More tax increases due to unions?

Dannyboy83

I was speaking to a friend who works in the Revenue today about the impending teacher's strike. Obviously it doesn't seem likely at this stage that the government is going to learn to stand up to unions... I suggested that the government may have an interim budget and seek to increase income tax rates.

She was adamant that this will not happen - she said the tax burden is already too high and the government cannot take the risk that people will simply just start leaving if it increases again.
More interesting to me, was that she said that the teachers unions actually have very little support among the civil service and many areas of the public service, because they are paid multiples of what a clerical officer typically makes.

Over 80% of the education budget goes on wages and I can't imagine there is any low hanging fruit left to pick - so I genuinely cannot fathom where the money will come from if not from tax increases?


What do forum members think will be the outcome?

liammur

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

I was speaking to a friend who works in the Revenue today about the impending teacher's strike. Obviously it doesn't seem likely at this stage that the government is going to learn to stand up to unions... I suggested that the government may have an interim budget and seek to increase income tax rates.

She was adamant that this will not happen - she said the tax burden is already too high and the government cannot take the risk that people will simply just start leaving if it increases again.
More interesting to me, was that she said that the teachers unions actually have very little support among the civil service and many areas of the public service, because they are paid multiples of what a clerical officer typically makes.

Over 80% of the education budget goes on wages and I can't imagine there is any low hanging fruit left to pick - so I genuinely cannot fathom where the money will come from if not from tax increases?


What do forum members think will be the outcome?

1 very low hanging fruit is getting primary principals into the classroom and teach, this 1 simple move would save maybe 500 extra teaching positions.

Another one they could look at is universities: tremendous waste here, mainly on professors exorbitant wages.

But I agree, the unions are doing nobody any favours.

gerryo777

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

I was speaking to a friend who works in the Revenue today about the impending teacher's strike. Obviously it doesn't seem likely at this stage that the government is going to learn to stand up to unions... I suggested that the government may have an interim budget and seek to increase income tax rates.

She was adamant that this will not happen - she said the tax burden is already too high and the government cannot take the risk that people will simply just start leaving if it increases again.
More interesting to me, was that she said that the teachers unions actually have very little support among the civil service and many areas of the public service, because they are paid multiples of what a clerical officer typically makes.

Over 80% of the education budget goes on wages and I can't imagine there is any low hanging fruit left to pick - so I genuinely cannot fathom where the money will come from if not from tax increases?


What do forum members think will be the outcome?

I think that if enda & co really want to put it up to the PS unions, now is the time to do it.

As long as the IMF are here he has cover to sort them out once and for all.

As for the teachers, €505 million last year on top of their wage bill?

They need to wake up and realise what's really happening in this little country of ours!

Riskymove

sorry, but what is your actual point or question?

will there be a tax increase if the teachers do not agree with a cut to allowances?

then no is the answer

gerryo777

liammur wrote: »

1 very low hanging fruit is getting primary principals into the classroom and teach, this 1 simple move would save maybe 500 extra teaching positions.

Another one they could look at is universities: tremendous waste here, mainly on professors exorbitant wages.

But I agree, the unions are doing nobody any favours.

The people who support these unions should ask themselves why their 'leaders' are paying themselves 6 figure sums.......

Uriel.

Don't know the true figure but is 80% cost an overly crazy figure for the primary resource in an industry? Perhaps, maybe it should be closer to 60%, I don't really know

Teachers teach, fair enough there are other costs associated with education, but the reality is that they are a central point of the service provision.

I don't see them going on strike. They are having their annual conferences, all interest groups will sabre rattle at such events (e.g. AGS last week), especially where a Minister is due to make a showing. It's a reminder to the powers that be that they are still there and their woes must be acknowledged at least

mossy2390

teachers will never be happy regardless of what happens, the one profession that are never ever happy and make sure everyone else knows about it

gerryo777

They must have too much time on their hands!

And their not 'cheap' or 'underpaid'.....

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/1500-teachers-earn-up-to-115k-a-year-189895.html

UnLuckyAgain

mossy2390 wrote: »

teachers will never be happy regardless of what happens, the one profession that are never ever happy and make sure everyone else knows about it

From your caustic tone I can tell you're not a teacher yourself?

Before playing the same old record of "under worked and overpaid teachers", people need to realise that teaching is probably the most fractured and fragmented profession, with full-time employment (nevermind full-time PERMANENT employment) being like gold dust. Majority of teachers may spend 5, 7, maybe up to 10 years on temporary or part-time contracts before finally getting some form of job security.

mossy2390

UnLuckyAgain wrote: »

From your caustic tone I can tell you're not a teacher yourself?

Before playing the same old record of "under worked and overpaid teachers", people need to realise that teaching is probably the most fractured and fragmented profession, with full-time employment (nevermind full-time PERMANENT employment) being like gold dust. Majority of teachers may spend 5, 7, maybe up to 10 years on temporary or part-time contracts before finally getting some form of job security.

a lot like jobs in other sectors so?
and they dont get 3-4 months off a year

dont get me wrong i wouldnt become a teacher, im only out of school a couple of years and see what teachers have to put up with but at the end of the day its year decision to get into that profession so ye know all of the above when ye get into the profession, the thing is the pay is very good and the working hours are good and the holidays are second to none yet teachers are always complaining about pay and just neglect the fact of holidays whenever its brought up
teachers as a profession are far better off then a lot of other professions but are always complaining

liammur

mossy2390 wrote: »

a lot like jobs in other sectors so?
and they dont get 3-4 months off a year

In fairness, you are talking in circles. What good is getting 3 or 4 months off when those non permanent teachers don't get paid?

mossy2390

liammur wrote: »

In fairness, you are talking in circles. What good is getting 3 or 4 months off when those non permanent teachers don't get paid?

just like in any job you don't get made permanent straight away you have to work your way up, why should teaching be any different?

Brussels Sprout

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

I was speaking to a friend who works in the Revenue today about the impending teacher's strike.

Does anyone seriously think that they'd be stupid enough to go on strike. Can you imagine it? Teacher bashing is already one of the nation's favourite past-times. If they were to go on strike they'd be absolute pariahs.

Idbatterim

now is probably the ideal time for the government to renege on the croke park agreement, who would have an iota of sympathy for any public or civil servants?! can you imagine the tutors striking and the wrath they would face from everyone, but particularly the private sector and unemployed who have school going kids! you cant make an omelette without breaking eggs, even the short term cost of the CPA is too much! read an indo article few weeks ago saying a considerable amount of FG ministers are of the opinion that the CPA is far too high a price! Lets sort this out once and for all, if its not done in our darkest hour, when will it ever be sorted? Well done to those who voted labor and ensured another bloody wish wash of two parties pulling in different directions, in the end achieving nothing...

eric hoone

How can anyone blame unions for getting the best deal for their members?
On the other hand, how can the union leaders look their new members in the eye after sacrificing them at the altar of Croke Park?
It's crocodile tears they were shedding for their new collleagues at conference.

Dannyboy83

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

Does anyone seriously think that they'd be stupid enough to go on strike. Can you imagine it? Teacher bashing is already one of the nation's favourite past-times. If they were to go on strike they'd be absolute pariahs.

Honestly, I'm not so sure...

A) They went on strike when I was doing my leaving cert in 2001.

http://www.breakingnews.ie/archives/2001/0310/ireland/gbcwsngb/

A nationwide strike is scheduled for next Wednesday and, with five more walk-outs planned over the next three weeks, the state's leaving and junior certificate oral exams are in doubt.

The teachers' demands have so far been rejected by the government, which has insisted the issue can only be resolved through an existing national wage agreement.

As of yesterday, they were are again threatening the nation with strikes:

http://www.independent.ie/lifestyle/education/latest-news/teachers-threaten-to-go-on-strike-if-government-cuts-their-pay-again-3076724.html

SECOND and third-level teachers yesterday warned the Government that they "can't and won't take any more" cuts to pay -- and threatened to go on strike.

Teachers threatened the Fine Gael-Labour coalition that if the Croke Park deal was breached by any reduction in allowances or pay, "all bets are off".

C) The unions in Ireland don't care what the Irish public thinks, they have proved that much over the last 3/4 years beyond a shadow of a doubt.
Nobody has said 'No' to them for a long time - plus they know they have the coalition by the balls.
And teachers believe they are 'entitled' to x,y,z.

I imagine Ruari Quinn would happily face them down, as the man genuinely does care about reforming our broken system, but it seems to me like his arm is being twisted by the cabinet, who are terrified.

Education Minister Ruairi Quinn has said the Government has no plans to change the terms of the Croke Park Agreement.

I hope I'm wrong, but I think if the Unions can find a way in which they consider the Croke Park deal has been breached (allowances), they will happily go to war.
I don't think they will need to tho - the coalition do not have the spine.

One of the ministers charged with overseeing the reform of the public service has warned of a "nuclear winter" of industrial action if the Croke Park deal is abandoned.

Read more: http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/kfideycweyql/rss2/#ixzz1rmGoFRjU

.
.
.
.
so anyway, Ronan Lyons is on record saying that the planned savings from the Croke Park Agreement are one tenth of the actual savings required

http://www.ronanlyons.com/2011/04/26/%E2%80%9Cslash-and-burn%E2%80%9D-anything-but-the-need-for-realism-in-budget-2012/

This is on a completely different scale to what the Croke Park Agreement has currently planned. It is estimated that its efficiency measures in education would save 0.5%, one tenth of the savings needed in a single year.

Now it seems that we cannot even get this .5%, lol!!! :pac:


So since
i) we can't cut wage expenses -
and
ii) the total salary bill comprises 80% of the education budget
and
iii) I imagine the low hanging fruit has been picked, meaning that 20% covers necessities which cannot be cut further.

Well - that means spending cannot be reduced, which means we have to have tax increases, right?

Perhaps that was what Michael McGrath meant when he suggsted the Household charge will be €500 from 2013 onward

Brussels Sprout

The teachers may not care how they are perceived by the public at large but ultimately if they do go on strike how the cabinet will react will depend on public perception. In 2001 there was a more favourable opinion of teachers and public sector workers in general. That's probably at an all time low now though.

I can't understand why the government fear strikes. I mean the IMF are in the country. They have the perfect political and economic excuse to face down the unions.

Brussels Sprout

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

So since
i) we can't cut wage expenses -
and
ii) the total salary bill comprises 80% of the education budget
and
iii) I imagine the low hanging fruit has been picked, meaning that 20% covers necessities which cannot be cut further.

Well - that means spending cannot be reduced, which means we have to have tax increases, right?

Don't forget that they also promised not to raise income taxes or cut social welfare or pensions.

They basically created a massive rod with which to beat themselves.

Any tax increases have to be either new taxes (household charges, water) or increasing other taxes like VAT.

The capital budget has of course already been shredded (no votes there) and then there's the other money making schemes such as taking money from private pension funds.

They are scraping the bottom of the barrel and it's still not enough. Something's got to give. So, which is it going to be?

A) Reduce Public Sector Wages? (not through natural wastage)
Social Welfare cuts?
C) Income Tax hike?
D) All of the above?
E) None of the above (Coalition falls apart triggering an election)

Dannyboy83

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

I can't understand why the government fear strikes. I mean the IMF are in the country. They have the perfect political and economic excuse to face down the unions.

I agree, but it's just the tip of the insanity iceberg.
I mean, the public sector pay increments are still ongoing...

The main reason imo must be that Labour know on which side their bread is buttered and are terrified of haemorrhaging their vote to Sinn Fein/ULA.

lmimmfn

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

Any tax increases have to be either new taxes (household charges, water) or increasing other taxes like VAT.

Petrol/Diesel taxes should cover most of whats needed in the next few years when we hit 3euro a litre.

Brussels Sprout

lmimmfn wrote: »

Petrol/Diesel taxes should cover most of whats needed in the next few years when we hit 3euro a litre.

Well the excise per litre is fixed so there won't be any extra money in that. VAT is charged as a % of the fuel cost but when people buy extra petrol and diesel they pay for it by not buying other things so the gain in VAT would be balanced by the VAT losses elsewhere in the economy.

Besides, even if that wasn't the case you'd still only be scratching the surface of the 12 billion deficit with fuel taxes.

creedp

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

Don't forget that they also promised not to raise income taxes or cut social welfare or pensions.

They basically created a massive rod with which to beat themselves.

Any tax increases have to be either new taxes (household charges, water) or increasing other taxes like VAT.

The capital budget has of course already been shredded (no votes there) and then there's the other money making schemes such as taking money from private pension funds.

They are scraping the bottom of the barrel and it's still not enough. Something's got to give. So, which is it going to be?

A) Reduce Public Sector Wages? (not through natural wastage)
Social Welfare cuts?
C) Income Tax hike?
D) All of the above?
E) None of the above (Coalition falls apart triggering an election)

You forgot to mention the significant tax breaks available to those with resources to pay tax consultants for them to exploit - maybe its time for the well healed to give up on a few tax breaks at least until things level out. Its called donning the green jersey or at least that's what politicans/captains of industry call it when the masses are being asked to contribute more in this time of need .. solidarity for all

Sleepy

UnLuckyAgain wrote: »

From your caustic tone I can tell you're not a teacher yourself?

Before playing the same old record of "under worked and overpaid teachers", people need to realise that teaching is probably the most fractured and fragmented profession, with full-time employment (nevermind full-time PERMANENT employment) being like gold dust. Majority of teachers may spend 5, 7, maybe up to 10 years on temporary or part-time contracts before finally getting some form of job security.

And why do so many people struggle to get a permanent job as a teacher? Could it be down to the simple fact that too many people are qualifying to become teachers? It's arguably the most secure job in the country (both private or public), it's well paid, the holidays are fantastic and the hours couldn't be more family friendly. Is it any surprise there's a surplus of graduates qualified to teach? Reducing teaching salaries should actually help correct this over-supply and improve the lot of those who want to be teachers (since they'd face less competition for the jobs as those who considered the high salary above the other attractive features of being a teacher sought out that high salary in another profession).

It's the right time to face down the unions, particularly with the spectacular logic fail demonstrated by John MacGabhann's statement at this conference that “allowances are an intrinsic, indivisible part of teachers’ pay” (if they were indivisible, they wouldn't be allowances, they'd be salary :rolleyes:), the 20% figure mentioned as pay reduction sounds a rather fanciful figure to me too, especially in an environment where increments are still being paid.

Mr Quinn would, I'd imagine, have the backing of his FG colleagues at cabinet level (and undoubtedly that of the taxpayer) but, ironically, it's most likely that it'd be his own party that wouldn't have the balls to stand up to their great friends the unions.

NIMAN

I think teachers could take a reduction in their 'qualification allowance'. That would help. We expect teachers to have a certain level of qualification.

Plus stop getting paid for 10 or 15min of 'yard duty' every now and again. This all adds up. I would see these are part of the job, not something you should get extra money for.

And also, up around here and I'm sure it applies in other areas of the country, there are alot of free lunches given out to those who can afford to buy their own. Teachers even get the lunch free! That could save a pile of money.

nice_guy80

some of the bull spouted here about teachers is unbelievable

just because a newspaper prints figures, doesn't mean they are accurate

all the principals and vice principals are included in those salary figures. they receive extra for their duties, so technically they are management.
principals into the classroom??? the majority of principals in primary schools ARE in the classroom. The rest run big schools, which can have from 8 up to 40 staff.
As for principals secondary schools, the responsibility they have is like running a company

yard supervision is included. that is not basic salary as people can ipt out of it and it also not paid until the end of the year, when you only get one third of it due to tax.Teachers do yard duty during their breaks. it is EU law that they get paid for it. would a factory worker have to keep working during their lunch??

qualification allowances are basically to acknowledge that you are qualified andhave the teacher training done. In the past many people (some still do) worked as teachers who were not fully qualified.

free lunches? lunches are provided to children in schools located in disadvantaged areas. often they are sent to school with no lunch. yes teachers often eat the left over sandwiches and fruit. whats the harm in that?

Sleepy

Who needs a newspaper to tell them that teachers are over-paid? Their union does it for you:

http://www.asti.ie/pay-and-conditions/pay/salary-scale/salary-scale-for-teachers-appointed-prior-to-january-2011/

n97 mini

An interesting contrast as to how the threat of strike action from the public sector can be viewed, and subsequently handled.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=paF5tEaqcVQ

thenumbersguy

Try this site for detailed pay stats and links

http://nospinireland.com/index.html

n97 mini

Needs work. Front page mentions "public sector pat rates". Pats are a perk I didn't know they were getting.

femur61

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

I
Over 80% of the education budget goes on wages and I can't imagine there is any low hanging fruit left to pick - so I genuinely cannot fathom where the money will come from if not from tax increases?


What do forum members think will be the outcome?

I was talking to my sister in laws yesterday who are public sector workers (4 of them). None are teachers and all feel exactly the same OP They have hit the nail on the head. They are getting annoyed at the behavior of the teachers unions and their members they feel they should appreciate how lucky they are. Everybody knows compared to other OECD countries they are near the top of wage earners.

touts

It is a bit silly to blame the next lot of tax rises (and there will be tax rises) on the teachers. The whole public expenditure needs to be cut. Teachers, Nurses, Civil servants, Welfare etc.

It is not surprising that a pencil pusher in Revenue said "oh it's all the fault of another department". She might as well have said "Don't cut me. Please don't cut me. Cut them!".

No one department can take all the blame and no one department can take all the pain. Croke Park needs to be scrapped. It is a Toxic deal and is making the country sick. There needs to be large scale targetted layoffs in the administration and back office functions of all departments. The remaining admin functions and the frontline functions need to then need to completely redesign their work practices to be efficent in maximising output rather than maximising staff numbers. Allowances, expenses and possibly salaries will all have to be cut.

At the same time we need significant cuts to welfare. It is insane that there are thousands of parents who are still saving the Children's allowance. Hell the post office has savings plans designed specifically to allow them do that. That needs to stop. Also paying for things like €400 communion dresses and a €200 bouncy castle has to stop immediately. Then the welfare payments in general need to be benchmarked to come into line with the EU averages. When you see thousands of east europeans happy to sit on the dole here where instead of going home when they lost their jobs you know something is desperately wrong with our levels of payment.

And we need to stop the general sense of entitlement that wider society has. For example just go onto the UL section and look at the outrage at having to pay for medical treatment as well as getting a free university education. When did university education include a right to free healthcare regardless of your ability to pay? We all need to accept that we have to pay our way. No one owes us a living.

However that simply is not going to happen with Labour in government. They are the political wing of the trade unions. So there will be general avoidance of reform within the civil service and possibly even an extension on the Croke Park deal. Individual groups will continue to point at other groups in the hope of continuing to confuse things. At the same time the German loan sharks will continue to demand repayment of the money Seanie Fitz and the Lads sto... sorry borrowed from them. To fund all that taxes for private sector workers will have to increase north of 60% while property taxes will have to average out somewhere around €1000 per house.

thenumbersguy

Until the whole bohemoth that is the public sector realises that the money that keeps it going comes from the hard earned money of the private sector there won't be any changes and that is unlikely to happen any time soon.
My wife is a civil servant, bottom level so she doesn't get the big wage packets and the stories that she has told me over the years of what goes on in her office would make any private sector worker cringe. Any privately run company on a contract would do the same job for half the cost. There are a lot of good people in many areas of the public sector that would love to see the service run properly but the bad habits are so ingrained that it would take a revolution to change things and our current group of politicians will never do that.

creedp

thenumbersguy wrote: »

Until the whole bohemoth that is the public sector realises that the money that keeps it going comes from the hard earned money of the private sector there won't be any changes and that is unlikely to happen any time soon.
My wife is a civil servant, bottom level so she doesn't get the big wage packets and the stories that she has told me over the years of what goes on in her office would make any private sector worker cringe. Any privately run company on a contract would do the same job for half the cost. There are a lot of good people in many areas of the public sector that would love to see the service run properly but the bad habits are so ingrained that it would take a revolution to change things and our current group of politicians will never do that.

So would you support the argument made here that your wife's wages should be slashed in order to sort out this behmoth? Should the pay of people who are doing their best and achieveing in their areas be slashed to sort out the inefficient ones? I can see this happenning in a private company .. you won't get your bonus this year and you pay will be slashed because your colleague is slacking!

Sleepy

creedp - that's exactly the problem with a unionised workforce.

Collective bargaining means thenumbersguy's wife (and other productive workers) would have to take a pay-cut in order to protect their lazier colleagues jobs. Without the union (and it baffles me why so many PS unions still have support for this very reason), the wasters could be made redundant, more efficient work practices could be put in place and salaries could be maintained (or even increased where deserved) for those productive workers that were left.

thenumbersguy

Sleepy makes the point very well. While the debate centres maiinly on pay rates and in many instances the pay rates are too high, there are huge savings to be made without touching pay rates at all. Staff numbers could be slashed without any effect on services if the organisation was run the same way as things are done in the private sector.

To give an example, in my wifes office, everyone does a daily return of the amount of work they have done for the day, ie number of claims processed etc. The numbers are recorded and .....nothing!. It doesn't matter if one person does three times what someone else does, noone is criticised or disciplined. Can you imagine that in a private company!. The official line is that everyone does the best they can.

As Sleepy said, reward the good workers, get rid of the wasters and a lot of the problems would be solved and this would apply throughout the public sector. We all know rubbish teachers,Gardai,doctors etc but when do you see them being sacked! Very rare!

creedp

thenumbersguy wrote: »

Sleepy makes the point very well. While the debate centres maiinly on pay rates and in many instances the pay rates are too high, there are huge savings to be made without touching pay rates at all. Staff numbers could be slashed without any effect on services if the organisation was run the same way as things are done in the private sector.

To give an example, in my wifes office, everyone does a daily return of the amount of work they have done for the day, ie number of claims processed etc. The numbers are recorded and .....nothing!. It doesn't matter if one person does three times what someone else does, noone is criticised or disciplined. Can you imagine that in a private company!. The official line is that everyone does the best they can.

As Sleepy said, reward the good workers, get rid of the wasters and a lot of the problems would be solved and this would apply throughout the public sector. We all know rubbish teachers,Gardai,doctors etc but when do you see them being sacked! Very rare!

Agree wholeheartedly with this view but don't tell me this is exclusive to the public sector. A friend of mine works in a large multi-national phara company where there is a dosser who is tolerated and the official line is the company is more concerned with possible litigation following sacking the guy that with the lack of productivity endured by keeping him on. Another guy working for another large pharma company tell yarns about excessive sick leave and people covering late arrivals/early departures, etc. Obviously these are examples that don't define a sector but they do show that unresolved IR problems exist in every sector. Anotehr person I knnow who works in a bank constantly bemoans a persons who is not only a dosser but is destructive to the operation of the bank. Again, senior mgt seem incapable of dealing with this problem. It is also the case that the bigger the organisation the more likely these problems will arise. I have no doubt that they exist to a greater extent in the PS and this is something that must be addressed as part of the reform of the service. However comparing a small private company to a large organisation such as a large private organisation of a public organisation is not always helpful.

Sleepy

That's a fair point and the larger an organisation is, the more likely it is for poor performers to get away with it / the harder it becomes to fire them. However, in a private company, it's the owners money that's wasted and if enough of it is tolerated, the company will go bust. In the PS, it's our money and, even when the organisation is bankrupt, the underachievers are not only being tolerated, they're being shielded from the reality of the economy by the Croke Park Agreement!

creedp

Sleepy wrote: »

That's a fair point and the larger an organisation is, the more likely it is for poor performers to get away with it / the harder it becomes to fire them. However, in a private company, it's the owners money that's wasted and if enough of it is tolerated, the company will go bust. In the PS, it's our money and, even when the organisation is bankrupt, the underachievers are not only being tolerated, they're being shielded from the reality of the economy by the Croke Park Agreement!

I find it difficult to understand why PS costs relate to our money but when a private sector org is innefficient and charges over the odds it the owners/shareholders' money. I buy products from innefficient/profiteering private orgs and pay for it through higher than necessary prices using my money. I am a customer of the private org just as a taxpayer/resident is a customer of the PS. Why do retail stores have a higher mark-up here than anywhere else? Why are banking charges (even pre-going bust) higher here than anywhere else? Why are legal costs so prohibitive in this country? Why is it so expensive to eat out in this country? Why? Why ? Why?

Sleepy

Simple answer: choice and competition.

I can choose to shop on-line, drive up to Northern Ireland or simply shop around to get better value for money when dealing with private sector companies.

When dealing with the public sector that option isn't there: I can educate my children in the local school or pay twice (since my taxes for that school) and send them to a private school if one's available in the area. Even if I could afford it I can't choose to have my area policed by a competitor to An Garda Siochana. Nor can I realistically avoid HSE hospitals, Local Government Services, the various quangos, semi-state energy rackets etc.

Idbatterim

Collective bargaining means thenumbersguy's wife (and other productive workers) would have to take a pay-cut in order to protect their lazier colleagues jobs. Without the union (and it baffles me why so many PS unions still have support for this very reason), the wasters could be made redundant, more efficient work practices could be put in place and salaries could be maintained (or even increased where deserved) for those productive workers that were left.

nail on the head! About the only thing that alot of PS workers share in common, is that they are PS workers, some of them on modest wages are being forced to take cuts, so that those above can continue to be on ridiculous pay and perks etc, i dont know how they think they are all in the same boat!

Onthe3rdDay

The problem teachers have is the minority of them that are just terrible at their jobs. No one tends to remember the decent teachers that worked hard and did a good job. We all remember the one's that were incompetent and lazy.

While many people have no day to day contact with public service workers we nearly all had to come through the school system. Bad teachers do a disservice to their colleagues as well as the pupils they're supposed to teach.

To think that Bad teachers are having long holidays and decent benefits while taxes continue to go up is a PR disaster.

Idbatterim

I find it difficult to understand why PS costs relate to our money but when a private sector org is innefficient and charges over the odds it the owners/shareholders' money. I buy products from innefficient/profiteering private orgs and pay for it through higher than necessary prices using my money. I am a customer of the private org just as a taxpayer/resident is a customer of the PS. Why do retail stores have a higher mark-up here than anywhere else? Why are banking charges (even pre-going bust) higher here than anywhere else? Why are legal costs so prohibitive in this country? Why is it so expensive to eat out in this country? Why? Why ? Why?

The answer is simple. pretty much all down to government related costs and decisions...

creedp

Idbatterim wrote: »

The answer is simple. pretty much all down to government related costs and decisions...

Seriously, every part of the private sector in Ireland would be world class from a competitive perspective if only for Govt costs and decisions?

Idbatterim

Seriously, every part of the private sector in Ireland would be world class from a competitive perspective if only for Govt costs and decisions?

The competition in most industries in the private sector is intense, have you seen the likes of dealpages? If they arent competitive, they will go bust, there is a cost to providing a rip off, pathetic service, unlike the PS... well actually there is a cost to that, for all of us, including those in the PS...

creedp

Sleepy wrote: »

Simple answer: choice and competition.

I can choose to shop on-line, drive up to Northern Ireland or simply shop around to get better value for money when dealing with private sector companies.

When dealing with the public sector that option isn't there: I can educate my children in the local school or pay twice (since my taxes for that school) and send them to a private school if one's available in the area. Even if I could afford it I can't choose to have my area policed by a competitor to An Garda Siochana. Nor can I realistically avoid HSE hospitals, Local Government Services, the various quangos, semi-state energy rackets etc.

Choice and competition are of course important in controlling the private sector but we also see that if not regulated what a private sector organisation can do to its customers, shareholders and employees. I can remember a prominent private sector advocate not so long ago strongly arguing that if only the public sector/health boards would adopt the internal control system of the Irish Banks ...

Sleepy

creedp wrote: »

Choice and competition are of course important in controlling the private sector but we also see that if not regulated what a private sector organisation can do to its customers, shareholders and employees. I can remember a prominent private sector advocate not so long ago strongly arguing that if only the public sector/health boards would adopt the internal control system of the Irish Banks ...

I'd advocate a far greater system of control for a public body than that but tbh I'd blame the public sector for the position the Irish Banks have left us in as the banks themselves. The regulator was asleep at the wheel, the government of the day's policies were akin to throwing bottles of gas into a bonfire, the councils were okaying anything that might generate some PEL/Rates revenue for them, the government of the day socialised their losses.

And, at the end of the day, no matter how galling the losses our government foisted on us to save the banks, the deficit in the public accounts is a problem of far greater magnitude for us.

creedp

Sleepy wrote: »

I'd advocate a far greater system of control for a public body than that but tbh I'd blame the public sector for the position the Irish Banks have left us in as the banks themselves. The regulator was asleep at the wheel, the government of the day's policies were akin to throwing bottles of gas into a bonfire, the councils were okaying anything that might generate some PEL/Rates revenue for them, the government of the day socialised their losses.

And, at the end of the day, no matter how galling the losses our government foisted on us to save the banks, the deficit in the public accounts is a problem of far greater magnitude for us.

Wasn't that what led our new white knight leader to damn us all in Davos by telling the world that everyone went mad borrowing in Ireland and this caused the belly-up. Good to know that he is taking politically responsibility for the problem! I'm sure he got a bear hug from Sarkosy for that particular gem!!

Sleepy

What else can the man do but acknowledge the truth!?

People borrowed too much, Banks lent too much and the Fianna Fail government did everything in their power to encourage it right up to the point where they guaranteed the losses of the banks.

There is no silver bullet. We can't pull a stroke to get out of where we are. All we can tighten our belts and get the public finances in order, make our country a more attractive place to do business and for entrepreneurs to start new businesses, work our collective arses off for the next decade and hope (or pray if you're that way inclined) that it's enough to provide a better Ireland for the next generation.

Brussels Sprout

I've always noticed that David McWilliams has steered well clear of ever passing comments on the Public Sector wage issues. I assumed that this was because he didn't want to alienate anybody on a topic that ignites strong feelings on either side of the debate. So it was with a whole lot of interest that I read his latest piece which was on the topic:

I have to ‘fess up. I have a soft spot for teachers. I am from a family of teachers on one side. Both my mother and one of my sisters are teachers, as are my uncles and aunts. Further back, there are teachers dotted around all over the place, so I am genetically pro-teacher. I also remember the teachers who influenced me years ago. These people made a huge impression on me and changed the way I looked at the world.

So it is with a certain amount of familial trepidation that I write this piece....

But from the point of view of salaries and pay rates, it seems that the idea that our country is bankrupt has evaded the teachers’ union leaders.

Teachers are not being singled out, nor are they being picked on. There just isn’t the cash out there.

But for the Croke Park Agreement, the writing is on the wall. The State can’t afford it. Never mind all the spin we are seeing and hearing right now from the likes of the NTMA or the Department of Finance. There will be no going back to the markets next year. The Spanish and Italian bond markets are getting hammered. There is no way in the world that anyone is going to lend to Ireland, unless we offer a realistic way out of this and stop pretending that national wage deals signed in 2010 have any realistic hope of being paid.

It strikes me that the union bosses are leading their members up a garden path if they keep telling them that the commitments entered into in the Croke Park deal can be met. This can only lead to disappointment. And there are few things more irresponsible than false hope.

Teachers need to learn hard lessons about pay

ardmacha

McWilliams is stretching the truth, as usual.
All this talk about wages declining is all very fine. But the CSO show that hourly wages generally are about 2% less than in early 2009, while teachers know very well that their wages have declined by 10% more than that (except the ones that can't do maths). Wages generally will not decline significantly in 2012, if at all.

sarumite

ardmacha wrote: »

McWilliams is stretching the truth, as usual.
All this talk about wages declining is all very fine. But the CSO show that hourly wages generally are about 2% less than in early 2009, while teachers know very well that their wages have declined by 10% more than that (except the ones that can't do maths). Wages generally will not decline significantly in 2012, if at all.

Are those numbers taking into account paybill reduction through job loss as well? If a company chooses to make people redundant over reducing wages it would seem appropriate to include that as well imo.