How do people feel about this one? Will it be short and sweet?
Mod warning:
https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121425200/#Comment_121425200
So are you talking about the size of our national debt, like you were before, or bond yields?
Bond yields change all the time (and are strongly affected by interest rates, govt bonds are a less attractive investment when rates rise) but that has no effect on the size of our national debt.
Governments sell bonds all the time, usually to refinance other bonds which have matured.
The idea that the Irish Government is going to have any difficulty at all selling bonds and at a low yield too is nonsensical. It's not 2010.
None of this is at all relevant to the pay talks.
True, a strike is a long way off (and still unlikely). However, there is a process in advance of strike and they are the type of deadlines I'd expect the unions to be setting.
For instance, weren't the unions "poised" to ballot for strike action if no deal was reached?
There is no deal. The government is not at the table. Where is the ballot that proves the unions will put their money where their mouth is?
I think if they tack on half a percent and reduce it to a two year deal it will pass. It won't satisfy everyone but it will pass nonetheless. The biggest issue was how little was on offer for the first year. People need increases now.
TDs are not public servants, they are public representatives.
Of course they did.
They had to unless they were members of a union on strike on the same day. CPSU did exactly the same when PSEU was on strike.
BTW CPSU were NOT the lowest paid workers in the civil service! Won't somebody think of the service officers and cleaners... ah but they don't count do they? 🙄 (there is still a few cleaners about who are civil servants, not contractors)
I'm sure there were those saying that in the North too. You'd wonder why they bothered to join a union at all.
Comparing the north’s public service situation to ours is ill-informed.
Comparing things is looking at the differences and similarities, it's not saying they are the same
I feel if they up it to 10%, with say 3% March, 1.5% october,2.5% March, 1.5% October, 1.5% March it would pass no bother. Wish they'd hurry up and get an offer that we can even vote on.
Yes the government`s recent bond auction was a success. The government got it`s money. The pension funds got their bonds. If inflation turns out to be low, going forward, the government should be able to keep up payments and the fund managers will be happy. Certainly government and ECB projections are for low inflation and why wouldn`t they be, you won`t sell many bonds if you tell them inflation is going to be high. But assuming the government and ECB really think inflation is heading lower, are they right?
The evidence suggests enough fund managers believe them to buy their bonds but the market sentiment suggests a slight majority are now not in agreement with the ECB and governments like ours. If inflation increases, the funds that bought the bonds will start losing money in real terms. The cost of borrowing will increase for the government and if the bond holders cut their losses and bail out early, all hell will break lose.
It wouldn`t surprise me if the IMF were back in Ireland within two years.
Yeah it would surprise me too.
Complete rubbish.
Crazy talk.
If bondholders sell their bonds, so what? It's like someone you sold a car to selling it on, whether they make a loss or not is no skin off your nose. Any future bolds sold by the government will be on different terms reflecting the circumstances at the time of the sale, but that's always the case anyway.
Ireland is one of, if not the most, safe investments in Europe for government debt and the markets reflect that.
Lot more differences than similarities in the context of public sector pay between the North and South. I’d have no doubt we would strike if we were in their situation but we aren’t even close.
I'd agree, once it is in double digits it will pass, the question is then how quickly, not a fan of the more than 2 years and I don't think I would vote for it if the deal was for 2.5 rather than 2, backdated to January with a start of 3% will see it through either way, needs to have reach 5% by October, then the same next year, 3% in January, 2% in October.
3% March 24 (backdated to 1st Jan), 3% June 24, 3% January 25, 3% June 25 is the very, very minimum I'd consider accepting to get a deal across the line.
They can feck off with dragging this into 2026
Deal or No Deal.
No one talks more of "service" than the likes of jokers like Varadkar/Donohoe
German union pay demand of set €500 per month / 21% raises inflation fears
Construction workers seek wage increase that could delay interest rate cuts by the European Central Bank, economists warn
The present government have no mandate whatsoever to negotiate beyond February 2025.
so do they have a mandate for, say, Metrolink, which will take another 3 or 4 governments to complete?
That's ridiculous, of course governments do things all the time which continue on past the next election.
It doesn’t really work like that in government. They have to plan for the future past Feb 2025. I’m surprised a public servant or even just a person wouldn’t understand that.
thats one of the worst takes in this thread.
FF/FG have no legal mandate to enact any form of social legislation beyond February 2025. That's not an opinion. That's a fact. I could equally argue with you that such a requirement to plan for the future in the public service could have been enacted in 2020 for five years to 2025.
To be perfectly honest coming from you that's quite something especially when I consider you prefer deals where money is paid in tiny pieces over many years than paid upfront. You literally prefer deals where you're paid less.
You completely miss the point on that but I don’t want to restart that.
The government have the power to agree a deal past the end of the government. The world doesn’t stop and reset every election.
It is undemocratic to agree a deal past their electoral mandate. That's what the unions should be telling the DPER and that a one year deal for 2024 should only be negotiated. It is then up to the voters to decide.
It’s factually incorrect.
So the next government can walk in and say to the contractors for the children’s hospital “sorry lads, the previous lot didn’t have the mandate for this contract, out ye go”.
The government have the authority to agree a deal past their official term. Any other statement is your opinion it’s undemocratic.
Hahahahah that couldn’t be any further from a fact.
Be careful what you wish for. People jumped in far too quickly last time.
The next government can do that, absolutely.
Building a hospital is not the same as passing legislation beyond your mandate.
What legislation needs to be passed….?
Do we reset the laws when the government steps down? New government, new legislation?
In fairness no legislation is required if it is an agreement for industrial peace. The point still stands though.
Perhaps public servants would be better off dealing with a new government because this present government couldn't care less about public servants? An election campaign revealing the shortages of staff in the public sector is required rather than a boast of public sector peace from a decrepit government
This is the stance the unions should take and agree a one year deal only.
So the government have the authority to agree a pay deal that extends beyond the term of their office. However, in your opinion, they shouldn’t do that (or maybe able to do that).
I am assuming that is what you now mean.
fair?
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wd.vanillicon.com/v2/dbd35c43580ff62b54e9919958f2a898.svg)
