retiring politicans or public servants be they roddy molloy, patrick neary or jimmy down in the tax office.
That applies to everyone.
If someone screws up they get fired, no if or buts and again this applies all the way from the top to the bottom.

Now all the perks should be chopped, no first class travel, no chauffeurs except for taoiseach, finance, justice.
The rest can share a few cars and should have to apply for them like use of aircraft.
Anybody found to be using them for family reasons lose use of them in future.
No use of aircraft within Ireland if not by one of the above top ministers and journeys must be longer than 50 miles.
(Lets see how minister dempsey gets home to Trim then. :mad:)

Government jets not to be used if commerical direct flights available within Europe and/or interchanges less than 2 hours available.
Again government jets only availble for top ministers including Foreign Affairs minister in this case.

Justice should always be protected and ex justice ministers as well.
EDIT: ehh thinking about this I wouldleave out mcdowell.

All expenses need to be vouched for.
No help with constituency expenditure either.
It is not the taxpayers job to get them re elected.

All state boards to have numbers chopped.
Why do we have 17 people on state pensions board and another 17 or so were on board of Fás ?
Quangoes to be chopped by 50% with no lump sum payoffs for board members or execs.
Staff and execs can be moved to other departments where available.

angelfire9 wrote: »

I agree with this 110%!!
But also I would make the following additional suggestions:

Firstly, do we really need Garda drivers and Garda protection for Ministers and retired Taoisigh these days? Thankfully peace has been brought to Northern Ireland so i don't see the need for all the expensive security?

And speaking of Ministry’s do we really need 20 Junior Ministers, including 2 each specifically for Agriculture, Fisheries & Food, Environment Heritage & Local Government, and Community & Gaeltacht affairs.

In light of the pension levy i have a suggestion regarding government/ministerial pensions, would it be possible to restrict the number of pensions that former ministers and TD's get, to one pension (whichever is higher) and also the pension that some TD's are getting from former employment, seeing as public servants are paying massive money for their pensions would it not seem fair and equitable to reduce the pension bill emanating from the Dail?

You were doing so well until this point. :rolleyes:
Agree politicans should only receive the one and they should not get it until normal pension age or if they take early retirement they must be out of all public life roles.

Looking at your post I would say you are a public servant, so I will also suggest this change for ALL public sector workers.
All public sector workers must agree to new contracts that they can be moved within their current organisation, to another organisation or to a new location if within 25 miles of current location WITHOUT receiving any monetary compensation for this movement.
Now lets not get foolish and claim that Gardaí become doctors etc, but realistically someone working in admin or even certain management roles can be moved.
Example of this would be where person working in Co Council in Ennis can be moved to Motor Reg Dept in Shannon or vice versa.
Salary and pension entitlements would be preserved wherever possible*, but that would be it.
Could be choice of job or no job and in that case they may be paycut.

I am tired of hearing instances where workers refuse to move a couple of miles to new location, often brand new building, until they are compensated, because they are loosing canteen or some such.
Felixibility and efficency needs to be the new buzzwords.
If people start making suggestions about those at the top then they bloody well better be willing to take them at the bottom too.
It would take me mouch longer to voice all the proposed changes to HSE and it's lobby groups.

angelfire9 wrote: »

Can we do nothing about the massive "golden handshakes" the bankers and the financial regulator are getting lately, it hardly seems right that they didn't do their jobs properly and are being compensated for it!

And finally... do we really need the Seanad???

Anything that is state backed or owned should not have the facility to offer golden handshakes or parting gifts be they pension top ups, especially to those that are affectively forced to resign.

To my mind the only thing the Seanad allows is for the couple of very good intelligent no nonsense people like Shane Ross to ge to sit on Oireachtas committees which can then get to interview the shysters.

If he, and people like Morgan Kelly, Peter Matthews, David Norris, could be given roles in Oireachtas committees without the Seanad I would say chop it in the morning.

angelfire9

jmayo wrote: »

Now all the perks should be chopped, no first class travel, no chauffeurs except for taoiseach, finance, justice.
The rest can share a few cars and should have to apply for them like use of aircraft.
Anybody found to be using them for family reasons lose use of them in future.
No use of aircraft within Ireland if not by one of the above top ministers and journeys must be longer than 50 miles.
(Lets see how minister dempsey gets home to Trim then. :mad:)

Government jets not to be used if commerical direct flights available within Europe and/or interchanges less than 2 hours available.
Again government jets only availble for top ministers including Foreign Affairs minister in this case.

Justice should always be protected and ex justice ministers as well.
EDIT: ehh thinking about this I wouldleave out mcdowell.

Actually maybe Justice & Taoiseach could keep the cars but the rest of them can drive themselves! Retired though? Why bother? Who is going to go after the retired ones??

jmayo wrote: »

All expenses need to be vouched for.
No help with constituency expenditure either.
It is not the taxpayers job to get them re elected.

DEFINITELY! They get well enough payed to pay their own bloody expenses!

jmayo wrote: »

All state boards to have numbers chopped.
Why do we have 17 people on state pensions board and another 17 or so were on board of Fás ?
Quangoes to be chopped by 50% with no lump sum payoffs for board members or execs.
Staff and execs can be moved to other departments where available.

jmayo wrote: »

Looking at your post I would say you are a public servant, so I will also suggest this change for ALL public sector workers.

Nope I'm an accountant, lost job at the start of the summer now relying on the hubby's Garda income for a family of 4 and it is tight!

jmayo wrote: »

All public sector workers must agree to new contracts that they can be moved within their current organisation, to another organisation or to a new location if within 25 miles of current location WITHOUT receiving any monetary compensation for this movement.
Now lets not get foolish and claim that Gardaí become doctors etc, but realistically someone working in admin or even certain management roles can be moved.
Example of this would be where person working in Co Council in Ennis can be moved to Motor Reg Dept in Shannon or vice versa.
Salary and pension entitlements would be preserved wherever possible*, but that would be it.
Could be choice of job or no job and in that case they may be paycut.

I am tired of hearing instances where workers refuse to move a couple of miles to new location, often brand new building, until they are compensated, because they are loosing canteen or some such.
Felixibility and efficency needs to be the new buzzwords.
If people start making suggestions about those at the top then they bloody well better be willing to take them at the bottom too.
It would take me mouch longer to voice all the proposed changes to HSE and it's lobby groups.

Agreed 100% can't see it happening though

jmayo wrote: »

Anything that is state backed or owned should not have the facility to offer golden handshakes or parting gifts be they pension top ups, especially to those that are affectively forced to resign.

EXACTLY!!!!!!!!!!

jmayo wrote: »

To my mind the only thing the Seanad allows is for the couple of very good intelligent no nonsense people like Shane Ross to ge to sit on Oireachtas committees which can then get to interview the shysters.

If he, and people like Morgan Kelly, Peter Matthews, David Norris, could be given roles in Oireachtas committees without the Seanad I would say chop it in the morning.

Can they not go forward for dail seats in the next election? I like David Norris & Shane Ross they talk sense most of the time

johnboy_123

This will never happen

BeeDI

If you ask me, the elite in this country are divided into two groups.
Those earning over say around €150k pa. Should be able to shoulder more pain / taxes.

Then the other elite class, is those on social welfare. Why? Because they get every bloody thing for free.

The real poor class nowadays, are the middle income earners.
Facing more taxes, more cut backs, and will have to fund their kids college at an ever increasing rate.

The middle classes face the biggest real decline in living standard!:(

AckwelFoley

BeeDI wrote: »

If you ask me, the elite in this country are divided into two groups.
Those earning over say around €150k pa. Should be able to shoulder more pain / taxes.

They do, and will - the higher tax bracket will be probably lowered and the rate will be increased

BeeDI wrote: »

Then the other elite class, is those on social welfare. Why? Because they get every bloody thing for free.

The real poor class nowadays, are the middle income earners.
Facing more taxes, more cut backs, and will have to fund their kids college at an ever increasing rate.

The middle classes face the biggest real decline in living standard!:(

2 points made here and they are interesting and perhaps true. I do agree with you that its the middle income earners that are probably hit the hardest. Its simply case by numbers - the more people in a bracket the more likel they will be hit with taxes.

Personally im more in favour of cuts than increased taxes. Property tax is going to come in and its unavoidable at this point - however - there are people walking out of the social welfare office that have never worked a day in their life, there are county councils spending hundreds of thousands on sand and stones they dont need and probably wont use - merely to use up the rest of their allocated budget for this year before december so they wont lose it next year.. essentially they're spending for the sake of it.. there is massive waste in parts of the public service, but due to unions etc, its nearly impossible to cut them to a more economic level

deadduck

great article, we need more of this, and on the front pages of our national papers!

Dorcha

BeeDI wrote: »

Then the other elite class, is those on social welfare. Why? Because they get every bloody thing for free.

No, they don't.

flutered

Dorcha wrote: »

No, they don't.

i defineatly agree with you, i have a disibility pension, 201 euro per week, i get the fuel allowance, etc, but been unable to walk and living where i am i need a car, which costs quite a lot, the only thing i get for free is my oncology treatment, hopefully the op does not begrudge me that, btw i have to pay for the consultants fees, which are paid in cash.

Capt'n Midnight

who was telling us that everyone had to shoulder the wheel and what % cut have their ilk taken compared to the 30% reduction in payroll spend in the private sector ?

http://www.rte.ie/laweb/ll/ll_t10g.html back in 1991 the top rate of tax was REDUCED to 52%


back in 1976 when we had 3 bands the income tax top rate was over 73.5% when you took into account PRSI and that wasn't for the elite

fedor.2.

It is easy enough to tell the poor to accept their poverty as Gods will when you yourself have warm clothes and plenty of food and medical care and a roof over your head and no worry about the rent, but if you want them to believe you- try to share some of their poverty and see if you can accept it as gods will yourself.

Thomas Merton

dan_d

BeeDI wrote: »

Then the other elite class, is those on social welfare. Why? Because they get every bloody thing for free.

The real poor class nowadays, are the middle income earners.
Facing more taxes, more cut backs, and will have to fund their kids college at an ever increasing rate.
(

Right.And what about those of us who are middle class and on social welfare?Where do we fit in?
I can assure you I'm middle class - if that means college educated, with a good degree and prior to this mess, a good career- and I get jack squat from SW other than 196eur a week.Furthermore, I'd imagine I'd get laughed out of it if I tried asking for anything else.
Kindly do not go around saying 'everyone on social welfare is....' because it's not true.There's some of us who would give anything for a job and who are in this position through no fault of their own.It's a point that's been made time and again around here, and it shows a lamentable ignorance on the part of some posters to make sweeping statements like that.

digme

Darlughda

So what can we do?

Protest on the streets? Great, SWP and SF will show up and hijack the whole thing and the inevitable response will happen in the media.

What is the alternative?

Nonoperational

The suggestion that all public sector salaries drop to €100k is so stupid and ill thought out it is astonishing any educated person would even consider it would be feasible. First of all you simply cannot cut someone from €200k to €100k with the swipe of a pen. Whatever your thoughts on how deserving they are of it they worked up to where they are and many worked very hard to get there.

Secondly there are many many good people in the Irish public sector. There may be the opinion that there are a lot of over paid wasters and there may be, but most of those people wouldn't be on €100k anyway. Politicians aside a lot of the people on over €100k (doctors, academics in universities etc, industry liaison people, etc etc) bring in far more money into the country than their salaries will ever amount to. If you were to cut these peoples salaries by 100 - 200% then they'd simply leave and go somewhere else. We need top class people in health, education etc. Maybe now more than ever.

It keeps coming back to this "elite". Not everyone on €100k is "elite". What if these people deserve to be on €200k? People deserve to be rewarded for dong jobs that take over a decade to qualify for and have very high responsibility. When the boom was going strong it was fascinating to watch how different friends of mine fared. Some left education straight after the leaving and did a trade or went straight into the workforce. Lots were earning €800-1000 a week and seriously living it up every weekend. Others went to college and further education for anything from 4 - 15 years (ie they are still there) earning between nothing and €12k a year. They worked like fu****s putting down 12 hour days between thought and self directed learning and study and now some of them are progressing to be very well qualified professionals in their field. The lads that were laughing at them a few years ago arn't doing so well.

Why should they be crucified? Pay a share, of course. Pay a higher share than most, of course, but now people are almost turning them into demons and this suggestion public sector wages are capped at €100k is ludicrous in my opinion. It's an easy target this €100k thing and maybe for bankers and politicians that have a direct responsibility for the crash there is a case but it simply cannot be brought in as a sweeping measure.

oppenheimer1

ednwireland wrote: »

waits for a poster to say it wouldnt save that much money so lets not bother

:rolleyes:

Well it wouldn't save that much money, it would just be optics. Thats not to say it shouldn't be done of course. The real waste is within the department of health and a serious look needs to be taken at consultants pay. However it has to be remembered that cutting their pay will adversely affect tax returns.

However there is real scope for savings to be made in pay revision for senior civil servants and politicians alike though.

rumour

gpf101 wrote: »

The suggestion that all public sector salaries drop to €100k is so stupid and ill thought out it is astonishing any educated person would even consider it would be feasible. First of all you simply cannot cut someone from €200k to €100k with the swipe of a pen. Whatever your thoughts on how deserving they are of it they worked up to where they are and many worked very hard to get there.

Your wrong, quite simply you can. Just turn off the money. Guess what, that is happening get used to it.

gpf101 wrote: »

Secondly there are many many good people in the Irish public sector. There may be the opinion that there are a lot of over paid wasters and there may be, but most of those people wouldn't be on €100k anyway. Politicians aside a lot of the people on over €100k (doctors, academics in universities etc, industry liaison people, etc etc) bring in far more money into the country than their salaries will ever amount to. If you were to cut these peoples salaries by 100 - 200% then they'd simply leave and go somewhere else. We need top class people in health, education etc. Maybe now more than ever..

If 100k is not good enough for them good luck, at this point in time its more than we can afford. See how simple it is, don't have the money can't pay.

gpf101 wrote: »

What if these people deserve to be on €200k?

I don't care because I don't have the money.

gpf101 wrote: »

People deserve to be rewarded for dong jobs that take over a decade to qualify for and have very high responsibility.

And 100k is just reward. If you don't like it leave.

gpf101 wrote: »

Why should they be crucified? Pay a share, of course. Pay a higher share than most, of course, but now people are almost turning them into demons and this suggestion public sector wages are capped at €100k is ludicrous in my opinion. It's an easy target this €100k thing and maybe for bankers and politicians that have a direct responsibility for the crash there is a case but it simply cannot be brought in as a sweeping measure.

Study is an aid to progression in life but should not be the only measure, you communicate as if it is the route to entitlement. If you want high wages go to the private sector. The public sector can't afford it.

Nonoperational

Well you can debate it all you want it simply will not happen. Even if the EU and IMF come in it won't happen. It's one of the most stupid suggestions I have ever heard.

Did it happen in Greece? Of course not. Cuts will be a %. Might be a bit higher for the higher paid but a cap of €100k is such a ridiculous, juvenile, ill thought out idea it doesn't deserve any more time wasted on it. Good luck. Come back and rub it in my face if it happens.

Amhran Nua

gpf101 wrote: »

We need top class people in health, education etc.

At what point do we stop getting top class people who are passionate about their work, and start getting average type people who just go for the highest paying jobs? You saw a lot of that in IT at the end of the 90s, people who had no business being in the field but who joined up anyway because that was where the money was. As odd as it sounds, excessive remuneration can in fact be counterproductive. The trick is in finding the right balance.

There should be no automatic assumption that highest paid = best.

Manach

With respect gpf101 , even if did theydeserve the 200K(which I'm sure some do), if the money is not there to pay and the private sector in Ireland is not exacting in hiring mode then they'd have little choice in the matter. Amhran Nua point about the IT industry is on the nose, being one of those people myself

Nonoperational

But you still can't think it's reasonable to cut someones wages in half? I agree there needs to be cuts and savings you'll get no argument from me there.