How much will PS pay be cut by ?

Rabidlamb

It's looking increasingly likely that the hammer is going to fall somewhere between PS pay & the SW budget.
Most people would agree that personal taxation has reached the point of diminishing returns & further increases will only encourage non-compliance.

My question is simple as it is brutal, how much will PS pay be cut by & how will it be staggered ?.

OMD

Rabidlamb wrote: »

It's looking increasingly likely that the hammer is going to fall somewhere between PS pay & the SW budget.
Most people would agree that personal taxation has reached the point of diminishing returns & further increases will only encourage non-compliance.

My question is simple as it is brutal, how much will PS pay be cut by & how will it be staggered ?.

It won't be cut at all.

dan_d

Don't know, we'll have to just wait and see. Patience being a virtue and all that...

I could hypothesise but there's no point. It'll inevitably degenerate into a mud-slinging, public vs private match.

RichardAnd

It will be cut and I think only the most deluded and sheltered civil servant doesn't see that coming.

I don't think a blanket cut is what's needed though. Some of the lower paying public service jobs aren't much different from private sector positions of the same type in terms of pay. An administrator new to the PS would be getting about 22-25k a year which is similar to a private admin worker.

What is needed is a top down review and audit but I'm wise enough to know this probably won't happen. I'd say up to 10% across the board in addition to saving possible fromt he CPA. There will be strikes, there will be a few weeks of hassel but this isn't an issue that's going to go away so the sooner it's tackled, the better.

I just hope this can be done without any civil servants loosing their jobs.

Tipp Man

You'd be hoping for 15-20% but it is more likely to be in the 10% region, anything less is hardly worth the hastle

Welfare and social handouts need to be dramatically reduced as well

jimmycrackcorm

At the moment the issue is being raised to put pressure on the PS to implement cost saving reforms seeing as it is a couple of years now since the negotiations began on the CPA; I say "began" because the unions have been stretching out the period.

Even David Begg was on Vinnie making the point about the CPA only recently being agreed and that there hasn't been time to reform since.

There's no point in cutting PS pay.

Many get annual increments every year anyway

paddy0090

No optimisim? Finally.

It hasn't been cut that much as PS unions say it has. The pension levy is just a tax on income that you've been getting away with for years. The courts defined it as income already earned so it's only right that you pay tax on it. Even the tax breaks have been closed.

Benifits in the private sector have been treated this way since 2003.

Anyway I don't think pay will be cut, I think it will be numbers that are cut. There's a lot of quangos that have out lived there usefulness e.g Office of Tobaaco Control - job done. And we're so far off where we'd like to be that demand for some public services is dramatically down e.g Health and safety inspectors, Council architects and engineers.

The reason I don't think it will be a pay cut is because they've been pushing the PS in this direction with talk of reform and productivity gains. The logical conclusion of reform is to remove the parts of the process you don't need. So the government want more done with less overheads/staff.

It would be nice if they could do it in a manner that's fair and doesn't affect services. But ask yourself do you really belive that with so many politicians and unions fighting it out that this will be the end game. Anyone optimisitic?

irishh_bob

Rabidlamb wrote: »

It's looking increasingly likely that the hammer is going to fall somewhere between PS pay & the SW budget.
Most people would agree that personal taxation has reached the point of diminishing returns & further increases will only encourage non-compliance.

My question is simple as it is brutal, how much will PS pay be cut by & how will it be staggered ?.

the only thing you can be absolute sure of at the next budget is that the OAP wont be cut , politicans have absolute cover from the public not to touch that sacred cow

irishh_bob

paddy0090 wrote: »

No optimisim? Finally.

It hasn't been cut that much as PS unions say it has. The pension levy is just a tax on income that you've been getting away with for years. The courts defined it as income already earned so it's only right that you pay tax on it. Even the tax breaks have been closed.

Benifits in the private sector have been treated this way since 2003.

Anyway I don't think pay will be cut, I think it will be numbers that are cut. There's a lot of quangos that have out lived there usefulness e.g Office of Tobaaco Control - job done. And we're so far off where we'd like to be that demand for some public services is dramatically down e.g Health and safety inspectors, Council architects and engineers.

The reason I don't think it will be a pay cut is because they've been pushing the PS in this direction with talk of reform and productivity gains. The logical conclusion of reform is to remove the parts of the process you don't need. So the government want more done with less overheads/staff.

It would be nice if they could do it in a manner that's fair and doesn't affect services. But ask yourself do you really belive that with so many politicians and unions fighting it out that this will be the end game. Anyone optimisitic?

a lot of the QUANGO,s are professional hand ringers and talking shops of sorts but outfit which allows politicans to outsource descisions and responsibilitys will not be gotten rid off too quickly

ShowMeTheCash

I think the PS wage over the next few years will decrease by 30% plus. And i understand this might sound extreme but consider this.

Irish doctors and specialists are paid twice as much as their counterparts in Germany, Irish nurses are the 4th highest paid in the OECD. Our politicians are among he highest paid on the planet. Teachers are paid 15% more than the average in the OECD.

Now we are a kick in the pants away from defaulting on our bail out (Which we will default on), Greece have resorted to basically auctioning off airports and other public assets.

At the moment we are borrowing money to sustain our unsustainable economy, something needs to break soon!!

Raskolnikov

Health accounts for the lions share of public spending, so realistically, it will have to take a lot of cuts. The HSE already intends on cutting 5,000 administrative and support staff from the 28,000 in that group. That still leaves about 80,000 care giving staff, it's inevitable that we will lose quite a few doctors and nurses out of this. I can actually see centralisation as well with facilities. Quite a few hospitals would close, or have services moved. Dublin could probably lose the likes of Tallaght and Cappagh Hospital. Other regional hospitals could be closed (Drogheda, Mallow, Sligo, South Infimary in Cork, etc). We could probably also remove things like cancer services from Waterford and Limerick, moving them to Cork or Galway.

Education also takes a huge chunk of spending, although with class size so big, it would be another hard sector to cut in. I belive the average class size in Ireland is in the mid-twenties, we would probably need to look at bring that up to about the 30 mark, although it would be inevitable that some schools could end up with class sizes of upto 40.

hmmm

I can't see any PS pay cuts with Labour in power. They will try and cut the bill by offering a large voluntary redundancy program that we can't afford. When that fails the government will fall as the only alternative is paycuts.

ParkRunner

The health insurance is gone, the digital tv is gone, holidays are a distant memory, cycling is the preferred method of transport etc. Public servants have already been grabbed by the ankles, turned upside down and any spare change which fell out of the trouser pockets has been taken away. All that is left is for the trousers themselves to be taken away!

paddy0090

EF wrote: »

The health insurance is gone, the digital tv is gone, holidays are a distant memory, cycling is the preferred method of transport etc. Public servants have already been grabbed by the ankles, turned upside down and any spare change which fell out of the trouser pockets has been taken away. All that is left is for the trousers themselves to be taken away!

1)Not that many people could afford health insurance to begin with. Anyway it's coming back and it's going to be mandatory.;)

2)Distant? How distant? 1,2,3 years?:rolleyes:

3)Did they take the etc. out of the trousers as well. Also if you find Public transport too expensive maybe you should look at the pantsless public transport unions.:mad:

Flashgordon197

Rabidlamb wrote: »

It's looking increasingly likely that the hammer is going to fall somewhere between PS pay & the SW budget.
Most people would agree that personal taxation has reached the point of diminishing returns & further increases will only encourage non-compliance.

My question is simple as it is brutal, how much will PS pay be cut by & how will it be staggered ?.

Why did you start this thread? A bit sadistic is it not? As for taxation reaching its limit--it has not. Even if you paid Public sector workers nothing-you would still have to increase taxes. Property water etc vague statements like "Most people agree" cuts no ice with the IMF-increased taxes are in the four year plan agreed with the IMF-I dont think you have read it. Am I right?

Rabidlamb

Flashgordon197 wrote: »

Why did you start this thread? A bit sadistic is it not?

Too many existing threads just being vehicles for PS bashing.
I wanted some debate on the actual size of the cuts & the resulting savings to the exchequer.

Flashgordon197 wrote: »

As for taxation reaching its limit--it has not. Even if you paid Public sector workers nothing-you would still have to increase taxes.

PAYE tax has been pushed as far as they dare go, anything further will suffer from the law of diminishing returns.
The tax take so far this year is already below it's projection.
Remember the 80's & the prevalence of the black economy.
I've had to resort to "cash jobs" recently just to stay competitive.

Flashgordon197 wrote: »

Property water etc vague statements like "Most people agree" cuts no ice with the IMF-increased taxes are in the four year plan agreed with the IMF-I dont think you have read it. Am I right?

Stealth taxes & rates are sure to be introduced/increased, I agree.
The IMF don't care how the gap is closed, the program can be altered as long as the targets are met.

Finally a question, how do you see us closing the €20 billion deficit ?.

Delancey

At the very least the Government could freeze increments for a period of , say , 3 years - that would be a start.

Agree that a cull of the quangoes is sorely needed - I think this small country of ours has something like close to a dozen regional fisheries boards for example.

Godge

Because of the pension levy and also because of pension contributions as well as the USC and tax, there are very few public servants that are not contributing over 60% of their top decile income to the Exchequer. What I mean by that is if you cut public sector pay, you are cutting the part of the salary that at the marginal rate is being taxed at over 60%. Therefore for every 1bn cut in public service pay, the net saving is 400m. Out of that net saving of 400m, you can factor in diminished VAT receipts.


All of the above is not to say that public service wages won't be cut - it is just to say that there is little value to the Exchequer in doing so. However, pensioners don't pay a lot of tax. Change the rules to make social welfare payments subject to tax and the balance of advantage also changes.

Delancey

Godge wrote: »

Change the rules to make social welfare payments subject to tax and the balance of advantage also changes.

The maximum amount a person in receipt of Job Seekers Allowance gets is 188 Euro a week. The minimum wage is significantly above that - are you seriously suggesting that people on 188 a week ( that assumes they qualify for the full payment ) should be taxed on that ?

ShowMeTheCash

Godge wrote: »

Because of the pension levy and also because of pension contributions as well as the USC and tax, there are very few public servants that are not contributing over 60% of their top decile income to the Exchequer. What I mean by that is if you cut public sector pay, you are cutting the part of the salary that at the marginal rate is being taxed at over 60%. Therefore for every 1bn cut in public service pay, the net saving is 400m. Out of that net saving of 400m, you can factor in diminished VAT receipts.


All of the above is not to say that public service wages won't be cut - it is just to say that there is little value to the Exchequer in doing so. However, pensioners don't pay a lot of tax. Change the rules to make social welfare payments subject to tax and the balance of advantage also changes.

I think the pure mathematics of this is is flawed!

1. Civil servants that are already paying 60% I think show how far from reality the PS worker are from where they need to be.
2. I think social welfare is very high in this country, but we have basically over priced everything making it impossible for anyone to get buy on anything less.

End of the day public services cost money, it will come down to what we can afford, the money pot is now gone without pay cuts we will see mass closers of failures of public sector bodies.

femur61

Its like a cyber sport PS bashing. Personally, should be cut and reforms. Most in PS have no incentives like in the private sector. Job for life literally destroys them, they have a mantra "we work hard" newsflash so do the private sector and if they don't the company they work for will close or if self employed = no job.

sarumite

Godge wrote: »

Because of the pension levy and also because of pension contributions as well as the USC and tax, there are very few public servants that are not contributing over 60% of their top decile income to the Exchequer.

Neither the pension levy nor contributions are contributing to the exchequer. They are contributing towards your nest egg for retirement....along with a an approx. further 9% contribution from your employer.

Flashgordon197

Rabidlamb wrote: »

Too many existing threads just being vehicles for PS bashing.
I wanted some debate on the actual size of the cuts & the resulting savings to the exchequer.



PAYE tax has been pushed as far as they dare go, anything further will suffer from the law of diminishing returns.
The tax take so far this year is already below it's projection.
Remember the 80's & the prevalence of the black economy.
I've had to resort to "cash jobs" recently just to stay competitive.



Stealth taxes & rates are sure to be introduced/increased, I agree.
The IMF don't care how the gap is closed, the program can be altered as long as the targets are met.

Finally a question, how do you see us closing the €20 billion deficit ?.

You asked me a question and I will answer it. The truth is nobody knows exactly how the 18 billion (it aint 20) deficit will be bridged as its dependant on so many factors-rate of interest, economic growth etc but I think the four year pplan (which I have read parts ) outlines the following areas
1. Cutting public sector numbers- I personally favour mandatory redundancies rather than voluntary as I really dont see why I should take a pay cut again,lose my home -while we have excess staff. I think the Government hopes to lose 20,000 plus jobs but Im unsure of the figure and despite howlin's howling-I dont think he has a clue either .
2. A property tax of some sort/asset tax-there still is a huge amount of wealth in this nation and every EU nation bar us has one but politically this is tricky in Ireland
3.Water charges
4 Ending or lowering of tax write offs ie pension write off from 40% to 20 % Because of pension levy this would amount to a pay cut again for public sector if you know anything about the levy. BTW I always paid for mine(pension)
6 Cutting quangos
7 Cutting Welfare/Child benefit
8. Selling some state assets.

Anyway all of the above is in the four year plan but its much much easier to just follow what the Media have been feeding everyone and attack salaries. Dont get me wrong even with all this you might still need pay cuts but its telling that threads like this pop up all the time-stating the 'necessity' of pay cuts as if these people had the national interest in mind when I know that its really their own pockets and these people (including yourself) never reveal any pay cuts they had or their circumstances but yet feel free to discus those of others.

If we are all in this together then everyone needs to know where you are coming from-the Im a taxpayer doesn't do it for me. I pay through the nose for most things the private sector creates so your costs, wages are as relevant to me as mine are to you. High food Doctors mechanics carpenters plumbers you name it.

I wont be back on this thread as its like ground hog day here-Im just tired of telling people the basic facts-ie we have a plan(albeit a semi perfect one) ,its open to adjustment by the IMF but at least look at it first rather than following the line of Tony O'Reilly. I wish you well.

deise blue

Labour party in Government & Unions capable of paralysingly the country = no pay cuts but an increasing focus on Croke Park savings.

Flashgordon197

sarumite wrote: »

Neither the pension levy nor contributions are contributing to the exchequer. They are contributing towards your nest egg for retirement....along with a an approx. further 9% contribution from your employer.

This sort of nonsense above is why any rational public servant should steer clear of these threads-there is no public sector pension fund. The pension levy was to bridge gap in deficit-nothing else-despite its title and only someone living in a cave the last few years would think otherwise.All public sector pensions are paid out of current expenditure. The much discussed pension reserve fund is for the old age pension-which public servants dont get.

Tipp Man

deise blue wrote: »

Labour party in Government & Unions capable of paralysingly the country = no pay cuts but an increasing focus on Croke Park savings.

Paralyising the country for how long, a couple of days?? (bar maybe the ESB)

I think there is absolutley NO fear in the general public of the country being paralysed. The only thing that would do is build even more determination in people to see the public sector costs agressively reduced

sarumite

Flashgordon197 wrote: »

This sort of nonsense above is why any rational public servant should steer clear of these threads-there is no public sector pension fund. The pension levy was to bridge gap in deficit-nothing else-despite its title and only someone living in a cave the last few years would think otherwise.All public sector pensions are paid out of current expenditure. The much discussed pension reserve fund is for the old age pension-which public servants dont get.

The pension levy was to bridge a gap between the amount of money paid into pensions and the amount of money being withdrawn pensions. In otherwords the pension was underfunded. The pension levy should have been brought in during benchmarking. There is nothing rational about saying that contributing to my penions fund is contributing to the exchequer as was claimed, thats false assertion.

RobbieTheRobber

sarumite wrote: »

Neither the pension levy nor contributions are contributing to the exchequer. They are contributing towards your nest egg for retirement....along with a an approx. further 9% contribution from your employer.

Thats not true though is it, pensions are paid out of the current funds any pension contributions PS make go straight back into the excehequer not into some pension fund!

deise blue

Tipp Man wrote: »

Paralyising the country for how long, a couple of days?? (bar maybe the ESB)

I think there is absolutley NO fear in the general public of the country being paralysed. The only thing that would do is build even more determination in people to see the public sector costs agressively reduced

What on earth relevance does the ESB have to this discussion.

The ESB is a semi state operation which has suffered no pay cuts !

What I am referring to is targeted industrial action by teachers , firemen , nurses , council workers etc .

RobbieTheRobber

deise blue wrote: »

What on earth relevance does the ESB have to this discussion.

The ESB is a semi state operation which has suffered no pay cuts !

What I am referring to is targeted industrial action by teachers , firemen , nurses , council workers etc .

What do you mean by targeted?

johnn

Half it at least hopefully, and they should scrap the dole imho, people may consider doing an honest days work then :rolleyes:

Tipp Man

deise blue wrote: »

What on earth relevance does the ESB have to this discussion.

The ESB is a semi state operation which has suffered no pay cuts !

What I am referring to is targeted industrial action by teachers , firemen , nurses , council workers etc .

People don't really give a damn who goes on strike, it can't and won't cripply the country as ye are just not quite as important as ye like to think

The ESB reference was to show that a widespread blackout could actually cripple the country. See the difference

Pharaoh1

My recollection is that the Budget in Dec 09 cut both PS pay and Social Welfare rates and the Budget in Dec 2010 again cut Social Welfare rates but not PS pay rates.(although PS pensions were reduced)
It did of course increase income tax for everyone through the bands/credits adjustment and the USC.
It is difficult to see how welfare rates could be cut again with PS pay left untouched. I would imagine there would have to be some reductions even if these were limited to the upper segment.

deise blue

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

What do you mean by targeted?

In the event of industrial action I believe the Unions will establish a contingency fund which will enable frontline employees to strike without suffering a major impact on their pay .

I think we will see a series of rolling strikes - teachers one week followed by nurses , ambulances drivers , fire services etc. at different intervals.

This contingency fund would be funded by the Public Sector as a whole with contributions from all unions & sympathetic members of the public.

deise blue

Tipp Man wrote: »

People don't really give a damn who goes on strike, it can't and won't cripply the country as ye are just not quite as important as ye like to think

The ESB reference was to show that a widespread blackout could actually cripple the country. See the difference

Less of the " ye " - I've worked all my life in the Private Sector.

You really shouldn't work on the basis that because someone disagrees with you on Public Sector matters that they are naturally Public Sector employees .

RobbieTheRobber

deise blue wrote: »

In the event of industrial action I believe the Unions will establish a contingency fund which will enable frontline employees to strike without suffering a major impact on their pay .

I think we will see a series of rolling strikes - teachers one week followed by nurses , ambulances drivers , fire services etc. at different intervals.

This contingency fund would be funded by the Public Sector as a whole with contributions from all unions & sympathetic members of the public.

To be honest i think that is highly unlikely.

It sounds like the sort of thing people would say when they are trying to scare people about a certain group of people within society.

Have you any evidence to back up this belief or even any reason to think such is likely, or is this just your own nightmare scenario?

Silvio.Dante

danbohan wrote: »

ogh god is it ? , i am going for counselling tomorrow . i have to start loving esb workers, on average salary of 75k per year and realise that while the rest of the country ie the private sector is spiraling deeper and deeper into recession these lovely s and their friends in other semi states and the public sector must not have their salary's cut or their jobs cut and must be allowed to strike with impunity to maintain their status quo even if it means finally sinking this old ship

Well you won't be pointing your Luger at us CPSU members who don't even earn half of that lotto figure of €75K...

th3 s1aught3r

It should be cut by about 20%. I just fear that the PS Unions will kick up such a stink that the governemnt will be afraid to cut it by much and would prefer to increase tax, less hassle

RobbieTheRobber

th3 s1aught3r wrote: »

It should be cut by about 20%. I just fear that the PS Unions will kick up such a stink that the governemnt will be afraid to cut it by much and would prefer to increase tax, less hassle

The cuts to PS wages of 20% your proposing is that inclusive of any changes to tax?

Or are you suggesting a further 20% cut to wages plus any additional tax that the state introduces?

Silvio.Dante

th3 s1aught3r wrote: »

It should be cut by about 20%. I just fear that the PS Unions will kick up such a stink that the governemnt will be afraid to cut it by much and would prefer to increase tax, less hassle

And far more equitable once the tax changes are progressive...

Jaysoose

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

Well you won't be pointing your Luger at us CPSU members who don't even earn half of that lotto figure of €75K...

You speak for all the CPSU members now do you? Its been said before if you want to earn more money then get the skills required to get a better paid job. You cant hold up your wages and say "look im low paid everyone feel sorry for me" you get paid what your skills are worth and thats nobody's fault but yours.

bamboozle

obviously people earning least should be affected least by cuts, if it were me i would not touch salaries under 50k, i would cut income between 51-99k by 10% and i would cut income over 100k by 50%.

Irrespective of cutting salaries, waste needs to be eradicated, how this person was able to swan about for 5 years claiming a state salary is unbelievable


http://www.independent.ie/national-news/civil-servant-claims-she-was-stalked-during-gallery-visits-2624438.html

Silvio.Dante

Jaysoose wrote: »

You speak for all the CPSU members now do you? Its been said before if you want to earn more money then get the skills required to get a better paid job. You cant hold up your wages and say "look im low paid everyone feel sorry for me" you get paid what your skills are worth and thats nobody's fault but yours.

Just don't come sniffing after my meagre earnings dude or I might bite...

Jaysoose

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

Just don't come sniffing after my meagre earnings dude or I might bite...

Bite away there will be plenty of people happy to take over your position, if you cant see that your stance is ludicrous then i genuinely feel sorry for you.

You have had increments paid to you during all this insulating your from the cuts and your still not happy, your living in dreamworld.

RobbieTheRobber

bamboozle wrote: »

obviously people earning least should be affected least by cuts, if it were me i would not touch salaries under 50k, i would cut income between 51-99k by 10% and i would cut income over 100k by 50%.

Irrespective of cutting salaries, waste needs to be eradicated, how this person was able to swan about for 5 years claiming a state salary is unbelievable


http://www.independent.ie/national-news/civil-servant-claims-she-was-stalked-during-gallery-visits-2624438.html

Nice sweeping statements.

No cuts under 50k ok

but a person on 99k gets a 10% cut

89.1K after cuts

but the person who earns 101k in your world now earns 50.5k.

System is broken.

Tipp Man

deise blue wrote: »

Less of the " ye " - I've worked all my life in the Private Sector.

You really shouldn't work on the basis that because someone disagrees with you on Public Sector matters that they are naturally Public Sector employees .

your kidding nobody but let me rephrase to keep you happy

Nobody gives a damn if the public sector go on strike. This rubbish of paralysing the country is just that - absolute rubbish and as a supposed "private sector" worker then you shouldn't be trying to create or spread this rubbish

As for your rolling fund - who is going to fund it? The problem the unions face now is that their public sector workers are so well paid that it will cost million upon millions to fund a sustained period of striking. Do the unions have the kind of money necessary for this?? I doubt it.

For example the ASTI has 18,000 members. If the average secondary teachers salary is €1,000 per week (and it was higher than that according to CSO in 2008) then ASTI needs 18m to fund just 1 week of secondary teachers picketing. Thats 18m per week just on secondary teachers. How much exactly are in the ASTI coffers??

Anyway with the summer holidays approaching it doesn't matter a damn about teachers striking (although i can't ever remember them striking during the summer funny enough)

Jaysoose

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

Nice sweeping statements.

No cuts under 50k ok

but a person on 99k gets a 10% cut

89.1K after cuts

but the person who earns 101k in your world now earns 50.5k.

System is broken.

You need to read that post again his suggested cuts are on additional pay above 100K so the 101K guy would have a 10% cut on 100K and 50% on the additional 1K.

Your maths are broken.

RobbieTheRobber

Jaysoose wrote: »

You need to read that post again his suggested cuts are on additional pay above 100K so the 101K guy would have a 10% cut on 100K and 50% on the additional 1K.

Your maths are broken.

The word additional is never used in post!

doncarlos

Jaysoose wrote: »

Bite away there will be plenty of people happy to take over your position,

Well maybe they should leave a full-time job and go back to college like I did (working part time with no grant).
I worked hard to get my public sector job and work hard doing it, so it's very annoying to hear the usual public sector bashers roll out the same old rubbish in every thread.

bamboozle

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

Nice sweeping statements.

No cuts under 50k ok

but a person on 99k gets a 10% cut

89.1K after cuts

but the person who earns 101k in your world now earns 50.5k.

System is broken.

eh no, you didnt read my post correctly, cuts would be staggered, no cuts on first 50k, 10% on next 50k and 50% on everything over 100k.

person on 99k would drop to 94.1k, person on 101k would drop to 95.5k and for argument sake person earning 250k would drop to 170k.