Its official : public sector pay per hour is 49% higher than private sector

The wage bill is about €16bn per year (€19bn if you include pensions).

We will take in @€;31bn in tax in 2010.

I am not going to say that all PS workers are overpaid but the pay bill is still far too high.

Silly topic title though, "its official"? Where have you been for every single quarterly release of those CSO statistics?

avoidspammers wrote: »

I'll bet the public sector bricklayers and other tradesmen weren't earning an average of 2k per week in the good times. Funny how nobody cared what the PS workers earned during the good times. It reminds me of an old school friend of mine who cried when he finished all his sweeties first, he used to demand that his mummy take all our sweets!

Av. Sp.

Wow.


Do you have any idea what the Public Sector Wage Bill increased by between 1999 and 2009?

Any idea what Ireland's tax revenues declined by between 2007-2010?

Of course people are more concerned with the issue now.

avoidspammers wrote: »

I have a very good idea of this. My point is, the greedy elements of the private sector simply didn't care then, because life was good. Also, I reckon I could safely bet that you yourself had no idea of the payscales within the Public Sector in those times also. Now, everybody is an armchair economist

You really are going to alienate people further by trying to deflect the important point, your bitterness that people pay more attention to PS wage scales now is probably justified but it doesn't really change the reality.

The wages went out of control with the country's tax revenues and need (ed) to fall accordingly.

avoidspammers wrote: »

I presume you do realise that by further cutting PS pay across the board, revenues will be further depressed. This itself will lead to probably negative market growth in 2011 and 2012.

A.S.

Not really. You'll have to do me a mathematical example of that - assume an effective tax rate of 50%. If the Gov hadn't cut the bill by €1bn then it would have recieved €500k in tax - instead it made a full saving of €1bn.

I don't really see what public sector pay rates have to do with economic growth - if anything the wages being decreased will have a knock on effect in the private economy and make us more competitive leading to greater employment and more growth.

avoidspammers wrote: »

Well, there's your version whereby cuts will increase the tax take, and then there's the view from many economists, that further tax hikes and paycuts (in the Public Service) will only serve to reduce spending having the knock-on effect of depressing the private sector businesses.

Oh no, no no. You have misunderstood I am afraid.

There is an argument (well the Gove readily admit it) that cutting back on development projects (long-term infrastructural projects which would employ alot of people or have a long term positive effect - think the Dart underground or broadband schemes).

I am afraid public sector pay levels do not fall under this category - when the economists say the adjustment (THE adjustment as in the €6bn - not public sector pay cuts) will reduce economic growth (not disputed) they don't refer to public sector pay (which isn't even happening this budget remember).

avoidspammers wrote: »

Really? "wow", this sounds like an IBEC arguement. This is exactly the type of comment that endorses the decision by the government to cut the minimum wage on the destitute workers of Ireland.

A.S.

You are assuming an allegiance and then you are putting public sector pay in the same bracket as the minimum wage so I won't engage you based on minsinformation (deliberate or otherwise).

I don't mean to sound harsh here but if your growth argument was based on the mistaken theory that decreasing public sector wages will have a net negative effect on economic growth then that is the problem.

grungefreak1 wrote: »

This has all been said and done a thousand times Noodler and Avoidspammers. You'll never reach agreement on this. Although, I do think to be fair to Avoidspammers, he has made some very valid points. It's easy to attack the public service (of which I'm not a member) because all the facts and figures are freely available, but we must remember, the private sector created more of a demand for construction and were easily as (probably more) silly about salary expectations in terms of repayment of loans to the greedy bankers.

Just thought I'd have my say.

GF

So you come onto the thread to say stop debating but then come down on one side right at the end of the post with an irrelevant point to the point we are discussing? Bravo.

What we were just discussing with regards public sector wages being in anyway linked to economic growth is not up for debate, or discussion or anything else - it was a mistake on behalf of the poster which I was trying to correct as calmly as I could.

avoidspammers wrote: »

Wow. How good of you.

It beats the spread of an argument based on a misinterpretation.

Grassroots_FF wrote: »

Public sector workers need to do their patriotic duty and take another 20% cut in pay. We can't afford these bloated pay rates for inefficient services.

:rolleyes:

But developers like Simon and Paddy Kelly are deserving of our respect and their money?


now there is a truly twisted outlook on life.

amacca wrote: »

:rolleyes:

But developers like Simon and Paddy Kelly are deserving of our respect and their money?


now there is a truly twisted outlook on life.

Alot our of developers showed entrepreneurship and innovation and set up their own businesses. Most public sector workers show none of those qualities yet they get gold plated pensions and benifits.

Grassroots_FF wrote: »

Public sector workers need to do their patriotic duty and take another 20% cut in pay. We can't afford these bloated pay rates for inefficient services.

No, what needs to happen is that the €16bn paybill is reducued further.

The Government needs to sort out this out far more specifically than it has done so far. Cutting the fat, reducing silly wages etc and perhaps a small cut for those earning over a certain amount - I think the % cut off all wages generally is a bit lazy.


I'd love to know if PS pensions are actually self-sustaining at this stage, now that a pension levy is in effect. Anyone know anything about this?

amacca wrote: »

:rolleyes:

But developers like Simon and Paddy Kelly are deserving of our respect and their money?


now there is a truly twisted outlook on life.

I don't understand the relevance?

amacca wrote: »

my fault...


grassroots_ff had posted in the simon kelly thread minutes before his stirling contribution to this one singing the praises of "the developers"

Sorry, gotcha.

noodler wrote: »

I'd love to know if PS pensions are actually self-sustaining at this stage, now that a pension levy is in effect. Anyone know anything about this?

http://www.audgen.gov.ie/documents/vfmreports/68_Central_Gov_Pensions.pdf
Self sustaining is always going to be open to interpretation..

Are the PS pensions fully funded? No, there is still a defecit of about €108 billion, and this is growing year on year.

Some sections would run at a suplus presently, but the PS pensions are a pay as you go scheme (so in effect the government does very little saving), so as we move out in years, and the PS gets smaller (less going in) and the PS retirees grow (more coming out) the situation gets worse.



http://www.finfacts.ie/irishfinancenews/article_1018283.shtml

With the PS levvies now in place, the PS are funding a lot more of their pension than previously.. It is open to discuss whether this is enough, Maolney & Whelan (http://www.ssisi.ie/Moloney&Whelan2009.pdf) estimated that in order to fund a defined benefit scheme you need to put ~30% of salary into your pension..

It's also worth noting that it wasn't just a pension levy that hit PS workers, they have also taken a hit with changes to the scheme.. they will now get a 50% of average salary rather than final salary.. which is less for them, and is obviously going to mean less defecit going forwards (although I have not seen any estimates on how much).

People are also somewhat unfair to PS workers in one other respect.. Private companies will often match employee contributions, but people seem to have an issue with PS pensions not being 100% self funded.. The state should continue to pay a good amount (at least market rate) into PS workers pensions..

Will all of the changes balance the books? I'm not so sure, the situation will be better as this was a ticking timebomb, but we need to make sure that any changes don't leave PS employees out in the cold with late sweeping changes giving them little time to replan their retirement.. I also believe that the government could/should take a more active role in manageing the fund, and not continue to run the pay as you go scheme.

Japer wrote: »

Hearing the truth ( that the public sector is way over-pensioned and overpaid, both compared to the private sector and other public sectors elsewhere, inc our nearest neighbours ) hurts the public sector. Its like telling someone who is obese that they are fat and will have to trim down.

So much disinformation and intentional dishonesty, you would be in pain if the truth were to hurt!