Croke Park deal to fail

kippy

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

I do think anyone who hides their profession in such debates only make it look like they have something to hide, even if they claim they don't. It's not like it's a big secret to the world (unless your job is something illegal :P). Furthermore, in a discussion on public sector pay, it allows people to tailor their argument to the person they are discussing it with.

You can claim that PS workers are overpaid, but relative to who? To the guy who scrubs the toilets at McDonalds? To the Taoisach?

In order to appreciate your stance, we need to know what direction you are coming at this debate from. Refusing to give a hint of what sort of job you work, and as such what wages & benefits , means that you are deliberately keeping the argument unfairly one sided. And the only reason to do that is if you feel that it would only serve to make your argument look to be on shaky grounds. As such, it is very relevant to such discussions, as it allows us a fuller view of why you feel like you do, why you argue like you do and why you believe what you believe. That's the difference between having a debate and having a rant; if you want a debate, you lay as many cards as you can on the table, and we talk things out. If you want a rant, you hide as many as you want, because then, obviously, you're not interested in hearing both sides of the argument or coming to new conclusions. You want to moan about things.

So please do continue to spout nonsense and lies about pensions, working hours, etc etc. But until you give us an example of your own to compare it to, you hold no credibility in such discussions.

To be fair to the poster, the issue really isn't how "well" paid anyone is or rather it shouldnt be.
The issue is the emplorer of public servants is borrowing approximately one billion per month to keep the state afloat. And while people have to put bread on the table, the state simply cannot afford to pay the rates it currently pays.

smash

Jawgap wrote: »

Actually, you can't. If you are caught doing nixers in the private sector the taxman will want a word with you - if you are caught doing them in a lot of public sector jobs, the taxman will still want a word and its grounds for disciplinary action up to and including dismissal.

In my own role, I'm prohibited from taking on any outside work - so if my financial situation deteriorated to the point of insolvency I'm not allowed go take a second job (tax paying or not).

I think it's pretty much the same in the Guards and a lot of other parts of the PS.

I also have to declare my financial interests each year and I'm not allowed accept gifts or hospitality in excess of €125 - anything over €10 has to be declared to the big bosses.

When I joined the PS I even had to sell the small amount of shares I had in my previous employers' firm - going into a regulatory role means removing any suspicion of a conflict of interest.

It's the same with the private sector though. An employer can sack you for engaging in a conflict of interest if you're caught working on the side.

malibu4u

Jawgap wrote: »

If you are caught doing nixers in the private sector the taxman will want a word with you - if you are caught doing them in a lot of public sector jobs, the taxman will still want a word and its grounds for disciplinary action up to and including dismissal.

given the number of for example teachers who do grinds, I find its hard to believe "its grounds for disciplinary action up to and including dismissal.".
all the teachers I know insist on cash, no cheques, no credit card. i know lots of public servants who openly done work on the side over the years eg house drawings, extension supervision, summer outdoor course teaching and so on.

Lord TSC

kippy wrote: »

To be fair to the poster, the issue really isn't how "well" paid anyone is or rather it shouldnt be.
The issue is the emplorer of public servants is borrowing approximately one billion per month to keep the state afloat. And while people have to put bread on the table, the state simply cannot afford to pay the rates it currently pays.

In fairness, you're right. But there's some people coming on who do want to raise the issue of how well paid some are, and also to attack some sectors for having perks and benefits (holidays, pensions, and yes, rate of pay comparative to how "hard" a job is perceived to be).

It's not that I'm addressing the posters who are being quite reasonable and debating the point at hand; with that post, I'm addressing the ones who seem intent on mouthing off about the PS workers wages in relation to what their job entails, both in reality and in the perception of the poster, and who are spreading lies about what some jobs entail.

kippy

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

In fairness, you're right. But there's some people coming on who do want to raise the issue of how well paid some are, and also to attack some sectors for having perks and benefits (holidays, pensions, and yes, rate of pay comparative to how "hard" a job is perceived to be).

It's not that I'm addressing the posters who are being quite reasonable and debating the point at hand; with that post, I'm addressing the ones who seem intent on mouthing off about the PS workers wages in relation to what their job entails, both in reality and in the perception of the poster, and who are spreading lies about what some jobs entail.

You'll have that about almost any topic on any forum, and that works both ways as well, you've plenty people here who say they work in the public sector, who seem to have absolutely no idea about how things work in the private sector.
I suppose the less time spent arguing with the more "lose" on either side, the better.

Boombastic

All this talk of 'why didn't ye take a public jobs during the boom' :rolleyes: The Celtic tiger ended 5 years ago, seems like some in the public sector can't keep up with the times and and living in a past that ended half a decade ago.

Jawgap

Boombastic wrote: »

All this talk of 'why didn't ye take a public jobs during the boom' :rolleyes: The Celtic tiger ended 5 years ago, seems like some in the public sector can't keep up with the times and and living in a past that ended half a decade ago.

I think the point is that if you were inolved in recruiting for the PS during the boom years you'd have shared experiences of being dismissed and even, in one case I remember, being laughed at when you told people the starting salaries.

We also used to bet on how long new starts would stay - starting at 9 and gone by lunchtime wasn't unusual and 30 minutes was the record.

Additionally, more than once I remember being told that I must not be any good if I was working in the PS - the COO who made the remark to me is redundant when last I heard.

Now it seems that the shouting classes who were so dismissive of the PS are now realising that perhaps the PS isn't the worst place in the world to work.......and there are still plenty of jobs in the PS, which begs the question that if they are online why aren't they applying for any of them?

Maybe those whinging the loudest are the ones who realise they're the chumps for not positioning their careers to be more resilient.

Menas

Jawgap wrote: »

I think the point is that if you were inolved in recruiting for the PS during the boom years you'd have shared experiences of being dismissed and even, in one case I remember, being laughed at when you told people the starting salaries.

We also used to bet on how long new starts would stay - starting at 9 and gone by lunchtime wasn't unusual and 30 minutes was the record.

Additionally, more than once I remember being told that I must not be any good if I was working in the PS - the COO who made the remark to me is redundant when last I heard.

Now it seems that the shouting classes who were so dismissive of the PS are now realising that perhaps the PS isn't the worst place in the world to work.......and there are still plenty of jobs in the PS, which begs the question that if they are online why aren't they applying for any of them?

Maybe those whinging the loudest are the ones who realise they're the chumps for not positioning their careers to be more resilient.

But what people are saying is "now that CP2 has been rejected what is the solution - how will our bankrupt country make the savings necessary in the public sector pay/pensions bill to bring it back to affordable levels?"

I don't see anyone here boo hooing that they cannot get a job in the PS so am not sure why you have brought that up.

Jawgap

Trigger Happy wrote: »

But what people are saying is "now that CP2 has been rejected what is the solution - how will our bankrupt country make the savings necessary in the public sector pay/pensions bill to bring it back to affordable levels?"

I don't see anyone here boo hooing that they cannot get a job in the PS so am not sure why you have brought that up.

A lot of people have been on whining about how well paid and cushy the PS is, well if it is (relative to the private sector) I thought they might be interested in getting one of the jobs.......

you might not have read my previous posts, so here goes again......

If you want to shave €300m + off the PS pay bill, start with compulsory redudancies and compulsory re-deployment - that way you get the savings AND you get a PS fit for purpose. Also, redundancy should not be based on LIFO. LIFO may be cheaper but it doesn't your left with the best people, just the ones who've been there the longest.

The only proviso I'd add is that any such savings made in the HSE should be ploughed back into clinical staff - reduce the number of managers and admins and increase the numbers of nurses, doctors, radiographers etc.

Bring in 3 to 5 year renewable contracts for anyone on Asst Principal or above - if you don't perform, you don't get renewed.

Better use of technology

....and seriously update working practices. We inherited a colonial based civil service from the Brits and it hasn't changed much in 90 years.

Galwayguy35

Gordon Stale Birthmark wrote: »

I didn't mean it was a dig at anyone, its an accepted term used when talking about the workforce. I did plenty of work on building sites myself at summers and weekends during my undergrad and don't think less of anybody no matter what their job be they a cleaner or a CEO (I think less of dole scroungers though).

Plenty did make a lot of money as has already been outlined, I didn't say everyone.

Well I agree with you there, I despise dole cheats.

Menas

Jawgap wrote: »

A lot of people have been on whining about how well paid and cushy the PS is, well if it is (relative to the private sector) I thought they might be interested in getting one of the jobs.......

you might not have read my previous posts, so here goes again......

If you want to shave €300m + off the PS pay bill, start with compulsory redudancies and compulsory re-deployment - that way you get the savings AND you get a PS fit for purpose. Also, redundancy should not be based on LIFO. LIFO may be cheaper but it doesn't your left with the best people, just the ones who've been there the longest.

The only proviso I'd add is that any such savings made in the HSE should be ploughed back into clinical staff - reduce the number of managers and admins and increase the numbers of nurses, doctors, radiographers etc.

Bring in 3 to 5 year renewable contracts for anyone on Asst Principal or above - if you don't perform, you don't get renewed.

Better use of technology

....and seriously update working practices. We inherited a colonial based civil service from the Brits and it hasn't changed much in 90 years.

You are right, I did not see your previous post and looking at it now this is one of the most sensible posts I have seen on this thread (apart from my own of course!).
If the unions and government were up for a head to toe reform of the public service to weed out the rot, correct broken/stupid/non-efficient work practices, centralize cross department services (IT, real estate, cleaning etc) work in true partnership with SMART goals then I would dance from the roof tops because this would achive savings this year and every year and leave us all with a PS that we could be proud of.
But I don't think this will happen. They may pay lip service to it and achieve very little. To many reasons not to 'fix' it will arise.
So the government prefers to use a blunt instrument like pay cuts to get what they need.

Boombastic

Jawgap wrote: »

.............
....and seriously update working practices. We inherited a colonial based civil service from the Brits and it hasn't changed much in 90 years.

I agree with a lot of your reform proposals, but the resistance by the public sector to embrace change will prevent real change from occurring.

malibu4u

Jawgap wrote: »

A lot of people have been on whining about how well paid and cushy the PS is, well if it is (relative to the private sector) I thought they might be interested in getting one of the jobs.......

I remember in 2005 , 500 applying for one of 8 jobs in the public sector. Even then demand for jobs in the public sector exceeded supply. there are 2 million people in the private sector. the public sector is not recruiting, or certainly not recruiting enough to take on 2 million people.

Besides the country will end up even broker if extra public servants are taken on.

Best thing is to bring pay in to line with other sectors. Everyone knows the public sector is overpaid and there is huge waste , for example unecessary sickies, slacking, long breaks.

malibu4u

malibu4u wrote: »

I remember in 2005 , 500 applying for one of 8 jobs in the public sector. Even then demand for jobs in the public sector exceeded supply. there are 2 million people in the private sector. the public sector is not recruiting, or certainly not recruiting enough to take on 2 million people.

Besides the country will end up even broker if extra public servants are taken on.

Best thing is to bring pay in to line with other sectors. Everyone knows the public sector is overpaid and there is huge waste , for example unecessary sickies, slacking, long breaks.

I know of a number of highly skilled positions that cannot be filled because anyone qualified to do them is walking away as soon as they hear the salary. Its about half what they can get in the private sector, this is now not a few years ago.

johnnydeep

Jawgap wrote: »

I think the point is that if you were inolved in recruiting for the PS during the boom years you'd have shared experiences of being dismissed and even, in one case I remember, being laughed at when you told people the starting salaries.

We also used to bet on how long new starts would stay - starting at 9 and gone by lunchtime wasn't unusual and 30 minutes was the record.

Additionally, more than once I remember being told that I must not be any good if I was working in the PS - the COO who made the remark to me is redundant when last I heard.

Now it seems that the shouting classes who were so dismissive of the PS are now realising that perhaps the PS isn't the worst place in the world to work.......and there are still plenty of jobs in the PS, which begs the question that if they are online why aren't they applying for any of them?

Maybe those whinging the loudest are the ones who realise they're the chumps for not positioning their careers to be more resilient.

really checked that out and no sign of recruiting any nurses gardai firemen customs. guess it is only the lower paid (nobody gives a **** about) administrative staff that leave

Menas

johnnydeep wrote: »

really checked that out and no sign of recruiting any nurses gardai firemen customs. guess it is only the lower paid (nobody gives a **** about) administrative staff that leave

IT project manager on up to 55k in there with 25 dsys holidays. That Is not low level admin. That was the only one I looked at.

smash

Trigger Happy wrote: »

IT project manager on up to 55k in there with 25 dsys holidays. That Is not low level admin. That was the only one I looked at.

It is low level salary though for the job.

malibu4u

I know of a number of highly skilled positions that pay double in the public sector compared with the going rate in the private sector.

The taxpayer is being fleeced yet again.

malibu4u

malibu4u wrote: »

I know of a number of highly skilled positions that pay double in the public sector compared with the going rate in the private sector.

The taxpayer is being fleeced yet again.

I doubt there are many if any jobs fitting the above description.

Menas

smash wrote: »

It is low level salary though for the job.

Min 3 years experience! The job is a program office job. The salary range is about right imo and deffo not the admin type job that job one wants as someone said earlier.

smash

Trigger Happy wrote: »

Min 3 years experience! The job is a program office job. The salary range is about right imo and deffo not the admin type job that job one wants as someone said earlier.

Shouldn't be called an IT Manager position then.

johnnydeep

johnnydeep wrote: »

really checked that out and no sign of recruiting any nurses gardai firemen customs. guess it is only the lower paid (nobody gives a **** about) administrative staff that leave

There are plenty of positions open in Universitys and IT's around the county, just look at their websites.

Celticfire

malibu4u wrote: »

I know of a number of highly skilled positions that pay double in the public sector compared with the going rate in the private sector.

The taxpayer is being fleeced yet again.

A list of these jobs with the remuneration in both sectors (with a little bit of proof thrown in) would be nice.

Menas

smash wrote: »

Shouldn't be called an IT Manager position then.

What are you on about? It is not called an IT Manager position.

smash

Trigger Happy wrote: »

What are you on about? It is not called an IT Manager position.

IT Project manager... Still underpaid.

Menas

smash wrote: »

IT Project manager... Still underpaid.

No it is not. Go to a jobs site and an entry level it project manager gets from 25k upwards. Senior roles with 15 years plus year experience get 90k plus. So up to 55k for this role with this experience requirement with these benefits is good.

Why do you think this is underpaid?

smash

Trigger Happy wrote: »

No it is not. Go to a jobs site and an entry level it project manager gets from 25k upwards. Senior roles with 15 years plus year experience get 90k plus. So up to 55k for this role with this experience requirement with these benefits is good.

Why do you think this is underpaid?

Because I know a lot of IT Project managers, all on better wages than this.

Menas

smash wrote: »

Because I know a lot of IT Project managers, all on better wages than this.

Good for them. And you know the difference between project management and program office too?
I know a lot of unemployed it project managers who would not consider this underpaid. And a lot of guys in employment who do not earn this much. That it with pmp, itil and a degree.
The market would tend to agree with me and this role will get filled at this rate.
As a tax payer I would prefer jobs get advertised at market rates and not on the basis of what your friends say they get paid.

Odysseus

malibu4u wrote: »

I know of a number of highly skilled positions that pay double in the public sector compared with the going rate in the private sector.

The taxpayer is being fleeced yet again.

As all public job paysacales and position offered are advertised, you should be able to show us links to the jobs then?

smash

Trigger Happy wrote: »

As a tax payer I would prefer jobs get advertised at market rates and not on the basis of what your friends say they get paid.

So would I.