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

cursai · 14-01-2011 05:42PM

noodler wrote: »

Okay

How many more times do you want to be refuted?

Eamon, read the thread and understand the difference between wanting to hit all PS workers with an identical % pay cut and reducing the pay/pensions bill overall.

Is the €488 a week net? May I ask which profession.

EDIT: Scrathc that, if Eamon is your real name - I guess you'd rather not give your profession as well.

NOODLER i agree totally with your arguments on % pay cuts and pay/pensions ratios.
The public service should be cut by a third.
But i wont argue the rest. Its all incomparable. There is no comparative job types in my area. This argument is redundant.

noodler · 14-01-2011 05:53PM

cursai wrote: »

NOODLER i agree totally with your arguments on % pay cuts and pay/pensions ratios.
The public service should be cut by a third.
But i wont argue the rest. Its all incomparable. There is no comparative job types in my area. This argument is redundant.

I am not sold on a crazy cut in numbers for the sake of it.

If there are enough people in admin positions who are not contributing anything near enough to justify their wages then then should be paid more appropriately or leave.

I think the "no comparison" argument is overblown but I don't even see why it is relevent from a Public Finances position.

The country pays what it can afford - it shouldn't arbitrarily link public sector wages to private. This is what makes benchmarking such a farce - claims that the Private Sector wages were going way ahead of Public Sector wages and so had to increase. Then when the bad times hit we have people arguing there is no comparsion.

Anyway, as I said, the pay bill should be set more closely to the numbers employed and affordibility.

cursai · 14-01-2011 06:03PM

noodler wrote: »

I am not sold on a crazy cut in numbers for the sake of it.

If there are enough people in admin positions who are not contributing anything near enough to justify their wages then then should be paid more appropriately or leave.

I think the "no comparison" argument is overblown but I don't even see why it is relevent from a Public Finances position.

The country pays what it can afford - it shouldn't arbitrarily link public sector wages to private. This is what makes benchmarking such a farce - claims that the Private Sector wages were going way ahead of Public Sector wages and so had to increase. Then when the bad times hit we have people arguing there is no comparsion.

Anyway, as I said, the pay bill should be set more closely to the numbers employed and affordibility.

Once again there IS no comparable jobs types in my area. NOBODY in the private sectors does the hours and type of work i do. My job couldnt be privatised.
Benchmarking was a farce but no one complained when it was going on.
No private sector worker complained when THEY earned ridiculous money.
There are a lot of inequality in both areas.
I too am paying for PRIVATE banks which should have been shut(at least one of them).

Jaysoose · 14-01-2011 06:08PM

cursai wrote: »

NOODLER i agree totally with your arguments on % pay cuts and pay/pensions ratios.
The public service should be cut by a third.
But i wont argue the rest. Its all incomparable. There is no comparative job types in my area. This argument is redundant.

Are you a Wizard?

cursai · 14-01-2011 06:10PM

Jaysoose wrote: »

Are you a Wizard?

No i'm an essential service that would become very nasty and unsociable if it were privatised!

Jaysoose · 14-01-2011 06:12PM

cursai wrote: »

Once again there IS no comparable jobs types in my area. NOBODY in the private sectors does the hours and type of work i do. My job couldnt be privatised.
Benchmarking was a farce but no one complained when it was going on.
No private sector worker complained when THEY earned ridiculous money.
There are a lot of inequality in both areas.
I too am paying for PRIVATE banks which should have been shut(at least one of them).

Are you a sorcerer?

Jaysoose · 14-01-2011 06:13PM

cursai wrote: »

No i'm an essential service that would become very nasty and unsociable if it were privatised!

Why dont you enlighten us and let the boardsies judge if your essential or not.

martian1980 · 14-01-2011 06:46PM

Jaysoose wrote: »

Are you a sorcerer?

what's the difference between a sorcerer and a wizard?

Head The Wall · 14-01-2011 07:01PM

cursai wrote: »

No i'm an essential service that would become very nasty and unsociable if it were privatised!

Nobody said it had to be privatised, what is being said is it can be compared to something.

And by the way nobody is irreplaceable.

If you are the only person in the country that does your job let us know what it is.

noodler · 14-01-2011 07:42PM

You're not the Taoiseach, are you?

sceptre · 14-01-2011 08:22PM

No-one's obliged to inform other people on this forum of what they do for a living. Also, please refrain from posting idiotic comments like "are you a wizard" etc. It says more about you when you post idiocy like that than it can possibly say about anyone else.

There's a topic of discussion here (hinted at strongly by the thread title - kindly make an attempt to actually discuss that topic.

/mod

cursai · 14-01-2011 08:42PM

.........walks away with massive pay check and smug 'job for life' expression:).

Jaysoose · 14-01-2011 08:53PM

sceptre wrote: »

No-one's obliged to inform other people on this forum of what they do for a living. Also, please refrain from posting idiotic comments like "are you a wizard" etc. It says more about you when you post idiocy like that than it can possibly say about anyone else.

There's a topic of discussion here (hinted at strongly by the thread title - kindly make an attempt to actually discuss that topic.

/mod

Wow just wow...the post was made in jest and thats obviously how it was taken so get over yourself you jumped up arse.

paul71 · 14-01-2011 08:59PM

Jaysoose wrote: »

Wow just wow...the post was made in jest and thats obviously how it was taken so get over yourself you jumped up arse.

Oh dear, ban prediction.

Jaysoose · 14-01-2011 09:01PM

paul71 wrote: »

Oh dear, ban prediction.

I will get over it.

noodler · 14-01-2011 09:27PM

I have to agree, the debate in here has been reasonably heated without the need for mod threats.

If someone comes into the thread arguing they are indispensible in their PS job, theres no other job like it etc then I think it was surprising people were curious.

cursai · 15-01-2011 02:06AM

Hey. This arguing is ridiculous. If i was to sit down with anybody over a beer and explain my situation and the situation of thousands of other people in my similar boat. A reasonable person would have to agree!
These threads about how Public servants get paid too much is completely unfair.
Like i go to lunch with Jim Fitzpatrick everyday or something.
At the end of the day we are all plebs who will never make an impact....except maybe an act of terrorism(not condoning or advising on any way...
I get paid by John and you get paid by Peter.
This is another issue distracting from the real issues.

cursai · 15-01-2011 02:07AM

noodler wrote: »

I have to agree, the debate in here has been reasonably heated without the need for mod threats.

If someone comes into the thread arguing they are indispensible in their PS job, theres no other job like it etc then I think it was surprising people were curious.

I personally am not indispensable but my line of work is!
Also I can see why anybody would be curious but i dont want to be abused!

macannrb · 15-01-2011 12:09PM

cursai wrote: »

Hey. This arguing is ridiculous. If i was to sit down with anybody over a beer and explain my situation and the situation of thousands of other people in my similar boat.

I think this is the problem. Every PS worker on this thread, looks at the PS pay bill from their point of view, and not from the macro point of view. Cabinet Ministers do the same, otherwise they would be taking massive cuts too.

I have sympathy for you cursai, and the person I rent from has the same argument, no real comparision to private jobs, not many people work the same hours, or have to deal with the same ****. But the same girl said that one of her friends was on 50k in 2007 and a bank happily gave her 400k (eight times salary! and no parental guarentee). So if we take this person as an example, then you can see why this person would never even think of taking a pay cut, because all their money is going to the bank. And with the same respect, they would never think of the government financial problems, because as soon as cuts are thought of, a defensive mindset kicks in and before you know it no rational argument for cutting wages would be acceptable because that means she would lose her house. Again understandable but the problems of some individuals are not bigger then the problems of the country. People need to take responsibility for their problems, many people shouldnt have taken huge mortgages like this without real independent financial advice. Now they need to take responsibility for them.

To be fair Cursai, you seem likeable and I wish you well in the future, and maybe we should have a beer, but I can also tell you the stories of thousands who are leaving the country.

macannrb · 15-01-2011 12:26PM

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

Indeed, ok so.
Do you propose a 100% cut?
If not what percentage cut do you propose?

i have proposed a system of cuts. maybe read the thread.

So apply that theory to ireland for me please and how its application could eb expected to be seen by the citizens of this nation?

I actually just did. please read my post.... slowly

Hansome generous, very descriptive not very useful. What is a fair pension for a PS staff member who may be employed by the state fo as many as 50years?

I judge from you spelling errors, this is written in the heat of the moment, and you are fairly angry. Maybe you didn't think for a second that private sector workers aren't entitled to a pension at all. Why can't PS workers save for retirement like everyone else

While it is my opinion it is also fact my wages are not 49% higher than the private sector so how is this title true?

A sample of one, is not a reliable sample size. You are just showing that the education system here is below par, maths in particular is not taught effectively and in reality some teachers should be fired if they can't teach effectively.

In your esteemed opinion does this also include removing the minimum wage.
Which is undoubtedly a barrier to a competitive workforce in international terms?

Again your basic understanding of economics of this country lets you down. This government generates about 1/3 of its corp tax through the IFSC and more in income taxes. Ire has a lot of other MNCs which are in research, ie pharma etc, and all these are not really effected by the minimium wage. So this is not an issue for the major areas of the economy. You are trying to distract us, but you are just showing your lack of understanding.

But seeing as you have mentioned it, income tax will effect all these jobs a lot more, and by keeping PS pay and pensions bill high, then it will lead to higer taxes in the future, and many of these jobs will go, leaving even less revenue for the government.

Indeed they can, so are you suggesting then that EU is major part of our ecomomic situation by not allowing us to set interest rates or to "print money"?
Also how does printing money help with national debt, surely by printing more money you devalue your currency and but leave your level of debt intact?
Im open to being proven wrong on this I dont understand international economics.

Yes you are wrong. Again schooling probably has some part to play here. Maybe you didnt take economics and are just in over your head. By devaluing the currency, your debt is then worth less also, but only if its in the same currency. And since you have printed more money, you can pay it off. but the result is also that it is harder to buy foreign goods etc.

[/QUOTE]Is all this debt as a result of PS wages?

No. Nobody ever said that. But I am sure you realise it has contributed to it to a large degree.

I cant really answer im not privy to government intentions!

No, but using a basic understanding, my argument is logical, especially given the impending election. But then again you have failed to grasp my more basic arguments so maybe I am setting my expectations too high for you.

Gumbo · 15-01-2011 01:27PM

macannrb wrote: »

People need to take responsibility for their problems, many people shouldnt have taken huge mortgages like this without real independent financial advice. Now they need to take responsibility for them.

Totally agree, but what about the people that did seek advice. From independent mortgage brokers who we were "supposed" to trust were independent. People asked for advice on what bank to use etc and also the surveyors that happily agreed thenprie was fair for the house before the bank would hand over the mortgage.

These are professional people that myself and anybody else that took out a mortgage paid for and expected that the advice they were been given was correct.

But as we all know now, it was just another box that had to be ticked before they moved swiftly into their next customer.

If we knew then what we know now........

Gumbo · 15-01-2011 01:34PM

Why can't PS workers save for retirement like everyone else

PS workers do save for their own pension.
I personally pay 309e per month for my pension thy will yield me 6900 per year if I stay 40 years in the PS. I also pay PRSI and all the usual taxes to cover my state pension.

309 per month for 40 years will cover my PS pension entitlements and yet the guy that sits on his ass on welfare still gets 234 per week after never contributing anything.

Please get your facts correct when using them in an argument.

Welease · 15-01-2011 01:46PM

kceire wrote: »

PS workers do save for their own pension.
I personally pay 309e per month for my pension thy will yield me 6900 per year if I stay 40 years in the PS. I also pay PRSI and all the usual taxes to cover my state pension.

309 per month for 40 years will cover my PS pension entitlements and yet the guy that sits on his ass on welfare still gets 234 per week after never contributing anything.

Please get your facts correct when using them in an argument.

Is 6900 based on your final salary at 40 years?

cursai · 15-01-2011 01:50PM

macannrb wrote: »

I think this is the problem. Every PS worker on this thread, looks at the PS pay bill from their point of view, and not from the macro point of view. Cabinet Ministers do the same, otherwise they would be taking massive cuts too.

I have sympathy for you cursai, and the person I rent from has the same argument, no real comparision to private jobs, not many people work the same hours, or have to deal with the same ****. But the same girl said that one of her friends was on 50k in 2007 and a bank happily gave her 400k (eight times salary! and no parental guarentee). So if we take this person as an example, then you can see why this person would never even think of taking a pay cut, because all their money is going to the bank. And with the same respect, they would never think of the government financial problems, because as soon as cuts are thought of, a defensive mindset kicks in and before you know it no rational argument for cutting wages would be acceptable because that means she would lose her house. Again understandable but the problems of some individuals are not bigger then the problems of the country. People need to take responsibility for their problems, many people shouldnt have taken huge mortgages like this without real independent financial advice. Now they need to take responsibility for them.

To be fair Cursai, you seem likeable and I wish you well in the future, and maybe we should have a beer, but I can also tell you the stories of thousands who are leaving the country.

I dont know about that lady. But i have NO house, cant afford one. Never got into that madness. Have no new car. All i know is what i can afford!
What i can afford is reduced by expenses i incur because of my job.
I know if get cut by much more ill be considering the dole as my wage wont sustain me!
My point is everyone is taking cuts. no reasonable public servant is against it!
I pay a lot for my pension. it has evened out since three yrs ago when it was inequitable compared to private pensions.
Public servants pay just as much as everyone else.
i have private sector friends who earn more than me for easier jobs and vice versa i have public servant friends who earn less for the same job.
This argument is unfair and the average public servant is an easy target when peoples angry should be pointed towards their government....such as how their wasnt a no confidence vote in Brian Cowen recently by any of the political parties....purely because they knew Cowen has to hang on until his pension increase in March. They're all buddy buddy while we are just plebs!

macannrb · 15-01-2011 02:31PM

kceire wrote: »

Totally agree, but what about the people that did seek advice.

there are about 300k people who bought houses between 2004-2008 who are in negative equity. All of these people have to accept that no one forced them into their decision. But as I pointed out, keeping PS pay bill high, just to save thouse PS workers houses, is not sustainable. PS pay has to come down far far quicker then has been happening.

cursai wrote: »

This argument is unfair and the average public servant is an easy target when peoples angry should be pointed towards their government

My argument is not anger against the government, its against the lack of cuts in overall government expenditure which I have said on this thread time and time again. this is why I argue of a reduction of all gov expenditure, not just PS pay.

because they knew Cowen has to hang on until his pension increase in March. They're all buddy buddy while we are just plebs!

to some extend I agree. but i think part of the reason is that they want to keep the election as far away from the date of teh IMF. this is a real low point in the history of economic Ireland. The electrate is very feable and many will forget that this has happened. Especially since the OAP pension hasnt been touched, etc etc

kceire wrote: »

PS workers do save for their own pension.
I personally pay 309e per month for my pension thy will yield me 6900 per year if I stay 40 years in the PS. I also pay PRSI and all the usual taxes to cover my state pension.

309 per month for 40 years will cover my PS pension entitlements and yet the guy that sits on his ass on welfare still gets 234 per week after never contributing anything.

Please get your facts correct when using them in an argument.

Get my facts correct? I didnt give any facts? I just asked why couldnt PS workers save for their pension? Maybe a reading class or two wouldnt go astray....

So what you are saying is your 7k pension is guarenteed. that is not the case for many private sector employees. And the pension levy does not cover it.... The government are making a loss as the accrual for pensions is far higher then the pension levy.

Just to give you an idea of the pension problem building up, the ESB has pension liabilities of 5.428bn (its around page 100). It has about 6000 employees. Since the state doesnt give this information on the government, we can extrapulate to give an idea, , that would give a liability per person in the ESB of 861k, and an estimated liability based on 300k public servants, of 260bn. So as I said, why can't public sector employees save for themselves especially since they are paid 49% higher then private sector.

kaiser sauze · 15-01-2011 02:46PM

kceire wrote: »

either you have the countries national debt in mind or its just a simple fact that YOU want to see peoples wages reduced.
End Result = PS pay and pension bill being reduced.

PS pay and bill was
17.097Bn in 2008
16.471Bn in 2009
15.092Bn in 2010

and still decreasing........

I went back a couple of pages and found this^

You deliberately used the wrong figures and have stuck with them ever since, even though you now know that your description of them is inaccurate.

The behaviour following this can only be concluded as "troll".

You have been called out, yet you still use them.

When are you going to stop?.

kceire wrote: »

your document is dated Feb 2010.
my figures are from here - http://www.finance.gov.ie/documents/publications/reports/2010/payanal0510.pdf which although contains no exact date, but it does refer to the CPA and mentions that it contains data from the 31st Dec 2010, would lead me to believe that its more up to date.

(im no analylist (sp) so im open to correction on that)

You can sing that.

noodler wrote: »

I think one set of figures contain pay alone and another contains pay AND pensions, no?

Indeed, a concept that kceire has been unable, or unwilling, to grasp for several pages now.

kceire wrote: »

quite possible, but the title of my link is :

You do not understand what your link means, yet you use it to backup your arguments?? The mind truly boggles now.

kceire wrote: »

my figures were also for pay and pensions.

As has been pointed out to you a rather ridiculous number of times: your figures, the ones you have on your autopaster, are PS pay only.

kceire wrote: »

thats the same document i was linking to 5 pages back

plus my figures are for the PS pay bill, which incase you forgot is the title of the thread :

no mention of pensions in there is there now :rolleyes:

Like you said before, stop blurring the lines or being deliberately facetious.

Anything else I can help you with tonight?

The quotes here are in order, even before I called you out for stating figures and trimming the truth with them you have been deliberately using them while I now believe you actually do know what you are doing and you are hoping that noone will see you for what you are.

kceire wrote: »

no problem, your welcome.
judging by the anger in your posts you should release some of that pressure from your head before that explodes.

just because the figures dont please your personal vendetta you attack me, the mind boggles :rolleyes:

Personal vendetta?

I am calling you out for blurring the lines with your figures and refusing to accept the economic reality of the finances of the state.

If you believe there is a vendetta use the report button and if there are any merit in your claims, of which there have been none thus far, I will quickly be banned from politics. Perhaps I might even be sitebanned because my "vendetta" has been so hurtful to you.

kceire wrote: »

the forecast says it will reduce, i have stated that in many many many posts but ye ignore it.
i dont know the exact/proper figure it will reduce by, and either do you!
we can all quote the forecast but the true figures will be released in Jan 2012.

You are unwilling to debate DoF forecasts?

kceire wrote: »

wasting your time LOL
your time has been wasted since the moment you posted your personal vendetta against certain peoples opinions....... so please stop wasting my time.

Utter nonsense. You have your figures wrong, you were wrong

kceire wrote: »

i copied/pasted your exact post, so were obviously both at the same level....

And who actually wrote it?

macannrb wrote: »

Hi Kaiser,

Kceire is a one trick pony. All he can say is PS pay costs have done down x in the last y years. he repeats this z amount of times in response to anyone's attempts to engage in a debate of PS pay cost. Further attempts to engage in expanding the debates away from "pay costs have gone done..." result in "ps begrugder" "throwing toys out of prams" etc and he must defend his one trick patch. These tricks won't get him very far in the real world but I’m sure in the PS they have been fine.

The problem that Kceire has, is that on any sinking ship, the common sense thing to do is to follow the rats. The government is a sinking ship and default is only a matter of time. And the rats are jumping ship, Dermot Ahern, Noel Dempsey, Mary Wallace, Jimmy Devin etc and more that dont want to announced their flight intentions just yet. these guys will be just fine as their party will put them on quango boards, or their 6m pensions will keep them warm at night. However Kceire only has one trick and in the real world he will find it difficult to adapt.

Kaizer, I also think Kceire shoots himself in the foot showing his lack of intelligence with his one trick antics, in a sense giving us a first class example why those in the education system in Ireland are ineffective at their jobs. One might suggest overpaid, or lack or routing out the bad eggs in the profession.

But Kaizer, you should also know that not all in the PS lack intelligence as Kceire does. My parents are both receive very modest paychecks from the government and both agree that the country is heading towards ruin unless major changes happen. Both parents hate unions, and would be patriotic enough to accept across the board paycuts as they don’t take their paychecks for granted. But they know there is an element in the PS which would object wholesale as many have far too large mortgages, large credit card bills, and in general wont accept that the problems of the country will eventually effect their lifestyle as they have leveraged their furture wages on houses and other things. But there is hope, even if there is an element such as kceire. It reminds me of the Upton Sinclair quote, "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his job depends on not understanding it".

I find it ironic how kceire thanked this post.

kceire wrote: »

and all the PS begrudgers mouth off is "we want pay cuts", when in fact the pay bill is being reduced. if youve been around these forums you will understand why i post the same stuff as the PS begrudgers simply copy/paste the same argument from post to post also.

I don't see anyone else parroting off the same tired, incorrect figures over and over again.

What is the model # of your autopaster?

kceire wrote: »

its an argument that can never be won on here as everybody has their own agenda and you never really know wether the poster is posting from real experience or is a wind up

You lost the argument long ago by posting up incorrect figures.

kceire wrote: »

for all you know i could be a Dunnes Stores check out assistant!
you have no way of judging me based on my wind ups agianst one poster that goes out of their way to attack me.

AHA!

Here you admit to not actually dealing with my points to you and merely winding me up. You have conclusively shown now that you are just trolling.

Well done.

Welease wrote: »

Is 6900 based on your final salary at 40 years?

kceire has no idea about his/her pension. S/he wants to leave it and pay into a private one that is completely at the mercy of market forces.

Gumbo · 15-01-2011 02:47PM

macannrb wrote: »

I just asked why couldnt PS workers save for their pension? Maybe a reading class or two wouldnt go astray.....

And I told you PS workers do pay their pensions.
So Maybe a reading class or two wouldnt go astray for you too ...... Same BS again, when toe given factual figures you resort to insults.......the mind boggles at times

Head The Wall · 15-01-2011 02:47PM

Welease wrote: »

Is 6900 based on your final salary at 40 years?

No that figure is based on 50% of his current salary (38k) less the OAP. He's being evasive and misleading to make it seem like he pays in full for his pension

Gumbo · 15-01-2011 02:50PM

Head The Wall wrote: »

No that figure is based on 50% of his current salary (38k) less the OAP. He's being evasive and misleading to make it seem like he pays in full for his pension

Do the figures.........

ParkRunner · 15-01-2011 02:55PM

macannrb wrote: »

there are about 300k people who bought houses between 2004-2008 who are in negative equity. All of these people have to accept that no one forced them into their decision. But as I pointed out, keeping PS pay bill high, just to save thouse PS workers houses, is not sustainable. PS pay has to come down far far quicker then has been happening.

This is, in my opinion, the big problem in the country at the moment. I'll take your word on the 300k people who bought between 2004-2008 because I have no other figures to hand.

I don't think that anyone will disagree that wages cannot be kept at a level to meet the mortgage repayments of massively over-priced houses. But it is a problem both in the public and private sector and we can't go repossessing every house as it is illogical.

A partial debt forgiveness might be the only solution to allow wages to be brought down further without leaving thousands of people destitute. But even this will require further bank recapitalisation so we will all have to pay for this in one way or another I reckon. (Note - I don't have a massive mortgage)

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

Comments