Budget 2013 - Troika warns welfare cuts and income tax rises look unavoidable

robd

Well it's started folks:
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2012/0103/1224309737525.html

Troika basically saying that welfare will have to be cut and income tax base broadened through increasing of bands and reduction of credits. Also saying public service pay bill will need to be reduced. Also critical of capital budget cut which they see as political easier decision.

Government will not be able to keep to election promises which I've already predicted on other threads.

Looking like a vicious budget already.

THE COALITION will have difficulty in keeping to its promise not to adjust tax bands and credits in Government and will also need to rely on cuts in social protection to provide the “bulk of savings”, troika officials monitoring Ireland’s bailout programme have determined.

Two separate analyses by the EU Commission and the International Monetary Fund published before Christmas have disclosed details of proposed measures for the 2013 budget, which is unprecedented for Ireland. A total of €3.5 billion in savings are planned; €1.25 billion in new taxes and €2.25 billion in cuts.

The analysis has also criticised aspects of Government policy, including its decision to make larger than expected reductions in the capital budget as well as the lack of punitive sanctions for unemployed people who refuse to seek work.

The main proposals for new taxes outlined by Government negotiators to the troika late last year were: a value-based property tax (to replace the €100 household charge); a further rise in carbon tax; hikes in vehicle and motor taxes as part of a reform to revert from emissions-based charges; further changes in PRSI; reducing the tax-related cost of private pension provision; and increased excises for alcohol and tobacco.

However, while the Government has promised no changes to income tax rates, bands or credits, IMF staff concluded that broadening the tax bases “will likely need to encompass tax bands and credits”.

Minister of State for Finance Brian Hayes said yesterday that given the volatility of the global economic outlook, it was “early days” to be too specific about budget 2013. However, he said that advance disclosure of proposals for next December’s budget was part of a reform process spearheaded by Minister for Public Expenditure Brendan Howlin since last year.

He said he expected the Government, in a break with tradition, to set out its main budgetary proposals in late summer or early autumn. Mr Hayes said that it would ensure no repeat of the embarrassing leak of proposed tax and VAT increases to the German Bundestag last November.

“There should not be any great secrecy in how we arrive at the €3.5 billion. It should be known in advance. If we are going to do this right, we need a much earlier engagement with committees and the opposition,” said Mr Hayes.

Officials from the troika will arrive in Ireland next week for a 10-day mission to evaluate Ireland’s compliance with the bailout programme during the last quarter of 2011.

In advance of their arrival, Mr Hayes said he did “not foresee any major difficulties in the Government meeting the [end of December] targets” as set out by the Memorandum of Understanding.

The biggest two areas identified for the €2.25 billion in spending adjustments are for cuts in social protection expenditure and in public sector numbers. The IMF has stated social protection will “contribute the bulk of [Government] savings” (expected to be upwards of €500 million for 2013).

The EU Commission, in an implicit criticism, stressed that “financial sanctions for unco-operative unemployed” was still very rare in Ireland.

The Commission also criticised the frontloading of €755 million in capital cuts in the 2012 budget, saying it “raised questions on the quality of the adjustment and the Government’s preference for taking politically easier measures”.

The disposal of State assets has led to ongoing disagreement between the troika and Government and will play a major part in this month’s discussions. The Government has committed to divesting only €2 billion in State assets while the IMF has suggested €5 billion. The Government may agree to a higher figure this month, but only if a portion of the proceeds are used for jobs stimulus rather than debt reduction.

emo72

just cant see how we can stomach another vicious budget. only the 3rd of january, and look at the petrol 1.53 a litre. 100 euro house tax. 23% vat. jesus christ.

Cookie_Monster

The main proposals for new taxes outlined by Government negotiators to the troika late last year were: a value-based property tax (to replace the €100 household charge); a further rise in carbon tax; hikes in vehicle and motor taxes as part of a reform to revert from emissions-based charges; further changes in PRSI; reducing the tax-related cost of private pension provision; and increased excises for alcohol and tobacco.

fags and booze again, what a surprise :rolleyes:
why are they reverting from and emissions based motor tax system rather than simply upping the rates for the bands?
reducing the pension tax credits is also short sighted IMO and will lead to less investment by people in their pensions causing more trouble down the road

The IMF has stated social protection will “contribute the bulk of [Government] savings” (expected to be upwards of €500 million for 2013).

Only 500m, why so little from an area that has so much to give? Rates for most payments are still sky high in comparison to neighbouring countries and in comparison to how much the went up compared to inflation in the good years.
Sounds like little change and more of the same to me, minimal cuts and taking the soft options with tax increases.

robd

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

Only 500m, why so little from an area that has so much to give? Rates for most payments are still sky high in comparison to neighbouring countries and in comparison to how much the went up by in comparison to inflation in the good years.
Sounds like little change and more of the same to me, minimal cuts and taking the soft options with tax increases.

Doesn't make any sense to me given previous sentence.

The biggest two areas identified for the €2.25 billion in spending adjustments are for cuts in social protection expenditure and in public sector numbers

The bulk of the cuts would mean > 50% or 1.15m to me. Bad journalism perhaps.

meglome

emo72 wrote: »

just cant see how we can stomach another vicious budget. only the 3rd of january, and look at the petrol 1.53 a litre. 100 euro house tax. 23% vat. jesus christ.

What vicious budget, can we stop the blowing out of proportion.

johnnyskeleton

Is there any chance that if the ps haven't achieved their dubious "savings" by 31 dec this year, the govt will say that they upheld their side of the bargain but the public sector did not and therefore she loads of ps jobs an impose further cuts? If this government are simply buying time until the CPA runs out then perhaps they are smarter than they get credit for.

The_Honeybadger

Surely this is not a surprise to anybody? We have a structural deficit that needs to be fixed, end of story. Short of an economic miracle we are in for several more austere budgets. Living standards will continue to decline. People had impossible expectations in terms of what their living standards should be before the recession and they now have to get used to the fact that they need to plan their financial affairs better, do without the holiday or new car etc. Some people are genuinely fecked financially because of taking on too much debt and something will eventually be done for them once everything has settled. Cuts in SW might seem unfair, but that is where the bulk of the government spend goes so of course it is going to be in the firing line for cuts, same with health. Croke park is a sham that will eventually be revisited as well, most of the "savings" that are coming from it are simply an extension of the recruitment moratorium that would have come about anyway. Expect headline SW rates, child benefit, alcohol & tobacco and the other usual suspects to be hit again and again over the coming years until we are out of the woods. Even when we get back to -3% GDP things are going to be hard as people save every spare penny, terrified of unemployment etc, meaning more nails driven into the retail and services industry coffin. We can only hope that our new overlords will take pity and reduce our debt burden to allow us to pick ourselves up off the floor, maybe then we will see some light coming through, but until then don't be surprised to be reading more articles laying out the misery ahead.

robd

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Is there any chance that if the ps haven't achieved their dubious "savings" by 31 dec this year, the govt will say that they upheld their side of the bargain but the public sector did not and therefore she loads of ps jobs an impose further cuts? If this government are simply buying time until the CPA runs out then perhaps they are smarter than they get credit for.

Think it's very clear from murmurings and this press release that CPA will be ended this year. I expect them to use low (possible even negative) growth as the excuse for not keeping to both CPA and election promises etc.

I was appalled by a couple of the weak political decisions they took in this budget. Front loading both the capital expenditure cuts and VAT increases. This is sure to affect already fragile growth. They did this so they didn't have to make welfare cuts they should have made. God knows whats happening with Euro over the next 12 months. Really not looking good though.

Raskolnikov

The Troika have laid out our budget plans for 2013. Interesting that this seems to be one of the first murmurings of discontent with regard to the recent budget. I wonder what Eamon Gilmore will have to say about this; will be be Labour's way, or Frankfurt's way?

meglome wrote: »

What vicious budget, can we stop the blowing out of proportion.

Budget 2012 wasn't particularly vicious by itself, however, when you combine it on top of previous budgets, you get some pretty heavy austerity. If you want an interesting exercise, try doing a back-of-the-fag-packet calculation of what you're paying in taxation before the recession, and then today. For a higher earner, the cumulative effect of the USC, income levy, carbon levy, VAT hike, band-narrowing, DIRT hike, etc. is costing thousands.

robd

mickeyk wrote: »

Surely this is not a surprise to anybody? We have a structural deficit that needs to be fixed, end of story. Short of an economic miracle we are in for several more austere budgets. Living standards will continue to decline. People had impossible expectations in terms of what their living standards should be before the recession and they now have to get used to the fact that they need to plan their financial affairs better, do without the holiday or new car etc. Some people are genuinely fecked financially because of taking on too much debt and something will eventually be done for them once everything has settled. Cuts in SW might seem unfair, but that is where the bulk of the government spend goes so of course it is going to be in the firing line for cuts, same with health. Croke park is a sham that will eventually be revisited as well, most of the "savings" that are coming from it are simply an extension of the recruitment moratorium that would have come about anyway. Expect headline SW rates, child benefit, alcohol & tobacco and the other usual suspects to be hit again and again over the coming years until we are out of the woods. Even when we get back to -3% GDP things are going to be hard as people save every spare penny, terrified of unemployment etc, meaning more nails driven into the retail and services industry coffin. We can only hope that our new overlords will take pity and reduce our debt burden to allow us to pick ourselves up off the floor, maybe then we will see some light coming through, but until then don't be surprised to be reading more articles laying out the misery ahead.

I'm not surprised at all. However, judging by the posts on other threads on this group there will be surprised people. I expect people to debate the unfairness of cutting welfare and keep putting out lines in regard to bank bailout. These posts will of course completely miss the point that we have a huge current deficit which has to be reduced regardless. There's some posters on here who have clearly never taken an economics (macro or micro) course or finance course. Current welfare is completely and utterly unaffordable and while the cuts will serious affect those who are in receipt of it, it is completely and utterly unavoidable.

I was disgusted with election manifestos of the 2 government parties, as even then it was clear they couldn't be kept. In trying to keep CPA and welfare rates (by cutting capital expenditure and increasing VAT) this year, they're actually sending us deeper into recession.

sarumite

Raskolnikov wrote: »

The Troika have laid out our budget plans for 2013. Interesting that this seems to be one of the first murmurings of discontent with regard to the recent budget. I wonder what Eamon Gilmore will have to say about this; will be be Labour's way, or Frankfurt's way?

The EC is based in Brussels (and luxenbourg) and the IMF is based in US. The ECB, which is based in Frankfurt, wasn't mentioned in the article.

Raskolnikov

sarumite wrote: »

The EC is based in Brussels (and luxenbourg) and the IMF is based in US. The ECB, which is based in Frankfurt, wasn't mentioned in the article.

I'm quoting Gilmore
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/0204/1224288986133.html

Mr Gilmore said the challenge facing the electorate was to accept the rescue deal or to trust Labour to change its terms. “It’s Frankfurt’s way or Labour’s way,” he said.

Launching his party’s economic plan for stability and growth yesterday, Mr Gilmore said the choice facing the electorate was to have the budget decided in Frankfurt (the headquarters of the ECB) or by the Irish government.

_Kaiser_

They're starting the spin/scaremongering/softening-up (delete as appropriate) early this year!

Expect a "emergency budget" by April/May no doubt

robd

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

They're starting the spin/scaremongering/softening-up (delete as appropriate) early this year!

Expect a "emergency budget" by April/May no doubt

An emergency budget is most definitely a possibility.

Crazy Horse 6

We aint seen nothing yet.

GetWithIt

Ok, so there's 11 months till the next budget. How about implementing all the proposals that never make into the budget because there "just isn't enough time"?

Tax child benefit.
Amalgamate Town and County Councils and centralize certain functions.
Get rid of green diesel and introduce a rebate system instead, indirectly saving 10s of millions lost through fuel laundering.

There are others. If you had the will there are plenty of areas of Govt expenditure that could be addressed given a 11 month lead in period that could conceivably bridge the gap.

gandalf

TBH I don't and didn't understand the Governments thought process at the last budget. Surely the time to get the really painful cuts over with was towards the start of their term. Instead they kicked the can down the road (as appears to be the standard fashion in this country) and went for the easy targets (although with VAT I despair at the thought process as a move like that will kill the faltering economy). They have to still address the major cost centres in the countries expenditure, the spending on public services and on social welfare. It is obvious to a lot of people that the CPA is a luxury the country cannot afford to adhere to and the sooner proper surgical cuts are applied the better.

And to those that will inevitability come on here spouting on about the bank bailouts, that is a separate issue and doesn't take away from the fact that as a country we are spending far more than we take in taxes. It complicates the issue more down the line because we will have to have a large surplus between tax take and spend to service the funds we have received on loan. We are no where near even breaking even.

doc_17

From the coalition's point of view it'll be tougher for them to enact any meaningful change as they approach mid term. The green diesel thing is a huge issue and would save money. Child benefit is another that needs reform but the CPA is where the sh*t will hit the fan. Nobody has any problem with surgical cuts (that make significant savings) but hitting very low paid will give Labour the hebegebies.

If they keep increasing taxes they'll be signing their own death warrant politically and I'm not sure Mr Gilmore will be up for that

Taxi Drivers

Why is this an issue? That Budget 2013 would have cuts of more than €3 billion was flagged in the National Recovery Plan published in November 2010 and the €3.5 billion figure was in the Medium Term Fiscal Statement published last November. Both of these were written by us not the EC or the IMF. They are only re-using the figure that we have provided. We are free to get to the deficit limit by any means we wish.

bleg

I would have thought what the IMF are saying is fairly obvious. However there's no point in doing all of this if it doesn't prepare us for the technological revolution that's around the corner. We need to increase funding to education and decrease funding to social welfare. There needs to be a complete evaluation of all public services as per the Croke Park agreement to ensure that the best possible or at least a decent level of service is being provided with a customer focussed approach. I think the Revenue service is a shining light for all public services in this regard.

However none of this is going to happen, the govt will continue shaving here, there and everywhere and people won't give a **** about their kids and the bigger picture but will continue to be stuck in the here and now.

daltonmd

gandalf wrote: »

TBH I don't and didn't understand the Governments thought process at the last budget. Surely the time to get the really painful cuts over with was towards the start of their term. Instead they kicked the can down the road (as appears to be the standard fashion in this country) and went for the easy targets (although with VAT I despair at the thought process as a move like that will kill the faltering economy). They have to still address the major cost centres in the countries expenditure, the spending on public services and on social welfare. It is obvious to a lot of people that the CPA is a luxury the country cannot afford to adhere to and the sooner proper surgical cuts are applied the better.

And to those that will inevitability come on here spouting on about the bank bailouts, that is a separate issue and doesn't take away from the fact that as a country we are spending far more than we take in taxes. It complicates the issue more down the line because we will have to have a large surplus between tax take and spend to service the funds we have received on loan. We are no where near even breaking even.

I agree with you except the part where you dismiss the bank bailouts. Yes we spend far more than we earn, but we are borrowing money to repay banking debts - this to me wipes out ANY gain that could be made through these austerity budgets.
As soon as we get to the target deficit - then we have to start repaying that money - that is shocking and unsustainable.

While our deficit was/is a problem we are now in year 4 of austerity, we have taken out at lease 10 billion Euro from the economy and we are still looking at 16/18 billion deficit.

We are repaying bank debt using a credit card that is maxed out and where we are borrowing to repay the minimum payments.

Personally I could stomach all the cuts in the world - but I cannot stomach the betrayel of this government to the electorate - they are, to my mind, a dead government walking.

When we do get to zero deficit, it will be at a huge cost, high emigration, a worse than ever health and education situation. More "working" people on or below the poverty line.

then the repayments start - so while the bank issue is a "seperate" one - the repayments of the loans are a loading of more debt onto the taxpayer....

Chucky the tree

About 3 years to late but at least something is finally being down about our ridiculous welfare rates.

woodoo

daltonmd wrote: »

While our deficit was/is a problem we are now in year 4 of austerity, we have taken out at lease 10 billion Euro from the economy and we are still looking at 16/18 billion deficit..

I think its nearer €20 billion taken out.

Irish Steve

GetWithIt wrote: »

Ok, so there's 11 months till the next budget. How about implementing all the proposals that never make into the budget because there "just isn't enough time"?

Tax child benefit.

Reasonable idea, with care

Amalgamate Town and County Councils and centralize certain functions.

Could go a lot further, like get rid of motor tax as a stand alone charge, and put if on the fuel, more mileage, pay more, low mileage, pay less. Sounds fair.

Sort out the Health service and HSE, get rid of "private medicine" and make it a free at point of service system. That frees up a LOT of people to do jobs that might earn something for the country, rather than being a cost

Get rid of green diesel and introduce a rebate system instead, indirectly saving 10s of millions lost through fuel laundering.

And how do you propose to deal with the massive market for Gas Oil, used for home heating? That's also Green or Marked Diesel, and there will be a very large number of very unhappy people if that system is changed any time soon...

There are others. If you had the will there are plenty of areas of Govt expenditure that could be addressed given a 11 month lead in period that could conceivably bridge the gap.

Yes, but getting agreement on them could be the sticking point. There is an army of bureaucrats in Europe "producing" rules on things like the shape, size, colour and degree of bend of bananas. Bluntly, that's rules for a banana Republic, we can't afford that level of legislation and protectionism any more. It's doing very little to protect Banana producers and consumers, and a great deal to protect the jobs of the people "producing" and enforcing the regulations, and costing everyone that's living in the "real" world way too much in comparison to the value that we're receiving.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

GetWithIt

Irish Steve wrote: »

And how do you propose to deal with the massive market for Gas Oil, used for home heating? That's also Green or Marked Diesel, and there will be a very large number of very unhappy people if that system is changed any time soon...

I'm simply repeating a suggestion made before the budget.
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/euro150m-lost-to-laundered-diesel-annually-according-to-new-report-2914772.html

Irish Steve wrote: »

Yes, but getting agreement on them could be the sticking point. There is an army of bureaucrats in Europe "producing" rules on things like the shape, size, colour and degree of bend of bananas. Bluntly, that's rules for a banana Republic, we can't afford that level of legislation and protectionism any more. It's doing very little to protect Banana producers and consumers, and a great deal to protect the jobs of the people "producing" and enforcing the regulations, and costing everyone that's living in the "real" world way too much in comparison to the value that we're receiving.

You sound like a civil servant. No offense to you or actual civil servants but this sounds like a rant from Yes Minister.

There are so many small things you could do which of their own would save a million here or there but added up would save a fortune. And I'm not talking about reducing this allowance or taxing that product.

Another example is to remove all 1 and 2 cent coins from circulation. This is done is other EU countries. The savings would be relatively small but there is no reason not to do things like this.

the groutch

I hope there is an emergency budget to bring in welfare cuts and increased direct taxation.
Last month's budget was far too protectionist, and the "vunerable" need to take a hit as well.
And the sooner the CPA is torn up the better too.

djpbarry

emo72 wrote: »

just cant see how we can stomach another vicious budget.

Can't you? Because the rest of Europe is looking at Ireland's welfare rates and thinking "WTF?"

Irish Steve wrote: »

There is an army of bureaucrats in Europe...

I'm pretty sure there is not. It's something of a myth that the EU has a massive civil service supporting it.

Godge

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Absolutely correct. There is only one way that the Government can keep their promise not to reduce headline social welfare rates. That is by reducing the numbers on social welfare. They have already tried something this year with the changes to the entitlements for lone parents which were out of line with the rest of Europe.

The next step is to address the long-term unemployed and ensure that those who have made no effort to retrain or get a job lose their entitlements. These reforms are actually better in the long-run because if you get rid of the culture of life-long welfare dependency and replace it with a work culture, you have a much healthier society.

The government may be forced by their promises into such an approach. The actual rates can be freezed until inflation and increases in Europe have brought them back in line with reality.

murphaph

Godge wrote: »

The government may be forced by their promises into such an approach. The actual rates can be freezed until inflation and increases in Europe have brought them back in line with reality.

I don't think they can take this approach when Germany debates long and hard about a €5 PER MONTH increase to its equivalent of the dole, which is less than half what you'd get in Ireland. It'd simply take too long for the rest of Europe to catch up with our rates in Ireland.

Having said that, they might be able to leave core dole and state pension payments relatively alone if they can pick off or reduce the number of "perks" which actually cost (IIRC) about 16bn of the social protection budget, while dole itself costs about 4bn.

Reducing these "perks" also tends to affect genuine working people who have lost their jobs less than the "career benefit" types who know what to say to get these "perks".

foxcoverteddy

If you are right that we should expect an emergency budget, why are ex government ministers riding around in state provided Mercedes, which we no doubt pay for the fuel as well? Does clawback only apply to the normal people.
A TD knows the slary so why all the extra payments when they leavwe or change jobs etc?
Let's all pull together not one half tow the other along.

hmmm

foxcoverteddy wrote: »

If you are right that we should expect an emergency budget

I can see no justification for an emergency budget, that's more fantasy. We'll have to wait and see how tax revenues are doing, but the divergence between government forecasts (and independent forecasts) of growth next year is still relatively small - they are only forecasts after all. If the forecasts turn out to be wrong by the amount predicted, the government can easily cover the gap by holding down spending.

Good loser

hmmm wrote: »

I can see no justification for an emergency budget, that's more fantasy. We'll have to wait and see how tax revenues are doing, but the divergence between government forecasts (and independent forecasts) of growth next year is still relatively small - they are only forecasts after all. If the forecasts turn out to be wrong by the amount predicted, the government can easily cover the gap by holding down spending.

I think the revenue targets will be missed significantly and that we will have an emergency budget.

meglome

Raskolnikov wrote: »

I'm quoting Gilmore
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/0204/1224288986133.html

Mr Gilmore said the challenge facing the electorate was to accept the rescue deal or to trust Labour to change its terms. “It’s Frankfurt’s way or Labour’s way,” he said.

Launching his party’s economic plan for stability and growth yesterday, Mr Gilmore said the choice facing the electorate was to have the budget decided in Frankfurt (the headquarters of the ECB) or by the Irish government.

Actually Pat Rabbitte really annoyed me on the Frontline budget show, he sat there blaming FF and the EU for what was happening. We'll never have any real change if politicians can't be honest.

HellFireClub

In fairness, there is to process no get people off the dole. The government plan is to leave people on the dole in an entirely open ended basis. I was on the dole for a year and a half up until last year, you'd get more thanks and respect in this country for staying on the dole rather than trying to get yourself off it. I ended up starting up a small business to get myself off the dole and was obstructed in doing so at every juncture by the very state agencies in this country that exist to support people like myself, at hufe expense to the taxpayer.

While job hunting, I ran into all the usual obstacles that you run into in this country, neotism, no replies, etc.

In this country, it isn't what you know or what you can prove you can do, it's who you know.

The problem is within the social welfare dept, if you ever have the misfortune in life to have to go in there once a month, the whole atmosphere is one of doom and dread, everyone with their heads down, shuffling along in the queue.

What needs to happen is that the PS workers in the social welfare offices need to be taken out of there in their entirety, and replaced with a team of people who can go in and completely change the atmosphere in those buildings.

It should be mandatory that every business in Ireland should have to notify their local Social Welfare office, (via a website where the whole thing in transparent and anyone can apply for the position in the full interests of fairness), of a vacancy, and there should be a code of practice brought in that insists that open and fair procedures are used to allow those out of work to apply for a vacancy, should one exist (which means it becoming mandatory for employers to advertise jobs and then hold proper interviews, this could be incentivised via the taxation system), and the folks currently working in the Social Welfare Offices, who are a bunch of absolutely useless and self serving individuals as far as I'm concerned, based on my own personal experience, should be moved off somewhere else and a fresh team of positive private sector folks should be brought/sub-contracted in to manage a process of hooking up unemployed people with vacancies nationwide, on a pay per person taken off the dole basis, which would hugely cut down on the cost of runnig this department.

kippy

HellFireClub wrote: »

While job hunting, I ran into all the usual obstacles that you run into in this country, neotism, no replies, etc.

In this country, it isn't what you know or what you can prove you can do, it's who you know.

I'd like to know where you were applying for jobs if that is your attitude......
There is a level of "who you know" and "contacts" but that's in every country - just look at the amount of multinationals that run schemes whereby employees can recommend someone they know for jobs.
A lot of Irish people seem to think this is an Irish Phenonomen and use it as an excuse.
But this is'nt as wide spread as you seem to think. I've had 8 or so different jobs in the past twelve years - none of them were got by "who you know".

foxcoverteddy

Dear kippy and hellfire club, one presumes you have knowledge of medmenham, that is an aside sorry.
Isn't it sad we are on the same side but have such diverse views on the same subject.
Both systems work, the who you know, may be they admire the way you work, the one you don't know, interviews do not give that good an indication.
People try to be there best when attending interviews so the only protection for the employer is a three or six month trial.
One thing the current regime is pretty tatty to say the least.
Regards foxy

HellFireClub

kippy wrote: »

I'd like to know where you were applying for jobs if that is your attitude......
There is a level of "who you know" and "contacts" but that's in every country - just look at the amount of multinationals that run schemes whereby employees can recommend someone they know for jobs.
A lot of Irish people seem to think this is an Irish Phenonomen and use it as an excuse.
But this is'nt as wide spread as you seem to think. I've had 8 or so different jobs in the past twelve years - none of them were got by "who you know".

I'm certainly not imagining that I applied for many many jobs that I appeared on the face of it to be highly qualified for, to not even receive a reply in relation to my attempt to get a job. In the end, I was becoming so utterly ground down by it, that I decided f*ck it and I started up a new business, competing now against, and taking business from, the same businesses that didn't think I was worth an interview only a year and a half ago...

I remember when I was in PAYE employment, it was the exact same, the nod and the wink culture in this country is part of the problem with unemployment, and it could only have gotten worse in this recession as folks try to look out for their own to a much greater extent I'd imagine.

As I was saying, you'd need to have stood in the dole queue for a few months to really be able to understake the sheer hopelessness that starts to set in on a mental and emotional level, and that's just on the "survival" end of your capabilities, and by that I mean the effect that going down and signing on and collecting your dole once a week will have on your confidence and your mental health...

Then you'll find that you are throwing out CV's and you don't even get a reply and this completely reinforces the view that has already taken firm hold in your mind that you have turned into some sort of a social outcast, as you stand in the dole queue once a month to sign on, head down, slowly shuffling towards the hatch like everyone else.

Then you listen to the radio and all you hear is doom and gloom and more hopelessness and despair.

I'll tell you one thing, based on my own recent enough experiences: the unemployment problem in this country could be easily sorted, or at least a very good start could be made in immediately reducing the number of people on the live register, (I'm obviously not saying the whole problem can be sorted out immediately), but for the want of a bit of political courage and competence, a very good start could be made on completely turning around the current situation with regard to mass unemployment, which is that thousands of people are signing on every month as job losses continue and thousnads of Irish people are leaving the country in search for work.

As I've said before on this site, the answer is to get competent people who actually give a sh*t, into the Social Welfare offices up and down the country, get the PS bean counters, the clockers, the "that's not my job I'm in the CPSU, I'm covered by Croke Park, so you can't touch me", get them out of there, every last one of them, and put a team of people in there who are tasked to reduce the number of people signing on every month by matching them up with jobs.

There should be 3 hatches down in those offices:

(1) The hatch for folks who will take a PAYE job. These people can get matched up with jobs in their area that they are suitable for in terms of qualifications and experience.

(2) The hatch for folks who might be in a position to start up a business, these folks get brought into a job creation program and get access to start up facilities that are affordable in terms of where they are starting from.

(3) There is no hatch (3), you need to have a personal plan for yourself, either to create a job or to take a job, staying long term on the dole without having such a plan should be something that just doesn't happen, because the competence of the new people working in the Social Welfare Office will either be working with you to find a job or else working with you to start a small business.

Compare this to the current set up, where if you are prepared to sign on once a month, you can stay on the dole for years without anyone asking you have you tried to find work or made any effort to get off the dole, so there is no means of distinguishing between people who are genuinely trying to find a job, and those that are making no attempt whatsoever to get off the dole.

noodler

Does anyone have a link to the two reports mentioned on the article?

Nothingbetter2d

getting rid of a lot of local and national politicians would see a huge saving.

we have 900+ local politicians in a country of 4 million... manchester uk has a population of 4million and has a fraction of the number of local politicians.

the senate is another waste of money imo..

djpbarry

HellFireClub wrote: »

In this country, it isn't what you know or what you can prove you can do, it's who you know.

As opposed to every other country on the planet? You really think “networking” is unique to Ireland? You think that, for example, the fact that Boris Johnson and David Cameron were school buddies is just a coincidence?

HellFireClub wrote: »

It should be mandatory that every business in Ireland should have to notify their local Social Welfare office, (via a website where the whole thing in transparent and anyone can apply for the position in the full interests of fairness), of a vacancy, and there should be a code of practice brought in that insists that open and fair procedures are used to allow those out of work to apply for a vacancy, should one exist (which means it becoming mandatory for employers to advertise jobs and then hold proper interviews, this could be incentivised via the taxation system)...

Surely employers should be free to hire whoever the hell they want? Is it not reasonable to assume that, generally speaking, the job goes to the best candidate?

HellFireClub wrote: »

...and the folks currently working in the Social Welfare Offices, who are a bunch of absolutely useless and self serving individuals as far as I'm concerned, based on my own personal experience, should be moved off somewhere else and a fresh team of positive private sector folks should be brought/sub-contracted in to manage a process of hooking up unemployed people with vacancies nationwide, on a pay per person taken off the dole basis, which would hugely cut down on the cost of runnig this department.

So your solution to the unemployment problem in Ireland is to essentially replace the Department of Social Protection with a state-sponsored recruitment agency? There aren’t enough recruitment agencies in the world already?

HellFireClub wrote: »

I'm certainly not imagining that I applied for many many jobs that I appeared on the face of it to be highly qualified for, to not even receive a reply in relation to my attempt to get a job.

Maybe people who were more qualified than you also applied for the same jobs?

HellFireClub wrote: »

I remember when I was in PAYE employment, it was the exact same, the nod and the wink culture in this country is part of the problem with unemployment, and it could only have gotten worse in this recession as folks try to look out for their own to a much greater extent I'd imagine.

You know, if you find Ireland so displeasing, you could always emigrate? Let us know when you find this magical land where employers launch straight into a nationwide search when filling new positions without first consulting their sources.

HellFireClub wrote: »

Then you listen to the radio and all you hear is doom and gloom and more hopelessness and despair.

I’ve got more doom, gloom, hopelessness and despair from your posts on this thread than I’d get in a month of radio broadcasts.

HellFireClub

djpbarry wrote: »

As opposed to every other country on the planet? You really think “networking” is unique to Ireland? You think that, for example, the fact that Boris Johnson and David Cameron were school buddies is just a coincidence?
Surely employers should be free to hire whoever the hell they want? Is it not reasonable to assume that, generally speaking, the job goes to the best candidate?
So your solution to the unemployment problem in Ireland is to essentially replace the Department of Social Protection with a state-sponsored recruitment agency? There aren’t enough recruitment agencies in the world already?
Maybe people who were more qualified than you also applied for the same jobs?
You know, if you find Ireland so displeasing, you could always emigrate? Let us know when you find this magical land where employers launch straight into a nationwide search when filling new positions without first consulting their sources.
I’ve got more doom, gloom, hopelessness and despair from your posts on this thread than I’d get in a month of radio broadcasts.

Your obvious cynicism fails to explain how come I apparently wasn't considered worthy enough to be interviewed for jobs that I was clearly well qualified and experienced for, yet when I got a pain in my hoop applying for these jobs and getting no replies, and decided to start up a business in an industry that I am highly qualified in and highly experienced in, I can do it as good as, if not better than, the same businesses that I previously applied to, who I now compete against in the industry??? Maybe you might explain that one to us???

Maybe you need to stand in the dole queue to "get" the problem with the whole system. As an employer, I can hire who I want, however I spent enough time in PAYE jobs in the past to know that it isn't always the best suited candidate who gets a job, there is a huge amount of corruption and cronyism in this country, the point I'm making is that it isn't just in the political world, the property world or the banking world, it is everywhere in this country, the nod and the wink culture.

This might not be your experience, if you have had a more positive experience, please discuss that, and not try to start an argument with me based on opinions I hold in good faith.

And as for "if you don't like Ireland, leave", I don't see why because this country is so messed up by what is blatant stupidity at this stage, that I or any other person should be expected to leave this country, that makes no sense whatsoever. There is a problem with this country and it needs to be confronted and dealt with, no point in running away from problems, nothing gets fixed by doing that.

djpbarry

HellFireClub wrote: »

Your obvious cynicism fails to explain how come I apparently wasn't considered worthy enough to be interviewed for jobs that I was clearly well qualified and experienced for...

Because there were obviously other candidates who were considered more suitable. It's a pretty simple explanation - no need to resort to conspiracy theories.

The_Honeybadger

HellFireClub wrote: »

Your obvious cynicism fails to explain how come I apparently wasn't considered worthy enough to be interviewed for jobs that I was clearly well qualified and experienced for, yet when I got a pain in my hoop applying for these jobs and getting no replies, and decided to start up a business in an industry that I am highly qualified in and highly experienced in, I can do it as good as, if not better than, the same businesses that I previously applied to, who I now compete against in the industry??? Maybe you might explain that one to us???
.

Not trying to be a bo**cks here HellFireClub, but I have successfully managed to land two reasonably good jobs in the past three years (first one didn't work out for reasons beyond my control), and yes, people don't reply, jobs.ie and those type of sites are full of bogus ads etc. Nepotism is a fact of life in every country, and will continue to be, but it is not right to say every vacancy is filled in this way.

If you weren't getting replies I would respectfully suggest that you get your CV and cover letters professionally reviewed, because what you are saying doesn't add up if you are as qualified as you say you are. And fair play for setting up your own business btw.

HellFireClub

djpbarry wrote: »

HellFireClub wrote: »

Your obvious cynicism fails to explain how come I apparently wasn't considered worthy enough to be interviewed for jobs that I was clearly well qualified and experienced for...

Because there were obviously other candidates who were considered more suitable. It's a pretty simple explanation - no need to resort to conspiracy theories.

No conspiracy theories at all, it isn't a credible position to adopt, as you have tried to do, that someone can somehow be so under qualified for a vacancy that they've applied for, to the extent that they can't even be sent letter or an e-mail saying that their CV will be kept on file, yet the same candidate can then go on a month later to start up and successfully run an identical business in the same industry. That isn't a credible position to find yourself in, trying to make a credible argument out of that situation because it simply doesn't stand up to logic or reason.

kippy

HellFireClub wrote: »

No conspiracy theories at all, it isn't a credible position to adopt, as you have tried to do, that someone can somehow be so under qualified for a vacancy that they've applied for, to the extent that they can't even be sent letter or an e-mail saying that their CV will be kept on file, yet the same candidate can then go on a month later to start up and successfully run an identical business in the same industry. That isn't a credible position to find yourself in, trying to make a credible argument out of that situation because it simply doesn't stand up to logic or reason.

What do you mean "no conspiracy theories"? You've stated categorically that the reason you didn't have any success was that you suffered unfairly at the hands of nepotism and "who you know" syndrome.
Companies are under no obligation to reply to anything you send them, while it is good manners, I wouldn't go around expecting it.
To me, it looks like you don't realise what exactly is involved in the hiring process and why companies take on some people and don't take on others. Indeed your position that nepotism and "who you know" is only an Irish thing defies logic.
I would suggest that these companies:
a. Didn't like something on your CV.
b. Didn't feel you CV was as good or better than other candidates.
c. Felt your salary expectations (or some other expectation) didn't match theirs.
I couldn't tell you to be honest as I dont have access to you CV, but there are far more items looked at when looking through CV's than academic qualifications. Perhaps there was something in your past history that didnt add up?
Either way, I don't see why taking up the position that DJPBarry takes up "defies logic", participially when he, or indeed any of us have any idea of you "real life" temperament, CV, demeanour and qualifications.

That being said, fair play to you for setting up your own business in these times. I don't know what field you are in, but I wish you luck.
Perhaps you should be grateful you didn't manage to get a job and was forced into attempting to set up a business?

All I know, as mentioned above, is that over the past twelve years I've applied for approximately 70 roles, had interviews for 12 and managed to land 8 or so, without any nepotism. Indeed there were many companies I never heard back from.

Back on topic,
Is anyone surprised that income tax rises and welfare cuts are on the cards? I've already stated in a budget thread that I think there will be a mini budget this year and the CPA will be on the chopping block by September.

Gumbo

kippy wrote: »

What do you mean "no conspiracy theories"? You've stated categorically that the reason you didn't have any success was that you suffered unfairly at the hands of nepotism and "who you know" syndrome.
Companies are under no obligation to reply to anything you send them, while it is good manners, I wouldn't go around expecting it.
To me, it looks like you don't realise what exactly is involved in the hiring process and why companies take on some people and don't take on others. Indeed your position that nepotism and "who you know" is only an Irish thing defies logic.
I would suggest that these companies:
a. Didn't like something on your CV.
b. Didn't feel you CV was as good or better than other candidates.
c. Felt your salary expectations (or some other expectation) didn't match theirs.
I couldn't tell you to be honest as I dont have access to you CV, but there are far more items looked at when looking through CV's than academic qualifications. Perhaps there was something in your past history that didnt add up?

+1

i applied for a job in 2002, and when i got it, a few years later i asked the guy did many apply etc etc
He said, "yeah a few, and to think we werent even gona call you back!"

I asked why, and he said "well, we looked at our location and where you lived and figured it would be a trek for you to cross the city everyday" (Finglas-Harolds Cross).
Delighted they choose to call as i got 95% of my experience from them.

djpbarry

HellFireClub wrote: »

No conspiracy theories at all, it isn't a credible position to adopt, as you have tried to do, that someone can somehow be so under qualified for a vacancy that they've applied for, to the extent that they can't even be sent letter or an e-mail saying that their CV will be kept on file, yet the same candidate can then go on a month later to start up and successfully run an identical business in the same industry.

First of all, I have adopted no such position - I passed no comment on your qualifications. How could I - I know nothing about them.

Secondly, to state the obvious, this is an anonymous forum - I have absolutely no means of validating your story.

Finally, as has been pointed by other posters, to assume that you should be a shoo-in for any job (or even an interview), just because you feel you're more than qualified, is being disrespectful toward other candidates (whom you know nothing about, by the way) and, quite frankly, incredibly arrogant. Based on your posts on this thread, it seems to me you have very little experience of job searching and if this is the kind of attitude you approached your applications with, it's not terribly surprising you didn't receive any replies.

robd

HellFireClub wrote: »

No conspiracy theories at all, it isn't a credible position to adopt, as you have tried to do, that someone can somehow be so under qualified for a vacancy that they've applied for, to the extent that they can't even be sent letter or an e-mail saying that their CV will be kept on file, yet the same candidate can then go on a month later to start up and successfully run an identical business in the same industry. That isn't a credible position to find yourself in, trying to make a credible argument out of that situation because it simply doesn't stand up to logic or reason.

It's my experience to get turned down or not replied to for roles applied to directly but get an interview through and agent. It's also my experience to be ignored by one agency but get an in to a role no problem with another agency. It's also my experience to get in directly.

Just the way it is. Impossible to know why but there's definitely no conspiracy theories.

murphaph

Unfortunately the old "who you know" is not just an Irish thing. The Germans even have an expression for it: "Vitamin B" (where the B stands for "Beziehungen" or "connections").

kippy

murphaph wrote: »

Unfortunately the old "who you know" is not just an Irish thing. The Germans even have an expression for it: "Vitamin B" (where the B stands for "Beziehungen" or "connections").

I don't understand why people believe that this "who you know" is a bad thing?
Sure, implemented wrongly it is, but if I were an employer and I got a recommendation from a current reliable and trustworthy member of staff for a person for another role, I would generally take it seriously. Employers can and do save vast sums of money on recruitment using these connections. Sites like LinkedIN and the likes are built upon this very thing.

The world revolves around connections and social interactions. At some point in your life you realise that you can make this work for you or use it to help someone out. And in fairness, in most areas, even if you have been recommended by someone, you would generally still have to go through the interviews and impress the person you will be working for enough to get the job.

When it doesn't work is where kids of parents get into jobs or people get jobs that are known by others but are plainly wasters.