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

NWPat · 22-02-2011 02:35PM

noodler wrote: »

Well, in fairness, the CP Deal has been in effect for almost a year now without any real signs of savings. You'll probably blame the Government here although many others feel it was a number of people in the PS dragging their feet (*for obvious reasons).

Even if no progress has been made yet, some quantification of savings to be made would be nice.

More biased opinion which is based on nothing more than your sense of self importance. Once again I point to this site.
http://implementationbody.gov.ie/home/
Please explain how 1.8 billion in savings is not a real sign.

noodler · 22-02-2011 02:41PM

Pay Bill (Gross) Pensions Bill (Gross) Exchequer Pay & Pensions Bill (Gross)
2009 17,375,523 2,579,927 19,956
2010 15,934,832 2,732,802 18,667,634
2011 15,711,719 2,924,332 18,636,051

Jesus Boards tables are a pain for me to do.

Anyway, point there was the disappointing rise in the Pensions Bill leaving an estimated Gross 2011 bill of 18.6bn.

Pay Bill (Net) Pensions Bill (Net) Exchequer Pay & Pensions Bill (Net)
2008 17,097 1,656 18,753

2009 16,471 2,007 18,478
2010 15,092 2,235 17,327

noodler · 22-02-2011 02:45PM

NWPat wrote: »

More biased opinion which is based on nothing more than your sense of self importance. Once again I point to this site.
http://implementationbody.gov.ie/home/
Please explain how 1.8 billion in savings is not a real sign.

I think you might need to go and take a lie down pal, a number plucked out of the air means nothing. Would you like to give me a department and annual breakdown on how that 1.8bn will be saved?

fliball123 · 22-02-2011 02:47PM

kceire wrote: »

what proof do you want? surely if money is being saved then we wont know the figures involved until January 2012?

Well the proof will be if you get cuts...If you get cuts you need not acheive the objective of the CPA

fliball123 · 22-02-2011 02:49PM

NWPat wrote: »

This statement is untrue and shows you have no idea about this subject. If you had any real concerns you would have visited this site
http://implementationbody.gov.ie/home/
and seen that in 2010 1.8 billion was saved by the introduction of the pension levy and a series of pay cuts.

I was getting to the point that if you do not make the reccomended savings under cpa then you will be cut again...and a contribution to a defined benefit...come on will you

20Cent · 22-02-2011 02:50PM

noodler wrote: »

I think you might need to go and take a lie down pal, a number plucked out of the air means nothing. Would you like to give me a department and annual breakdown on how that 1.8bn will be saved?

Its not will be, its has been saved.

Gumbo · 22-02-2011 02:51PM

fliball123 wrote: »

Well the proof will be if you get cuts...If you get cuts you need not acheive the objective of the CPA

aghh, see this is the PURE BEGRUDEGERY coming out now, you dont care that money is being saved you just want to see other people being cut because you were.

noodler · 22-02-2011 02:55PM

NWPat wrote: »

and seen that in 2010 1.8 billion was saved by the introduction of the pension levy and a series of pay cuts.

noodler wrote: »

Pay Bill (Gross) Pensions Bill (Gross) Exchequer Pay & Pensions Bill (Gross)
2009 17,375,523 2,579,927 19,956
2010 15,934,832 2,732,802 18,667,634
2011 15,711,719 2,924,332 18,636,051

Jesus Boards tables are a pain for me to do.

Anyway, point there was the disappointing rise in the Pensions Bill leaving an estimated Gross 2011 bill of 18.6bn.

Pay Bill (Net) Pensions Bill (Net) Exchequer Pay & Pensions Bill (Net)

2008 17,097 1,656 18,753
2009 16,471 2,007 18,478
2010 15,092 2,235 17,327

On a net or gross basis how has 1.8bn been saved in pension and pay cuts based on the above?

The best I can see is 1.6bn from the Gross pay Bill.

Genuinely asking.

kceire wrote: »

aghh, see this is the PURE BEGRUDEGERY coming out now, you dont care that money is being saved you just want to see other people being cut because you were.

Would you ever stop being with your whinging. The Bill is too high and attemping to portray people as simply jealous is not going to chnage the situation.

Gumbo · 22-02-2011 03:00PM

noodler wrote: »

Would you ever stop being with your whinging. The Bill is too high and attemping to portray people as simply jealous is not going to chnage the situation.

would you ever stop with your PS Whinging, savings are being made but ye lot simply are not happy with that, whether your jealous/begrudgers/ "or have the nations interest at heart

", you'll never be happy and coming on an internet forum posting biased opinions and ill-informed info isint gona change the situation either...........

noodler · 22-02-2011 03:02PM

kceire wrote: »

would you ever stop with your PS Whinging, savings are being made but ye lot simply are not happy with that, whether your jealous/begrudgers/ "or have the nations interest at heart ", you'll never be happy and coming on an internet forum posting biased opinions and ill-informed info isint gona change the situation either...........

Ye lot?

Nice try.

Gumbo · 22-02-2011 03:05PM

noodler wrote: »

Ye lot?

Nice try.

nice try yourself

noodler · 22-02-2011 03:07PM

noodler wrote: »

On a net or gross basis how has 1.8bn been saved in pension and pay cuts based on the above?

The best I can see is 1.6bn from the Gross pay Bill.

Genuinely asking.

My mistake here, I did not include 2008, when I did the figure looks to be a saving of 2bn net in the Pay Bill (which I persume is the figure they are alluding to - and if so they have didn't market it very well).

Although overall (pay and pensions it is still only 1.4bn)

fliball123 · 22-02-2011 03:09PM

kceire wrote: »

aghh, see this is the PURE BEGRUDEGERY coming out now, you dont care that money is being saved you just want to see other people being cut because you were.

Eh no its a you were set a target to acheive and if you dont acheive it tough...the money isnt there so your wage needs to be cut...nothing to do with begrudgery..I never said you guys where not making savings...show me where I said that...This is the first tangable acheivement the ps as a whole has been asked to acheive if they dont then when their wages are cut they cannot cry about it...thats all

noodler · 22-02-2011 03:23PM

… Exchequer Pay & Pensions Bill (Gross) Exchequer Pay & Pensions Bill (Net)
1999 7,998 7,763
2000 8,883 8,632
2001 10,406 10,186
2002 11,746 11,489
2003 12,946 12,773
2004 14,170 13,891
2005 15,493 14,973
2006 16,780 16,218
2007 18,161 17,600
2008 19,353 18,753
2009 19,956 18,478
2010 18,667 17,327
2011 (estimate) 18,636 ????

NWPat · 22-02-2011 05:59PM

noodler wrote: »

I think you might need to go and take a lie down pal, a number plucked out of the air means nothing. Would you like to give me a department and annual breakdown on how that 1.8bn will be saved?

I'm not your pal, the figures are the figures given by the implimentation body, thats their job. If you want a breakdown of the figures request them from the people who drew them up. If you choose not to believe them, that is your perogative, however, it is on these figures that government will make its policy and not the ramblings of the ill informed.

NWPat · 22-02-2011 06:28PM

fliball123 wrote: »

I was getting to the point that if you do not make the reccomended savings under cpa then you will be cut again...and a contribution to a defined benefit...come on will you

As savings have been made in line with, and in some cases exceeding the CPA recomendations, your analysis is floored. If you had read the CPA and the Implementation Body reports you would know that far from more cuts, a restoration of some pay to lower paid public servants may well be in the offing.

From the CPA:

"Those savings will be independently verified by the
Implementation Body. In the event of sufficient savings being identified in the Spring 2011 review, priority will be given to public servants with pay rates of €35,000 or less in the review of pay which will be undertaken at that stage."

srsly78 · 22-02-2011 06:59PM

That's some good stuff you've been smoking Pat, please share.

ardmacha · 22-02-2011 07:08PM

As savings have been made in line with, and in some cases exceeding the CPA recomendations, your analysis is floored. If you had read the CPA and the Implementation Body reports you would know that far from more cuts, a restoration of some pay to lower paid public servants may well be in the offing.

This is not going to happen, of course. A major weakness of the CPA is that it focusses on savings, not on the starting situation. So if you started with lots of waste, savings are easy enough to find and there isn't any stress. If, on the other hand, a particular sector had had some decent management and a positive union attitude over the years then they will already be fairly efficient and will now be excoriated for not achieving sufficient "savings".

noodler · 22-02-2011 07:16PM

noodler wrote: »

… Exchequer Pay & Pensions Bill (Gross) Exchequer Pay & Pensions Bill (Net)
1999 7,998 7,763
2000 8,883 8,632
2001 10,406 10,186
2002 11,746 11,489
2003 12,946 12,773
2004 14,170 13,891
2005 15,493 14,973
2006 16,780 16,218
2007 18,161 17,600
2008 19,353 18,753
2009 19,956 18,478
2010 18,667 17,327
2011 (estimate) 18,636 ????

NWPat wrote: »

I'm not your pal, the figures are the figures given by the implimentation body, thats their job. If you want a breakdown of the figures request them from the people who drew them up. If you choose not to believe them, that is your perogative, however, it is on these figures that government will make its policy and not the ramblings of the ill informed.

Without a doubt, of all the brazen outright "were keeping our wages and to hell with the country" PS defenders I have seen on this thread, you may well be the one with the most delusional sense of knowledge.

Check out Ireland's tax revenues and tell me if you feel the PS wages either:

a) Rose in proportion with the revenues
b) have fallen in proportion with the fall in revenues

The ill-informed ramblings? Do you hear yourself? Quoting one figure from the implementation body whilst I post figures from the DoF specifcially pertaining to the Pay and Pensions Bill. You carry on accepting figures without any justification or breakdown whilst calling others ill-informed - great watch.

NWPat · 22-02-2011 07:21PM

ardmacha wrote: »

This is not going to happen, of course. A major weakness of the CPA is that it focusses on savings, not on the starting situation. So if you started with lots of waste, savings are easy enough to find and there isn't any stress. If, on the other hand, a particular sector had had some decent management and a positive union attitude over the years then they will already be fairly efficient and will now be excoriated for not achieving sufficient "savings".

That's your opinion, but if the CPA is adhered to, and I see no other likely route for the next government, then it should happen. Just because you don't like does not mean it won't happen, and I will repeat again, its not the choice of the ill informed.

NWPat · 22-02-2011 07:31PM

noodler wrote: »

Without a doubt, of all the brazen outright "were keeping our wages and to hell with the country" PS defenders I have seen on this thread, you may well be the one with the most delusional sense of knowledge.

Check out Ireland's tax revenues and tell me if you feel the PS wages either:

a) Rose in proportion with the revenues
b) have fallen in proportion with the fall in revenues

The ill-informed ramblings? Do you hear yourself? Quoting one figure from the implementation body whilst I post figures from the DoF specifcially pertaining to the Pay and Pensions Bill. You carry on accepting figures without any justification or breakdown whilst calling others ill-informed - great watch.

Quite a rant there, however, you make so many errors its easy to pick them off. If you have read the CPA you will know its the Implementation Body that decides if targets have been met, not the DoF or even you. Therefore, if they say it is so, it is. I have no idea as to the answer to questions a) and b) perhaps you could enlighten me.

NWPat · 22-02-2011 07:43PM

srsly78 wrote: »

That's some good stuff you've been smoking Pat, please share.

Its too good to share;)

noodler · 22-02-2011 08:07PM

NWPat wrote: »

That's your opinion, but if the CPA is adhered to, and I see no other likely route for the next government, then it should happen. Just because you don't like does not mean it won't happen, and I will repeat again, its not the choice of the ill informed.

And when you say not the choice of the ill-informed, what do you mean?

The CPA was the Government's idea and many unions had to be dragged kicked and screaming into it.

Who is the informed you speak? Or do you just say the word because you think it sounds nice?

NWPat wrote: »

Quite a rant there, however, you make so many errors its easy to pick them off. If you have read the CPA you will know its the Implementation Body that decides if targets have been met, not the DoF or even you. Therefore, if they say it is so, it is. I have no idea as to the answer to questions a) and b) perhaps you could enlighten me.

Hmm, you clearly said payments to the "pay bill". I have put the pay bill up for 2008-2010 but why are you giving the CPA or the implementation body credit for paycuts/pension levies which took place before its existence?

Also, to correct you, it will be the EU/IMF who will decide if the targets are being met just as it says in the MoU. End of third quarter being the first deadline target.

NWPat · 23-02-2011 09:14AM

noodler wrote: »

And when you say not the choice of the ill-informed, what do you mean?

The CPA was the Government's idea and many unions had to be dragged kicked and screaming into it.

Who is the informed you speak? Or do you just say the word because you think it sounds nice?

Hmm, you clearly said payments to the "pay bill". I have put the pay bill up for 2008-2010 but why are you giving the CPA or the implementation body credit for paycuts/pension levies which took place before its existence?

Also, to correct you, it will be the EU/IMF who will decide if the targets are being met just as it says in the MoU. End of third quarter being the first deadline target.

You are the ill informed, I am not giving credit to anyone, just pointing out that its the Implementation body that decides on these issues and not you. The IMF/EU have no role in the implementation of the CPA, they are only interested in the repayment of loans.

gigino · 23-02-2011 12:02PM

NWPat wrote: »

The IMF/EU have no role in the implementation of the CPA, they are only interested in the repayment of loans.

You think it has not gone un-noticed by the IMF / EU that we - as one of the most bankrupt countries in the world - are asking to borrow more and more massive amounts of money ( massive compared to the size of the country / population ) , while our public servants are still one of the highest paid and pensioned in the world ? Why should the Garda in Cologne or Birmingham work harder for less money , in order that Paddy the Guard in Carrick or Belturbet can get more ? Paddy the Guard's average annual income ( 60k) can now buy a nice new rwo bedroom apartment on the Shannon ( which can be got for 55 k http://www.daft.ie/searchsale.daft?id=310830 ) , and have five grand left over for his years shopping in Lidl or wherever he chooses. When he retires aged 50 he can put in an offer and maybe get half a dozen of them with his tax free pension lump sum. If he lets them out it would suppliment his retirement pension, shure who could live on his public service pension of 35 or 40 grand a year?

fliball123 · 23-02-2011 12:18PM

NWPat wrote: »

As savings have been made in line with, and in some cases exceeding the CPA recomendations, your analysis is floored. If you had read the CPA and the Implementation Body reports you would know that far from more cuts, a restoration of some pay to lower paid public servants may well be in the offing.

From the CPA:

"Those savings will be independently verified by the
Implementation Body. In the event of sufficient savings being identified in the Spring 2011 review, priority will be given to public servants with pay rates of €35,000 or less in the review of pay which will be undertaken at that stage."

Then why are the likes of FG and FF banging on about that the CPA has yet to be proven to be making the required savings?? As I say proof in the pudding if you get cut its obvious you didnt acheive what was asked for

Gumbo · 23-02-2011 12:20PM

fliball123 wrote: »

Then why are the likes of FG and FF banging on about that the CPA has yet to be proven to be making the required savings?? As I say proof in the pudding if you get cut its obvious you didnt acheive what was asked for

what will you all do if PS pay is not cut, will you be happy that the savings were made elsewhere or still look for PS pay cuts?

fliball123 · 23-02-2011 12:29PM

NWPat wrote: »

You are the ill informed, I am not giving credit to anyone, just pointing out that its the Implementation body that decides on these issues and not you. The IMF/EU have no role in the implementation of the CPA, they are only interested in the repayment of loans.

You have hit the nail on the head Pat good man...So lets see how would this conversation go
Enda Kenny:
Well mr IMF man

In the last budget and the next 3/4 we cut and will be cutting the dole
In the last budget and the next 3/4 we cut and will be cutting the childs allownce
In the last budget and the next 3/4 we cut and will be cutting the public services.

But the ps pay was not touched and will not be cut under cpa due to the prev gov not having the moxy to put it up to the unions and kicking the problem down the road

The gov has incresae tax in the same period and has actually hit and gone past the point of diminishing returns as there was less tax take from income last year even do it was risen. As people have lost thier jobs (no one in the ps do bar contractors) people leaving the country as they have had enough or people having thier hours and wage slashed...

Mr IMF man:
yeah well you cant keep raising tax as it is having the effect of giving less tax take...more tax per person but less people paying it and all that..

Great you have cut all areas of spend...oh wait hang on whats this 19 odd billion on ps pay and pensions why no cuts there...

Enda Kenny:

We cant touch it due to CPA ... they have acheived savings in some areas..

Mr IMF Man
Thats great but we will not give you another cent until this 19 billion amount is cut.

Enda Kenny:

Ring Oconnor and Begg and tell them to get the lub as Dame Enda is going to screw them over..

haha its crazy to think that one area of spend will not be touched even if the cpa is adhered to ...

fliball123 · 23-02-2011 12:34PM

kceire wrote: »

what will you all do if PS pay is not cut, will you be happy that the savings were made elsewhere or still look for PS pay cuts?

Well it will be an ongoing process and if you guys pull it out of the hat you will have a temp retrieve but the bottom line is that the public sector both wages and spend has to come into toe...There can only be so much takin away from spend on non wage..

NWPat · 23-02-2011 02:31PM

fliball123 wrote: »

You have hit the nail on the head Pat good man...So lets see how would this conversation go
Enda Kenny:
Well mr IMF man

In the last budget and the next 3/4 we cut and will be cutting the dole
In the last budget and the next 3/4 we cut and will be cutting the childs allownce
In the last budget and the next 3/4 we cut and will be cutting the public services.

But the ps pay was not touched and will not be cut under cpa due to the prev gov not having the moxy to put it up to the unions and kicking the problem down the road

The gov has incresae tax in the same period and has actually hit and gone past the point of diminishing returns as there was less tax take from income last year even do it was risen. As people have lost thier jobs (no one in the ps do bar contractors) people leaving the country as they have had enough or people having thier hours and wage slashed...

Mr IMF man:
yeah well you cant keep raising tax as it is having the effect of giving less tax take...more tax per person but less people paying it and all that..

Great you have cut all areas of spend...oh wait hang on whats this 19 odd billion on ps pay and pensions why no cuts there...

Enda Kenny:

We cant touch it due to CPA ... they have acheived savings in some areas..

Mr IMF Man
Thats great but we will not give you another cent until this 19 billion amount is cut.

Enda Kenny:

Ring Oconnor and Begg and tell them to get the lub as Dame Enda is going to screw them over..

haha its crazy to think that one area of spend will not be touched even if the cpa is adhered to ...

Priceless!!!!!

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

Comments