No public sector wage cuts or redundancies?

unkel

Is the government for real? Surely the IMF will resize the public sector both in numbers and in the wage and pensions bills?

According to the papers today, no public servant will get a wage cut and none is made redundant. Surely the croke park deal is null and void in these circumstances as per the dramatic changes clause?

Riskymove

apparantly the IMF team are happy with the Croke Park deal...for now...reviewed on a yearly basis for progress on savings

I'd expect further moves to reduce numbers in PS through continuation of current policies

RobbieTheRobber

unkel wrote: »

According to the papers today, no public servant will get a wage cut and none is made redundant. Surely the croke park deal is null and void in these circumstances as per the dramatic changes clause?

Is this causing you upset?

Will sacking Public servants fix the countries ills?

How does cutting public sector numbers help re-capitalise our banks?

adelcrowsmel

unkel wrote: »

Is the government for real? Surely the IMF will resize the public sector both in numbers and in the wage and pensions bills?

According to the papers today, no public servant will get a wage cut and none is made redundant. Surely the croke park deal is null and void in these circumstances as per the dramatic changes clause?

Where are you getting this from - seems like a fairly rash statement? Its saying in most of the papers how many jobs will go in the public sector. For eample see the Irish Independent article http://www.independent.ie/national-news/budget/news/27000-public-sector-staff-face-axe-and-pay-to-be-cut-by-euro1bn-2433053.html

ntlbell

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

Is this causing you upset?

Will sacking Public servants fix the countries ills?

How does cutting public sector numbers help re-capitalise our banks?

Why do they have to be sacked to save money?

We need to address the wage bill, that doesn't always mean job cuts.

Inquitus

ntlbell wrote: »

Why do they have to be sacked to save money?

We need to address the wage bill, that doesn't always mean job cuts.

It means cut pay, or cut jobs, or do a bit of both.

RobbieTheRobber

ntlbell wrote: »

Why do they have to be sacked to save money?

We need to address the wage bill, that doesn't always mean job cuts.

Well seeing as the title includes the word redundancies i assumed the OP was talking about reducing numbers, or is there another meaning to the word redundandcies I dont know of?

Riskymove

do we really need to re-start one of these threads now, we all know where it will end up

the plan is going to target public pay bill through reducing numbers, allbeit without compulsary ones for now and through hitting PS pensions in some way

ten pages of calling for paycuts and sackings and slagging PS off wont change that today

Riskymove

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

Well seeing as the title includes the word redundancies i assumed the OP was talking about reducing numbers, or is there another meaning to the word redundandcies I dont know of?

In his OP he says 'made redundant' the implication is clear imo

locomo

Our public service is still the highest paid in Europe, with the highest pensions. It would be absolutely astounding if the IMF comes in to a country and imposes further austerity measures on everyone else, , AND LENDS OVER 90,000,000,000 WHICH WILL BE EXPECTED TO BE REPAID BY OUR GRANDCHILDREN @ 5 or &% INTEREST PER YEAR, if they do not tackle the scandal of public service expenditure.
The goverment should set an example in the public service, by cutting their own wages / pensions and the wages / pensions of the top civil servants.

Riskymove

locomo wrote: »

Our public service ........ etc

well i guess we are gonna have one of those threads :rolleyes:

beeno67

ntlbell wrote: »

Why do they have to be sacked to save money?

We need to address the wage bill, that doesn't always mean job cuts.

Because it is easier and saves more money to cut jobs. If you take 300,000 public sector jobs earning 40K each. A 10% cut to everyones salary would save the country about €710 million a year. Cutting 10% of the workforce saves €965 million a year (excluding redundancy payments) with a lot less fuss.

Now obviously it depends where this 30,000 newly unemployed go. If they all go on the dole then obviously it will cost the government more.

sarumite

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

Is this causing you upset?

Will sacking Public servants fix the countries ills?

How does cutting public sector numbers help re-capitalise our banks?

Re-capitlasing the banks is a short term problem....our deficit is the real long term unsustainable problem. Reducing the cost of running the state will help with that.

RobbieTheRobber

locomo wrote: »

Our public service is still the highest paid in Europe, with the highest pensions. It would be absolutely astounding if the IMF comes in to a country and imposes further austerity measures on everyone else, , AND LENDS OVER 90,000,000,000 WHICH WILL BE EXPECTED TO BE REPAID BY OUR GRANDCHILDREN @ 5 or &% INTEREST PER YEAR, if they do not tackle the scandal of public service expenditure.
The goverment should set an example in the public service, by cutting their own wages / pensions and the wages / pensions of the top civil servants.

A couple of questions?
In your post you say the imf will impose austerity measures on everyone else, who is this everyone else?

Is this 90billion being loaned to pay public servants alone?

RobbieTheRobber

sarumite wrote: »

Re-capitlasing the banks is a short term problem....our deficit is the real long term unsustainable problem. Reducing the cost of running the state will help with that.

Ok so say we had, oh i dont know a four year plan to tackle our overspend (ignoring completely the re-capitalisation of banks) would the imf be here?


recapitalising our banks is short term Oh so after we re-capitalise them all the problems with them just fades away does it?

westtip

locomo wrote: »

Our public service is still the highest paid in Europe, with the highest pensions. It would be absolutely astounding if the IMF comes in to a country and imposes further austerity measures on everyone else, , AND LENDS OVER 90,000,000,000 WHICH WILL BE EXPECTED TO BE REPAID BY OUR GRANDCHILDREN @ 5 or &% INTEREST PER YEAR, if they do not tackle the scandal of public service expenditure.
The goverment should set an example in the public service, by cutting their own wages / pensions and the wages / pensions of the top civil servants.

+1 spot on loco but no point going on about it here - as another poster said we know where the thread will go. The L'oreal attitude in our Public sector will continue - because we're worth. They are not, you know that I know that - even they know that. It is not criticism of our PS workers Bertie has much to blame - when he had the gillette free men in for social partnership "negotiations" they would say jump and he would say how high. Fair play to the gillette free wonder boys I know I am not allowed to use the B word, so there you go - they got a GREAT DEAL for their members, we will struggle through next year, more people will emigrate, crime rate will go up, the only people eating out in the surviving Bistro's will be PS workers and the grey ex PS workers enjoying ludicrously high pensions. There are now two working classes in Ireland: The upper class public sector workers and the rest of us outside that protected world. I am jsut sorry I did not get on the gravy train of public sector years ago - who would have envisaged the PS being the priveliged classes of Ireland.

Theboinkmaster

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

Is this causing you upset?

Will sacking Public servants fix the countries ills?

How does cutting public sector numbers help re-capitalise our banks?

Nothing to do with the banks - we're borrowing to pay public sector wages so we need to cut the wage bill. There are only 2 ways to go this:

1) pay cuts
2) reduced numbers

IMO it should be a combination of both - offer early retirement etc and across the board pay cuts.

Who caused the mess, who deserves cuts etc is entirely irrelevant - it's just simple mathematics. 50Bn out 30Bn in = cut 20Bn over the next 3 years.

beeno67

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

A couple of questions?
In your post you say the imf will impose austerity measures on everyone else, who is this everyone else?

Is this 90billion being loaned to pay public servants alone?

Well at current rates it would only fund public sector pay for the next 6 years.

sarumite

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

Ok so say we had, oh i dont know a four year plan to tackle our overspend (ignoring completely the re-capitalisation of banks) would the imf be here?

A credible four year plan that the economists believed would work....or the one offered by the government?

RobbieTheRobber

sarumite wrote: »

A credible four year plan that the economists believed would work....or the one offered by the government?

Does the IMF not consist of economists?

Loads of hard working and eager temps and contract workers in the PS will no doubt be culled, while folks there years who do close to f all and do a bad job of it are safe as houses on their bloated benchmarked salaries.

RobbieTheRobber

Theboinkmaster wrote: »

Nothing to do with the banks - we're borrowing to pay public sector wages so we need to cut the wage bill.

:D:D

your gas

http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/1124/imf-business.html

Edit: i stole this link from a thread on this forum
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/1124/1224284024467.html

tunney

year #1: Tax increases, SW cuts, Min wage cuts
year #2: Tax increases, SW cuts, Min wage cuts
year #3: Tax increases, SW cuts, Min wage cuts, savage PS cuts in pay and pensions. PS go to protest, no support at all.
year #4: Tax increases, SW cuts, Min wage cuts, PS cuts

beeno67

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

:D:D

your gas

http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/1124/imf-business.html

The banks cost less in the long term. Over the next 10 years, (if not cut) public sector pay & pensions will cost close to €150 Billion. This is way more than the banks would cost.

Theboinkmaster

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

:D:D

your gas

http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/1124/imf-business.html

What's your point? Whilst linked, the government current expenditure deficit is an entirely separate issue to the recapitalisation of the banks.

That €20Bn has to be closed and if the EU/IMF are providing the funding they have every right to insist on austerity measures in the public sector. Without them public sector employees will get their payslips one day but no money in their bank accounts :rolleyes:

maxximus

There is a lot of seething on this forum over the imf/eu decision not to cut ps pay.

The anti ps brigade begrudgers thought that imf/eu would cut and now that they have decided that the cp agreement is sufficient these people are truly sickened.

The imf/eu have obviously looked at everything and know a lot more than the posters on here, so accept their decision.

Theboinkmaster

tunney wrote: »

year #1: Tax increases, SW cuts, Min wage cuts
year #2: Tax increases, SW cuts, Min wage cuts
year #3: Tax increases, SW cuts, Min wage cuts, savage PS cuts in pay and pensions. PS go to protest, no support at all.
year #4: Tax increases, SW cuts, Min wage cuts, PS cuts

I don't agree - the EU/IMF are smart economists. Year 1 will have the sharpest tax increases but the other years will have alot less, just tweaking. As as an economist they know there's a breaking point whereby it becomes a disincentive to work etc.

Also there's no way they'll leave the PS pay until 3 years just no way. It will be mid 2011 at the latest IMO.

I do agree on the SW and min wage though - will be probably done in just 2 phases I'd imagine, not every year - they'll need time to see the effect of each reduction.

RobbieTheRobber

beeno67 wrote: »

The banks cost less in the long term. Over the next 10 years, (if not cut) public sector pay & pensions will cost close to €150 Billion. This is way more than the banks would cost.

Yes but over the next ten years the banks would not be providing any services to the state, which i think you might find the public services do.

unless AIB/anglo/boi et al, are going to clean streets educate children maintain hospitals insure tax revenue is collected bla bla bla bla bla


Anyway I give up, im not going to argue with people who will insist the banks have done nothing wrong and the only problem is our public services. :rolleyes:

RobbieTheRobber

beeno67 wrote: »

The banks cost less in the long term. Over the next 10 years, (if not cut) public sector pay & pensions will cost close to €150 Billion. This is way more than the banks would cost.

The problem isnt the long term, its the short term capital crisis, which has been created by the banking failure.

I feel like im a record stuck in a loop here, if we sack all public servants with no severence pay, we are still left with the major crisis which is the banking failure.
I cant believe there are so many people who are so anti public servants that they refuse to accept this.

Theboinkmaster

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

The problem isnt the long term, its the short term capital crisis, which has been created by the banking failure.

I feel like im a record stuck in a loop here, if we sack all public servants with no severence pay, we are still left with the major crisis which is the banking failure.
I cant believe there are so many people who are so anti public servants that they refuse to accept this.

I think you're misinterpreting what people are saying mate. Nobody is denying the problem of the banking crises - it needs to be fixed yes.

But the public sector pay is another huge problem, billions of € each year - and this needs to be corrected ASAP.

This thread's about public sector pay and is nothing to do with the banking crises.

They're 2 different issues, but because you cannot argue your points in favour of the PS you're dragging the banks into it. Very clever that, you nearly had us fooled. Almost :pac:

danbohan

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

The problem isnt the long term, its the short term capital crisis, which has been created by the banking failure.

I feel like im a record stuck in a loop here, if we sack all public servants with no severence pay, we are still left with the major crisis which is the banking failure.
I cant believe there are so many people who are so anti public servants that they refuse to accept this.

of course people accept that the banking crisis is at the heart of our problems ,what people cant accept is the inability of public servants shown time and again on these forums to grasp the reality of our situation and to accept that fundamental change and restructuring in the public service is absolutely essential. Irish society is not anti public service , yet , but if our politicians fail to restructure it while screwing everybody else that may change

adcom

locomo wrote: »

Our public service is still the highest paid in Europe, with the highest pensions......

Yawn. only half informed again. Parrotting out things that have been in the indo (which may i divert a bit- is still telling people to buy property).

The point which has been made countless times before is- Ireland have one of the highest costs of living in Europe.

I could probably go on but honestly Im tired of this public v private fight.:(

maxximus

Theboinkmaster wrote: »

I think you're misinterpreting what people are saying mate. Nobody is denying the problem of the banking crises - it needs to be fixed yes.

But the public sector pay is another huge problem, billions of € each year - and this needs to be corrected ASAP

Well the imf/eu have decided that it doesn't need to be corrected so can you now accept that?

dreenman

unkel wrote: »

Is the government for real? Surely the IMF will resize the public sector both in numbers and in the wage and pensions bills?

According to the papers today, no public servant will get a wage cut and none is made redundant. Surely the croke park deal is null and void in these circumstances as per the dramatic changes clause?

According to the papers???!!! The Irish press have been as accurate as a ministers statement or a Dept of Finance forecast!

Anyway tinkering with the public sector is not going to stem the haemorrhaging of cash from the state into the banking system. You could scrap the entire public service then maybe just maybe the tax revenue be just enough to cover interest on the bailouts ... oh except there would be no means of collecting the tax as you've just scrapped the public service! See we can all be silly. By the way I'm in the private sector.

droidus

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

The problem isnt the long term, its the short term capital crisis, which has been created by the banking failure.

I feel like im a record stuck in a loop here, if we sack all public servants with no severence pay, we are still left with the major crisis which is the banking failure.
I cant believe there are so many people who are so anti public servants that they refuse to accept this.

They're scared, and they want someone else to be cut instead of them. Mix that fear with a healthy dose ignorance and a pinch of hate and this is what you get.

Of course, the fact that massive PS pay cuts or redundancies would probably destroy the economy, that the cuts themselves are doomed to failure (as they have failed for the last few years) and that even with massive cuts the banking crisis will still drag us down doesn't enter into it. Cuthulu could be rising from the depths and the nukes could be flying overhead but some of the posters here would still be calling for PS cuts as the solution to all our problems.

RobbieTheRobber

Theboinkmaster wrote: »

They're 2 different issues, but because you cannot argue your points in favour of the PS you're dragging the banks into it. Very clever that, you nearly had us fooled. Almost :pac:

This thread is about IMF forced cuts to PS staff, the IMf are here becasue of the banking crisis, seperating them and discusing them in isolation serves no purpose............. Oh unless you just want to moan about how lazy/overpaid/incompentent bla bla bla public sector workers are

RobbieTheRobber

danbohan wrote: »

of course people accept that the banking crisis is at the heart of our problems ,what people cant accept is the inability of public servants shown time and again on these forums to grasp the reality of our situation and to accept that fundamental change and restructuring in the public service is absolutely essential. Irish society is not anti public service , yet , but if our politicians fail to restructure it while screwing everybody else that may change

Who is this everybody else?
Who?
Are public servants not also members of this state or we considered as seperate entities?

unkel

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

Is this causing you upset?

Will sacking Public servants fix the countries ills?

The public sector payroll and pensions bill is too high, the states income is simply not high enough any more (nor will it be in the next few years) to pay this bill.

I suggest a proper benchmarking session this time, at the end of which all our public sector workers would earn EU average wages and pensions and the total public sector would be EU average for a country of our size. Fair enough?

And yes, I'd wager that would go a long way towards fixing this countries ills. I'd wager it would save €5-10 billion per year

Beans_On

slightly off topic but...
it concerns me what way would forced redundancy in public/civil service likely to be implemented (if ever implemented)?

I presume its likely to be the usual... Last in - First out.

does anyone know what way they are planning on doing it in UK public service forced redundancy?

maxximus

unkel wrote: »

The public sector payroll and pensions bill is too high, the states income is simply not high enough any more (nor will it be in the next few years) to pay this bill.

I suggest a proper benchmarking session this time, at the end of which all our public sector workers would earn EU average wages and pensions and the total public sector would be EU average for a country of our size. Fair enough?

And yes, I'd wager that would go a long way towards fixing this countries ills. I'd wager it would save €5-10 billion per year

Unkel, has this not been done to death ? The imf/eu have obviously decided that the cp agreement is sufficient as it stands , can people not accept this ?

People were baying for blood on here for months on end wishing the imf would come in and sort our public sector out once and for all.:rolleyes:

They have made their decision , so wagers and suggestions are off the table , lets accept their decisions and move on.

RobbieTheRobber

Beans_On wrote: »

slightly off topic but...
it concerns me what way would forced redundancy in public/civil service likely to be implemented (if ever implemented)?

I presume its likely to be the usual... Last in - First out.

does anyone know what way they are planning on doing it in UK public service forced redundancy?

as far as i know they offer redundancy and if there is not enough uptake they then look at other options.

As far as the brits culls go, they are following something very similiar to the irish model for cuts, while they came out and said they were cutting x number of Ps staff most of those loses will come through...wait for it, wait for it........ natural wastage!

martian1980

maxximus wrote: »

Unkel, has this not been done to death ? The imf/eu have obviously decided that the cp agreement is sufficient as it stands , can people not accept this ?

People were baying for blood on here for months on end wishing the imf would come in and sort our public sector out once and for all.:rolleyes:

They have made their decision , so wagers and suggestions are off the table , lets accept their decisions and move on.

very true. Still, at least the mob on here got a few days glee from jmayo's "source" that there were to be 30% wage cuts across the public service.

maninasia

Riskymove wrote: »

do we really need to re-start one of these threads now, we all know where it will end up

the plan is going to target public pay bill through reducing numbers, allbeit without compulsary ones for now and through hitting PS pensions in some way

ten pages of calling for paycuts and sackings and slagging PS off wont change that today

This issue has been debated to death. Yet the elephant in the room remains.

martian1980

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

as far as i know they offer redundancy and if there is not enough uptake they then look at other options.

As far as the brits culls go, they are following something very similiar to the irish model for cuts, while they came out and said they were cutting x number of Ps staff most of those loses will come through...wait for it, wait for it........ natural wastage!

And there have been no paycuts in the UK either

maxximus

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

And here we have the real problem too much time reading the sindo or some other pro government anti ps tripe has left you willing to de-humanise ps workers.

Absolute crap and on that point i now know you have nothing valid for me to reply to!

I agree 100% robbie , i am a long time lurker here and the anti ps bile on here is an absolute disgrace , last week there was a thread on here labelling some ps workers as killers with blood on their hands , it is truly shocking stuff on here at times .

Theboinkmaster

maxximus wrote: »

Well the imf/eu have decided that it doesn't need to be corrected so can you now accept that?

How do you know the IMF/EU have decided that?! where's your source?

I very much doubt it. They will tear the Croke Park agreement to shreds.

Buford T Justice

unkel wrote: »

Is the government for real? Surely the IMF will resize the public sector both in numbers and in the wage and pensions bills?

According to the papers today, no public servant will get a wage cut and none is made redundant. Surely the croke park deal is null and void in these circumstances as per the dramatic changes clause?

Does it really matter what the government plans are at this stage? Their days are numbered, and FG have a clear mandate that they want to reform the PS, and so on and so forth. Won't they just bring about these changes anyway once they become the new government, and lets face it, its extremely likely.

martian1980

Theboinkmaster wrote: »

How do you know the IMF/EU have decided that?! where's your source?

I very much doubt it. They will tear the Croke Park agreement to shreds.

the fact that the 4 year plan has to be rubber stamped by the EU/IMF

Theboinkmaster

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

This thread is about IMF forced cuts to PS staff, the IMf are here becasue of the banking crisis, seperating them and discusing them in isolation serves no purpose............. Oh unless you just want to moan about how lazy/overpaid/incompentent bla bla bla public sector workers are

serves no purpose for you, tring to defend overpaid PS employees? you're trying to move the thread off-topic to support you lack of an argument.

Yes IMF are here largely because of the banks, but so what? We still are running a 20Bn current expenditure deficit which needs to be corrected - hence PS cuts.

unkel

maxximus wrote: »

Unkel, has this not been done to death ? The imf/eu have obviously decided that the cp agreement is sufficient as it stands , can people not accept this ?

No I can't accept that all the poorest, most vulnerable people have to pay the price of budget cuts. Social welfare is cut by 5%, the minimum wage is cut by 12% and grossly overpaid and over numbered public sector workers are left with their overinflated salaries?

Can people not accept that our public sector workers are paid way too much compared to public sector workers in other EU countries? Can people not accept this is no longer sustainable?

maxximus

martian1980 wrote: »

the fact that the 4 year plan has to be rubber stamped by the EU/IMF

^^^^^^^^^ that pretty much says so !