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

noodler wrote: »

Are PS pensions self-sustaining?

dont know, is the state penion self-sustaining?
Dublin City Council's pay and pension bill is self sufficient though, that i do know.

kceire wrote: »

Your big fail is your arrogance to admit when your wrong. You keep banging on about PS pensions and how they are awarded free of charge,

I never said they are "awarded free of charge". I do say they are paid by the taxpayer / whoever pays the government money ...that is where the money ultimately comes from.

kceire wrote: »

yet you fail to mention that in alot of cases, myself included, my contributions actually cover the benefits received.

Do not kid yourself. In the case of the average Guard retiring now, his pension pot has been calculated to be worth 1.2 million. Lets say he joined at age 19 or 20 and is retiring, as he is entitled to, now at age 49 or 50. Since 1981 no way his "contributions actually cover the benefits received." lol lol.

No way were his contributions in to his pension fund worth the equivalent of 40 grand a year ! He was only earning a fraction of that when he joined the cops in 1981 !

Anyway, now he is retired + has his tax free lump sum of 18 months salary - which to put things in perspective would almost buy not one but two nice 2-bedroom newly built " tax incentive" apartments, on the lovely river Shannon.
http://www.daft.ie/searchsale.daft?id=310830-

He also has his pension paid by the government of 50% of his finishing salary. He will receice this pension for each and every year of the rest of his life, which is reasonable to assume ( or at least hope ) will be another 30 or 35 years at least. And he is only 49 or 50 so can rent out his 2 two-bedroom apartments tax free. Great life considering his employer, our government, is one of the most bankrupt governments in the world, and the IMF is here. I know you are also a public servant, but do you really think this is morally correct or sustainable ?

kceire wrote: »

dont know, is the state penion self-sustaining?
Dublin City Council's pay and pension bill is self sufficient though, that i do know.

The PS Pension Bill is not self-sustaining.

Mainly due to the fact for years there was no direct contribution to it from the PS workers and the Pension Levy doesn't really plug this hole.

The main problem is the DB schemes though - the state is on the hook no matter what the fluctuations in the relevant pension funds.

I hope you will bear in mind, that whatever your case individually, the bill is not self-sustaining.

noodler wrote: »

Mainly due to the fact for years there was no direct contribution to it from the PS workers and the Pension Levy doesn't really plug this hole.

i contributed to my pension before the levy was introduced, and so dod every other PS worker out there.

the levy was an increase to that payment.

kceire wrote: »

i contributed to my pension before the levy was introduced, and so dod every other PS worker out there.

the levy was an increase to that payment.

Yeah, the entire country paid PRSI but only a fraction recieved Defined Benefits Pensions, the difference in which over the State Pension was financed in no small part by other taxpayers.

noodler wrote: »

Yeah, the entire country paid PRSI but only a fraction recieved Defined Benefits Pensions, the difference in which over the State Pension was financed in no small part by other taxpayers.

No, before the pension levy, PS workers paid PRSI, and a pension contribution. Not just PRSI as posters on here would have you believe.

Now contributions are :

PRSI
Pension contribution
PRD (pension levy)

kceire wrote: »

No, before the pension levy, PS workers paid PRSI, and a pension contribution. Not just PRSI as posters on here would have you believe.

Now contributions are :

PRSI
Pension contribution
PRD (pension levy)

Really?

How much was it?

noodler wrote: »

Really?

How much was it?

ill route out a payslip from before the levy was introduced but it was approx 6.5% of salary.

hardcore

On average PS wages are higher so there should be some pay cuts in some areas of the PS.

kceire wrote: »

ill route out a payslip from before the levy was introduced but it was approx 6.5% of salary.

Gross or Net?

Yeah, check out the specifics if you get a chance - cheers.

noodler wrote: »

Gross or Net?

Yeah, check out the specifics if you get a chance - cheers.

i think its gross, but i may be wrong, im only PS 2 years so should be able to find exact figures. it will be monday though as i keep mu slips in my desk and im off this week on leave.

ardmacha

Everyone in the PS appointed after 1995 pays 6.5% of their gross salary as a pension contribution. Persons appointed before 1995 are paid less by the amount of the pension contribution. Some groups e.g. teachers had always paid the 6.5%.

ardmacha wrote: »

Everyone in the PS appointed after 1995 pays 6.5% of their gross salary as a pension contribution. Persons appointed before 1995 are paid less by the amount of the pension contribution. Some groups e.g. teachers had always paid the 6.5%.

+1

the ill informed info out there is unreal, prooved simply by the fact that a poster above who by their own admission would be for PS cuts, didnt even know that PS staff contributed to their pension even before the Pension Levy.

not having a go at that poster btw, its just used to show that people dont actually know all the facts about PS staff.

Really?

How much was it?

sollar

kceire wrote: »

No, before the pension levy, PS workers paid PRSI, and a pension contribution. Not just PRSI as posters on here would have you believe.

Now contributions are :

PRSI
Pension contribution
PRD (pension levy)

I pay (PS):

PRSI
2 seperate Pension contributions
Pension Levy
USC
Tax

None of which i can opt out of.

kceire wrote: »

+1

the ill informed info out there is unreal, prooved simply by the fact that a poster above who by their own admission would be for PS cuts, didnt even know that PS staff contributed to their pension even before the Pension Levy.

not having a go at that poster btw, its just used to show that people dont actually know all the facts about PS staff.

kceire wrote: »

dont know, is the state penion self-sustaining?
Dublin City Council's pay and pension bill is self sufficient though, that i do know.

Priceless..

You do know!.. I have provided you the information several times when you have posted misleading information about public pensions being adequately financed. They are a long way from being adequately financed.

The defecit is running at about €116 Billion for PS pensions, and about €13 Billion for the State Pension. (this is the liability that currently exists for workers who have paid in and are due pensions for service already given) .. as per the Auditor General Report for 2009.

http://www.audgen.gov.ie/documents/annualreports/2009/ReportVol1_09_rev2.pdf

"Public Service Pension Liabilities
1.12 At end December 2009, a total of €116 billion had accrued in respect of occupational pensions payable to public servants."

In case you were interested, that is a 7.4% increase on the defecit since 2008.
http://www.finfacts.ie/irishfinancenews/article_1020577.shtml

kceire wrote: »

dont know, is the state penion self-sustaining?
Dublin City Council's pay and pension bill is self sufficient though, that i do know.

Care to provide a link for that? The annual report doesn't cover it in detail, it gives a deficit of €2.4 Billion..

"Pension Liabilities
The Finance Strategic Policy Committee commenced an actuarial evaluation of Dublin City Council’s future pension liabilities in 2005. The final report of this evaluation was issued in December 2006. Mr. John Reilly, Actuary, with the Department of Finance, conducted the evaluation. The principal findings are thatpension liability of Dublin City Council amounts to €1.8bn, at a discount rate of 5.5%, increasing to €2.4bn, at a discount rate of 4% all in 2005 values."

http://www.dublincity.ie/YourCouncil/CouncilPublications/Documents/Annual%20Report%20and%20Accounts%202009.pdf

And its pretty clear, the funding doesn't come from your pocket..

"Increases in pension costs are financed through revenue income. Sustained increases form a steadily increasing demand on funds secured through commercial rates, which might otherwise fund service provision/improvements. In 2007 the Finance Strategic Policy Committee corresponded with the Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government and the
Department of Finance, outlining the funding pressures arising from increasing pension liabilities. Further correspondence issued in 2009 at the request of the Audit Committee. No change has occurred to date in the pension funding arrangements for Local Authority staff."

Welease wrote: »

Priceless..

You do know!.. I have provided you the information several times when you have posted misleading information about public pensions being adequately financed. They are a long way from being adequately financed.

The defecit is running at about €116 Billion for PS pensions, and about €13 Billion for the State Pension. (this is the liability that currently exists for workers who have paid in and are due pensions for service already given) .. as per the Auditor General Report for 2009.

http://www.audgen.gov.ie/documents/annualreports/2009/ReportVol1_09_rev2.pdf

"Public Service Pension Liabilities
1.12 At end December 2009, a total of €116 billion had accrued in respect of occupational pensions payable to public servants."

In case you were interested, that is a 7.4% increase on the defecit since 2008.
http://www.finfacts.ie/irishfinancenews/article_1020577.shtml

Welease wrote: »

Care to provide a link for that? The annual report doesn't cover it in detail, it gives a deficit of €2.4 Billion..

"Pension Liabilities
The Finance Strategic Policy Committee commenced an actuarial evaluation of Dublin City Council’s future pension liabilities in 2005. The final report of this evaluation was issued in December 2006. Mr. John Reilly, Actuary, with the Department of Finance, conducted the evaluation. The principal findings are thatpension liability of Dublin City Council amounts to €1.8bn, at a discount rate of 5.5%, increasing to €2.4bn, at a discount rate of 4% all in 2005 values."

http://www.dublincity.ie/YourCouncil/CouncilPublications/Documents/Annual%20Report%20and%20Accounts%202009.pdf

And its pretty clear, the funding doesn't come from your pocket..

"Increases in pension costs are financed through revenue income. Sustained increases form a steadily increasing demand on funds secured through commercial rates, which might otherwise fund service provision/improvements. In 2007 the Finance Strategic Policy Committee corresponded with the Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government and the
Department of Finance, outlining the funding pressures arising from increasing pension liabilities. Further correspondence issued in 2009 at the request of the Audit Committee. No change has occurred to date in the pension funding arrangements for Local Authority staff."

i know serious questions, dont go down well on here, but hers one :

whay are Local Authorites excluded from all calculations, is it because they are self sufficient or very close to self sufficient?

kceire wrote: »

i know serious questions, dont go down well on here, but hers one :

whay are Local Authorites excluded from all calculations, is it because they are self sufficient or very close to self sufficient?

Be more specific...

Which LA and which calculations?

Welease wrote: »

Be more specific...

Which LA and which calculations?

the ones you linked.

The Exchequer pay bill does not include the pay costs of local authority staff because those costs are
not directly funded by the Exchequer and the Local Government Fund does not include an identifiable
pay element.

the report also states :

Net new entrant contribution rates – the proportion of pay needed to fund retirement benefits for a
typical civil servant would cost 11.9% of pensionable remuneration for occupational pension
entitlements and a further 7.6% to fund State Pension.

so given i pay approx 20% towards my pension, excluding my PRSI contributions, does that mean i cover the costs of my PS pension?

kceire wrote: »

the ones you linked.

the report also states :

so given i pay approx 20% towards my pension, excluding my PRSI contributions, does that mean i cover the costs of my PS pension?

If the pension fund was adequately funded.. there would not be a €2.4 Billion deficit.. It's not complicated.

Regarding your bitmap.. thats because they are funded by the CoCo's.. and the CoCo report which I linked stated a deficit of €2.4 Billion.. So it's not adequately funded...

To answer your 20% question.. the published information i have seen says "No".. they talk about needing about 30% funding to cover a DB pension.. I'll dig out the report.. It was by Mooney.. Pension Insecurity in Ireland was the name i think

Edit - Wrong name Moloney
http://www.ssisi.ie/Moloney&Whelan2009.pdf

"For instance, in the recent benchmarking of public
sector remuneration to that of the private sector (Report of the Public Service
Benchmarking Body (2007)), the cost to the employer of the civil service pension was
estimated as about 20% of salary (with the higher discount rate applied to private
sector schemes) but that figure increases to 30% of salary if the more appropriate
riskless rate is applied (p. 227). The former figure was adopted in the benchmarking
exercise rather than the figure closer to fair value, so public sector remuneration is
underestimated9."

But it's a waste of time.. I have given you this info numerous times.

Welease wrote: »

If the pension fund was adequately funded.. there would not be a €2.4 Billion deficit.. It's not complicated.

i was of the opinon that there was no pension fund for Local Authorities, that they were paid for on an ongoing basis.

DCC pay their salaries and pensions from the contributions of their existing employess, 2011 figure is expected to be €438.10m.

i was wrong when i said they were 100% self sufficient, as DCC will receive €74.89m from the Local Government Fund in 2011, which is the only government funding it receives that it can spend an for any purpose.

Welease wrote: »

To answer your 20% question.. the published information i have seen says "No".. they talk about needing about 30% funding to cover a DB pension.. I'll dig out the report.. It was by Mooney.. Pension Insecurity in Ireland was the name i think

but the report you published / linked says i need to pay 11.9% to fund my pension, so which report do we believe......whatever one suits our argument???

kceire wrote: »

i was of the opinon that there was no pension fund for Local Authorities, that they were paid for on an ongoing basis.

DCC pay their salaries and pensions from the contributions of their existing employess, 2011 figure is expected to be €438.10m.

This really isn't complicated...

1) There is no reserve pension fund for LA's... There is 0 in the kitty..
2) There is a pension liability of €2.4 billion..
3) See point #1

The fund is run as pay as you go.. Which means they just about cover it by upping rates etc. but your funding doesn't exist for yourself it has been paid out to cover a previously underfunded (and now retired) CoCo employee..

There is a tipping point.. which appears to have been reached (as per the annual report) whereby the payments by current staff do not meet the required payments to current pensioners (further underfunding).. What will it be like in 10 years if the current cuts to staff continue.. How much will YOU need to pay to fund their pensions?

MagicSean

sollar wrote: »

I pay (PS):

PRSI
2 seperate Pension contributions
Pension Levy
USC
Tax

None of which i can opt out of.

I pay 16% of my gross basic pay towards pension and prsi. My allowances and overtime are generally taxed at a higher rate. The way I figure it, my pension contributions will cover my payments for 10-12 years. As most of the men in my family die before 65 I think the government will actually make money on me.

k_mac wrote: »

I pay 16% of my gross basic pay towards pension and prsi.

And what a great pension you will have if you are lucky enough to live to the statistically average age, which is increasing due to advances in healthcare etc. I know you feel you are been hard done by having to contribute towards your pension, when there are so many retired public servants today who contributed flip all - relatively speaking - to their pension pots. All private sector workers though would love to have your pension to look forward to for only 16% of their pay. Many have had their pension plans / savings - if they were lucky enough to have any , which most did not - decimated through the collapse of the property market and bank shares etc.

Lets hope you live long past 65. Remember that the people who pay taxes to the government fund your pay, taxes and pension. Most of these people do not have the same pay, security or pension as yourself.

sollar

gigino wrote: »

All private sector workers though would love to have your pension to look forward to for only 16% of their pay.

There are plenty of private sector workers who pay nothing more than PRSI. They will still be kept by the state when they turn 65 though.

sollar wrote: »

There are plenty of private sector workers who pay nothing more than PRSI.

Please quantify " plenty" ? Income tax rates are the same for public sector workers as for private sector workers. All public sector workers have the advantage of a PAYE allowance, which many private sector workers do not.....so if anything the private sector pays a greater percentage of their income in tax. As my brother says, a self employed person earning say 30k a year pays more tax compared to a public sector person earning 30k. You have to see it from their point of view.

Besiders, the tax rates are implemented,set and enforced by the public sector ( the politicians and revenue etc ). If a number of private sector workers do not pay income tax because they earn too little (e.g. those on the minimum wage ), you cannot blame the private sector workers concerned. They, like all other private sector workers, would love and give anything to have a public sector pension, funded by the state, to look forward to.

sollar

Income tax assumed. I was really refering to lack of pension contributions.

erictheviking1

gigino wrote: »

And what a great pension you will have if you are lucky enough to live to the statistically average age, which is increasing due to advances in healthcare etc (for those who can afford it). I know you feel you are been hard done by having to contribute
towards your pension, when there are so many retired public servants today who contributed flip all - relatively speaking - to their pension pots.
Some private sector workers though would love to have your pension to look forward to for only 16% of their pay plus PRSI contributions plus USC as its often forgotten that payment of state pension is deducted from public sector pension. A fact often left out by the begrudgers on here and leaving ordinary working public sector workers with very little in public sector pension payments.
Many have had their pension plans / savings - if they were lucky enough to have any , which most did not (Whose fault is that?)- decimated through the collapse of the property market and bank shares etc.(Whose fault is that?) Investments may go DOWN as well as up. However, investing in low risk funds will give a steady but stable return.
Speculators gambling on high risk investments caused pension funds to lose value. Nothing else!
Way too many posters on here posting totally misleading and dishonest 'facts' and I suspect posting using multiple usernames to increase the 'wind-up factor'
Please let this f***ing thread die!:mad:

Lets hope you live long past 65. Remember that ALL the people who pay taxes to the government fund your pay and receive a service in return. SOME of these people do not have the same pay, security or pension as yourself, Especially the ones who work for tightass small businesses or for greedy employers.

FIXED!

erictheviking1

gigino wrote: »

Please quantify " plenty" ? Income tax rates are the same for public sector workers as for private sector workers. All public sector workers have the advantage of a PAYE allowance, which many private sector workers do not.....so if anything the private sector pays a greater percentage of their income in tax. As my brother says, a self employed person earning say 30k a year pays more tax compared to a public sector person earning 30k. You have to see it from their point of view.

Besiders, the tax rates are implemented,set and enforced by the public sector ( the politicians and revenue etc ). If a number of private sector workers do not pay income tax because they earn too little (e.g. those on the minimum wage ), you cannot blame the private sector workers concerned. They, like all other private sector workers, would love and give anything to have a public sector pension, funded by the state, to look forward to.

Yet more misleading bull****. All Class A1 PRSI paying employees have the same PAYE allowance.
Most private sector workers are employees! FACT! The self employed have got some neck trying to compare themselves to employees in the private sector. There is a f***ing world of difference in your respective circumstances.
Self employed get the perk of declaring their own income for a start, they can claim a ****load of expenses and as for the whingeing and crying about pensions or dole. Employees pay PRSI at class A1 plus their employers have to pay employers prsi contribution towards a future state pension and in case they ever need to sign on it will cover dole payments. The self employed don't pay so don't get. Go on. Tell me I'm wrong!

PS What really irks me is the amount of time this minority (because they are a minority) of fecking begrudgers spend on here posting. Obviously naive students who believe they deserve to be walking straight into Alan Sugar's fecking job. Get a life. And more importantly get a job. You all quite obviously have too much time on your hands.