Government to reverse some Public Secor Pay cuts

chopper6

Idbatterim wrote: »

I do, but we can see just what damage these have done now. The several years of austerity has been head-wrecking, I think people are done with the boom - bust, auction politics sh*t. You can see from commentary after articles, that the level of awareness and knowledge on subjects of an economic and political matters are probably incomparable to where they were before the economy tanked. We never had a boom bust before, many other countries have particularly Germany, hence they crave stability, low inflation etc...

Do you actually think people have learned a damn thing from that?

There's another property "boom" already underway...it's all gonna happen again.

Idbatterim

Do you actually think people have learned a damn thing from that?

There's another property "boom" already underway...it's all gonna happen again.

yeah I am well aware of it, just got a notice of a rent increase, living in Dublin 14, so I am all to well aware of it unfortunately! The morons running the place dont seem to give a toss either, prime docklands sites that Noonan recently referred to as Dublins "Canary Wharf" will be full of 8-10 storey crap! I was reading in the indo earlier the problems students are having trying to secure accommodation this time around and companies who provide said accommodation are being inundated with enquiries...

Idbatterim

maybe we should cap the age for seeking election at 50, institutionalised career politician dinosaurs are simply too far removed from reality...

kippy

comongethappy wrote: »

Well, the LPT takes in about 400 million.
Any offsetting reduction in USC would be modest.

The gov already pay a grant of €7k - €10k to a company who hires someone who has been on the dole for over a year.

Not anywhere near enough and this has only come in in the past 12 months.
That unemployed person costs the state on average 20K per annum when unemployed (conservative estimate, I would suggest a hell of a lot more) inclusive of potential lost in tax revenue.

comongethappy

kippy wrote: »

Not anywhere near enough

How much would you have the taxpayer subsidise employers?

kippy

nice_guy80 wrote: »

what do they actually take home after deductions?
that is the stat that is never mentioned

there are far more people on lower salaries in the PS than the average, but the high earners bring up the average
The median would be a far better indicator

I wonder does the median salary level exist in any of the reports.
I've no idea what it is but it would provide a level of balance to any discussion.

kippy

comongethappy wrote: »

How much would you have the taxpayer subsidise employers?

Well, if you look at job bridge, the taxpayer is already subsidising employers to the tune of a full persons salary per place gained.
1. Scrap job bridge.
Thats a good start.

2. In addition to the figures already mentioned for Jobpath, offer employers a deduction in PRSI, and a portion of the persons salary as a tax write off or something to that effect, again on a sliding scale depending on how long they've been on the live register.

3. Limit this to a 2 year payment with a lump sum of another 10K if they are still there after 4 years.
Run the scheme over 5 years.
Limit the amount of people per company etc etc


If that doesn't work, have the person on a sliding scale of taxes if they take up a role. Give them a tax break to work. I dont actually know the specifics but I do know it is much better incentivising labour/work than incentivising not working/sitting at home etc.

At least the person is working, paying tax, learning new skills etc etc.........

It'd be better for the state to subsidise someone working, rather than subsidising

comongethappy

kippy wrote: »

2. In addition to the figures already mentioned for Jobpath, offer employers a deduction in PRSI, and a portion of the persons salary as a tax write off or something to that effect, again on a sliding scale depending on how long they've been on the live register.

3. Limit this to a 2 year payment with a lump sum of another 10K if they are still there after 4 years.
Run the scheme over 5 years.

At least the person is working, paying tax, learning new skills etc etc.........

They already tried the PRSI thing, but employers hated it & take up was very low..... so they changed it to a grant system instead.

I like the idea of rewarding a long term commitment to hiring & retaining a long term unemployed person.

noodler

It will be slightly funny to see unions argue for this that just because the deficit may reach 3% or under.

Apart from our massive debt piles of circa €180bn, we will be extremely limited in any expenditure increases thanks to Fiscal Compact and associated fiscal rules.

Things won't be going back to the way they were with regards public expenditure - not in any recognisable way at least.

kippy

comongethappy wrote: »

They already tried the PRSI thing, but employers hated it & take up was very low..... so they changed it to a grant system instead.

I like the idea of rewarding a long term commitment to hiring & retaining a long term unemployed person.

Yeah, I know, it was overly complex I believe.

Point is, I dont think there is enough being done in this area and more can be done. The cost of not working to the state is huge and it gets harder to get people back to work the longer they are off.

I'd probably also suggest putting something towards more infrastructure projects as this will also drive employment to a point.

aliveandkicking

Monife wrote: »

That is the most stupid thing I have ever heard. There are other options apart from FF. I personally, not that it is any of your business and for my own reasons, will vote SF and independents in the next GE.

Any opinion on the first part of my post? (the part you didn't quote). I am well aware there are other options but I'm pragmatic. I asked what you think will happen if people don't vote FG or Labour not what could or should happen.

The reality is that if people don't vote for FG or Lab we will end up with a FF led government probably with SF as coalition partners. If you're happy to have FF back in government five years after destroying the country then go right ahead and don't vote or give preferences to any of the government candidates at the next GE.

LordNorbury

noodler wrote: »

It will be slightly funny to see unions argue for this that just because the deficit may reach 3% or under.

Apart from our massive debt piles of circa €180bn, we will be extremely limited in any expenditure increases thanks to Fiscal Compact and associated fiscal rules.

Things won't be going back to the way they were with regards public expenditure - not in any recognisable way at least.

It's just surreal I think, and in fact it is scary, to hear government ministers starting to mutter about public sector pay increases.

This country is still borrowing 650 million Euro a month over and above what it is collecting in taxes. What planet are these guys living on when they start telling the best paid and most protected public servants on earth, still after 6 years of recession, that they can start positioning them for pay increases?!?

Godge

noodler wrote: »

It will be slightly funny to see unions argue for this that just because the deficit may reach 3% or under.

Apart from our massive debt piles of circa €180bn, we will be extremely limited in any expenditure increases thanks to Fiscal Compact and associated fiscal rules.

Things won't be going back to the way they were with regards public expenditure - not in any recognisable way at least.

LordNorbury wrote: »

It's just surreal I think, and in fact it is scary, to hear government ministers starting to mutter about public sector pay increases.

This country is still borrowing 650 million Euro a month over and above what it is collecting in taxes. What planet are these guys living on when they start telling the best paid and most protected public servants on earth, still after 6 years of recession, that they can start positioning them for pay increases?!?

You can muse among yourselves all you like about it but the legislation and the Dail debates at the time were clear on this - once the money is there, the pay cuts will be restored.

LordNorbury

Godge wrote: »

You can muse among yourselves all you like about it but the legislation and the Dail debates at the time were clear on this - once the money is there, the pay cuts will be restored.

How on earth can the money be there when we borrowing half a BILLION a month, plus another 150 million thrown on top of that, just to keep the lights turned on in this country every month? This is absolutely insane, that for nothing other than political expediency, a small group of workers in this state, who are very much in the minority, when considered against the total body of people who are currently employed in this state, are being allowed to dictate the agenda in this manner. This 650 million Euro a month that is being borrowed, none of this is going to capital spending, it is largely going into public sector pay. There is simply no way it will be tolerated the the public sector will be getting payrises anytime soon.

comongethappy

Godge wrote: »

once the money is there, the pay cuts will be restored.

I suppose "once the money is there" is a relative term..

Obviously a €5 billion deficit wouldn't normally be the right time for a pay increase, but that's the cowardice of governments for you!

JohnMc1

Idbatterim wrote: »

maybe we should cap the age for seeking election at 50, institutionalised career politician dinosaurs are simply too far removed from reality...

Term limits as well. You can only sit in the Dail for so long. Voters need to start saying No to Career Politicians. If a Politician had to leave in a few years and live and work under the laws [and taxes] that they made then they wouldn't be so reckless in their behavior.

Head The Wall

kippy wrote: »

I wonder does the median salary level exist in any of the reports.
I've no idea what it is but it would provide a level of balance to any discussion.

This has been asked before and the last one I remember seeing had the median near or higher than the average

sparksfly

LordNorbury wrote: »

How on earth can the money be there when we borrowing half a BILLION a month, plus another 150 million thrown on top of that, just to keep the lights turned on in this country every month? This is absolutely insane, that for nothing other than political expediency, a small group of workers in this state, who are very much in the minority, when considered against the total body of people who are currently employed in this state, are being allowed to dictate the agenda in this manner. This 650 million Euro a month that is being borrowed, none of this is going to capital spending, it is largely going into public sector pay. There is simply no way it will be tolerated the the public sector will be getting payrises anytime soon.

Unfortunately it will be tolerated. The private sector is disjointed, unrepresented by their unions (who only look after their public sector members ) and generally let themselves be trampled on again and again.
A much fairer move would be to reduce the USC for everyone, but no, lets give the public sector more.

Its high time there was an effective union exclusively for the private sector.

kippy

Head The Wall wrote: »

This has been asked before and the last one I remember seeing had the median near or higher than the average

Have you got a source for it?

chopper6

sparksfly wrote: »

Unfortunately it will be tolerated. The private sector is disjointed, unrepresented by their unions (who only look after their public sector members ) and generally let themselves be trampled on again and again.
A much fairer move would be to reduce the USC for everyone, but no, lets give the public sector more.

Its high time there was an effective union exclusively for the private sector.

SIPTU is the largest private sector union in the country.

If people don't want to join a union that's nobody else's fault but their own.

chopper6

sparksfly wrote: »

Unfortunately it will be tolerated. The private sector is disjointed, unrepresented by their unions (who only look after their public sector members ) and generally let themselves be trampled on again and again.
A much fairer move would be to reduce the USC for everyone, but no, lets give the public sector more.

Its high time there was an effective union exclusively for the private sector.

SIPTU is the largest private sector union in the country.

If people don't want to join a union that's nobody else's fault but their own.

Tiger Mcilroy

sparksfly wrote: »

Unfortunately it will be tolerated. The private sector is disjointed, unrepresented by their unions (who only look after their public sector members ) and generally let themselves be trampled on again and again.
A much fairer move would be to reduce the USC for everyone, but no, lets give the public sector more.

Its high time there was an effective union exclusively for the private sector.

This is the problem alright, its truly depressing to see the same old election tricks at play by the same bunch of career politicians.

How they can even contemplate giving the public service back some of the cuts when there is still money being borrowed on an enormous scale to run the country is ridiculous.

Are the public sector solely responsible for the slight recovery or is it in reality everybody paying increased taxes and charges so why isnt a much more equitable approach being taken and reducing USC or some such.

noodler

Godge wrote: »

You can muse among yourselves all you like about it but the legislation and the Dail debates at the time were clear on this - once the money is there, the pay cuts will be restored.

Its posts like this that show you up.


You wax lyrical for post upon post doing your utmost to seem above PS Bashers and then the second someone disagrees with you about something you start with comments every bit as snide as the PS bashers you rage against every day on here.

We will see how the ground lies after July 2016.

kippy

Godge wrote: »

You can muse among yourselves all you like about it but the legislation and the Dail debates at the time were clear on this - once the money is there, the pay cuts will be restored.

To be blunt about it Godge, that's farcical.
The money very plainly isn't there and won't be for a long time to come.
While the deficit might be coming down the national debt is forever growing. Think it's now over 200 Billion!!!
Thats the state of the nations finances and it's very easy to point to that figure as a stumbling block to any pay rises.

I dont really want to see pay restored to any level until the nation can afford it. I'd rather see improvments for everyone rather than just to the 300K PS workers before any pay hikes.
Why - because ultimately the nation cannot afford to cosy up to a sector of society.

chopper6

kippy wrote: »

To be blunt about it Godge, that's farcical.
The money very plainly isn't there and won't be for a long time to come.
While the deficit might be coming down the national debt is forever growing. Think it's now over 200 Billion!!!
Thats the state of the nations finances and it's very easy to point to that figure as a stumbling block to any pay rises.

I dont really want to see pay restored to any level until the nation can afford it. I'd rather see improvments for everyone rather than just to the 300K PS workers before any pay hikes.
Why - because ultimately the nation cannot afford to cosy up to a sector of society.

They are not "pay hikes"...they are contractual restoration of pay cuts.

kippy

chopper6 wrote: »

They are not "pay hikes"...they are contractual restoration of pay cuts.

Whatever you want to call them, they are not in anyway feasible in the current environment.

chopper6

kippy wrote: »

Whatever you want to call them, they are not in anyway feasible in the current environment.

They will be when the money that's been set aside to pay them is available.

I for one am looking forward to it

Chimichangas

hmmm wrote:

Ridiculous, utterly ridiculous. We've managed to bankrupt the country with our overspending, and Labour can't wait to get back to increasing wasteful government spending. The health service is barely functioning, and instead of saying that any extra revenue will go towards increased services instead it's going to be diverted into the pockets of the public service workers. Is there any politician in FG who will stand up to them?

arrived to this thread late, but I also must have missed the part where it was found that government spending bankrupt the country..???? #areuforreal?

chopper6

Chimichangas wrote: »

arrived to this thread late, but I also must have missed the part where it was found that government spending bankrupt the country..???? #areuforreal?

You also missed the assertation that we are the best paid public servants on the planet and our greed is preventing an economic recovery when the private sector is working flat out.

Tiger Mcilroy

chopper6 wrote: »

You also missed the assertation that we are the best paid public servants on the planet and our greed is preventing an economic recovery when the private sector is working flat out.

Ive read the thread and to be fair I missed this aswell, maybe you could quote the post that states this?


The counter argument is mainly that if the country can afford this kind of action it should be done in a more equitable way by reducing USC or a similar tax that we ALL pay.