2017 Public Sector Pay Deal

Donal55 · 08-06-2017 9:05am #1

New Agreement on the table after talks and the Unions appear happy. €800,000 in pay increases over 3 years. Comparable to better private sector increases and outsourcing of services to private industry removed from the agenda.
Win, win for the Unions by the looks of things.

red ears · 08-06-2017 11:19am

Donal55 wrote: »

New Agreement on the table after talks and the Unions appear happy. €800,000 in pay increases over 3 years. Comparable to better private sector increases and outsourcing of services to private industry removed from the agenda.
Win, win for the Unions by the looks of things.

Not a win at all. The extra hours is a massive issue for public servants. The government won big keeping them in place.

fliball123 · 08-06-2017 12:05pm

red ears wrote: »

Not a win at all. The extra hours is a massive issue for public servants. The government won big keeping them in place.

What was the point of the commission on ps pay and pensions..to show how much more they earn and how much better their pensions are and then they still get a payrise..This country is mental

Chips Lovell · 08-06-2017 2:34pm

I've hived off the posts from the old 2013 thread and created a new one for the latest pay deal.

judeboy101 · 08-06-2017 2:36pm

Am I right in thinking all public servants can opt out of CP hrs if they pay for it?

Donal55 · 08-06-2017 4:09pm

judeboy101 wrote: »

Am I right in thinking all public servants can opt out of CP hrs if they pay for it?

Heard that today alright. Apart from teachers highlighting this one specific issue I don't think it was high up the list on other sectors of public or civil servants.
In fact apart from when the original clause was inserted almost 8 or 9 years ago, I don't recall having heard much discussion on this since at any union meeting or agm that I attended.

Our main gripe appeared to be FEMPI, lack of recruitment and promotion and pension levies. All which appear to be getting addressed now.

tayto lover · 08-06-2017 4:12pm

The Unions should refuse to attend talks until wages are restored.
When that happens then talk.

fliball123 · 08-06-2017 4:27pm

tayto lover wrote: »

The Unions should refuse to attend talks until wages are restored.
When that happens then talk.

The tax payer should stop paying tax until taxation is cut completely...You lads really dont know when you have it good

Lux23 · 08-06-2017 4:41pm

The hours don't bother me at all. I am in just before 9 and finish just after 5 and still work up a few flexi days.

_Brian · 08-06-2017 4:44pm

Can't see how this is being sold as a good deal and it's nowhere close to pay restoration.
Be interesting to see how the ballots go but it wouldn't surprise me if it's rejected.

Chips Lovell · 08-06-2017 4:46pm

Given the Public Sector Pay Commission's conclusion that there was a basis for parties to enter into negotiations, it would have been irresponsible for the government to ignore this and probably would be more costly to deal with piecemeal pay demands from individual unions on groups of unions.

On the face of it, it looks fairly reasonable. The unions can point to progress on some of their major issues such as unpaid hours and pay restoration, while the government can say it was in line with what they'd budgeted for a new public sector pay deal.

Chips Lovell · 08-06-2017 4:50pm

_Brian wrote: »

Can't see how this is being sold as a good deal and it's nowhere close to pay restoration.
Be interesting to see how the ballots go but it wouldn't surprise me if it's rejected.

Yeah, I suppose this is big question. I think its unrealistic to expect to get everything back in one fell swoop and some things, namely pensions, will never be the same again. But there's still a lot of upset people out there, so it could be a hard sell.

Riskymove · 08-06-2017 4:50pm

Donal55 wrote: »

Win, win for the Unions by the looks of things.

Well you could just as easily put forward a win win for Government

deal made - industrial peace
increases limited to a series of 1% increases spread over three years
Higher contirbutions to pensions kept in place
?660m worth of extra working hours kept in place

blanch152 · 08-06-2017 6:39pm

fliball123 wrote: »

What was the point of the commission on ps pay and pensions..to show how much more they earn and how much better their pensions are and then they still get a payrise..This country is mental

I don't think that is what the commission on ps pay and pensions concluded.

It was reported as such by some of the more sensationalist newspaper articles, but when you looked at the detail, this wasn't apparent. Here is a link to the report:

http://paycommission.gov.ie/publications/

Firstly, the commission notes that the 2007 Benchmarking Report ascribed a differential of 12% between public sector and private sector pensions and recommended salaries were adjusted to take account of this. Secondly, the Commission did its own analysis. In Appendix E of their report, the Commission values private sector pensions at 10-11% of salary and public sector pensions at 23-25% of salary, a difference of 13-14%, an increase of 2%. However, since 2007, public sector employees have been paying a new pension levy at an average rate of 7%. Using both of those analyses, it is reasonable to conclude that the pension levy should be reduced to 2% to account for the increased cost of pensions in the public sector.

Reading further on, Appendix F concludes that those at the top of the public sector are earning less than their private sector counterparts. In essence, those earning 100k or above in the public sector are earning less and paying more for their pensions than their private sector counterparts.

That is an uncomfortable truth both for the public sector unions which are dominated by the lower-paid and also for the ill-informed private sector viewpoints seen in many of the newspapers.

blanch152 · 08-06-2017 6:40pm

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

Yeah, I suppose this is big question. I think its unrealistic to expect to get everything back in one fell swoop and some things, namely pensions, will never be the same again. But there's still a lot of upset people out there, so it could be a hard sell.

Pay cuts were first imposed in 2008, for many public servants they still won't be restored 13 years later in 2021. Hardly one fell swoop.

tayto lover · 08-06-2017 6:44pm

blanch152 wrote: »

Pay cuts were first imposed in 2008, for many public servants they still won't be restored 13 years later in 2021. Hardly one fell swoop.

Yep. Full restoration should be a precondition to talks.
This is only messing by the leadership.

jamesthepeach · 08-06-2017 7:33pm

So they have to wait til 2021 and they dont even get to keep up with inflation until then.
Some restoration that will be. I think theyve been had. They have got nothing.
If you index link what they were on before the cuts, they will come out far, far worse than they were.

Hotblack Desiato · 08-06-2017 11:18pm

It's more than a bit much that the likes of Dublin Bus got 3.75% (a YEAR!) and Irish Rail are looking for the same, the other semi-states got nice increases thank you and little or no cuts in the bad times, but public servants will still be subject to 'emergency' measures in 2021 and probably beyond while still being expected to do what is illegal for a private sector employer to demand - work unpaid overtime.

jamesthepeach · 09-06-2017 7:04am

But .... It's not even inflation. Sorry, can't get over that. Insulting.
So glad im not public sector.
All of the unions should act as one from now on.
One out, all out. It's the only way for them.to get anywhere.

Jawgap · 09-06-2017 11:53am

Will they vote for it?

The larger unions might in sufficient numbers to see it rammed through against the wishes of other unions.

Personally, if I was still in the PS I wouldn't vote for it - it seems what you gain on one hand (the pay increases) you lose with the other (increased pension contributions), so any income growth will be merely a token.

Plus, are the Government bound by it? What's to stop them crying "emergency" and tossing the deal in the bin if it is politically expedient to do so? Why bind yourself to an agreement that the other party doesn't see themselves as being bound to?

Hotblack Desiato · 09-06-2017 8:59pm

The government have reneged on the last two public sector deals they entered into.

fliball123 · 13-06-2017 10:44am

blanch152 wrote: »

I don't think that is what the commission on ps pay and pensions concluded.

It was reported as such by some of the more sensationalist newspaper articles, but when you looked at the detail, this wasn't apparent. Here is a link to the report:

http://paycommission.gov.ie/publications/

Firstly, the commission notes that the 2007 Benchmarking Report ascribed a differential of 12% between public sector and private sector pensions and recommended salaries were adjusted to take account of this. Secondly, the Commission did its own analysis. In Appendix E of their report, the Commission values private sector pensions at 10-11% of salary and public sector pensions at 23-25% of salary, a difference of 13-14%, an increase of 2%. However, since 2007, public sector employees have been paying a new pension levy at an average rate of 7%. Using both of those analyses, it is reasonable to conclude that the pension levy should be reduced to 2% to account for the increased cost of pensions in the public sector.

Reading further on, Appendix F concludes that those at the top of the public sector are earning less than their private sector counterparts. In essence, those earning 100k or above in the public sector are earning less and paying more for their pensions than their private sector counterparts.

That is an uncomfortable truth both for the public sector unions which are dominated by the lower-paid and also for the ill-informed private sector viewpoints seen in many of the newspapers.

Think what you like that is exactly what it concluded what I outlined and the omissions left out of it were glaring as in comparing the ps pension to private sector pensions , when there are very few if any these days where a private sector pension is of the same cost to what it costs us the general public to pay for public sector pensions and if there are any out there most if not all are been wound down. Not a dicky bird in there about that.

Nothing in it with regard to a cost on job certainty and before anyone comes on here and says in the PS you can get sacked like anyone else in the private sector . I will point to a few examples just off the top of my head and current

the following :

our commissioner still in there despite the slush fund for the gards and other numerous scandals

The lad working in the OCDE who shredded the docs for Fitzy in Anglo still working

The medical team who killed Savita Halappanavar still working away

The gard doing a porn shoot on a garda car

The lad Kev Cardiff who misplaced 3 billion euros during the worst fincncial crash ever - promoted

Bertie Ahearn the luckiest gambler ever seen in the galway races and who over seen the worst crash ever - still getting a rolls royce pension

Yet the commission give no set price for job certainty? REALLY?

and regardless of what the PS are paying they are not covering the cost of their pension and I find it deplorable that you have the gov on one side and the unions on the other giving pay rises that have a knock on effect for both current and future pensions and not dealing with issues like this as Turkeys dont vote for Xmas

blanch152 · 13-06-2017 12:15pm

fliball123 wrote: »

Think what you like that is exactly what it concluded what I outlined and the omissions left out of it were glaring as in comparing the ps pension to private sector pensions , when there are very few if any these days where a private sector pension is of the same cost to what it costs us the general public to pay for public sector pensions and if there are any out there most if not all are been wound down. Not a dicky bird in there about that.

So now the pay commission is wrong, when it is pointed out to you that its conclusions don't agree with your conclusions. At least we have a better idea of what it said.

fliball123 wrote: »

Nothing in it with regard to a cost on job certainty and before anyone comes on here and says in the PS you can get sacked like anyone else in the private sector . I will point to a few examples just off the top of my head and current

the following :

our commissioner still in there despite the slush fund for the gards and other numerous scandals

The lad working in the OCDE who shredded the docs for Fitzy in Anglo still working

The medical team who killed Savita Halappanavar still working away

The gard doing a porn shoot on a garda car

The lad Kev Cardiff who misplaced 3 billion euros during the worst fincncial crash ever - promoted

Bertie Ahearn the luckiest gambler ever seen in the galway races and who over seen the worst crash ever - still getting a rolls royce pension

Yet the commission give no set price for job certainty? REALLY?

and regardless of what the PS are paying they are not covering the cost of their pension and I find it deplorable that you have the gov on one side and the unions on the other giving pay rises that have a knock on effect for both current and future pensions and not dealing with issues like this as Turkeys dont vote for Xmas

You are quite right, you can't get sacked in the public sector like you get sacked in the private sector. Even the packages given to the University of Limerick lads pale in comparison to the packages awarded to private sector executives who are sacked. Think Seanie Fitzpatrick and the like, think all the developers, think the CEOs who are fired. If the public sector adopted those practices, you might get a small number more fired, but the cost would be astronomical.

Creol1 · 14-06-2017 1:50pm

Jawgap wrote: »

Plus, are the Government bound by it? What's to stop them crying "emergency" and tossing the deal in the bin if it is politically expedient to do so?

Absolutely. Nothing.

That's one of the reasons unions are so important in the public sector. At least private-sector workers have legal protections against their employer. In the public sector, the employer is the one who makes the laws so they could do whatever they liked if it weren't for organised labour.

fliball123 wrote: »

Nothing in it with regard to a cost on job certainty and before anyone comes on here and says in the PS you can get sacked like anyone else in the private sector . I will point to a few examples just off the top of my head and current

the following :

our commissioner still in there despite the slush fund for the gards and other numerous scandals

The lad working in the OCDE who shredded the docs for Fitzy in Anglo still working

The medical team who killed Savita Halappanavar still working away

The gard doing a porn shoot on a garda car

The lad Kev Cardiff who misplaced 3 billion euros during the worst fincncial crash ever - promoted

Bertie Ahearn the luckiest gambler ever seen in the galway races and who over seen the worst crash ever - still getting a rolls royce pension

Yet the commission give no set price for job certainty? REALLY?

In both public and private sectors, employees with more than a year's service have substantial legal protection against dismissal (actually, the main exemptions are public-sector entities such as the Army and the Gardaí).

The main point regarding job security is not dismissal, but that there is no compulsory redundancies in the public service (excluding semi-states). However, this is due to the strength of the unions rather than the intrinsic nature of a public-service job, and governments use threats of compulsory redundancy to bully unions, as Brian Lenihan did during the crisis years and Richard Bruton has done more recently, so there is no guarantee against it.

On the broader point of the deal, it is very poor. Public servants still working for free, pay discrimination and tiny, spread-out pay rises that could easily be wiped away by inflation and rents. But what more did unions expect from the talks? Did they think the Government would just give them everything they asked for? From looking at other workers, especially the Guards, it's clear you have to remind the Government what you're capable of if you want to be taken seriously.

It will be very interesting to see how it goes in terms of being accepted by members. Impact and smaller civil service unions the CPSU and PSEU are in negotiations about amalgamating. If, as is likely, they take opposing stances on the deal, there could be ramifications for the merger.

14-06-2017 3:41pm

jamesthepeach wrote: »

So they have to wait til 2021 and they dont even get to keep up with inflation until then.
Some restoration that will be. I think theyve been had. They have got nothing.
If you index link what they were on before the cuts, they will come out far, far worse than they were.

Well does it need to be spelled out to them that they were on too much before the cuts ?

Jawgap · 14-06-2017 4:12pm

Augeo wrote: »

Well does it need to be spelled out to them that they were on too much before the cuts ?

really?

How come the likes of the HSE are struggling to fill so many positions if the salaries are so great?

.....in relation to my own circumstances I'm on roughly what I was getting paid in the PS, but the 'perks,' bonus scheme, professional support etc that my current employer provides are just never going to be available in the PS.....so yes, certainly in my experience salaries are probably generous in my area of work but total remuneration in the PS is quite parsimonious.

14-06-2017 4:23pm

Jawgap wrote: »

really?

How come the likes of the HSE are struggling to fill so many positions if the salaries are so great?.................

HSE might be an outlier.
Folks are queuing up to get into AGS for example

Country is awash with, part time & potential teachers

fliball123 · 14-06-2017 4:26pm

Creol1 wrote: »

Absolutely. Nothing.

That's one of the reasons unions are so important in the public sector. At least private-sector workers have legal protections against their employer. In the public sector, the employer is the one who makes the laws so they could do whatever they liked if it weren't for organised labour.

In both public and private sectors, employees with more than a year's service have substantial legal protection against dismissal (actually, the main exemptions are public-sector entities such as the Army and the Gardaí).

The main point regarding job security is not dismissal, but that there is no compulsory redundancies in the public service (excluding semi-states). However, this is due to the strength of the unions rather than the intrinsic nature of a public-service job, and governments use threats of compulsory redundancy to bully unions, as Brian Lenihan did during the crisis years and Richard Bruton has done more recently, so there is no guarantee against it.

On the broader point of the deal, it is very poor. Public servants still working for free, pay discrimination and tiny, spread-out pay rises that could easily be wiped away by inflation and rents. But what more did unions expect from the talks? Did they think the Government would just give them everything they asked for? From looking at other workers, especially the Guards, it's clear you have to remind the Government what you're capable of if you want to be taken seriously.

It will be very interesting to see how it goes in terms of being accepted by members. Impact and smaller civil service unions the CPSU and PSEU are in negotiations about amalgamating. If, as is likely, they take opposing stances on the deal, there could be ramifications for the merger.

Really so the examples I outlined where someone was killed, where someone committed a crime and destroyed evidence, where someone lost 3 billion? and you think that this person would be still working in the private sector..listen there is blinkered and then there is you

fliball123 · 14-06-2017 4:27pm

Jawgap wrote: »

really?

How come the likes of the HSE are struggling to fill so many positions if the salaries are so great?

.....in relation to my own circumstances I'm on roughly what I was getting paid in the PS, but the 'perks,' bonus scheme, professional support etc that my current employer provides are just never going to be available in the PS.....so yes, certainly in my experience salaries are probably generous in my area of work but total remuneration in the PS is quite parsimonious.

Because they face they face the same costbase and ridiculous tax regime in the country.

blanch152 · 14-06-2017 5:10pm

Augeo wrote: »

HSE might be an outlier.

Really? Do you have evidence to back it up?

The Pay Commission (I know it is discredited because people don't like what it said when it was clearly explained to them) said that there are problems at senior management level across the public service.

Augeo wrote: »

Folks are queuing up to get into AGS for example

Well obviously, given the lack of scandal, we have the top-most quality Gardai already for what we pay.

Augeo wrote: »

Country is awash with, part time & potential teachers

Is that a good thing, that our teachers are only part-time and don't have enough to live on?

14-06-2017 5:14pm

blanch152 wrote: »

Really? Do you have evidence to back it up?

Evidence that they are struggling to hire people? No, I didn't claim they were though

blanch152 wrote: »

Well obviously, given the lack of scandal, we have the top-most quality Gardai already for what we pay.

People are keen to join up .......... the wages are known.

blanch152 wrote: »

Is that a good thing, that our teachers are only part-time and don't have enough to live on?

It's not a good thing but it shows that there are plenty folk choosing the profession.

jamesthepeach · 14-06-2017 5:19pm

Too many people think everyone paid more than them or with better conditions is overpaid.

Someone is always jealous of someone else.
That will never change.

I believee everyone should strive to get the best deal for themselves. None of this pulling everyone else down sh1te thats endemic in Ireland.

Jawgap · 14-06-2017 9:57pm

Augeo wrote: »

HSE might be an outlier.
Folks are queuing up to get into AGS for example
Country is awash with, part time & potential teachers

The HSE might be an outlier??? It's the health service, it's one of the fundamental agencies of the state......

HSE struggling to recruit nurses

......and sure there are lots of teachers, just not the right kind of teacher

Teacher shortage worsens for Stem subjects

......funny thing is one of my kids is studying to be a maths & science teacher (a friend who is a school principal encouraged him)......and a lot of people suggest he's "wasting" his abilities......there are better paying and more financially rewarding jobs for science grads which is why a lot of our STEM teaching is done by people without the requisite specialist quals......hardly surprising given the pay on offer.

red ears · 14-06-2017 11:27pm

Jawgap wrote: »

The HSE might be an outlier??? It's the health service, it's one of the fundamental agencies of the state......

HSE struggling to recruit nurses

......and sure there are lots of teachers, just not the right kind of teacher

Teacher shortage worsens for Stem subjects

......funny thing is one of my kids is studying to be a maths & science teacher (a friend who is a school principal encouraged him)......and a lot of people suggest he's "wasting" his abilities......there are better paying and more financially rewarding jobs for science grads which is why a lot of our STEM teaching is done by people without the requisite specialist quals......hardly surprising given the pay on offer.

They have recently changed the length of time it takes to do the post-grad teaching qualification from one year to two years. So it will take 5 to 6 years to become a teacher now.

jamesthepeach · 15-06-2017 7:11am

red ears wrote: »

They have recently changed the length of time it takes to do the post-grad teaching qualification from one year to two years. So it will take 5 to 6 years to become a teacher now.

And everyone will have them for the rest of their life

Students for keeping them in school and adults will hate them for choosing a career with a decent pension and holidays because they never chose it.
The people who take the short term view always hate those who benefit from taking the long term view.

I was contracting for years and wouldn't take the full time job with the benefits package and promotions. I went for the money rather than the career, and stuck 50% of it into pension funds and got slagged off for it. Now I'm retiring. The people who slagged me off for the last 20 years are now asking me for my advice on retiring early. The very same people who told me I wasn't looking out for my future before. But.all they had to do was open their eyes and look at their own situations instead of being busy judging me for planning ahead.

I have no time for people who complain about what other people get in their jobs. You choose your own career path. If it's not working out you modify it. They just seem to want to whinge instead

fliball123 · 15-06-2017 10:19am

jamesthepeach wrote: »

Too many people think everyone paid more than them or with better conditions is overpaid.

Someone is always jealous of someone else.
That will never change.

I believee everyone should strive to get the best deal for themselves. None of this pulling everyone else down sh1te thats endemic in Ireland.

Thats easy to say James when you have a large % of the population not being able to afford a pension and having to shell out a large amount in tax to cover the cohort that is current and future public sector workers. Why not even the playing feild if the gov take money off someone for a pension why not let them put it into their own and let the public sector worker supply the full cost of their pension. People are not jealous they are outraged at the 2-tier system that exists ..

jamesthepeach · 15-06-2017 10:23am

fliball123 wrote: »

Thats easy to say James when you have a large % of the population not being able to afford a pension and having to shell out a large amount in tax to cover the cohort that is current and future public sector workers. Why not even the playing feild if the gov take money off someone for a pension why not let them put it into their own and let the public sector worker supply the full cost of their pension. People are not jealous they are outraged at the 2-tier system that exists ..

Everyone gets a pension.

People who started a job 20 or 30 years ago that promised them a pension as part of the renumeration do not owe the rest of us anything.
We all made our choices. You can't go back now and say, my job doesn't give me a pension, take theirs off them or charge them for it. Kind of makes a mockery of someone giving their lives to their particular job.

I worked for different companies that have 2%, 5% and 10% into pensions. The people who worked in the ones that have 2% shouldn't be complaining that by working somewhere else another person got 10%. I got 0% in those companies but that was my choice to structure my employment the way I did.

Jawgap · 15-06-2017 10:31am

fliball123 wrote: »

Thats easy to say James when you have a large % of the population not being able to afford a pension and having to shell out a large amount in tax to cover the cohort that is current and future public sector workers. Why not even the playing feild if the gov take money off someone for a pension why not let them put it into their own and let the public sector worker supply the full cost of their pension. People are not jealous they are outraged at the 2-tier system that exists ..

I tried this. I would love to be able to take my pension contributions and invest them privately - the fact is my private pension pot (at the moment) will yield a similar level of benefits to my PS pension but my PS pension is based on 2 years longer service!!

Bit like James, I started my pot early - if I hadn't have got divorced I'd be set fair for going early

The main reason people have problems generating a pension pot in Ireland, imo, is because they don't start early enough. Everyone (or certainly a huge majority) is obsessed with saving to get married and get a house......if that much dedication was put into saving for a pension they'd be a lot better off.

red ears · 15-06-2017 10:43am

fliball123 wrote: »

Thats easy to say James when you have a large % of the population not being able to afford a pension and having to shell out a large amount in tax to cover the cohort that is current and future public sector workers. Why not even the playing feild if the gov take money off someone for a pension why not let them put it into their own and let the public sector worker supply the full cost of their pension. People are not jealous they are outraged at the 2-tier system that exists ..

That's not going to happen. Show me a public worker anywhere in the western world that has to pay a private pension only. I've not researched it so there may well be examples of that. But i'd wager the vast majority have a public scheme. You have been focusing heavily on the Public Service for 8 years now. Surely you are an expert on these matters at this stage.

jamesthepeach · 15-06-2017 10:49am

red ears wrote: »

That's not going to happen. Show me a public worker anywhere in the western world that has to pay a private pension only. I've not researched it so there may well be examples of that. But i'd wager the vast majority have a public scheme. You have been focusing heavily on the Public Service for 8 years now. Surely you are an expert on these matters at this stage.

As a matter of fact every worker in the country is on publicly funded pension scheme.

It's up to them all of they want to pay extra to top it up, or to choose an employer who will add to it for them based on how the perceive the value of that top up.

If I wanted a pension of half my final salary is have joined the public sector. I wanted more and faster, so I didnt, I made my choices based on what I wanted, right from the beginning of my working life.

fliball123 · 15-06-2017 12:07pm

jamesthepeach wrote: »

Everyone gets a pension.

People who started a job 20 or 30 years ago that promised them a pension as part of the renumeration do not owe the rest of us anything.
We all made our choices. You can't go back now and say, my job doesn't give me a pension, take theirs off them or charge them for it. Kind of makes a mockery of someone giving their lives to their particular job.

I worked for different companies that have 2%, 5% and 10% into pensions. The people who worked in the ones that have 2% shouldn't be complaining that by working somewhere else another person got 10%. I got 0% in those companies but that was my choice to structure my employment the way I did.

Of course you can when people cant afford their own pension its an absolute disgrace that they are asked to pay for other peoples. There are few if any companies giving the type of pension that is going on in the public sector any that are you can be damn sure they are not over 200billion in debt and running a deficit

Cookie_Monster · 15-06-2017 12:20pm

red ears wrote: »

fliball123 wrote: »

Thats easy to say James when you have a large % of the population not being able to afford a pension and having to shell out a large amount in tax to cover the cohort that is current and future public sector workers. Why not even the playing feild if the gov take money off someone for a pension why not let them put it into their own and let the public sector worker supply the full cost of their pension. People are not jealous they are outraged at the 2-tier system that exists ..

That's not going to happen. Show me a public worker anywhere in the western world that has to pay a private pension only. I've not researched it so there may well be examples of that. But i'd wager the vast majority have a public scheme. You have been focusing heavily on the Public Service for 8 years now. Surely you are an expert on these matters at this stage.

NZ KiwiSaver is the same. Government job or not

blanch152 · 15-06-2017 12:38pm

fliball123 wrote: »

Thats easy to say James when you have a large % of the population not being able to afford a pension and having to shell out a large amount in tax to cover the cohort that is current and future public sector workers. Why not even the playing feild if the gov take money off someone for a pension why not let them put it into their own and let the public sector worker supply the full cost of their pension. People are not jealous they are outraged at the 2-tier system that exists ..

Do they not pay their PRSI?

blanch152 · 15-06-2017 12:39pm

fliball123 wrote: »

Of course you can when people cant afford their own pension its an absolute disgrace that they are asked to pay for other peoples. There are few if any companies giving the type of pension that is going on in the public sector any that are you can be damn sure they are not over 200billion in debt and running a deficit

Are you saying that banks and insurance companies should reduce their prices for those who don't have pensions so that the customers don't have to pay for the pensions of the employees of the banks and insurance companies?

jamesthepeach · 15-06-2017 12:42pm

blanch152 wrote: »

Do they not pay their PRSI?

Most people's prsi isnt enough to fund a pension of the size they get.

Oh, look where we are

fliball123 · 15-06-2017 1:39pm

blanch152 wrote: »

Are you saying that banks and insurance companies should reduce their prices for those who don't have pensions so that the customers don't have to pay for the pensions of the employees of the banks and insurance companies?

I am simply saying it is immoral to ask the majority (where over 90% of them) cannot afford to pay for their own pension yet they are asked to cover the public sector, if you look at a lot of the pension schemes in the banks now they are being wound down.

fliball123 · 15-06-2017 1:40pm

jamesthepeach wrote: »

Everyone gets a pension.

People who started a job 20 or 30 years ago that promised them a pension as part of the renumeration do not owe the rest of us anything.
We all made our choices. You can't go back now and say, my job doesn't give me a pension, take theirs off them or charge them for it. Kind of makes a mockery of someone giving their lives to their particular job.

I worked for different companies that have 2%, 5% and 10% into pensions. The people who worked in the ones that have 2% shouldn't be complaining that by working somewhere else another person got 10%. I got 0% in those companies but that was my choice to structure my employment the way I did.

Well when i started working I was told I would not be raped in taxes..things change, I now have to pay an odious tax called the USC which was supposed to be a temporary tax. Why should I have my terms and conditions cut and yours remain in place?

fliball123 · 15-06-2017 1:41pm

Jawgap wrote: »

I tried this. I would love to be able to take my pension contributions and invest them privately - the fact is my private pension pot (at the moment) will yield a similar level of benefits to my PS pension but my PS pension is based on 2 years longer service!!

Bit like James, I started my pot early - if I hadn't have got divorced I'd be set fair for going early

The main reason people have problems generating a pension pot in Ireland, imo, is because they don't start early enough. Everyone (or certainly a huge majority) is obsessed with saving to get married and get a house......if that much dedication was put into saving for a pension they'd be a lot better off.

Is your pension arrangement still available?

jamesthepeach · 15-06-2017 1:45pm

fliball123 wrote: »

Well when i started working I was told I would not be raped in taxes..things change, I now have to pay an odious tax called the USC which was supposed to be a temporary tax. Why should I have my terms and conditions cut and yours remain in place?

You aren't making any sense. And you are just getting worse. Serious jealousy of others who made good life decisions is the only thing I'm getting from your posts.

Jawgap · 15-06-2017 1:52pm

fliball123 wrote: »

Is your pension arrangement still available?

To who? Me?

If re-joined the PS I don't think I could re-start my contributions - I'd prefer to get the money out and make my own arrangements.

Jawgap · 15-06-2017 2:02pm

jamesthepeach wrote: »

You aren't making any sense. And you are just getting worse. Serious jealousy of others who made good life decisions is the only thing I'm getting from your posts.

It's funny, I returned to Ireland in early 00s and was slagged off royally for taking a PS job......people telling me it was a waste of my abilities.......that I'd make a lot more in the private sector (true)......that I'd never be able to get that buy-to-let apartment etc etc etc.

After I joined I sat on interview panels where people, on more than one occasion, turned their noses up at the starting salaries - and, in one case, laughed when we told them. I had to replace staff who left without giving notice, sometimes only weeks and even days (and again, in one case, hours) after starting because they got more lucrative job offers......

Then I got criticised as a public servant for being a public servant.....apparently I went from wasting my talents for pittance to being an over-paid wastrel.....all while suffering a 30% drop in after tax income, and while watching about one third of my colleagues being forced to give up their jobs without any form of redundancy pay (I just laugh at the ignorance of people who say there is no redundancy in the PS.......as if redundancy is the only way to reduce headcount :rolleyes:)

......and to be honest, I liked working in the PS but there comes a point where economics has to trump emotion, so I hopped out again. And to be honest I've yet to see anything in this deal or anywhere that makes me question the wisdom of that decision.

2017 Public Sector Pay Deal

Comments