How do people feel about this one? Will it be short and sweet?
Mod warning:
https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121425200/#Comment_121425200
Of course working from home etc should be rolled out and made available to everyone, but at the same time, people can't have it every way. If you want to live in Dublin, you are going to have to pay Dublin prices for accommodation / mortgages. That is the premium people have to pay if they want to live there.
Regarding public services availability in Dublin, obviously any that are needed to be physically in Dublin would need to stay there, but the vast majority of offices / departments could be moved to places where people could more easily afford housing or could get much more substantial home for their money. People wanting to stay in Dublin and keep all the jobs in Dublin are the reason accommodation /housing is so expensive.
For the towns that got departments due to decentralisation, it has been a great move for people from the area and for people who have to waste significantly less time commuting.
A lot of our debt was refinanced and locked in at lower interest rates for the long term when borrowing was cheap. The increase in interest rates will only apply to the portion of the debt that has to be refinanced.
The cost of our borrowing won't increase drastically overnight.
Personally I don’t think moving offices out of dublin will help. Many people for various reasons won’t want to move. Hybrid working should be fully embraced and hubs established around the country with the use of these being allowed to count towards your office days with an anchor day once a fortnight or month depending on business needs. This may encourage more people to move out without the need and hassle of relocating large sections of departments
moving offices out of dublin doesn’t address the need to provide public services for dublin - which are greatly needed such as nursing, teachers etc so this is where I think an additional allowance or something should be paid for those working and living in the capital
You could buy a fabulous house in Longford for the price discussed above.
The real issue is that the civil service should be trying to move departments out of Dublin again. Lets not call is decentralisation though this time as it has a lot of toxicity attached to it.
No reason for putting all these departments in Dublin where people can't afford to live.
Do enlighten me I said the borrowing of this money has gone up by 7 times am I wrong in that ? Is that not what the article states?
I’ve always said there should be a dublin weighting, and I say it again as someone who doesn’t live in Dublin. One union rep told me because there would be no appetite amongst members to have a dual system, but if new entrants could be screwed over to protect those already in the service I dunno why members, especially those living and working in dublin, aren’t pushing for this, it’s not novel it happens in the UK.
I already said there should be a Dublin weighting. Aside from Dublin, there's no reason why non Dublin based employees should live far from where they work.
Every city, town and village has three bed semis.
That's why there should be a Dublin weighting. Why do you think unions don't push for this for their Dublin employees?
You selective omitted the 'nowhere near where they work' part.
The narrative didn’t change it was just pointed out to you how ridiculous it is to say that if two civil servants above a certain grade pooled their money they could buy a house in say Longford, doesn’t really help when the majority of departments and buildings are in dublin
Idiotic comments aside what is your solution? What is your alternative?
Oh so now the narrative has changed. It's not that they can't buy a house, it's because it's only an "average" house.
So what's your solution? Pay everyone in the entire country Dublin rates?
There should be a Dublin weighting for those whose workplace is there, similar to London.
Of course the unions don't want that because it removes their ability to use Dublin to drive up wage demands for the entire country.
So if two mid ranking civil servants pool their income together they can just about manage an average home nowhere near where they work?
Given most Civil Service jobs are in Dublin, discounting Dublin from your analysis seems kinda flawed....
Dublin aside, this is completely possible for a €320,000 house; €320,000 being the average house price.
Take a couple of mid-level PS employees both on €50,000, they could easily get a mortgage of around €300,000.
How is this not affordable?
This is worst case scenario because if we are to believe the posters here if one of the couple is private sector, and thus better paid, the house is even more affordable.
100% agree. The Budget is on September 27th.
Ok, so you didnt actually understand the article, cant say im overly shocked.
I’m assuming the 3% only comes into play if you’ve been civil servant since February 2022!
If you read what I said I said they have reported this as positive yet the borrowing of this money is costing us 7 times what it was costing in February.
Do you actually read any of the articles you put up, or do you just read the headline, get a hard on and make up the rest?
From your latest Article;
However, the State is flush with €27.5bn in cash from a frenzy of low-rate borrowing through the pandemic, when ECB policy pushed yields into negative territory, giving Government’s a chance to spend on Covid supports.
And the Government’s modest borrowing needs this year – the exchequer is on course for a €5bn surplus – mean the NTMA is spending down a €6.3bn chunk of its cash balance rather than relying on market funding.
With estimates for GDP growth this year at about 5pc and tax receipts growing by more than 25pc across the major headings, the cost of debt service is unlikely to become a headwind for the Government finances in the near future
No vote for this deal should happen until after the budget is announced.
They need to look at the social welfare supports for employees.
I get the rise of a few euro and loose my medical card when 4 of us have medical issues requiring doctors and medication.
WFP also reduces significantly, so I'm in effect worse off for getting an increase
The deal is 8% for the lower paid. Hoping there will be other cuts to income tax and supports for rising energy costs available from the budget too.
The Government offered this deal because they know what’s coming down the line with the price rises etc that we are going to have to face.
There’s no other reason. I’m not so sure that it will be accepted now when I see the electricity/gas price rise, taxi fares up 12% too, food bills rising fast as well as rents and mortgage rates.
When you examine it properly it’s not so great at all. The wee carrot of the backpay shouldn’t entice people to vote ‘yes’ either.
I have yet to be corrected and its there for anyone to look in the history books at how those cuts unfolded we were told to get our house in order by an external auditor (the IMF) and they stated that we were paying our public sector too much (it wasn't me or anyone else in the country) so it had to be done. Sure the government of the day where on giving interviews and denying the IMF where coming into the country and some even on the morning of them arriving in Ireland and we are seeing the same approach from our politicians today head in the sand, nothing to see here..... 6.5% increases. Sure what could possibly go wrong.
I have retorted this all the time and 2014 is the year that most experts will tell you we were out of the crash and in 2015 we were back paying the public sector the same or more per head than were before the cuts came into force. Also one of those cuts was a contribution to a defined benefit. I have corrected others and said that this narrative of pay restoration came from the unions spinning.
You keep repeating this--and have already been corrected once--and it's lacking context. Specifically: from 2009 to 2013 there were 3 successive pay cuts in the public sector. What happened between 2014 and 2021 was largely pay restoration as the country emerged from recession. By setting your start point at 2014, you've deliberately picked a date to twist what happened to fit your narrative.
Someone mentioned that it's a good thing that this deal is a short deal.
I'd say it's the only good thing about it.
The current deal we're on (1% and 1.5% increases) was an absolutely terrible deal too, but at least it was mercifully short.
The multi-year deals are hopefully now forever a thing of the past. We always got shafted with them, but plenty of eejits would just look at the figures saying "ooh, in X years time my pay will be Y, I'll be rich!" and voted for it disregarding of course what the cost of living would do to that pay by the time they got it.
Nobody can now afford to ignore the effect of the cost of living, yet we're now being asked to accept a deal which doesn't even come close to addressing this, along with vague promises of "something will be done" in the budget. It's not nearly good enough.
I'm over 25 years in and the cumulative effect of weak unions and apathetic membership has seen the value of CS pay slowly but surely erode in real terms over that time.
As long as we keep signing up for bad deals out of fear, apathy, or a promise that the next one will be better, we will continue to get shafted.
"Keep hold of nurse, for fear of something worse."
Not going to happen.
Finance grads get utility vouchers and 20pc pay hikes
‘War for talent’ sees starter salaries of €65,000 plus promise of flexible work, inflation-busting incentives
might be time for certain sections of public sector to negotiate a separate deal with government
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w7.vanillicon.com/v2/7a1d0f49d56f52d3cfb2145c5b8cbe5a.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wd.vanillicon.com/v2/d5a8197d7274f92eab37915a6d9f12a1.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w0.vanillicon.com/v2/0e54e8024b002427df3ce2953d22b721.svg)
