Civil Servants want their money back.....

Dr. Kenneth Noisewater

Civil servants demand pay restoration before tax cuts

PSEU says civil servant on €50,000 has lost €483 per month as a result of cuts since 2009




Mid-ranking civil servants have demanded the Government give priority to restoring their pay and conditions of employment before introducing any general tax cuts.
Addressing its annual delegate conference in Killarney today, Public Service Executive Union (PSEU) president Brendan Lawless said a disproportionate amount of the burden of repairing the public finances had fallen on public servants.

“If the Government has scope for easing on austerity, we want
our money back”.

Mr Lawless said in better circumstances, people subjected to pay cuts and disimprovements in conditions, who had paid a disproportionate amount for the country’s economic collapse, were entitled to be first in the queue for any restoration.

“More than that though, the message needs to go from public servants to the political system that tax cuts damage the ability to deliver public services while those who have suffered disproportionately from austerity through income cuts and longer working hours deserve and indeed demand that they be treated fairly and that they begin restoration of their losses at the earliest opportunity.”

The PSEU represents around 10,000 mid-grade civil servants as well as some executive staff in companies and organisations such as eircom, An Post, the National Lottery and the Irish Aviation Authority.

Mr Lawless said the union would also resist any attempt to change members’ pension arrangements.

He told delegates that they should prepare “so that they understand the implications of any such battle if, or more than likely, when it arises”.

He said that any attempt to interfere with existing pension arrangements for staff in the Civil Service had been made in the talks with the
Government that led up to the Haddington Road agreement last year.

He said the Haddington Road deal had provided protection to pension arrangements until at least 2016 “but it would be a mistake to assume
that the issue will not arise again”.

Mr Lawless also urged delegates that they needed to consider change to the existing union structure in the Civil Service.

He said the process of negotiating the Haddington Road agreement had highlighted the fragmented nature of the public service union
organisation.

“Our employer, instead of dealing with a tight organisation speaking with one voice, finds itself in the position that it can operated with
tightly-controlled unanimity while on our side our response is disjointed, sometimes mutually contradictory and often no better than the lowest common denominator.

“That cannot be in the interests of public servants. Indeed it has not been in their interests in the last five years.”

“It is now almost three years since the Commission on Trade Unions recommended that there should be one union for administrative public
servants and soon we will need to decide if that is what we wish as this issue cannot drag on forever.”

In a bulletin to members issued before the conference the
PSEU general secretary Tom Geraghty said longer working hours introduced for
his members under the Haddington Road agreement last year represented the
equivalent of an average increase of 13 working days per year .

Mr Geraghty said a civil servant earning €50,000 per year at the start of the economic crisis in 2009 has lost around €483 per month as a
result of pay cuts, the pension levy and higher taxes imposed in the intervening period, their trade union has maintained.

He also said that the cost of the public service pay bill had reduced by 17.7 per cent or €3.3 billion between 2009 and 2013.

He said €1.8 billion of that reduction had been generated by the original Croke Park agreement.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/civil-servants-demand-pay-restoration-before-tax-cuts-1.1772520

What say you folks? Do these civil servants have a point? Is it time that they were restored to their pre-paycut salaries?

In my opinion, its not a runner, not at least until the budget deficit has been cleared. The country is already borrowing too much money to be giving it's employees pay rises.

However, I don't like the way the Irish Times have reported this (I know, I know). I heard Jack O'Connor on Matt Cooper and they don't seem to be making (despite Brendan Lawless' use of the word) demands..... hardly in a position to be doing so in fairness. Shoddy agendaised journalism.

gandalf

Based on the report on RTE the stench of entitlement from these guys is unbelievable. As some one who has suffered unemployment for two of the last four years it is obvious that some of these guys haven't a clue what an awful lot of us have gone through.

If we are in a better place then everyone in the state should get the benefit through tax cuts. I wonder is this happening because the union gets a percentage of the gross wage and they want more revenue due to dropping memberships.

The usual argument was trotted out that the "private" sector were getting pay rises. I think they will find that those getting raises are either in organisations making profit or that the individuals have skills that are in demand.

Sand

I think you'll find little support. Given the embarrassing debacle over the civil servants performance appraisal process, I cant see any pay rises being justified even if there was money to spare (and there isn't). The entitlement attitude should have been smashed after 2008, but happily for worst performers, the same poor performance and lack of accountability that contributed to the crisis has survived with little change. FG, and particularly Labour, have conclusively failed on that front.

SCOOP 64

PSEU says civil servant on €50,000 has lost €483 per month as a result of cuts since 2009.

But stiil nothing worst then having no job at all.

Flex

Based on the previous CSO report that compared private and public pay on an age and qualification and so on adjusted basis, the public sector were still paid 8-16% more than their private counterpart after the pay cuts IIRC. We should allow private sector pay rates to catch up with public sector pay rates before we consider more public sector pay increases.

Godge

Flex wrote: »

Based on the previous CSO report that compared private and public pay on an age and qualification and so on adjusted basis, the public sector were still paid 8-16% more than their private counterpart after the pay cuts IIRC. We should allow private sector pay rates to catch up with public sector pay rates before we consider more public sector pay increases.

Link please to that study?

Idbatterim

I just saw this article, came straight on here and afterhours to see if a thread had been started! so they dont reckon it should go towards job creation for those who dont have a job or to possibly towards higher pay for new Ps entrants who have been shafted on pay compared to someone doing exactly the same job? Those f**cking parasites can take a hike! Income tax cuts will give them a pay rise!

If they claim the private sector are handing out payrises willy nilly, let them join the private sector. Wasnt that their argument during the boom, well anyone could have gotten in on the act?

The usual argument was trotted out that the "private" sector were getting pay rises

Really, they must know more about my situation than I do then...

They were entitled to be "first in the queue" for any restoration, he said.

They are bottom of the heap IMO, right back there with pensioners...

marc_faber

labour need a boost in the polls so i wouldnt rule it out , fianna fail will need to engage in auction politics if they are to get back in goverment , courting the public sector has always worked for them

it may happen

sarumite

This is a non story really. We are in the silly season of union annual meetings when the more irrational and militant elements within the union movement shout the loudest and tend to ramp up a misguided sense of entitlement. The union leaders tend to dance to this tune during this period as it is the easier option and they know that in a few weeks the rabble rousing will settle down.

woodoo

I think its more the unions taking a position before the next Croke Park/Haddington Road agreement in a year or so. They are basically saying we want something back next time so don't even dream of trying to take more of us or worsening our conditions.

I think the gross salaries should not increase but i think some of the pension levy should be given back and i would support bringing the hours worked back to pre haddington road levels.

mikehn

Civil service salaries should be benchmarked against the private sector by an independent panel. :cool:

marc_faber

sarumite wrote: »

This is a non story really. We are in the silly season of union annual meetings when the more irrational and militant elements within the union movement shout the loudest and tend to ramp up a misguided sense of entitlement. The union leaders tend to dance to this tune during this period as it is the easier option and they know that in a few weeks the rabble rousing will settle down.

their is political currency to be earned from giving the public sector a pay rise , the private sector majority may not like it but they are far less powerful

that the country cannot remotely afford it is irrelevant

Idbatterim

who would PS mainly vote for in their infinite short sighted wisdom? Labour or the FF yes men I take predominantly I take it? Is the private sector less powerful though, they are a multiple of PS numbers wise...

ParkRunner

woodoo wrote: »

I think its more the unions taking a position before the next Croke Park/Haddington Road agreement in a year or so. They are basically saying we want something back next time so don't even dream of trying to take more of us or worsening our conditions.

I think the gross salaries should not increase but i think some of the pension levy should be given back and i would support bringing the hours worked back to pre haddington road levels.

This is it exactly. Both a pay rise and a pension levy cut will have pretty much the same effect on the payslip at the end of each fortnight. A pay rise would lead to meltdown here, yet a pension levy cut would probably be acceptable along with a tax cut to appease everyone.

RichardAnd

I wouldn't get too worked up about this. Remember, the original Croke Park deal contained a condition that pay would be "reimbursed" to some public sector workers if and when things improved. It was probably inserted into the deal so that the unions could save some face with their members, but the fact that it was there meant that this situation was going to come up eventually.

Another thing to consider is that these are the words of a union. There's a hint of recovery in the air, so it seems only natural that the unions are going to be asking for money. It highly irritating to hear a public service union ask for pay rises over private workers, but no union in the world has ever said "we're all right for now, lads. Take care of others, and we'll talk then."

As to what will come of this, that will be interesting. Politically, the government would be risking a lot of acrimony if the economy improves with PS workers' seeing some perks. For that reason alone, I think it's likely that there could be some sort of deal struck before the next general election. Perhaps Croke Park III is on the cards?

As I said though, this was bound to happen eventually.

creedp

RichardAnd wrote: »

It highly irritating to hear a public service union ask for pay rises over private workers, but no union in the world has ever said "we're all right for now, lads. Take care of others, and we'll talk then."

Presumably it all right Jack for private sector unions to be calling for pay rises for their members. Maybe the public sector unions should be calling for another 10% pay cut for their members so the private sector workers could be given a tax break (we all now the PS pay no taxes) although I suspect immediately a tread would open up here castigating that offer and suggesting it should be a minimum of a 50% cut. I suppose, on a good day, you could consider it to be mildly entertaining.

Heroditas

At risk of causing trouble here but how much of the €483 would many of those people recouped through increments?

Rorster_123

Heroditas wrote: »

At risk of causing trouble here but how much of the €483 would many of those people recouped through increments?

A big fat zero if they are at the top of the scale. The €483 is obviously less for those that are still on increments as the pay cuts and pension levy were both done on a percentage basis.

chopper6

One of the terms of the original PSA (croke park) was a restoration of paycuts if and when the situation improved.

The PS have taken a dissproportionate share of the hit on thier wages and if the private sector are receiving pay raises then it's high time the PS got thier money back.

If the Govt "cant afford it" they need to start kicking people off the dole sharpish.

As some one who has suffered unemployment for two of the last four years it is obvious that some of these guys haven't a clue what an awful lot of us have gone through

Yeah...so in two years there was absolutely no job at al you could take?

daithi84

Studies which say public servants earn more than private sector are severely skewed data!! The majority of people in the public service and civil service are low paid workers who after 15 years in the job reach a maximum of around €37k a year. I find it disgusting that the higher paid unions are asking for money back. Workers earning under €35k a year were promised priority for the reversal of pay cuts that were implemented under or before Croke Park agreement, and they have been forgotten about while higher paid have been given a date as to which their pay cuts will be returned. All figures for wages exclude the pension levy which doesn't go towards pensions but straight back into the department or council to where the employee works as an extra income source.

Low paid workers should be have their pay rates restored. The high paid earn enough in my opinion and aren't the ones who are the most affected by the cuts. When the pay cuts were introduced a few years ago the general reduction was 5% while the high paid workers only received a cut of 3% and still received bonus's on top of their salary. One bonus which i heard about was that the managers got a 10k bonus for staff filling out a compulsory form!!!

Barely There

Govt. borrowing billions every year to balance the books.
Civil Servants want pay increases.

What fcuking planet are these self-entitled, over-protected, over-paid morons on?

creedp

Barely There wrote: »

Govt. borrowing billions every year to balance the books.
Civil Servants want pay increases.

What fcuking planet are these self-entitled, over-protected, over-paid morons on?

As said before public servants should have no set wage. They should simply work all year for nothing and at the end of the year when everyone else has got their piece of the cake, they could then distribute whats left amongst themselves. Nothing left .. tough

Cookie_Monster

chopper6 wrote: »

If the Govt "cant afford it" they need to start kicking people off the dole sharpish.

so the unemployed should suffer disproportionally to ensure the PS keep their privileged position?

creedp

daithi84 wrote: »

Studies which say public servants earn more than private sector are severely skewed data!! The majority of people in the public service and civil service are low paid workers who after 15 years in the job reach a maximum of around €37k a year. I find it disgusting that the higher paid unions are asking for money back. Workers earning under €35k a year were promised priority for the reversal of pay cuts that were implemented under or before Croke Park agreement, and they have been forgotten about while higher paid have been given a date as to which their pay cuts will be returned. All figures for wages exclude the pension levy which doesn't go towards pensions but straight back into the department or council to where the employee works as an extra income source.

Low paid workers should be have their pay rates restored. The high paid earn enough in my opinion and aren't the ones who are the most affected by the cuts. When the pay cuts were introduced a few years ago the general reduction was 5% while the high paid workers only received a cut of 3% and still received bonus's on top of their salary. One bonus which i heard about was that the managers got a 10k bonus for staff filling out a compulsory form!!!

I think you'll find the pay cuts that were to be reversed by a set date were those ones which only affected those earning over €50k. That category were also hit by the previous cut and pension levy. I don't think there is any suggestion that those over €50k have got a date to prioritise the restoration of the cuts that affected all PS. I find it somewhat stange that you are comparing what has happenned to those under €35k to those who earn over €120k but seem to forget everyone else in the middle. It is my understanding that it was only the Asst Secretary Grade that received the 3% cut in recognition that they had also lost their 10% bonus, i.e. 15% cut in total, while those in the middle were hit with something in the region of 7 to 8%. So its not a case of sub €35k being hit for 5% while everyone over €35k only got hit for 3%.

chopper6

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

so the unemployed should suffer disproportionally to ensure the PS keep their privileged position?

The PS are keeping the country ticking over...the unemployed are dragging it down.

The only culture of entitelment i see is amongst people who think it's okay to be paid for years to *not* work.

Idbatterim

The PS have taken a dissproportionate share of the hit on thier wages and if the private sector are receiving pay raises then it's high time the PS got thier money back.

you mean our money?

hey used to keep a low profile when sneaking in allowances and pay increases but WOW... here we have a glaring example of the sense of entitlement this gang have. Not one word about reversing the cuts that were made to the most vulnerable in our society .. instead they want the most protected in our society in terms of job security and a steady income to be first to feed from the trough.

a comment from an article in the independent which I agree with, I do think job creation and restoring cuts to the genuinely vulnerable should be priority number one. Income tax cuts will please all workers, if they increase PS pay, it will just infuriate everyone else...

The Muppet

Barely There wrote: »

Govt. borrowing billions every year to balance the books.

That's one option. of course the Government have the option of making the Public service profitable by increasing charges for services, doubt that one would be very popular either.

Cookie_Monster

The Muppet wrote: »

That's one option. of course the Government have the option of making the Public service profitable by increasing charges for services, doubt that one would be very popular either.

or by increasing efficiency and reducing costs. But they've been 'trying' that for the last few years and failing miserably.

jester77

chopper6 wrote: »

One of the terms of the original PSA (croke park) was a restoration of paycuts if and when the situation improved.

The PS have taken a dissproportionate share of the hit on thier wages and if the private sector are receiving pay raises then it's high time the PS got thier money back.

If the Govt "cant afford it" they need to start kicking people off the dole sharpish.



Yeah...so in two years there was absolutely no job at al you could take?

I think you will find that anyone working in the private sector that has recently gotten a pay rise, has done so based on merit and personal performance and only when the performance of the company is doing well. I can guarantee you that no company in the private sector that is running a loss is handing out pay rises or "giving back money". So why do the public sector feel entitled to a rise given the current state of the government finances?

daithi84

creedp wrote: »

I think you'll find the pay cuts that were to be reversed by a set date were those ones which only affected those earning over €50k. That category were also hit by the previous cut and pension levy. I don't think there is any suggestion that those over €50k have got a date to prioritise the restoration of the cuts that affected all PS. I find it somewhat stange that you are comparing what has happenned to those under €35k to those who earn over €120k but seem to forget everyone else in the middle. It is my understanding that it was only the Asst Secretary Grade that received the 3% cut in recognition that they had also lost their 10% bonus, i.e. 15% cut in total, while those in the middle were hit with something in the region of 7 to 8%. So its not a case of sub €35k being hit for 5% while everyone over €35k only got hit for 3%.

Yes they were hit by previous wage cut my mistake. But the 3% cut affected people between 75k and over depending on what grade you are at not just restricted to Secretary General grade as this grade doesnt exist in public service just civil service. Bonus's are still being paid at least principal over grade and over and equivalent in the public service. Yes people over 35 and under 100 have received pay cuts aswell but i do think that the people on 37 and less which make up the bulk of the public sector should be prioritised over anybody else when it comes to restoration of pay. Also to mention as you know that USC targets low paid people in all sectors more than high paid people. I believe with the USC someone earning 1m actually received up to 30k of a reduction annually.

In the public sector you have 2 wage cuts, 3 for some others, increase in hours for no additional pay, reduction in holidays for some, delay of increments or in some cases the reverse of increments, reduced sick pay benefits and increase in workload due to people not being replaced and also lower grades expected to do work of higher grades for no extra money. It just has to stop at this stage.

sarumite

chopper6 wrote: »

One of the terms of the original PSA (croke park) was a restoration of paycuts if and when the situation improved.

The PS have taken a dissproportionate share of the hit on thier wages and if the private sector are receiving pay raises then it's high time the PS got thier money back.

If the Govt "cant afford it" they need to start kicking people off the dole sharpish.



Yeah...so in two years there was absolutely no job at al you could take?

Damn straight. People on the dole do not need money.

chopper6

jester77 wrote: »

So why do the public sector feel entitled to a rise given the current state of the government finances?

Because thier workload has increased as the population increases and the state bodies are busier than ever with more people using thier services.

That's why.

chopper6

sarumite wrote: »

Damn straight. People on the dole do not need money.

If they want it they could try,y'know..working.

That's what i had to do.

And if people are sayiong stuff like "I'd be better off on the dole" rather than taking a job of some sort then that is proof positive that the dole is too much.

jester77

chopper6 wrote: »

Because thier workload has increased as the population increases and the state bodies are busier than ever with more people using thier services.

That's why.

Maybe, but the government finances are not in shape to do this. Plenty of people in the private sector are in the same situation but don't feel entitled to a rise because they know their employer does not have the resources. Where do the public sector think this money will magically appear from?

chopper6

jester77 wrote: »

. Plenty of people in the private sector are in the same situation but don't feel entitled to a rise because they know their employer does not have the resources. Where do the public sector think this money will magically appear from?

Ah but they do..

And if they dont get it they bugger off elsewhere...unless of course they're not good enough to merit a raise.

I dont know of anybody in the private sector working for the same wages five years in a row.

The Muppet

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

or by increasing efficiency and reducing costs. But they've been 'trying' that for the last few years and failing miserably.

There you go, perhaps introducing/increasing prices for all public services, Education/Health/Policing etc on an end user pays private sector prices basis would work .

Cookie_Monster

The Muppet wrote: »

There you go, perhaps introducing/increasing prices for all public services, Education/Health/Policing etc on an end user pays private sector prices basis would work .

just penalise the user for their inability to deal with costs. Any private company that did that wouldn't last long, but I suppose with zero competition and compulsory services they can get away with that.

everdead.ie

chopper6 wrote: »

Ah but they do..

And if they dont get it they bugger off elsewhere...unless of course they're not good enough to merit a raise.

I dont know of anybody in the private sector working for the same wages five years in a row.

Out of curiosity you know public sector employees can bugger off some where else as well unless of course they're not good enough to merit a raise?

ardmacha

We haven't had one of these threads for a while, but the same immature nonsense appears again and again, showing how little anything has changed. We have the usual nonsense that people is the PS should work for the good of society and not get paid the going rate. We have the abusive comments, which are thanked. We have the social strategies whereby people should get something based on how much they are paid not on the value of their work.

The only way that this country can have effective government is if the people who work for it are paid the going rate and expected to work for that, any other proposition puts the proposer on a par with Bertie Ahern. Politicians wish to play politics and neither in the boom nor the recession has been any suggestion that this principle be applied, instead language like "deserving" is used which should have no place in the debate.

Tax cuts would imply that the public finances had recovered and so of course pay adjustments for the PS then comes on the table. Irresponsible politicians are musing on tax cuts when there remains a large deficit. It is truly disgusting that such a major economic upheaval has not only not produced a sustainable plan for the public finances, but does not even seem to have produced any sense that such a plan is needed.

gandalf

chopper6 wrote: »

One of the terms of the original PSA (croke park) was a restoration of paycuts if and when the situation improved.

The PS have taken a dissproportionate share of the hit on thier wages and if the private sector are receiving pay raises then it's high time the PS got thier money back.

If the Govt "cant afford it" they need to start kicking people off the dole sharpish.

But if people who work for organisations in the private sector are getting rises it is because they can afford it (ie they are in profit).

From what I can see there are no real savings being made by the PS and based on what came out late last year with the whole performance based increments in the PS the reform of this whole bureaucracy is an absolute farce.

Yeah...so in two years there was absolutely no job at al you could take?

Job I could "take", have you got a clue what the employment market is like or was like for the last couple of years!

The field that I work in is and was predominantly hiring through large multinationals who dictated that they had to have multilingual staff even if in most cases the jobs did not need that. I applied for lots of positions that I was over qualified for at fraction of what I would have earned previously with a "dumbed" down CV but the feedback from all of those was that they didn't want to hire me because they knew that I would walk once a position became available that I was qualified for. That was fair enough because it was true.

I did investigate setting up a business but after looking at the costs of rents and the extremely high rate costs charged by the County Councils to keep inefficient workers in jobs I had to shelve that idea.

I have however used that time wisely and I am currently finishing a Level 8 diploma course.

Luckily I have a job now but it is a fixed contract so I could be back to square one when that term ends.

Most people on the dole do want a job and it is the Governments duty to create the atmosphere to foster job creation (not to directly create jobs). Until they tackle the high cost of our PS and their efficiencies then imho they will continue to be an inhibitor to growth rather than a support to help growth occur.

creedp

everdead.ie wrote: »

Out of curiosity you know public sector employees can bugger off some where else as well unless of course they're not good enough to merit a raise?

There is a difference between asking for a raise and actually receiving it .. here people getting their knickers all in twist because a worker(s) has the cheek to ask for a pay rise .. unbelievable cheek really. My point being I didn't see a thread opened up here immediately criticising unions for seeking pay rises for their members in the private sector when we constantly hear about Ireland losing it competiveness against its main competitors. Maybe unions were only seeking increases for workers in companies which were competitive against their main competitior?

Important issue here is that there is no guarantee that pay increase will be granted and as you say both public and private sectoer workers can bugger off and seek work elsewhere anytime they choose.

marc_faber

daithi84 wrote: »

Studies which say public servants earn more than private sector are severely skewed data!! The majority of people in the public service and civil service are low paid workers who after 15 years in the job reach a maximum of around €37k a year. I find it disgusting that the higher paid unions are asking for money back. Workers earning under €35k a year were promised priority for the reversal of pay cuts that were implemented under or before Croke Park agreement, and they have been forgotten about while higher paid have been given a date as to which their pay cuts will be returned. All figures for wages exclude the pension levy which doesn't go towards pensions but straight back into the department or council to where the employee works as an extra income source.

Low paid workers should be have their pay rates restored. The high paid earn enough in my opinion and aren't the ones who are the most affected by the cuts. When the pay cuts were introduced a few years ago the general reduction was 5% while the high paid workers only received a cut of 3% and still received bonus's on top of their salary. One bonus which i heard about was that the managers got a 10k bonus for staff filling out a compulsory form!!!

your are deeply misinformed , the highest premium between public and private actually exists at the low pay grade , the likes of clerical officers are redicolously well paid compared to secretarys and receptionists in the private sector

when increments are taken into account , the average public sector worker is down no more than 10% since 2008

marc_faber

chopper6 wrote: »

One of the terms of the original PSA (croke park) was a restoration of paycuts if and when the situation improved.

The PS have taken a dissproportionate share of the hit on thier wages and if the private sector are receiving pay raises then it's high time the PS got thier money back.

If the Govt "cant afford it" they need to start kicking people off the dole sharpish.



Yeah...so in two years there was absolutely no job at al you could take?

the public sector were on nearly 50% more than the private sector prior to the crash so its irrelevant if they have " disproportionately " taken a larger drop since 2008 , its all relative

the private sector is where the jobs losses were this past six years

marc_faber

jester77 wrote: »

I think you will find that anyone working in the private sector that has recently gotten a pay rise, has done so based on merit and personal performance and only when the performance of the company is doing well. I can guarantee you that no company in the private sector that is running a loss is handing out pay rises or "giving back money". So why do the public sector feel entitled to a rise given the current state of the government finances?

private sector workers receive pay rises based on individual or company performance

public sector workers receive pay rises based on the ability of their unions to strong arm goverment

i can see the PS getting a lot of what they want here , labour badly need an injection of popularity and FG need a partner to form a coaltion next time round , fianna fail will give the public sector what they want if this goverment doesnt and no one wants to go into coaltion with SF

smart move by the unions , working in the public sector is easy street for so many

creedp

marc_faber wrote: »

the public sector were on nearly 50% more than the private sector prior to the crash so its irrelevant if they have " disproportionately " taken a larger drop since 2008 , its all relative

the private sector is where the jobs losses were this past six years

On the one hand in a previous post you argue that there is a higher premium for lower paid that higher paid thereby discounting the value of the average PS and yet you use average figures to support your argument whenever it suits! You could apply ther same argument in the private sector .. because some private sector workers have been getting pay increase these should be averaged across all private sectors workers.

your are deeply misinformed , the highest premium between public and private
actually exists at the low pay grade , the likes of clerical officers are
redicolously well paid compared to secretarys and receptionists in the private
sector

when increments are taken into account , the average public
sector worker is down no more than 10% since 2008

smileyj1987

I don't have any problem with them asking for a pay increase and no one should either . They need to do a full evaluation of the civil service from top to bottom . If anyone is found to be bad at their job then they should face the sack . I don't think this country should have the whole jobs for life like some of these people have . If they worked in the private sector I'm sure a proportion of them would have been fired by now . So do a full evaluation and pay people to do a good job and get rid of the rest .

marc_faber

creedp wrote: »

On the one hand in a previous post you argue that there is a higher premium for lower paid that higher paid thereby discounting the value of the average PS and yet you use average figures to support your argument whenever it suits! You could apply ther same argument in the private sector .. because some private sector workers have been getting pay increase these should be averaged across all private sectors workers.

your cherry picking

i made different points across different posts , you then constructed a fallacious arguement from what was on screen

OMD

ardmacha wrote: »

We haven't had one of these threads for a while, but the same immature nonsense appears again and again, showing how little anything has changed. We have the usual nonsense that people is the PS should work for the good of society and not get paid the going rate. We have the abusive comments, which are thanked. We have the social strategies whereby people should get something based on how much they are paid not on the value of their work.

The only way that this country can have effective government is if the people who work for it are paid the going rate and expected to work for that, any other proposition puts the proposer on a par with Bertie Ahern. Politicians wish to play politics and neither in the boom nor the recession has been any suggestion that this principle be applied, instead language like "deserving" is used which should have no place in the debate.

Tax cuts would imply that the public finances had recovered and so of course pay adjustments for the PS then comes on the table. Irresponsible politicians are musing on tax cuts when there remains a large deficit. It is truly disgusting that such a major economic upheaval has not only not produced a sustainable plan for the public finances, but does not even seem to have produced any sense that such a plan is needed.

The government need to encourage spending. If people fear every budget will be worse than the last they will save rather than spend. If people believe the worst is over, and the expectation of a tax cut (which will be more than eaten up by water charges) that can improve the mood of the country and boost spending which increases tax take etc etc.

As I have said to you many times before, higher paid public servants (those earning above €75k) have taken significant cuts, we'll above others in society, which have not been offset by increments. As for the rest of the public sector, we'll.......

Idbatterim

The government need to encourage spending. If people fear every budget will be worse than the last they will save rather than spend. If people believe the worst is over, and the expectation of a tax cut (which will be more than eaten up by water charges) than can improve the mood of the country and boost spending.

I agree with this, and you could make that argument for increasing welfare spending too, but that should be out of question IMO. In fairness, its the top tax rate that is insane, thats where they cuts should come, barring a total overhaul of the system, but no politician is going to kill the golden goose that enables them to buy off the various different sectors of society...

creedp

marc_faber wrote: »

your cherry picking

i made different points across different posts , you then constructed a fallacious arguement from what was on screen

I'll keep the point more general. When it suits the argument is made that a higher premium exists for lower paid public servants than higher paid one compared to equivalent private sector workers - normally that is used to stamp out any nonsense coming from the lower paid PS that they should be prioritised for any future pay increases - while on the other hand the argument that the average PS premium is/was nearly 50% is also commonly used - this is used to quel any argument that any PS should get a pay rise.

Of course the problem also arises when discussing the private sector, although normally it is for reverse reasons - e.g. averages can be used to claim that the average private sector wage is nearly 50% below the average PS wage but burn in the fires of hell if you suggest that increases in the average private sector wage means that all (or even a significant proportion) of the private sector have received wage increases.

Probably still too fallacious for most people ...

JDD

If we compare the Irish Government to a private employer, this is the situation we were and now are in. Economy goes into tailspin, Ireland Inc teeters towards bankruptcy. In order to avoid this they increase the price paid for the services they provide (taxes) and cut the costs of those services (2 x pay cuts and 1 x pension levy for staff).

Now, there are hints that Ireland Inc are recovering, and they face a dilemma. Should they now reduce the price of their services (taxes) or increase payment to their staff? Most people would say that you would only increase your staff payments if there was a risk that skilled people would leave. Keep in mind those of you who say that PS workers should only get a pay rise if procedures are changed so that low performing staff can be fired, and that it was the low performing staff that contributed to the economic collapse in the first place. I have no issue with the procedures being changed, but saying that low performing staff were the issue is a little off the mark. Public service entities were understaffed for the job they had to do, and were staffed with people who did not have the right experience. The reason why PS entities were benchmarked at the start of the boom was that they couldn't hold onto their experienced staff with the pay that was on offer. Even when benchmarked, certainly in the financial services sector, the private sector could always pay more. Since the bust, excellent experienced personnel have flooded the public service, mostly because they were the only ones hiring and the job security was attractive in such a volatile market. Now that the private sector is recovering, and since the recent PS pay cuts, we are seeing the start of a reverse flow of those excellent people back into the private sector. How is that good for the economy? How is that going to assist us from making the same mistakes as before?

Look, I believe tax cuts should be the first step if and when the economy gets to a place that it can sustain the cuts. But the pay rises can't be too far behind otherwise we're going to again end up with a public service that is staffed with the wrong people who can't get a job elsewhere.