What if a forced privatization happened

Ush1 wrote: »

But he's likely getting paid more than most employees and paying less tax. At least he should be if he has his head screwed on.

He's being given a fixed day rate and while he probably does pay less tax, he can't get the full value of his expenses back because of the PSWT.

This is an issue by the way across the economy, not just the state sector.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/bogus-self-employment-costs-state-300m-per-year-union-says-1.3654294

Mad_maxx

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Thankfully neoliberalism is solving all our social needs, creating a peaceful world, with equal opportunities for all, and spreading wealth equally amongst all. Neoliberalism rocks!

"neo liberalism" is just a slogan - buzzword for leftists to reach for when they want to rant

It's usually over used too

beauf

wrangler wrote: »

There is huge problems with out sourcing, bit it's because public servants in charge of it have little regard for taxpayers money .......and as you say it then becomes a gravy train.
Shameful what's going on

It really isn't. You have to account for every cent in the public sector and audits are regular thing. Its more about accountability and plausible deniability. If you do something yourself you have no one else to blame if it goes wrong. That includes the cost of something. The pressure from public opinion is that private sector is cheaper. When it isn't. But if you don't have the expertise in house (recruitment embargo) and your under pressure not to increase staff, then outsourcing is an alternative.

The private sector though inflates its costs for public sector work. Though even in the private sector you have to charge more for contracting than permanent work. Because the contract has to pay for when you are not working.

Its the same in a private sector company, outsourcing vs not outsourcing.

https://www.google.com/search?q=Outsorucing+Doesn%27t+save+money&oq=Outsorucing+Doesn%27t+save+money&aqs=chrome..69i57.8140j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

troyzer wrote: »

He's being given a fixed day rate and while he probably does pay less tax, he can't get the full value of his expenses back because of the PSWT.

This is an issue by the way across the economy, not just the state sector.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/bogus-self-employment-costs-state-300m-per-year-union-says-1.3654294

Well you never get the full value of the expenses. You can pay from a company account which tax has not been taken from yet.

The government are trying to pressurize companies to offer full time employment to contractors but in reality there is not much they can do. Most contractor agencies are based around 1 year contracts so they can't make a contractor a full time employee when they can only be sure of 1 year of work for them. Plus a salaried position will never pay what you can get in a daily rate.

It makes it easier for the government to tax people but in reality it's impossible to enforce.

Ush1 wrote: »

Well you never get the full value of the expenses. You can pay from a company account which tax has not been taken from yet.

The government are trying to pressurize companies to offer full time employment to contractors but in reality there is not much they can do. Most contractor agencies are based around 1 year contracts so they can't make a contractor a full time employee when they can only be sure of 1 year of work for them. Plus a salaried position will never pay what you can get in a daily rate.

It makes it easier for the government to tax people but in reality it's impossible to enforce.

I get all of my expenses back. He doesn't. This is really significant in a job which requires significant amounts of overseas travel.

He's not working through a third party. He's self employed directly by the state.

His day rate isn't worth much more. One overseas trip to Canada last year meant he finished the year with less money than me.

The is a great article that I can find at the moment about outsourcing in the NHS, in which outsourcing ended up over staffing and costing more, plus things are becoming so complex there is no understanding of how to sort them, for example, the building of several nuclear power stations in the uk has been halted by the Japanese company doing them because they cant be built or operated for the contract price the projects are too complex.

troyzer wrote: »

I get all of my expenses back. He doesn't. This is really significant in a job which requires significant amounts of overseas travel.

He's not working through a third party. He's self employed directly by the state.

His day rate isn't worth much more. One overseas trip to Canada last year meant he finished the year with less money than me.

Well then he needs to work on that.

In my field, contractors would make 50 - 75% more than FTE. I have got offers as a contractor to become staff and it doesn't come close to what I was on.

troyzer wrote: »

I get all of my expenses back. He doesn't. This is really significant in a job which requires significant amounts of overseas travel.

He's not working through a third party. He's self employed directly by the state.

His day rate isn't worth much more. One overseas trip to Canada last year meant he finished the year with less money than me.

You spend your time ruminating about the daily contractor who works alongside you wonder and working out who is doing the best financially?.

dxhound2005

Ush1 wrote: »

But they aren't the same. Sure I sit next to a guy who's a contractor on the same site 16 years.

He wouldn't get redundancy or anything like a full time employee. Pension contributions, insurance, sick pay etc... He could be technically dropped and the contract not renewed, unlike staff.

As I said, pros and cons.

If he is there for 16 years or even 8 years then I expect the Revenue would class him as an employee of the agency. Otherwise he could do 40 years and not have any entitlements?

https://www.revenue.ie/en/employing-people/becoming-an-employer-and-ongoing-obligations/guide-to-pay-as-you-earn-paye/determining-the-employment-status-of-an-individual.aspx

dxhound2005 wrote: »

If he is there for 16 years or even 8 years then I expect the Revenue would class him as an employee of the agency. Otherwise he could do 40 years and not have any entitlements?

https://www.revenue.ie/en/employing-people/becoming-an-employer-and-ongoing-obligations/guide-to-pay-as-you-earn-paye/determining-the-employment-status-of-an-individual.aspx

No revenue class him as an employee of his own company. You are correct, he doesn't have any entitlements that a full time member of staff would have.

Ush1 wrote: »

Well then he needs to work on that.

In my field, contractors would make 50 - 75% more than FTE. I have got offers as a contractor to become staff and it doesn't come close to what I was on.

It's not an option. The agency put a fixed rate out to tender and there's no room for negotiation.

People still take these jobs because work is relatively scarce in my field.

Wanderer78

Mad_maxx wrote: »

"neo liberalism" is just a slogan - buzzword for leftists to reach for when they want to rant

It's usually over used too

is it really:rolleyes: a lot of well respected commentators use it regularly

troyzer wrote: »

It's not an option. The agency put a fixed rate out to tender and there's no room for negotiation.

People still take these jobs because work is relatively scarce in my field.

That's fine, but I'm still not clear where the illegality is coming into it?

Ush1 wrote: »

That's fine, but I'm still not clear where the illegality is coming into it?

He is an employee for all intents and purposes and isn't treated as such.

Snow Garden

I work in the public sector after many years in the private sector. I made the move in 2012 for a better work life balance and pension certainty.

Until you (a) Instill real accountability amongst the management layers and (b) Do real meaningful performance appraisals, the public service will always be unfit for purpose.

Unfortunately to achieve (a) and (b) the government will need to take on the unions...which will never happen.

troyzer wrote: »

He is an employee for all intents and purposes and isn't treated as such.

But a lot of people don't want to be treated as such. Why would that be illegal?

Wanderer78

Snow Garden wrote: »

I work in the public sector after many years in the private sector. I made the move in 2012 for a better work life balance.

Until you (a) Instill real accountability amongst the management layers and (b) Do real meaningful performance appraisals, the public service will always be unfit for purpose.

Unfortunately to achieve (a) and (b) the government will need to take on the unions...which will never happen.

or is the problem, the private sector is in fact unfit for purpose?

Ush1 wrote: »

But a lot of people don't want to be treated as such. Why would that be illegal?

He doesn't but has no choice.

I've already shared a link highlighting this problem from a legal perspective, here's another.

Firblog

end of the road wrote: »

there are no jobs for life and haven't been for a very long time. a post man's pension is unlikely to be a generous one.

There are 2 men employed as motorbike technicians in Letterkenny Institute of Technology, the place hasn't had a course in motorbike maintenance in 25 years..

troyzer wrote: »

He doesn't but has no choice.

I've already shared a link highlighting this problem from a legal perspective, here's another.

From the article:

An increasing number of employers are depriving workers of sick pay and other social protections by forcing them to register as self-employed, Minister of State Kevin Humphreys has said.

That is obviously quite different to a contract role being offered and a contractor taking on the role.

As I said, it's the revenue trying to get their slice but it's more or less unenforceable in most cases. Companies can come up with reasons why this role is contracted.

stimpson wrote: »

Kameron Chilly Gunpoint wrote: »

Tough. It doesn't provide a less expensive service for the end user though. Plus, the transient nature of the workforce can lead to inefficiencies, inconsistences and a general lack of expertise in the function.

It give flexibility though. A friends husband worked as an IT contractor in a government dept. He changed toner in printers and nothing else. The reason being that the guy whose job it was to change typewriter ribbons had refused to do it and now comes in with the Indo and sits in the canteen all day. I believe Dublin Bus still have conductors on the books who do similar.

Why don't you tell us which Department office the typewriter guy is in? Because with FOI legislation, it will be very easy to confirm this issue and shine a big light on it.

And is your 'belief' about the conductors a simple act of faith, or is there any evidence behind it?

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Why don't you tell us which Department office the typewriter guy is in? Because with FOI legislation, it will be very easy to confirm this issue and shine a big light on it.

And is your 'belief' about the conductors a simple act of faith, or is there any evidence behind it?

Not exactly the same but I know this happened with the privatisation of the bins and Dublin City Council.

DCC weren't organised and the bin men ended up reading the paper and drinking tea for a number of months until they were put in other roles.

Firblog wrote: »

end of the road wrote: »

there are no jobs for life and haven't been for a very long time. a post man's pension is unlikely to be a generous one.

There are 2 men employed as motorbike technicians in Letterkenny Institute of Technology, the place hasn't had a course in motorbike maintenance in 25 years..

Source please?

Cienciano

Flyingsnowball wrote: »

Jeez, it seems all public sector staff are all pulling in the same direction and working hard to be the best at their jobs.
Nobody goes sick a few months before maternity leave and a year after. Nobody just gets left at a desk all day because they like a drink. People get let go fairly regularly for under performance just the same as the private sector.

Anyway now that the few people who race to get on the front page with a smart answer have finished maybe somebody could have a good think about it and come up with something I havnt thought of.
A bit of civilized discussion.

I've worked in both. The idea that the private sector is this lean performing machine with no waste, everyone working to 100% of their ability is laughable. Especially when a company is big. Very good people in public and private sector, plenty wasters too.

Ush1 wrote: »

Not exactly the same but I know this happened with the privatisation of the bins and Dublin City Council.

DCC weren't organised and the bin men ended up reading the paper and drinking tea for a number of months until they were put in other roles.

The system is not perfect and they were put in other roles, privatisation has its place in the mix, but it the bizarre belief that its the answer to all ills that I do not get its more belief without evidence.

https://www.aviva.com/newsroom/news-releases/2017/11/Aviva-announces-equal-paid-parental-leave/

A private company paying : All UK employees to get 26 weeks leave on full basic pay following the arrival of a new child. Men and women.

markodaly

There would be no need to hire agency staff or contractors if the current workforce was flexible in terms of the skills they offer and the work they perform.

The private sector is needed to fill gaping holes that those already in the PS are unwilling to fill themselves.

CrankyHaus

Ush1 wrote: »

Not exactly the same but I know this happened with the privatisation of the bins and Dublin City Council.

DCC weren't organised and the bin men ended up reading the paper and drinking tea for a number of months until they were put in other roles.

Actually DCC keeps some binmen on the books. They drive around places like Ballymun collecting all the fly-tipped rubbish. It's an indictment of how we brought bin charges in.

However I understand that most of them were redeployed to things like water-meter reading. Inevitably some are dissatisfied beacause they'd gotten used to start-early finish-early hours.

seamie78

Flyingsnowball wrote: »

I should be ashamed that I don’t think it’s right that a postman earns more than me from the tax pot I pay into to service the state?

A job for life no matter what?
Pension?

If I get let go tomorrow jobbridge will be hassling me with more tax payers money?
.

I assume you mean jobpath, the part of that department that is privatized surely going by your argument they do a fantastic job