Croke Park II preliminary Talks started today

Brussels Sprout

It is understood that management outlined its agenda for the talks, including widespread cuts in pay and conditions aimed at securing savings of €1bn over the next three years, in addition to reductions planned under the existing Croke Park Agreement.

So, what do you think would be fair conditions under a new agreement?


link to story

Gumbo

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

So, what do you think would be fair conditions under a new agreement?

What do you think would be fair conditions under a new agreement?

Brussels Sprout

kceire wrote: »

What do you think would be fair conditions under a new agreement?

It's difficult to give specifics since there are such a variety of workers being represented but in general and off the top of my head:

• no cuts in core pay for anyone earning less than 40k guaranteed
• an end to automatic increments based on time served
• Redundancies to made in areas that are not currently productive (an example being the planning offices all over the country that have little or no work)
• 10% pay cut for anyone earning over 100k
• 5% for anyone earning between 40-100k
• Increase the working week to 39 hours in areas where it is currently less than this

Gumbo

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

It's difficult to give specifics since there are such a variety of workers being represented but in general and off the top of my head:

• no cuts in core pay for anyone earning less than 40k guaranteed
• an end to automatic increments based on time served
• Redundancies to made in areas that are not currently productive (an example being the planning offices all over the country that have little or no work)
• 10% pay cut for anyone earning over 100k
• 5% for anyone earning between 40-100k
• Increase the working week to 39 hours in areas where it is currently less than this

Most of which is fair and wont hit the low earners, but my pet hate is people stating that certain departments have little or no work to do (planning in your case). Have you experience of this or just ranting off?

How do you know they have little or nothing to do? I work very closely with a planning dept of a large local authority and they are as busy now than during the boom. With less staff, the people are doing more.

Where there might have been 5 people dealing with planning applications, there are now 1.
They are also working on projects that simply couldnt be done during the boom due to resources etc

leonidas83

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

So, what do you think would be fair conditions under a new agreement?


link to story

- A complete freeze on increments until the economy is back on its feet.
- Introduction of a system of where there is accountability for poor decision making & performance.
- Removal of jobs for life, under reasonable grounds it should be possible to fire anyone.
- Reduction of 20% in wages for anyone earning above 100k p.a.
- Reduction of 10% in wages for anyone earning above 50k p.a.

The above five would have to be immediate as there would be many many more in the pipeline

Gumbo

leonidas83 wrote: »

- Reduction of 20% in wages for anyone earning above 100k p.a.
- Reduction of 10% in wages for anyone earning above 50k p.a.

Wouldnt work, it would have to be staggered as you would have the following situation :

Person A earning €99,000 being reduced to €89,100
Person B earning €101,000 being reduced to €80,800

So more like :

0-€49,999 - Nil Cut
€50,000 - €99,999 - 10% on the portion above 50k
€100,000 - 10% on the portion between 50k and 99.999k and 20% on the portion above 100k.

Farmer Pudsey

It will be intresting to see how it develops. The government have a problem in that the present micky mouse deal did not present real savings and productivity. The day of the 35 hour week is going to be under pressure.

I see the lazy journalist refered to a 40 hour when they should have said 39 hour week. Excessive hoildays in Co Councils should be targated. 28 days should be the max for any staff including privilage or racing days.

Real productivity should also be a target and should not take the form of outsourcing work that should be able to be efficiently done in house. Savings should not be at the cost of service. There is no reason that teachers could not spend 10-15% more hours teaching for 5-10% less pay. After all primary teachers have over 14 weeks off per year and 2nd level have about 18 weeks/year off. Maybe 2-4 of these should be used for training ang curriclum review updating. The same with third level lecturers. Very few students have lectures friday PM. Colleges are usually closed for a month at christmass and 16 weeks during the summer as well as mid-terms.

Where services are provided to the public Passport Offices, Car tax, Land registery, DVO offices these should be open from 9.30am-5.00pm and should stay open during lunch time.

Expensive equipment in hospitals should be uses for at least 12 hour a day 6 days a week and appointments scheduled from 8.30am-8.30pm. 9-5 saturday would be acceptable.

The list is not exhaustive but these are some idea's

MagicSean

It would be fair to seperate employees by rank and job type and form a different agreement for each.

Gumbo

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

Where services are provided to the public Passport Offices, Car tax, Land registery, DVO offices these should be open from 9.30am-5.00pm and should stay open during lunch time.

Passport and motor tax offices are open till 5pm in Dublin. I agree though, it should be the same for the rest of the country.
The door closes in the motor tax office at 3.30 but then the final 90 mins is spent clearing the que and dealing with online/postal applications.

Same as the passport office, doors close at 4.30 but then they deal with the que built up afterwards.

leonidas83

kceire wrote: »

Wouldnt work, it would have to be staggered as you would have the following situation :

Person A earning €99,000 being reduced to €89,100
Person B earning €101,000 being reduced to €80,800

So more like :

0-€49,999 - Nil Cut
€50,000 - €99,999 - 10% on the portion above 50k
€100,000 - 10% on the portion between 50k and 99.999k and 20% on the portion above 100k.

Of course a detailed analysis would be required to implement the proposal's I outlined. What I was giving was a basic outline of the measures that would be required.

godtabh

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

The same with third level lecturers. Very few students have lectures friday PM. Colleges are usually closed for a month at christmass and 16 weeks during the summer as well as mid-terms.

Lectures do more than lecture

Chips Lovell

One thing I'd like them to address is the current arrangement whereby new entrants are going in on much lower pay scales.

Either bring everyone down to the new level or move both scales to meet in the middle. They're creating a two tier public sector, which is only going to build resentment between newer and older workers in the long run.

I really think the unions shot themselves in the foot over this one and have sacrificed long term unity for the short term gain of protecting existing members. I won't be at all surprised though if nothing happens.

On the issue of cutting high earners pay only, isn't it a case that relative to the private sector it's actually the lower paid public sector workers who have the bigger premium?

Head The Wall

kceire wrote: »

Wouldnt work, it would have to be staggered as you would have the following situation :

Person A earning €99,000 being reduced to €89,100
Person B earning €101,000 being reduced to €80,800

So more like :

0-€49,999 - Nil Cut
€50,000 - €99,999 - 10% on the portion above 50k
€100,000 - 10% on the portion between 50k and 99.999k and 20% on the portion above 100k.

Are you trying to say that people earning under 50k are getting paid appropriately and there are no savings to be made there. Last CSO report said people at the lower pay scales got overpaid the most. Your scenario would have people on lower scales also earning more than someone over 50k. You earn under 50k, right?

All scales should be cut, higher paid have already received a proportionally bigger cut, while your employer is broke there should be no exemptions

Gumbo

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

I really think the unions shot themselves in the foot over this one and have sacrificed long term unity for the short term gain of protecting existing members. I won't be at all surprised though if nothing happens.

When the time comes for new entrants, they wont sign up for membership. The unions as you say, will be the ones to lose out. I personally am in no union and most people that will come after me will most likely not join one either.

Head The Wall wrote: »

Are you trying to say that people earning under 50k are getting paid appropriately and there are no savings to be made there. Last CSO report said people at the lower pay scales got overpaid the most. Your scenario would have people on lower scales also earning more than someone over 50k. You earn under 50k, right?

All scales should be cut, higher paid have already received a proportionally bigger cut, while your employer is broke there should be no exemptions

Please re-read the posts. They are not my figures, they are from here

sarumite

kceire wrote: »

When the time comes for new entrants, they wont sign up for membership. The unions as you say, will be the ones to lose out. I personally am in no union and most people that will come after me will most likely not join one either.

One can only hope, but if you look at the current situation with the nursing unions, most are blaming the government and not looking at their established peers.

Chips Lovell

kceire wrote: »

When the time comes for new entrants, they wont sign up for membership. The unions as you say, will be the ones to lose out. I personally am in no union and most people that will come after me will most likely not join one either.

Yep, that's exactly the kind of situation I can envision. The unions need to start thinking strategically and see the merits for everyone sharing the pain.

fliball123

Should be interesteing heard Dorrans off one union defending nurses and midwifes and stating that the government seem to be going back to the well that is the public sector looking for savings. I felt like kicking the radio and why Pat Kenny didnt have the balls to say the water that comes into the well that is the public sector pay and pensions via private sector taxes is being hit severely. I mean over the next 30 years we have a pension bill of 116billion on pensions in the public sector alone. How in Gods name was this allowed to happen. Forget about Anglo the up and coming pensions for retiring public servants is going to make our kids and grand kids paupers. But typical union no concessions and no pay cuts and no numbers cut for his people. if they all take this stance there is major trouble ahead. I just hope the government have the balls to actually demand savings that can tangibly be seen not the current smokescreen that is going on. If the PS and unions can save 1 billion with out cutting front line services or giving an even more diminished service to the people without cutting people or wage it should have been done years ago. I think there will be some unrest after this one.IMO. I agree with a previous poster of cuts at the lower end being minimal and anything under say 30k not touched but for amounts over this cuts should scale upwards. mayb 25% for any money earned over 150k, 20% anything between 100k and 150k, 15% anything between 50k and 100k and 10% for anything money earned between 30k and 50k Then the mess that is the pensions need to be looked.

Godge

fliball123 wrote: »

Should be interesteing heard Dorrans off one union defending nurses and midwifes and stating that the government seem to be going back to the well that is the public sector looking for savings. I felt like kicking the radio and why Pat Kenny didnt have the balls to say the water that comes into the well that is the public sector pay and pensions via private sector taxes is being hit severely. I mean over the next 30 years we have a pension bill of 116billion on pensions in the public sector alone. How in Gods name was this allowed to happen. Forget about Anglo the up and coming pensions for retiring public servants is going to make our kids and grand kids paupers. But typical union no concessions and no pay cuts and no numbers cut for his people. if they all take this stance there is major trouble ahead. I just hope the government have the balls to actually demand savings that can tangibly be seen not the current smokescreen that is going on. If the PS and unions can save 1 billion with out cutting front line services or giving an even more diminished service to the people without cutting people or wage it should have been done years ago. I think there will be some unrest after this one.IMO. I agree with a previous poster of cuts at the lower end being minimal and anything under say 30k not touched but for amounts over this cuts should scale upwards. mayb 25% for any money earned over 150k, 20% anything between 100k and 150k, 15% anything between 50k and 100k and 10% for anything money earned between 30k and 50k Then the mess that is the pensions need to be looked.

This thread is once again full of things that will not happen - I doubt very much there will be any pay cut, and if there is, it will be limited in nature and not more than 10%, even for the highest earners. Those hoping for something like 25% will be severely disappointed.

As well as people looking for things that just will not happen, the threads are full of inaccuracies and out-of-date facts. Take for example, the reference to the €116 billion pensions bill referenced in the above post. No link is provided but from memory I think it is based on a 2008 actuarial projection which has been quoted ever since by economists who don't understand it.

That study was based on a number of assumptions including:

- pension scheme remaining unchanged
- inflation plus pay increase to average around 4-5%.

In the five years since that study, pay has gone down rather than up and the pension scheme has been closed off to new members. The pension levy has also been introduced and a cut made to existing pensioners. The numbers of public servants has been cut and recruitment has virtually disappeared. The resultant effects of those measures have not been factored into the €116 billion cost and the result means that the real current figure is probably somewhere between €80 and €90 billion. As that is a total cost and not a cost per year, it is not that much greater than the current amount being paid. I just do not understand how the idea of a €116 billion public service pension hole keeps getting traction.

frankosw

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

Colleges are usually closed for a month at christmass and 16 weeks during the summer as well as mid-terms.

Complete rubbish. Colleges close from 23rd Dec to the 2nd of January and they reopen on that date.

I addition they do *not* close for the summer..they are open throughout the year.

sean200

kceire wrote: »

What do you think would be fair conditions under a new agreement?

?

Theboinkmaster

Godge wrote: »

As well as people looking for things that just will not happen, the threads are full of inaccuracies and out-of-date facts. Take for example, the reference to the €116 billion pensions bill referenced in the above post. No link is provided but from memory I think it is based on a 2008 actuarial projection which has been quoted ever since by economists who don't understand it.

That study was based on a number of assumptions including:

- pension scheme remaining unchanged
- inflation plus pay increase to average around 4-5%.

In the five years since that study, pay has gone down rather than up and the pension scheme has been closed off to new members. The pension levy has also been introduced and a cut made to existing pensioners. The numbers of public servants has been cut and recruitment has virtually disappeared. The resultant effects of those measures have not been factored into the €116 billion cost and the result means that the real current figure is probably somewhere between €80 and €90 billion. As that is a total cost and not a cost per year, it is not that much greater than the current amount being paid. I just do not understand how the idea of a €116 billion public service pension hole keeps getting traction.

Point is the same though - whether it's €80Bn or €116Bn it's still a massive liability.

frankosw

Theboinkmaster wrote: »

Point is the same though - whether it's €80Bn or €116Bn it's still a massive liability.

And 36 billion is a massive difference...

sarumite

Godge wrote: »

This thread is once again full of things that will not happen -

Maybe that is because the OP wasn't asking what they think would happen but rather "So, what do you think would be fair conditions under a new agreement?".

Personally I think what would be fair may not happen and what will happen may not be fair.

sean200

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

It will be intresting to see how it develops. The government have a problem in that the present micky mouse deal did not present real savings and productivity. The day of the 35 hour week is going to be under pressure.

I see the lazy journalist refered to a 40 hour when they should have said 39 hour week. Excessive hoildays in Co Councils should be targated. 28 days should be the max for any staff including privilage or racing days.

Real productivity should also be a target and should not take the form of outsourcing work that should be able to be efficiently done in house. Savings should not be at the cost of service. There is no reason that teachers could not spend 10-15% more hours teaching for 5-10% less pay. After all primary teachers have over 14 weeks off per year and 2nd level have about 18 weeks/year off. Maybe 2-4 of these should be used for training ang curriclum review updating. The same with third level lecturers. Very few students have lectures friday PM. Colleges are usually closed for a month at christmass and 16 weeks during the summer as well as mid-terms.

Do you get any facts correct?
Colleges this year close on the December the 21st this year (last EXAM FINISHED AT 5PM)
They opened on the 6th and the reason that there are no lectures on a Friday is because the students won’t turn up after lunch on a Friday.
It great to have all you facts incorrect while being outside looking in

fliball123

Godge wrote: »

This thread is once again full of things that will not happen - I doubt very much there will be any pay cut, and if there is, it will be limited in nature and not more than 10%, even for the highest earners. Those hoping for something like 25% will be severely disappointed.

As well as people looking for things that just will not happen, the threads are full of inaccuracies and out-of-date facts. Take for example, the reference to the €116 billion pensions bill referenced in the above post. No link is provided but from memory I think it is based on a 2008 actuarial projection which has been quoted ever since by economists who don't understand it.

That study was based on a number of assumptions including:

- pension scheme remaining unchanged
- inflation plus pay increase to average around 4-5%.

In the five years since that study, pay has gone down rather than up and the pension scheme has been closed off to new members. The pension levy has also been introduced and a cut made to existing pensioners. The numbers of public servants has been cut and recruitment has virtually disappeared. The resultant effects of those measures have not been factored into the €116 billion cost and the result means that the real current figure is probably somewhere between €80 and €90 billion. As that is a total cost and not a cost per year, it is not that much greater than the current amount being paid. I just do not understand how the idea of a €116 billion public service pension hole keeps getting traction.

The 116 Billion was discussed this morning on Pat Kenny's Radio program with Liam Doran I would hazard a guess if it was wrong Doran would have brought him to task

www.rte.ie/radio/ go to pat kenny it is the first segment on todays program. Sorry if I was not clear thats the full cost of retiring PS over the next 30 years so its not a yearly cost. But guess what we are borrowing to pay this so add in the interest as well.

As for what you say about cuts. I cant see their being any cuts, as there are both unionists and civil servants on both sides of the table. Its like the cow and sheep arguing at the butchers shop as to who will go under the knife first. The only problem is there is a gun to their head. The Troika have told the gov that the last round of redundancies was very expensive and suggested that this is not the way to go next time. So they need another 1 billion in savings and the troika were also keen to point out that the savings needed to be tangible. So if the Unions, PS and gov can come up with a way of saving 1billion without diminishing an already shockingly bad public service to its people, without industrial action, without pay cuts and without people being let go then let them do it.

frankosw

fliball123 wrote: »

. So if the Unions, PS and gov can come up with a way of saving 1billion without diminishing an already shockingly bad public service to its people, without industrial action, without pay cuts and without people being let go then let them do it.

Do you avail of public services yourself or do you do all your business with private companies?

Manach

Re: Lecturers, I know one data point is not much to add to the discussion, but I'd know several who work during term up till 9pm holding night-classes, as well as holding/organising various seminars during the terms.

For OP, what I'd like is someone besides the Government directly holding negotiations with the unions as they might have a perceived conflict of interest either way.

sean200

frankosw wrote: »

Do you avail of public services yourself or do you do all your business with private companies?

He might not even know the meaning of the public sector
?????

fliball123

frankosw wrote: »

Do you avail of public services yourself or do you do all your business with private companies?

I have availed of Public services in the past but in general I try not to use them as they are very poor IMO where as if I pay to do something privately the services is always better. But thats only my opinion. But I stand by the fact that services have been diminished, you cannot take the money out of services without it being hit whilst protecting pay and conditions of the work force behind it.

sean200

frankosw wrote: »

Complete rubbish. Colleges close from 23rd Dec to the 2nd of January and they reopen on that date.

I addition they do *not* close for the summer..they are open throughout the year.

correct and they were open for the public to use
But i did read in the media that most private companies did not open till the 7th

fliball123

sean200 wrote: »

Moan moan moan
I tell you what, lets privatise the public sector and let the idiots in the private sector **** that up the same way as they ****ed up this country
Just like this idiot

Sorry any links to the private sector doing this..the worst were the banks which only accrue for 1/3 of our debt and deficit. The other 2/3s was on the continuing gravy train that is public sector pay and pensions and our welfare state. So get your facts right and I believe that the public servants let us down with regards to our banks, where were the regulators, politicians to say stop? and now we see the banks in a lot of trouble there wont be any pay rises for those boys in the near future but our country is borrowing 18 billion and the public sector still think it prudent to be giving themselves pay rises??