addaword wrote: » Every parent likes to see their kids educated by their family and good friends on the best choices to make in life. It is not extremely difficult to get in to the public service. They can always leave and get a job in the private sector but I doubt they ever will, the public service just has so many advantages.
DubInMeath wrote: » Most rural dwellings aren't near any public water infrastructure I'd say. If we have a particularly dry summer we run out of water for a week until the table rises on a regular basis. This is on a deep well, not the standard shallow well that a lot of older houses would have had. There isn't any public infrastructure to connect to from asking the council, and they have no interest or plans to provide the infrastructure, even if they were getting more tax take for water that they already get. Friends in Laois are in the same situation, despite being a five minute drive to Carlow town they had to get a well dug when building their house last year because there isn't any infrastructure to connect to.
beauf wrote: » Everyone makes compromises based on where they decide to live.
[Deleted User] wrote: » this thread has given me an awful dose of guilt i'll pass the 2% on to the butler i think
DubInMeath wrote: » Yep they do, if I was to live in an estate I would probably kill the resident committee. But my answer was to the posters assumption that people have access to the public mains supply and deciding not to use it, despite already paying for it through the taxation that already exists.
Edgware wrote: » So they decided to build without knowing there was an adequate water supply. Good move
DubInMeath wrote: » Your reading comprehension isn't the best at times when trying to be edgy. Where did I say that my friends built where there was an inadequate water supply? Not being on the mains supply doesn't mean that you have an inadequate water supply. The supply issues that I face during a drought is due to farmers increasing their herd numbers with the ending of milk quotas and the need for additional water with the increased herd numbers.
DubInMeath wrote: » You said this earlier, but you can still join if you want. Unlike the private sector the public sector don't discriminate on age and as a new entrant, you will have the option to work until your 70.
Edgware wrote: » So the supply is adequate only for them but any change in circumstances and it isn't.
MarkR wrote: » I'm on 30+ pages here, so maybe I missed it. If the public service should take a pay cut, should those still working in the private sector also be taxed an equivalent amount, so we can all get the country back up and running together?
noodler wrote: » Hundreds of thousand of private sector workers have lost their jobs. On average, massive paycuts have been inflicted on them.
tayto lover wrote: » I really laugh at these threads on cutting public sector pay. Not going to happen.
salonfire wrote: » And likewise the public sector only look at the salaries when the private sector is flying, hence the scramble of benchmarking on the 00s. Once the private sector takes a nose-dive - twice now in 11 years - the response of the public sector is to look the other way. They daren't breathe the word bench-mark in recent years
noodler wrote: » Hundreds of thousand of private sector workers have lost their jobs.
On average, massive paycuts have been inflicted on them.
Hotblack Desiato wrote: » Most of them haven't lost their jobs though. Their employers have been temporarily closed due to the lockdown. Not even remotely the same thing. A lot of businesses which have closed permanently (Bewleys, Debenhams) were on their last legs anyway even before this crisis when the economy was doing very well. They were badly run businesses. .
noodler wrote: » Nonsense. More people are on the PUP than the TWSS, and so have lost their jobs, plus a substantial number of those on the subsidy scheme will never open. P.S. what a random pick of two high profile businesses to try and make a wider point about a million odd people on State support.
noodler wrote: » More people are on the PUP than the TWSS
thenightman wrote: » 988 as average public service wages per week .
thenightman wrote: » 988 as average public service wages per week is ridiculous.
thenightman wrote: » Sunday Times Editorial: Ireland is in no financial state to increase public sector pay The same arguments apply in the United Kingdom, however, where public-sector workers earned on average £549 (€610) in January, just 1% more than the £543 earned by their private sector counterparts.
thenightman wrote: » 988 as average public service wages per week is ridiculous. That figure is pushed up enormously by the high wage grades like AP, PO & Ast Secretary. There are very few post 2011 workers (already on reduced wages and far worse pension compared to colleagues performing same role) who will see anywhere near that money for a decade or two. I've recently been promoted after 3 years as a CO to EO, and won't come near that for 12 years.
Hotblack Desiato wrote: » If you think Rupert Murdoch or any of his rags give a damn about what is good for Irish society, you have another think coming. He has an agenda to push. "Whatever will make me richer."