How do people feel about this one? Will it be short and sweet?
Mod warning:
https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121425200/#Comment_121425200
Ah yes the lower PRSI which entitled one to no benefits at all. Not even an eye test.
Anything else you'd like to get off your chest?
It's not really a fair comparison. The over-dramatic 'raided' language doesn't help your case either, it was a tax, same as every other tax.
The levy on private pension funds was 0.6%, less that most funds would be paying in pension admin charges, for a very limited period. It was a clawback of a small fraction of the tax relief given to those putting money into those funds. It brought in a relatively small amount of income, despite being very widely spread, so the impact on any individual was negligible. And of course, it hit many public sector staff who pay AVCs too, so they were hit on the double.
By comparison, the PRD took a big chunk off the income of a much small group, was in place earlier, and has continued indefinitely since. It has ABSOLUTELY reduced the retirement income of the staff involved by restricting their funds available for investment, for spending on healthcare and housing. And it seems to have been accepted by the union movement now, which is just a bit strange.
You're trying to rewrite history now, clutching at straws to try to find some excuse for your false allegations. Let's remind ourselves of the post which you said was me peddling lies.
'It's not income tax. It's the additional deduction on my payslip each fortnight, on top of income tax that reminds me of the ongoing issue, created by the employer abusing their tax raising powers to implement a change to employee terms and conditions unilaterally, in a manner that would be illegal for any other employer.'
There's nothing about 'only State employees were targeted'. Everything in this post is factually correct. You're the liar in this exchange, making up false allegations to justify your slightly strange passionate hatred for public sector staff.
Can you either quote what specific words from me (not a rewriting of my words by you) are you claiming are lies, or have the decency to withdraw your false allegation?
How has it reduced retirement income?
Not completely true.
In certain areas, the government are bound by European directives and cannot rewrite the law unitlaterally in their favour.
Furthermore, if your argument was to hold water, public service contracts would have a higher status than the law of the land.
Lads what does any of this have to do with the pay talks
The key point is we should be looking to restore the only remaining cut from the recession that hasn't been reversed - the PRD/ASC. That should be the starting point for these talks.
Please start another thread, or move to DMs, it is frustrating to keep coming back to this thread to see the childish bickering ongoing
By reducing funds available to invest in buying additional service or AVCS, even funds available to improve household insulation or invest in healthcare, all of which lead to reduced income in retirement.
created by the employer abusing their tax raising powers to implement a change to employee terms and conditions unilaterally
This bit.
Take the hint lads.
Indeed, no entitlement to optical or dental benefit, no entitlement to illness benefit either.
If a pre-95 civil servant becomes ill and exhausts their sick pay, it's means tested Supplementary Welfare only.
They are also on a lower pre-95 payscale.
That's exactly what happened.
You might have a different view on my characterisation of this as an abuse of power. That's your opinion. That doesn't make me a liar.
Again, I'd suggest if you have any decency, you'll withdraw your false allegation
Are there no mods on this forum? And yes, I have reported both parties.
I have also reported people for taking the thread off topic. For a fella with over 26,000 posts, you'd think he'd follow the rules at least.
Not true, they are entitled to TRR - Temporary Rehabilitation Remuneration.
Apparently not, given that posters are allowed to call other posters 'liars' because they have a different view.
Only its not off topic.
Its very relevant to the history of how civil and public servants pay has been negotiated, and how it has been cut in the past.
If its boring you, you can block posters.
Probably a stupid question but is there a relationship between public pay talks and say talks relating to say state owned companies? As in does one set a benchmark or point of reference for the other?
Do such talks include other benefits or just pay? e.g. paid parents leave.
There no official bench mark bt obviously it's hard to ignore either. But state owned companies get far better pay and conditions than civil servants and public servsnts, which I never really understood. Semi state companies basically are given a pot of money and they get to decide how that's spent.
Traditional other benefits have been included but the last discussion was solely on pay snd this one seems to be too. I get the sense there isn't much appetite around additional benefits until the issue of pay is resolved.
Thanks.
I am not sure on conditions. I don't have DB pensions which is usually better?
My performance, my branches and organisations can really influence what the actual yearly increase is for me so its not as simple of seeing oh I'll be getting x percent next year which is nice to know. Does that apply to civil / public servants?
I'm perhaps very naive but I would unions talk to / survey members before hard about priories, money vs benefits?
Are semi state company staff easier to compare to private? Not that it should mean less pay but my skills are very comparable to private. I could easily make the transition. Pay and benefits are now better in most private companies in my field. Things like parents leave are becoming very common in the private sector of my area.
I'm not talking tech sector either.
Which is pension rate of pay, and also time limited.
Lets just hope any older civil servants all have spouses who are able to support them financially if they get seriously sick, because the State won't.
Do semi state companies get better pensions?
Income protection, which is often provided as a perk at no cost in professional private sector roles, is important for most public servants.
Absolutely not. I’m in Irish rail and my pension is what’s known as a funded scheme meaning that if the fund runs dry(or deliberately underfunded by the company) than pension benefits are cut or contributions must rise. Civil service/public service pensions are not a funded scheme meaning that they are paid out of general expenditure. Also retired members of my scheme don’t get a rise in their pension as the salaries of their former grade rise. Also we only get 20% of final pensionable pay after 40 years. There are some nuances to these rules, too much to go into here but you get the gist.
That's what I thought, which means the other poster wasn't comparing like with like.
Have you not got access to Ill-Health Retirement with free added years, up to 7?
Yes European directives may apply. That's completely irrelevant to my point. Unilaterally refers to the absence of the mandatory consultative processes in relation to non-govt employers changing T&Cs.
Second para - you've got it ass-backwards as the government's actions during the FEMPI period showed that anything written in a public sector contract of employment can be overridden on the whim of government.
You make it sound like Ill Health Retirement is something the employee can just decide for themselves - when eligibility for IHR is granted or not only after medical assessment by the CMO / parent Dept and usually comes with a substantial loss of income to the employee. Kind of a grim prospect after a long term of service.
True, that suited the unions though as you got hooked into the Income Continuance Plan (entirely at the employee's cost) and it's a brave 40- or 50-something who leaves the union and gives that up...
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://www.boards.ie/applications/dashboard/design/images/banned.png)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w7.vanillicon.com/v2/7a1d0f49d56f52d3cfb2145c5b8cbe5a.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wd.vanillicon.com/v2/dbd35c43580ff62b54e9919958f2a898.svg)
