Croke Park II preliminary Talks started today

antoobrien · 24-01-2013 02:51PM

Kaylee wrote: »

... one of the reasons why these shops managed to turn a profit and are in a position to pay their staff increases is that PS staff have enough money to buy stuff in their shops... no?

Personal Expenditure on Consumer Goods and Services in Ireland in 2011: 81.3bn
Net income of PS in 2011*: 12.6bn

If we were to reduce the PS bill by 1bn it would not mean a massive hit to the 81bn spent by consumers - lets not forget the fact that there will be other non consumer items that money is spent on, e.g. cars, dwellings etc. so the actual amount of money spent will be much higher than 81bn.

* Calculation based in average effective rate of tax as calculated by revenue in 2010 income distribution stats - the actual figure could be up to 2bn less.

fliball123 · 24-01-2013 02:55PM

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

That is emotive language fliball.
Are you accusing Public servants of robbing the tax payer?

Yes a section of them the gov continue to pay rediculous pay rises to a group of nearly 300k when we are in the ****ter. The unions dont want this to stop. Where does this money come from?

Lumbo · 24-01-2013 02:57PM

fliball123 wrote: »

Once again where these companies profitable. Look any argument here is show me a company in debt and borrowing and paying pay rises and I will show you a pig that can fly

Any Irish Bank.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0324/banks.html

noodler · 24-01-2013 02:58PM

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

Germany last year paid pay increases to public servants after strike action.
http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/europe/germany/120331/german-public-sector-workers-pay-rise-strikes

Last year Germany borrowed €22.5 billion
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/feedarticle/10612033

German national debt is roughly €2,195,325,000,000
http://www.nationaldebtclocks.org/debtclock/germany

So that is exactly what you asked for with no semantics.
It is not what you want but it is exactly what you asked for.

Awful points?

Last year we also borrowed 20bn euros and we are an absolutely tiny country comapred to Germany.

Have you no concept of scale?

Germany had the third lowest budget deficit in the Euro last year

(less than 1% of GDP whereas ours was the highest at 13%)

24-01-2013 02:58PM

fliball123 wrote: »

Yes a section of them the gov continue to pay rediculous pay rises to a group of nearly 300k when we are in the ****ter. The unions dont want this to stop. Where does this money come from?

Your an idiot!

I'm out of this discussion and forum, I cant be arsed trying to discuss something reasonably when the thread and forum is filled with ****e like this.

Godge · 24-01-2013 02:58PM

noodler wrote: »

I call absolute bull**** on this after I worked four years in retail on the same wage per hour.

I would need serious proof that there are annual increments for new starters which start off large but get smaller as time goes on in the same position ala the Public Service.

Now where in retail did you work? All of the major retailers operate incremental scales. Even though Dunnes are notoriously secretive about their arrangements here is one article about their six-point scale (I appreciate it is twelve years old but if you want to prove it has changed, do so)

http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/eiro/2000/01/inbrief/ie0001202n.htm

Of course I could be wrong - maybe you did work in retail, perhaps they operated a performance-based scale and you didn't qualify to move up the scale. Maybe you could tell me which years you worked in retail because again all of the major retailers applied the general round increases that applied because of the national pay agreement so if you were employed anytime between 1987 and 2008 you would have seen at least one increase a year from the pay agreements. If you want to show the above is "bull****", please provide a link.

noodler wrote: »

Strawman argument, comparing a retail worker on close to minimum wage finally, after four years, recieving a pay increase of measly 3% as some sort of pathetic attempt to justify a lack of action in CP2.

Sorry now, it looks to me like those increases apply to many others like assistant store managers as well as shop floor retail workers. Nowhere in the article does it say only the "close to minimum wage" workers are the only ones to get an increase.

noodler wrote: »

Another stupid argument considering we already pay our PS very well compared to international norms according to the OECD. Also stupid given the fact the PS and pensions bill doubled between 1999 and 2008.

Also stupid given there are 450,000 people claiming unemployment benefit in the country's worst unempployment crisis for decades.

Ok, it was a blunt point but I was pointing out that the unions might argue it, I never said it was my argument, so stop coming over all agressive about it. A more subtle union argument would be that there are wage inflation pressures in the economy and vacant low-level positions because social welfare rates are too high and that the Government should concentrate its efforts to achieve savings on that area of expenditure rather than on public service pay and in the meantime leave us alone and give us the 2% pay rise others are getting. Put that way, it is not as stupid as you make out.

noodler wrote: »

If they increase the profits of the company then all power to them. It is not something that should concern the Irish State unless there are heavily, heavily qualified scientists working somewhere in the Government sector who have a mobile set of skills and could switch from public to private in an instant.

Also, the MNCs in question would not be paying such wages increases if they were currently as broke as the Irish State is.

I didn't suggest the union would use them as an argument. I asked you would you prefer if I used a higher paid group that was getting a higher pay rise!

noodler wrote: »

No it wouldn't and it shouldn't

A periodic pay rise in the lowest paid sector of our economy whilst the majority of lower paid (although still much better paid than the same retail workers) public servant workers enjoy larger annual incremental increases is no argument whatsoever for not cutting the pay of higher earners which is being considered.

How do you even reconcile those two points with a straight face?

Not up to me to reconcile them. If you knew anything about negotiating you would know that pay rises in the private sector would make the CP2 negotiations more difficult. That is a fact, doesn't matter what your view is on the talks or what you believe the outcome should be, you should still be able to acknowledge that as a fact.

24-01-2013 03:01PM

noodler wrote: »

Awful points?

Last year we also borrowed 20bn euros and we are an absolutely tiny country comapred to Germany.

Have you no concept of scale?

Germany had the third lowest budget deficit in the Euro last year

(less than 1% of GDP whereas ours was the highest at 13%)

I made that post exactly to fiballs request. I even clarified.

The reason I made that post was to show up one of the most prominent posters here to have little to no understanding of how nations run.

I understand that Ireland is smaller but if you look at the post i quoted when making that post you will see my post met every criteria specified.

So yeah thanks for you wasted input.

Tim Robbins · 24-01-2013 03:01PM

Lumbo wrote: »

Any Irish Bank.

Who are owned by the government now.

fliball123 · 24-01-2013 03:01PM

Lumbo wrote: »

Any Irish Bank.

Who ownds the irish bank and watch how many redundancies and brnach closures there will be over the next year or 2 . Already Ulster bank are cutting as are PTSB, BOI and AIB continue on as the gov are once again looking after there buddies. I think you will find that any one in the private sector is not enjoying whats going on in the banks at the moment either..but it could be argued that they are needed just like the case is put for the ps?

Tim Robbins · 24-01-2013 03:02PM

Anyway all these fights between public and private sector show that the powers and be have implemented a successful divide and conquer strategy.

We should be arguing collectively for political reform.

Godge · 24-01-2013 03:03PM

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Did it say in this same article that the public sector have received 670 million in increments since Croke Park 1? .

No. Is that a figure from your imagination?

If not, is that a gross or a net figure? Do you have a link to a statistical source to back that up? Does it include the increments those recruited since Jan 10 on the new 10% less scales have got?

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Pretty incredible when no-one will lend us any money. We are in administration.

Eh, no, we have raised funding this year on the bond markets. Countries don't go into administration.

fliball123 · 24-01-2013 03:03PM

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

Your an idiot!

I'm out of this discussion and forum, I cant be arsed trying to discuss something reasonably when the thread and forum is filled with ****e like this.

temper there Robbie. A section are the gov not in the ps? are they not tackling ps pay rises. These increments have to come out of my back pocket. Try tackling the post and not the man and maybe lay off the coffee for a bit

24-01-2013 03:04PM

fliball123 wrote: »

temper there Robbie. A section are the gov not in the ps? are they not tackling ps pay rises. These increments have to come out of my back pocket. Try tackling the post and not the man and maybe lay off the coffee for a bit

When dont you tackle the facts and put that crack pipe your smoking down. later munchkin!

noodler · 24-01-2013 03:05PM

Godge wrote: »

Now where in retail did you work? All of the major retailers operate incremental scales. Even though Dunnes are notoriously secretive about their arrangements here is one article about their six-point scale (I appreciate it is twelve years old but if you want to prove it has changed, do so)

http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/eiro/2000/01/inbrief/ie0001202n.htm

Of course I could be wrong - maybe you did work in retail, perhaps they operated a performance-based scale and you didn't qualify to move up the scale. Maybe you could tell me which years you worked in retail because again all of the major retailers applied the general round increases that applied because of the national pay agreement so if you were employed anytime between 1987 and 2008 you would have seen at least one increase a year from the pay agreements. If you want to show the above is "bull****", please provide a link.

Sorry now, it looks to me like those increases apply to many others like assistant store managers as well as shop floor retail workers. Nowhere in the article does it say only the "close to minimum wage" workers are the only ones to get an increase.

Ok, it was a blunt point but I was pointing out that the unions might argue it, I never said it was my argument, so stop coming over all agressive about it. A more subtle union argument would be that there are wage inflation pressures in the economy and vacant low-level positions because social welfare rates are too high and that the Government should concentrate its efforts to achieve savings on that area of expenditure rather than on public service pay and in the meantime leave us alone and give us the 2% pay rise others are getting. Put that way, it is not as stupid as you make out.

I didn't suggest the union would use them as an argument. I asked you would you prefer if I used a higher paid group that was getting a higher pay rise!

Not up to me to reconcile them. If you knew anything about negotiating you would know that pay rises in the private sector would make the CP2 negotiations more difficult. That is a fact, doesn't matter what your view is on the talks or what you believe the outcome should be, you should still be able to acknowledge that as a fact.

Fine, if you are saying all your point was that the unions will try and use the fact workers in our lowest paid sector got a 3% pay increase so that highest paid workers in one of our higher paying sectors should not have their pay cut then fair enough.

I think they will be rebutted solidly if they rely on that in any shape or form.

Will they mention social welfare rates have been fixed for the last number of years despite a return to inflation in 2011,2012 and 2013? That welfare rates essentially have less purchasing power now than they did in previous years? Perhaps the unemployed should argue for increases to our welfare budget.

Godge · 24-01-2013 03:06PM

fliball123 wrote: »

Who ownds the irish bank and watch how many redundancies and brnach closures there will be over the next year or 2 . Already Ulster bank are cutting as are PTSB, BOI and AIB continue on as the gov are once again looking after there buddies. I think you will find that any one in the private sector is not enjoying whats going on in the banks at the moment either..but it could be argued that they are needed just like the case is put for the ps?

The banks are closing branches and cutting staff numbers with fair redundancy schemes (less generous than before because they had to reduce to public secotr terms) in order to preserve pay rises for existing staff.

The public sector is attempting to maintain and improve current levels of service through productivity measures, while also cutting staff numbers with the same redundancy schemes as the banks in other to preserve pay rates for existing staff while reducing pay for new entrants.

The public sector seems to be doing a slightly better job, wouldn't you say?

noodler · 24-01-2013 03:08PM

Godge wrote: »

The banks are closing branches and cutting staff numbers with fair redundancy schemes (less generous than before because they had to reduce to public secotr terms) in order to preserve pay rises for existing staff.

That is actually completely untrue.

Our banks have downsized considerably since 2008. Foreign assets have been stripped, mortgage lending has collapsed, foreign deposits have left in droves.

The primary reason banks are getting smaller is because they have downsized.

fliball123 · 24-01-2013 03:09PM

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

I made that post exactly to fiballs request. I even clarified.

The reason I made that post was to show up one of the most prominent posters here to have little to no understanding of how nations run.

I understand that Ireland is smaller but if you look at the post i quoted when making that post you will see my post met every criteria specified.

So yeah thanks for you wasted input.

Robbie I have told you its simple maths and all your huffing and puffing and deflection shows you cannot respond when you are put in a corner. I pointed out yes you put up what I asked but at the same time you neglect to leave out points where the German ps are underpaid in comparison to the rest of the economy. As I say simple maths..so heres one.If we bridged the deficit just by further taxation. It this is on income you can devide 8 billion by 1.8 million thats what everyone will have to pay or if its indirect and not on income its 8 billion devided by 4 million. Now you tell me can this happen. No one is looking for the ps to take the cuts alone and I have never said that but no one should be sheilded from cuts until we are out of the crapper...OK pumpkin you can put your dummy back in and stop spitting it out

Lumbo · 24-01-2013 03:09PM

fliball123 wrote: »

Who ownds the irish bank and watch how many redundancies and brnach closures there will be over the next year or 2 . Already Ulster bank are cutting as are PTSB, BOI and AIB continue on as the gov are once again looking after there buddies. I think you will find that any one in the private sector is not enjoying whats going on in the banks at the moment either..but it could be argued that they are needed just like the case is put for the ps?

You asked for an example. I gave one. There's a pig flying by your window.

There's plenty of other examples out there but I won't bother discussing it with you because you're unable to reasonably debate anything without making ridiculous assumptions based on nothing but your own opinion.

woodoo · 24-01-2013 03:10PM

fliball123 wrote: »

Regardless of your semantics an increment means the tax payer has to pay more to that individual for the same amount of work they were doing

Increments are inviolable as far as i am concerned.

fliball123 · 24-01-2013 03:11PM

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

When dont you tackle the facts and put that crack pipe your smoking down. later munchkin!

What part of that isnt fact?

Gumbo · 24-01-2013 03:12PM

fliball123 wrote: »

Point 1
I believe the likes of Dunnes and others this will be the first pay rise for any staff in the last number of years and if Dunnes or any of these other stores where not making a profit you can damn well expect that pay rises would not be paid.

Just because you make something up yourself, doesnt make it true. What you believe and what is reality are two different things. As per all my previous post, Dunnes have been paying the staff their increments every year for the previous 5 years in a row and no doubt before that but i cant confirm before 2008 as thats when my mam started to work on the shop floor with them.

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Forgive my ignorance but are the workers there unionised?

No unions present. She gets them every year and they still got their xmas bonus throughout the downturn too, which i wouldnt begrudge them btw, it can be tough work.

fliball123 wrote: »

Once again where these companies profitable. Look any argument here is show me a company in debt and borrowing and paying pay rises and I will show you a pig that can fly

AIB
BoI
Ulster bank
TSB
Citi group

No, wheres my pig.

fliball123 · 24-01-2013 03:15PM

Godge wrote: »

The banks are closing branches and cutting staff numbers with fair redundancy schemes (less generous than before because they had to reduce to public secotr terms) in order to preserve pay rises for existing staff.

The public sector is attempting to maintain and improve current levels of service through productivity measures, while also cutting staff numbers with the same redundancy schemes as the banks in other to preserve pay rates for existing staff while reducing pay for new entrants.

The public sector seems to be doing a slightly better job, wouldn't you say?

I would say yeah they are doing a better job but the banks and PS have one thing in common when it comes to trying to tackle the money spent on areas such as pay , pensions, golden handshakes and redundancies and the overpaying of all and that is unions. both are heavily unionised and when dealing with both banks and ps I would like the gov to have someone representing the tax payer and a TV crew in the meetings. I would like to see the whites of these ****ers eyes when looking for 10 million for a pension for ex civil serants or bankers.

Godge · 24-01-2013 03:15PM

Godge wrote: »

The banks are closing branches and cutting staff numbers with fair redundancy schemes (less generous than before because they had to reduce to public secotr terms) in order to preserve pay rises for existing staff.

noodler wrote: »

That is actually completely untrue.

I have to ask you to justify this.

Is it true that banks are closing branches?
Is it true that banks are cutting staff numbers?
Is it true that banks are still paying pay rises?

The answer to all three is yes. How can you say that the post is "completely untrue"?

fliball123 · 24-01-2013 03:18PM

kceire wrote: »

Just because you make something up yourself, doesnt make it true. What you believe and what is reality are two different things. As per all my previous post, Dunnes have been paying the staff their increments every year for the previous 5 years in a row and no doubt before that but i cant confirm before 2008 as thats when my mam started to work on the shop floor with them.

No unions present. She gets them every year and they still got their xmas bonus throughout the downturn too, which i wouldnt begrudge them btw, it can be tough work.

AIB
BoI
Ulster bank
TSB
Citi group

No, wheres my pig.

Ok let me change tact any company not being kept afloat with tax payers money is there increments going on. As I said in my last post the problem with the ps is the same as the banks in one word the unions.

Godge · 24-01-2013 03:18PM

noodler wrote: »

Fine, if you are saying all your point was that the unions will try and use the fact workers in our lowest paid sector got a 3% pay increase so that highest paid workers in one of our higher paying sectors should not have their pay cut then fair enough.

I think they will be rebutted solidly if they rely on that in any shape or form.

Will they mention social welfare rates have been fixed for the last number of years despite a return to inflation in 2011,2012 and 2013? That welfare rates essentially have less purchasing power now than they did in previous years? Perhaps the unemployed should argue for increases to our welfare budget.

You still haven't answered about where in retail you worked and how you managed not to get a pay rise for four years.

Remember you called it "complete bull****" when I said there were incremental pay scales in retail and I provided a link to show you there are.

Tim Robbins · 24-01-2013 03:18PM

Godge wrote: »

No. Is that a figure from your imagination?

If not, is that a gross or a net figure? Do you have a link to a statistical source to back that up? Does it include the increments those recruited since Jan 10 on the new 10% less scales have got?

250 million this year.
300 million last year.
120 million year before.

Eh, no, we have raised funding this year on the bond markets. Countries don't go into administration.

We are in an IMF / EU bailout program because we can't borrow enough money to run the country. The deficit is currently 14 billion. Every few years that amounts to a bank bailout.

In Greece the public sector pay has been cut by 50%. Here it has barely been touched. That is why there are no protests. Because it is usually the public sector who protest.

They are stronger politically. If anyone in the public sector thinks they have it hard - leave.

Godge · 24-01-2013 03:19PM

fliball123 wrote: »

Ok let me change tact any company not being kept afloat with tax payers money is there increments going on. As I said in my last post the problem with the ps is the same as the banks in one word the unions.

Dunnes Stores, see previous posts on the last two pages by a number of poster.

P.S. They don't recognise unions either.

P.P.S. As far as I know, they are profitable.

Gumbo · 24-01-2013 03:20PM

noodler wrote: »

That is actually completely untrue.

Your in trouble now, posting crap you cant back up...tut tut..

noodler · 24-01-2013 03:23PM

Godge wrote: »

I have to ask you to justify this.

Is it true that banks are closing branches?
Is it true that banks are cutting staff numbers?
Is it true that banks are still paying pay rises?

The answer to all three is yes. How can you say that the post is "completely untrue"?

The entire basis for your post was predicated on the reason bank staff numbers/branches falling was due to increasing the salaries of other staff members.

That is false. Banks are downsizing in staff and branches because they have downsized their business operations.

Gumbo · 24-01-2013 03:23PM

Tim Robbins wrote: »

In Greece the public sector pay has been cut by 50%. Here it has barely been touched. That is why there are no protests. Because it is usually the public sector who protest.

Homeowners are being levied with a severe new property tax, while public sector pay is being cut by up to 50% in some cases.

The state television is being shut down.

The cuts will last until October 2011.

Croke Park II preliminary Talks started today

Comments