Why has the €20 Billion deficit not reduced ?.

Debtocracy · 28-07-2011 07:28PM

If we made the full 18bn worth of cuts this year, I wonder how big the deficit would be next year Would be funny if it were still left with a >10bn deficit.

Jarren · 28-07-2011 07:36PM

Oryginal question is

Why has the €20 Billion deficit not reduced ?.

Three property developers owe NAMA €2bn each while a further 12 owe over €1bn, new figures show.

The Government agency set up to buy property developers loans from the banks also recorded impairment charges of €1.4bn in the same period while it had losses of €1.1bn in 2010.

However, the agency added these provisions for impairments do not necessarily mean the losses will ever materialise.

NAMA paid €30.2bn for 11,500 loans belonging to 850 developers last year and the value of the loans was €71.2bn – the average discount on the loans was 58pc.

By the end of last month, NAMA has agreed asset sales worth €3.9bn.

Just over 60pc of the assets are in Ireland with the remainder in Britain and abroad.

NAMA also said in its first annual report that about 59pc of the assets it has acquired to date are investment properties, while 41pc is in land or property under development.

The body also aims to boost the property market by stumping up some money for first time buyers who want to buy its apartments.

NAMA will sell hundreds of apartments in various parts of Dublin from October in a radical move to bring some life to the moribund property market.

Despite the losses, Nama has claimed it is making huge progress.

Brendan McDonagh, chief executive of NAMA, said: "We've made enormous progress on a wide range of fronts over the past 15 months and we're ahead of schedule in respect of many areas.

"Our expectation now is that the pace of activity will step up again in the months ahead as we move through the implementation phase of our work."

NAMA also said it has already repaid the taxpayer €1bn to the end of June this year.

It made an operating profit of €91m in the first three months of 2011.

http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/three-property-developers-owe-nama-more-than-euro2bn-each-2834190.html

While we discussing public/private sector those sc.......gs have the last laugh:(

3x2=6 Million
12x1=12 Milion

Total figure is 18bn that is only 15 property developers:mad:

kippy · 28-07-2011 08:21PM

jarecki1976 wrote: »

Oryginal question is

Why has the €20 Billion deficit not reduced ?.

Three property developers owe NAMA €2bn each while a further 12 owe over €1bn, new figures show.

The Government agency set up to buy property developers loans from the banks also recorded impairment charges of €1.4bn in the same period while it had losses of €1.1bn in 2010.

However, the agency added these provisions for impairments do not necessarily mean the losses will ever materialise.

NAMA paid €30.2bn for 11,500 loans belonging to 850 developers last year and the value of the loans was €71.2bn – the average discount on the loans was 58pc.

By the end of last month, NAMA has agreed asset sales worth €3.9bn.

Just over 60pc of the assets are in Ireland with the remainder in Britain and abroad.

NAMA also said in its first annual report that about 59pc of the assets it has acquired to date are investment properties, while 41pc is in land or property under development.

The body also aims to boost the property market by stumping up some money for first time buyers who want to buy its apartments.

NAMA will sell hundreds of apartments in various parts of Dublin from October in a radical move to bring some life to the moribund property market.

Despite the losses, Nama has claimed it is making huge progress.

Brendan McDonagh, chief executive of NAMA, said: "We've made enormous progress on a wide range of fronts over the past 15 months and we're ahead of schedule in respect of many areas.

"Our expectation now is that the pace of activity will step up again in the months ahead as we move through the implementation phase of our work."

NAMA also said it has already repaid the taxpayer €1bn to the end of June this year.

It made an operating profit of €91m in the first three months of 2011.

http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/three-property-developers-owe-nama-more-than-euro2bn-each-2834190.html

While we discussing public/private sector those sc.......gs have the last laugh:(

3x2=6 Million
12x1=12 Milion

Total figure is 18bn that is only 15 property developers:mad:

The figures relating to NAMA (I think) are not part of the deficit figures. The whole exercise was done off the books of the state itself.
The deficit figures are not just for this year either, we were in deficit for the last three years and will continue to be unless some major changes are implemented
No doubt if we didnt have the major issues with property/banks/NAMA we would probably be able to reduce the deficit in a more solid manner.

gbee · 28-07-2011 08:27PM

Anyone who thinks otherwise should commit suicide.

Erm, wrong party, is it? Who said that?

20Cent · 28-07-2011 10:14PM

According to bondwatch we are paying 42.3 million in senior unsecured EBS bonds tomorrow. Of course since the money is borrowed its a lot more than 42.3 million. Still its the schoolteachers that done it!!

Head The Wall · 28-07-2011 10:38PM

Degsy wrote: »

Well in my department of 25 people there are 4 on 50k and the rest on much less.
The top of the scale for most people in the grade is circa 30k and thats with more than 10 years in the job...you think thats competitive pay do you?

Since the cuts the starting rate is now 25k per anum and we cant take people on at that rate because of the embargo..so basically,you're talking out of your hole.

Read the post properly, regardless of what the average is in your dept, the overall average across the PS is roughly 50K as per the most recent CSO data

tails_naf · 28-07-2011 10:47PM

sollar wrote: »

You don't seem to be able to grasp this.

People retiring were getting the full pension anyway before or after the pension levy.

Yes the figure is 250 million. Its nothing new... increments have been paid for decades Noonan knows this. But Noonan also knows that we are saving him millions by taking up the work of retiring staff. This is a saving conditional on the CPA remaining in place.

There are a few things you may not be quite grasping too..

1) Increments over the last say 4 years at a rate of 1.6% (approx) comes out 6.5% - so the 7% reduction is wiped out already.

2) Its a 250 million rise this year, but that 250 million is compound - it's added to the previous years, and never goes away - i.e. the total cost of increments alone over the last 4 years (spread evenly) is 250 + 500 + 750 + 1000 = 2.5 billion total.

3) Saying increments 'would have been paid anyway' and pensions 'would have been paid anyway' doesn't make much sense - the idea here is to STOP paying increments, because we just can't afford it - and no sector, public or private needs pay rises! I believe the request was to justify them - saying 'they would have been paid anyway' is not justification.

sollar · 28-07-2011 11:02PM

tails_naf wrote: »

There are a few things you may not be quite grasping too..

1) Increments over the last say 4 years at a rate of 1.6% (approx) comes out 6.5% - so the 7% reduction is wiped out already.

2) Its a 250 million rise this year, but that 250 million is compound - it's added to the previous years, and never goes away - i.e. the total cost of increments alone over the last 4 years (spread evenly) is 250 + 500 + 750 + 1000 = 2.5 billion total.

3) Saying increments 'would have been paid anyway' and pensions 'would have been paid anyway' doesn't make much sense - the idea here is to STOP paying increments, because we just can't afford it - and no sector, public or private needs pay rises! I believe the request was to justify them - saying 'they would have been paid anyway' is not justification.

Read what Noonan has said. He has access to all the figures and he believes stopping increments would be unfair and he does not intend to do so. I'm with him on that.

Godge · 28-07-2011 11:05PM

ZYX wrote: »

http://www.cso.ie/releasespublications/documents/earnings/current/earnlabcosts.pdf

According to CSO in last 2 years public sector employment has fallen just under 1%. Average public sector pay has fallen about 5% (hourly earnings). Not really major stuff.

I know PS workers will criticise these figures but if you are can you give alternatives rather than just say "you are wrong".

Godge wrote: »

Why do people think they can get away with posting lies such as the statement in bold above? When a broad statement like that is posted, it should be the poster who is required to back it up with facts. It happens on both sides of this debate where people make these statements that have no basis in fact.

What is most surprising is that it is easy to find actual facts on the internet.

http://www.finance.gov.ie/documents/publications/reports/2010/payanal0510.pdf

Take the official Department of Finance report I have linked to. It states that the net pay and pensions bill has reduced from 18.753 bn in 2008 to 17.327 bn in 2010 a reduction of 1.426 bn and this does not take into account pension levy receipts of 875m in 2010. That means the total reduction in public service pay is 2.301 bn out of 18.753 bn which is a percentage cut of 12.2%. The percentage would have been much greater if I looked at pay only.

At the same time public service pay as a percentage of net non-capital expenditure has reduced from 50% to 43% therefore taking up a lower percentage of total expenditure i.e. it has reduced at a faster rate than other areas such as social welfare, grants to business etc.

On the other hand, the reductions have not kept pace with the reduction in GNP. However, given that there have been further reductions in pay for new entrants, a futher reduction in numbers and a reduction in pensions from the start of this year, I think that 2011 will show a further reduction in the pay and pensions bill. Unfortunately, I do not see a copy of the 2011 report on the finance website.

So to go back to the OP's question as to why the deficit has not reduced, the main answers are as follows:

- Money has been put into the banks (no new lending so money down a drain)
- New and increased taxes have not raised sufficient money (wrong type, should be property taxes)
- Social welfare has increased dramatically
- Interest costs on debt have risen

All of the above make it harder to reduce the deficit and it cannot be said that the public service pay bill is the main cause ahead of those four items.

YAWN,

How many times do I have to do this. There has been a 12.2% net reduction in the public service pay and pensions bill between 2008 and 2010 (pay on its own has decreased by much more). That is a cut of 2.3 bn euro, more or less equal to the cut in the deficit. The increased taxes have paid for the increased social welfare bill and the increased interest payments on the debt. Move along, look elsewhere for the scapegoats, the figures show that the public service has delivered.

I also outline how the bill will go down further in 2011 notwithstanding all the guff here about increments.

tails_naf · 28-07-2011 11:05PM

Riskymove wrote: »

the concept of increments is a means of providing more pay for more experience as oppossed to 300,000 seeking their own wage rise individually with employers, its a far easier process this way

Instead of simply paying everyone a fixed amount, regardless of performance - why not simply follow the method used in countless companies around the world - each department has a fixed budget for all pay rises - this includes promotion and in-grade related increases. The department evaluates the employees performance against his/her peers and divides the budget up on a curve - the useless will get 0, the good may get 5-6% - if the company is not doing so well, then there is no budget, or a small one.

It should be noted - that under this scenario, even though everyone employed gained experience in a 'bad year for the company' - people are not 'entitled' to a pay rise. It's the reality of many people's jobs - so why can't it be the same for the PS - there should be no expectation of an increase - especially one which is for experience gained, but makes not attempt to measure that experience!

kippy · 28-07-2011 11:08PM

tails_naf wrote: »

Instead of simply paying everyone a fixed amount, regardless of performance - why not simply follow the method used in countless companies around the world - each department has a fixed budget for all pay rises - this includes promotion and in-grade related increases. The department evaluates the employees performance against his/her peers and divides the budget up on a curve - the useless will get 0, the good may get 5-6% - if the company is not doing so well, then there is no budget, or a small one.

It should be noted - that under this scenario, even though everyone employed gained experience in a 'bad year for the company' - people are not 'entitled' to a pay rise. It's the reality of many people's jobs - so why can't it be the same for the PS - there should be no expectation of an increase - especially one which is for experience gained, but makes not attempt to measure that experience!

That makes sense and something I've advocated for years.......
Automated increments aren't a good idea in general and lead to a lot of issues.

If people aren't happy with their levels of pay and conditions they can try to:
Improve themselves (do courses, perform better)
Get another job.

Nijmegen · 28-07-2011 11:10PM

sollar wrote: »

Read what Noonan has said. He has access to all the figures and he believes stopping increments would be unfair and he does not intend to do so. I'm with him on that.

There's nothing fair about the deficit.

It just is.

Godge · 28-07-2011 11:10PM

tails_naf wrote: »

Instead of simply paying everyone a fixed amount, regardless of performance - why not simply follow the method used in countless companies around the world - each department has a fixed budget for all pay rises - this includes promotion and in-grade related increases. The department evaluates the employees performance against his/her peers and divides the budget up on a curve - the useless will get 0, the good may get 5-6% - if the company is not doing so well, then there is no budget, or a small one.

It should be noted - that under this scenario, even though everyone employed gained experience in a 'bad year for the company' - people are not 'entitled' to a pay rise. It's the reality of many people's jobs - so why can't it be the same for the PS - there should be no expectation of an increase - especially one which is for experience gained, but makes not attempt to measure that experience!

How do you measure a teacher's performance? Do you do it by exam results. Oh, the girls in Mr. Murphy's class all got As or Bs in the Leaving? Was that because he was a good teacher or because he was so bad they all went and got grinds?

How about a guard's performance? He issued more tickets for speeding than anyone else? Because he was more diligent and hard-working? Or did he just sit on the Lucan bypass where the speed-limit drops from 120 to 80 in 100m on a bend?

While countless companies worldwide might use perfomance pay (and it is being discredited in most of the up-to-date HR research), can you tell me how a perfomance-related pay system works in another public service, say the Greeks or the Italians for example?

Nijmegen · 28-07-2011 11:17PM

Godge wrote: »

How do you measure a teacher's performance? Do you do it by exam results. Oh, the girls in Mr. Murphy's class all got As or Bs in the Leaving? Was that because he was a good teacher or because he was so bad they all went and got grinds?

How about a guard's performance? He issued more tickets for speeding than anyone else? Because he was more diligent and hard-working? Or did he just sit on the Lucan bypass where the speed-limit drops from 120 to 80 in 100m on a bend?

While countless companies worldwide might use perfomance pay (and it is being discredited in most of the up-to-date HR research), can you tell me how a perfomance-related pay system works in another public service, say the Greeks or the Italians for example?

This is a straw man argument.

Firstly, yes there is a way to grade teachers - by setting a statistical baseline based on the performance of the students entering the classes. Schools already (mostly) grade their pupils on entry exams. A teacher who gets average 80% grades in one class might be underperforming against one who just manages to get 80% of her students to pass.

Secondly, police, nurses, doctors - represent a tiny portion of the public service.

Clerical staff, call center staff, IT staff, HR staff, managers, janitors even can be benchmarked against simple tests.

sollar · 28-07-2011 11:21PM

I'd like to add for those that think we are hideously over staffed in the Irish PS. We have about 300,000. Denmark has 700,000 public servants.

http://www.kto.dk/english/hjo.pdf

Nijmegen · 28-07-2011 11:21PM

sollar wrote: »

I'd like to add for those that think we are hideously over staffed in the Irish PS. We have about 300,000. Denmark has 700,000 public servants.

http://www.kto.dk/english/hjo.pdf

Denmark is a massive social welfare state that taxes the average individual more than twice as much as Ireland.

Oh, and they don't have an €18bn deficit.

RobbieTheRobber · 28-07-2011 11:25PM

Nijmegen wrote: »

Denmark is a massive social welfare state that taxes the average individual more than twice as much as Ireland.

Oh, and they don't have an €18bn deficit.

So your saying we should tax the average individual more?

Godge · 28-07-2011 11:32PM

Nijmegen wrote: »

This is a straw man argument.

Firstly, yes there is a way to grade teachers - by setting a statistical baseline based on the performance of the students entering the classes. Schools already (mostly) grade their pupils on entry exams. A teacher who gets average 80% grades in one class might be underperforming against one who just manages to get 80% of her students to pass.

Secondly, police, nurses, doctors - represent a tiny portion of the public service.

Clerical staff, call center staff, IT staff, HR staff, managers, janitors even can be benchmarked against simple tests.

Again, read the report I linked to.

Of a total public service number of 309,804 only 37,381 are civil servants (around 11%). 25,583 work in the security areas, most of whom are gardai, prison officers and army. Over one third of the staff work in the health area. Of the 93,000 approx. that work in the education area, at least 85,000 of these would be front-line staff - teachers, lecturers and special needs assistants (how do you measure their performance).

There is a completely misleading idea out there that public servants sit in offices pushing paper around. In fact, looking at the figures I would say that over 80% (a conservative estimate) are in grades such as doctor, nurse, radiologist, care assistant, teacher, guard, lecturer, prison officer, special needs assistant, army, social worker, inspector, community welfare officer, psychologist and other front-line staff where measurement of performance is close to impossible.

As for the example you give in relation to a teacher, it does not negate the example that while they both took in the same pupils and Mr. Smith did relatively well with his group, Mr. Murphy did better because all his students got grinds because he was crap.

Finally, given that the data you suggest using in relation to teachers is not readily available (schools don't have the secretarial staff needed to collate it) and checked, who will be hired to do the monitoring on top of the job they already do - whatever savings you think you might get will be outweighed by the cost of the system - think PPARS 2.

p.s. I am sure that the public service is gradually outsourcing its call centre staff and its data processing staff - see all the controversy lately about companies in India writing letters etc.

Nijmegen · 28-07-2011 11:33PM

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

So your saying we should tax the average individual more?

Government has been raising taxes.

Amount they collect has been going backwards - Gross, in terms of taxes like VAT (remember when it went to 21.5%?), and net in terms of value they get from other taxes (the value of each % is less and less as consumption falls.)

Seems fairly clear that government spending has not reduced (it is actually up first half 2011 vs first half 2010... Go figure), extra taxes are not working... Therefore....

Don't worry, the IMF will figure this out without the need for rambling national debates.

Get out your calculator, turn up your iPod, forget about the parish pump politics ten thousand miles away and you come to some simple conclusions.

Nijmegen · 28-07-2011 11:36PM

Godge wrote: »

Again, read the report I linked to.

Of a total public service number of 309,804 only 37,381 are civil servants (around 11%). 25,583 work in the security areas, most of whom are gardai, prison officers and army. Over one third of the staff work in the health area. Of the 93,000 approx. that work in the education area, at least 85,000 of these would be front-line staff - teachers, lecturers and special needs assistants (how do you measure their performance).

There is a completely misleading idea out there that public servants sit in offices pushing paper around. In fact, looking at the figures I would say that over 80% (a conservative estimate) are in grades such as doctor, nurse, radiologist, care assistant, teacher, guard, lecturer, prison officer, special needs assistant, army, social worker, inspector, community welfare officer, psychologist and other front-line staff where measurement of performance is close to impossible.

As for the example you give in relation to a teacher, it does not negate the example that while they both took in the same pupils and Mr. Smith did relatively well with his group, Mr. Murphy did better because all his students got grinds because he was crap.

Finally, given that the data you suggest using in relation to teachers is not readily available (schools don't have the secretarial staff needed to collate it) and checked, who will be hired to do the monitoring on top of the job they already do - whatever savings you think you might get will be outweighed by the cost of the system - think PPARS 2.

The Irish 'Can't do - Won't do' attitude.

Tell me, how did major companies hit hard by the recession manage to turn themselves around (if, by your thesis, nothing can ever be done to fix structural problems?)

HP, which fired something like 25,000 dead weight employees and hired 9,000 in new areas relevant to their future needs.

Imagine that in Ireland's bloated state......

Like I keep saying, some IMF accountants will cut right through the bulls*** that is ever present in our national debates, the straw man arguments and obfuscation and come back with some simple figures.

tails_naf · 28-07-2011 11:38PM

Godge wrote: »

How do you measure a teacher's performance? Do you do it by exam results. Oh, the girls in Mr. Murphy's class all got As or Bs in the Leaving? Was that because he was a good teacher or because he was so bad they all went and got grinds?

How about a guard's performance? He issued more tickets for speeding than anyone else? Because he was more diligent and hard-working? Or did he just sit on the Lucan bypass where the speed-limit drops from 120 to 80 in 100m on a bend?

While countless companies worldwide might use perfomance pay (and it is being discredited in most of the up-to-date HR research), can you tell me how a perfomance-related pay system works in another public service, say the Greeks or the Italians for example?

Well for a start, any manager that was unable to grade his employees would be ripe for a pretty dismal performance review himself, methinks. There are countless jobs in the PS, and outside of it that are difficult to grade, but yet every job outside of it (that I know of) regularly grade their employees, and employee remuneration is heavily based on this grading.
The metrics you just proposed were intended to show how crazy performance rating is - but the fact is, you didn't try too hard to come up with some metrics. When people know their pay is related to their managers perception of their performance, two things happen:

1) People put more effort into their work - as there IS a difference between doing nothing and doing something at the end of the day and it's reflected in their wages
2) They will go out of their way to explain and highlight to their manager in what ways they have contributed, especially if they felt they were overlooked in a previous performance rating.

So because of 2) above, and because I believe a manager would put more time into the question of how to measure performance than it takes you to type a post - I absolutely believe every PS job could, and should be graded for performance.

Godge · 28-07-2011 11:38PM

Nijmegen wrote: »

Government has been raising taxes.

Amount they collect has been going backwards - Gross, in terms of taxes like VAT (remember when it went to 21.5%?), and net in terms of value they get from other taxes (the value of each % is less and less as consumption falls.)

Seems fairly clear that government spending has not reduced (it is actually up first half 2011 vs first half 2010... Go figure), extra taxes are not working... Therefore....

Don't worry, the IMF will figure this out without the need for rambling national debates.

Get out your calculator, turn up your iPod, forget about the parish pump politics ten thousand miles away and you come to some simple conclusions.

Wrong taxes. We should impose a property tax, on all properties, including commercial property and a penal tax on derelict zoned sites. Separately from this we should charge the economic cost of providing services (electricity, broadband, waste disposal and bin collection etc.) to all. We should eliminate income tax reliefs which by their nature divert economic activity (people get tax relief on money paid into pension funds which invest abroad which means we encourage people to spend money elsewhere).

At the same time we should reduce income tax which would encourage people to work.

RobbieTheRobber · 28-07-2011 11:39PM

Nijmegen wrote: »

Government has been raising taxes.

Amount they collect has been going backwards - Gross, in terms of taxes like VAT (remember when it went to 21.5%?), and net in terms of value they get from other taxes (the value of each % is less and less as consumption falls.)

Seems fairly clear that government spending has not reduced (it is actually up first half 2011 vs first half 2010... Go figure), extra taxes are not working... Therefore....

Don't worry, the IMF will figure this out without the need for rambling national debates.

Get out your calculator, turn up your iPod, forget about the parish pump politics ten thousand miles away and you come to some simple conclusions.

What are these simple conclusions?

Lumbo · 28-07-2011 11:40PM

Rabidlamb wrote: »

I would be ashamed to accept pay rises from a bankrupt state with 14% unemployment.

I'm sure you'd be at the top of the queue handing it back :rolleyes:

Nijmegen · 28-07-2011 11:46PM

Wrong taxes. We should impose a property tax, on all properties, including commercial property and a penal tax on derelict zoned sites. Separately from this we should charge the economic cost of providing services (electricity, broadband, waste disposal and bin collection etc.) to all. We should eliminate income tax reliefs which by their nature divert economic activity (people get tax relief on money paid into pension funds which invest abroad which means we encourage people to spend money elsewhere).

At the same time we should reduce income tax which would encourage people to work.

...Or cut social welfare, making work more attractive and delivering a saving. That's the conclusion the bean counter will come to.

More tax takes more money away from people who can spur on demand and create more jobs in the domestic economy.

I'm sorry, but the government is as fat as ever - its main cuts have been to capital projects, not its daily spending, and this year it is spending MORE to date than this time last year.

What are these simple conclusions?

As above. Taxes not rising to close deficit. Government spending not decreasing. No major cuts have been made to public sector employment numbers, to social welfare rates and other big ticket items.

Slash. And. Burn.

Godge · 28-07-2011 11:52PM

tails_naf wrote: »

Well for a start, any manager that was unable to grade his employees would be ripe for a pretty dismal performance review himself, methinks. There are countless jobs in the PS, and outside of it that are difficult to grade, but yet every job outside of it (that I know of) regularly grade their employees, and employee remuneration is heavily based on this grading.
The metrics you just proposed were intended to show how crazy performance rating is - but the fact is, you didn't try too hard to come up with some metrics. When people know their pay is related to their managers perception of their performance, two things happen:

1) People put more effort into their work - as there IS a difference between doing nothing and doing something at the end of the day and it's reflected in their wages
2) They will go out of their way to explain and highlight to their manager in what ways they have contributed, especially if they felt they were overlooked in a previous performance rating.

So because of 2) above, and because I believe a manager would put more time into the question of how to measure performance than it takes you to type a post - I absolutely believe every PS job could, and should be graded for performance.

Not true that every employment in the private sector regularly grades their employees and links it to pay. Not my experience of the retail industry, nor the catering industry, nor small employers like garages etc. In fact, small businesses operate in a very different way to that.

Your suggestion will only lead to an increase in bureaucracy and bad work practices as you quite rightly point out that people will go out of their way to explain and highlight to their manager in what way they have contributed. What value in a teacher helping an individual pupil with personal problems when there is more to be gained from getting the whole class to improve their grades? This is the point I was making earlier, in that performance pay drives certain behaviours and is now becoming a problem for many industries as reflected in the latest research. It (the bonus culture) is also being mentioned as a significant factor in the problems that drove the banking and financial sector into the ground. You got your pay rise and your promotion for lending more money, the fact that it was unsustainable lending would not become clear for several years, well after your bonus was paid.

And remember one last fact shown up by much of the research, if performance pay is introduced to drive performance, it has some chance of success, if it is introduced merely as a cost-saving measure, it has none.

tails_naf · 28-07-2011 11:52PM

Godge wrote: »

As for the example you give in relation to a teacher, it does not negate the example that while they both took in the same pupils and Mr. Smith did relatively well with his group, Mr. Murphy did better because all his students got grinds because he was crap.

Grading of a teacher is not that difficult - it would be partly based on results - however, if a teacher is indeed crap and all his students are getting grinds there are 2 ways to see this - if 20-30 kids all need grinds in one class, and this teacher has a few classes, parents will mention this for sure. Don't pretend for a second that a principal had 'No Clue' if a teacher is amazing or crap. In other school systems it is often the case where the principal will sit in on a few classes of a teacher and observe - so:

grades - feedback from students and parents - and direct observation (say a few hours per term) - would be a good start.

If a teacher feels he/she is not getting the recognition for their stellar work, then as in any other job they are free to make a case and explain why they deserve the rise, etc.

Godge wrote: »

Finally, given that the data you suggest using in relation to teachers is not readily available (schools don't have the secretarial staff needed to collate it) and checked, who will be hired to do the monitoring on top of the job they already do - whatever savings you think you might get will be outweighed by the cost of the system - think PPARS 2.

Again - every company in the world does this. If there was not a SAVING to be made by it, it wouldn't be done. full stop. We have 2,000 excess HR staff in the HSE - the HR in my company do the reviews in conjunction with the management - it could be done, without any new hires.

PPARS is a good example of what happens when management, etc have no repercussions when it comes to delivering and performance. If a private company, like HP, had a f-up like PPARS, lots of heads would have rolled - they wouldn't be squabbling about pay rises!!

bottom line - If you don't have a vested interest in your job and in your performance, they by and large you won't perform.

Godge · 28-07-2011 11:56PM

Nijmegen wrote: »

...Or cut social welfare, making work more attractive and delivering a saving. That's the conclusion the bean counter will come to.

More tax takes more money away from people who can spur on demand and create more jobs in the domestic economy.

I'm sorry, but the government is as fat as ever - its main cuts have been to capital projects, not its daily spending, and this year it is spending MORE to date than this time last year.

As above. Taxes not rising to close deficit. Government spending not decreasing. No major cuts have been made to public sector employment numbers, to social welfare rates and other big ticket items.

Slash. And. Burn.

Look, how many times, public service pay and pensions bill dropped by 2.3 bn in two years 2008-2010 (when you include the pension levy). That accounts for the vast majority of the savings to date.

I agree with you that social welfare needs to to be cut.

On the taxes question, if someone is retired in Spain and owns several properties in Ireland, a tax on property will not affect the Irish economy as they will have to pay the tax out of the money they would normally spend in Spain. Now, I know that not all property is owned by people living aborad but a percentage is so a property tax does not have a 100% impact on economic activity in Ireland. An income tax rise does have such an effect making a property tax a better option.

Godge · 29-07-2011 12:01AM

tails_naf wrote: »

Grading of a teacher is not that difficult - it would be partly based on results - however, if a teacher is indeed crap and all his students are getting grinds there are 2 ways to see this - if 20-30 kids all need grinds in one class, and this teacher has a few classes, parents will mention this for sure. Don't pretend for a second that a principal had 'No Clue' if a teacher is amazing or crap. In other school systems it is often the case where the principal will sit in on a few classes of a teacher and observe - so:

grades - feedback from students and parents - and direct observation (say a few hours per term) - would be a good start.

If a teacher feels he/she is not getting the recognition for their stellar work, then as in any other job they are free to make a case and explain why they deserve the rise, etc.

Again - every company in the world does this. If there was not a SAVING to be made by it, it wouldn't be done. full stop. We have 2,000 excess HR staff in the HSE - the HR in my company do the reviews in conjunction with the management - it could be done, without any new hires.

PPARS is a good example of what happens when management, etc have no repercussions when it comes to delivering and performance. If a private company, like HP, had a f-up like PPARS, lots of heads would have rolled - they wouldn't be squabbling about pay rises!!

bottom line - If you don't have a vested interest in your job and in your performance, they by and large you won't perform.

You are so naive, you know nothing about the education system.

In most primary schools, the principal teacher also teaches a class. While there is an arrangement for a small amount of paid substitution, most of the time they are in class. How will they do the sitting-in on other classes? In their sleep? As I have said, increased costs!

As for PPARS, most of the F-up was due to the fact that they hired consultants to do a job that the consultants were not able to do as they had such little knowledge of the public sector. Most of the cost of PPARS went to private consultants!!!!

tails_naf · 29-07-2011 12:05AM

Godge wrote: »

Not true that every employment in the private sector regularly grades their employees and links it to pay. Not my experience of the retail industry, nor the catering industry, nor small employers like garages etc. In fact, small businesses operate in a very different way to that.

Small companies don't have formal reviews, because they are small. The intimately know what is going on and will award based on that. I too know this first hand - but then we're not talking about a 'small company', so it's a distraction to bring it up.

Godge wrote: »

Your suggestion will only lead to an increase in bureaucracy and bad work practices as you quite rightly point out that people will go out of their way to explain and highlight to their manager in what way they have contributed. What value in a teacher helping an individual pupil with personal problems when there is more to be gained from getting the whole class to improve their grades? This is the point I was making earlier, in that performance pay drives certain behaviours and is now becoming a problem for many industries as reflected in the latest research.

In fairness, if a teacher is spending his time with one pupil to the detriment of the rest of the class, then that is already a bad work practice. It's no wonder we've slipped from 3rd in europe to 12th if that is going on..

Godge wrote: »

It (the bonus culture) is also being mentioned as a significant factor in the problems that drove the banking and financial sector into the ground. You got your pay rise and your promotion for lending more money, the fact that it was unsustainable lending would not become clear for several years, well after your bonus was paid.

This is simply not accurate. Bonus culture did not cause the bad lending practices - poor regulation and direction from reckless upper management did.
The employees on the ground were told this is the way things are done - and they followed suit.

If an employee sells a LOT of what they were told to sell, then they make a bonus (or pay rise), which is fair - as they did and exceeded what was asked of them.

Those who DECIDED those financial products were sound, and the regulator who let it happen, was the problem - not bonuses.

Godge wrote: »

And remember one last fact shown up by much of the research, if performance pay is introduced to drive performance, it has some chance of success, if it is introduced merely as a cost-saving measure, it has none.

This is also not entirely accurate - if you increase performance it will lead to a cost-saving. In fact many, larger companies based successful cost-saving measures in part on ensuring the performers were rewarded and the slackers were not.

Why has the €20 Billion deficit not reduced ?.

Comments