Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Croke Park II preliminary Talks started today

1…118119121123124…159

Comments

  • #3602
    Uriel.
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,059 ✭✭✭Uriel.


    Idbatterim wrote: »
    surely over 32,800 is a high earner! it must be as the government deem this the amount at which they can shaft you for over half of your income...

    Irrespective of which sector I wouldn't consider that to be a high earner to be honest.

    Now if your job consists of routine call centre work and photocopying I'd consider it high pay but that's a separate issue


  • #3603
    woodoo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,219 ✭✭✭woodoo


    Uriel. wrote: »
    Less numbers means more work for those remaining in the job. More hours are required to bridge that gap. The alternative is a big cut to pay to ensure funding to hire new staff.

    If you want to work less hours do a four day week if it fits with your job role and suffer to cut in pay that goes with that.

    I'm happy enough with my current hours. As i said i'd be willing to forego a 3% paycut, But thats it we have given enough. Time to cut welfare and increase taxes to make up the shortfall. Then start concentrating on growth and jobs. Austerity can only do so much.


  • #3604
    Uriel.
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,059 ✭✭✭Uriel.


    woodoo wrote: »
    I'm happy enough with my current hours. As i said i'd be willing to forego a 3% paycut, But thats it we have given enough. Time to cut welfare and increase taxes to make up the shortfall. Then start concentrating on growth and jobs. Austerity can only do so much.

    Paycuts don't address the longer term problems in the public service nor do they allow for a long-term sustainable and effective public service.

    More productivity and greater reform does. It also gives workers the chance to choose between net income and work/life balance to a certain degree.


  • #3605
    hallelujajordan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,080 ✭✭✭hallelujajordan


    MMAGirl wrote: »
    If you increase taxes AND cut the ps then wouldn't you agree that they are paying twice while the rest of us only pay once.

    As I said before. The public sector pay tax at the same rate as the rest of us. They have extra levies too on top already.

    The trouble with this analysis is that it assumes that the only reason CPII existed was because the government needed to raise some cash and they saw the public sector as a soft target.

    The reality is that regardless of how big or small the hole in the government finances is we have a public sector that is 1) significantly overstaffed 2) significantly over-paid and 3) has no proper mechanisms in place to manage / reward performance and to ensure that only those workers who contribute and add value continue to exist in their roles. .

    Even if there were no financial deficit I would call on the government to fix these issues . . .

    Answer me this . . in the current situation why do you think it is fairer to ask me (a private sector worker, whose performance is measured on an ongoing basis) to pay more tax in order to maintain public sector workers (who will stay in their jobs regardless of their performance) on a salary premium of +17%


  • #3606
    spank_inferno
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,884 ✭✭✭spank_inferno


    woodoo wrote: »
    increase taxes to make up the shortfall. Then start concentrating on growth and jobs.

    Cos increased taxes always creates growth and jobs.


  • Advertisement
  • #3607
    Vizzy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,590 ✭✭✭Vizzy


    I don't know why the Government don't start to concentrate on small "saves",that is €25m here,€50m there.
    For instance a 7% cut in foreign aid would result in about €40m,I saw the firemen's rep on Primetime the other night saying that they have put forward proposals to save €30m,it must be easy to find €20m or €30m in taxes fraud or social welfare fraud.
    Thats €100m or thereabouts in 3 relatively small actions.

    Also,when don't the Gov ask Public Service workers to come up with savings themselves.You would be surprised how many PS workers are proud of what they do and would be only too willing to come up with ideas to minimise wastage and improve efficiency.


  • #3608
    spank_inferno
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,884 ✭✭✭spank_inferno


    Because a cut in renumeration will very definetely reduce public spending.

    Whereas "efficiency savings" are a bit harder to pin down, and rarely offer the real savings the headline figures would suggest.


  • #3609
    Vizzy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,590 ✭✭✭Vizzy


    spank_inferno wrote: »
    Because a cut in renumeration will very definetely reduce public spending.

    Whereas "efficiency savings" are a bit harder to pin down, and rarely offer the real savings the headline figures would suggest.

    You have just made the argument for me.
    "Sure we think we can't pin efficiencies down,so we won't bother with them" says Brendan.
    "Fair enough"says Inda


  • #3610
    spank_inferno
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,884 ✭✭✭spank_inferno


    Vizzy wrote: »
    You have just made the argument for me.
    "Sure we think we can't pin efficiencies down,so we won't bother with them" says Brendan.
    "Fair enough"says Inda

    Also, a well run organisation will be constantly changing and driving efficiencies anyway.
    I've never worked in the PS, but I'm sure that's what staff and management are delivering.

    So it just leaves renumeration, as a definitive avenue for cost reduction.


  • #3611
    Uriel.
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,059 ✭✭✭Uriel.


    Vizzy wrote: »
    I don't know why the Government don't start to concentrate on small "saves",that is €25m here,€50m there.
    For instance a 7% cut in foreign aid would result in about €40m,I saw the firemen's rep on Primetime the other night saying that they have put forward proposals to save €30m,it must be easy to find €20m or €30m in taxes fraud or social welfare fraud.
    Thats €100m or thereabouts in 3 relatively small actions.

    Also,when don't the Gov ask Public Service workers to come up with savings themselves.You would be surprised how many PS workers are proud of what they do and would be only too willing to come up with ideas to minimise wastage and improve efficiency.

    Do you have any idea what the firemen were suggesting for that cost saving?

    I don't know myself but a suggestion doesn't mean it's fully or partially workable


  • Advertisement
  • #3612
    Uriel.
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,059 ✭✭✭Uriel.


    Vizzy wrote: »
    I don't know why the Government don't start to concentrate on small "saves",that is €25m here,€50m there.
    For instance a 7% cut in foreign aid would result in about €40m,I saw the firemen's rep on Primetime the other night saying that they have put forward proposals to save €30m,it must be easy to find €20m or €30m in taxes fraud or social welfare fraud.
    Thats €100m or thereabouts in 3 relatively small actions.

    Also,when don't the Gov ask Public Service workers to come up with savings themselves.You would be surprised how many PS workers are proud of what they do and would be only too willing to come up with ideas to minimise wastage and improve efficiency.

    Do you have any idea what the firemen were suggesting for that cost saving?

    I don't know myself but a suggestion doesn't mean it's fully or partially workable


  • #3613
    ardmacha
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,476 ✭✭✭ardmacha


    I don't know why the Government don't start to concentrate on small "saves",that is €25m here,€50m there.

    Because some of the ministers/management would have to work to collect information on these?
    has no proper mechanisms in place to manage / reward performance and to ensure that only those workers who contribute and add value continue to exist in their roles. .

    Oh right, and the cure for this is to cut everyone, those who work, those who don't work, those who have cooperated to get savings, those who have not, those whose salary is higher than comparable jobs, those who are not. That will help manage performance. You could call it the Howlin model, it could become a leading management theory.


  • #3614
    Vizzy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,590 ✭✭✭Vizzy


    Uriel. wrote: »
    Do you have any idea what the firemen were suggesting for that cost saving?

    I don't know myself but a suggestion doesn't mean it's fully or partially workable

    I'm not sure what the suggested saving was, but the firemans rep mentioned €50m (I think) and said something about the number of fire chiefs.He also mentioned the amalganmation or fire service and ambulance (similar to the US) i.e. a sort of "fire rescue" setup.
    I appreciate that suggestions may not always equal actual savings but again he said that this had been brought to Government but it had simply been ignored.


  • #3615
    Uriel.
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,059 ✭✭✭Uriel.


    ardmacha wrote: »
    Because some of the ministers/management would have to work to collect information on these?



    Oh right, and the cure for this is to cut everyone, those who work, those who don't work, those who have cooperated to get savings, those who have not, those whose salary is higher than comparable jobs, those who are not. That will help manage performance. You could call it the Howlin model, it could become a leading management theory.

    +1000

    A broad brush indiscriminate cut as is being proposed is in my view detrimental to everyone and offers no long term benefit for any sector or the state as a whole


  • #3616
    Uriel.
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,059 ✭✭✭Uriel.


    Vizzy wrote: »
    I'm not sure what the suggested saving was, but the firemans rep mentioned €50m (I think) and said something about the number of fire chiefs.He also mentioned the amalganmation or fire service and ambulance (similar to the US) i.e. a sort of "fire rescue" setup.
    I appreciate that suggestions may not always equal actual savings but again he said that this had been brought to Government but it had simply been ignored.

    It's not so much that the suggestion might not equal the actual savings it's more a case of the workability and realism of the suggestion.

    For example. On fire chiefs for example. Say there's 75 in the country and the suggestion to save a few million a year is to sack 70 of them. That's hardly workable is it? And it's a case of well let's suggest everything that doesn't have an impact on our pay and conditions. Obviously I don't know what their suggestions are but it's likely that some are not realistic.


  • #3617
    spank_inferno
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,884 ✭✭✭spank_inferno


    Uriel. wrote: »
    It's not so much that the suggestion might not equal the actual savings it's more a case of the workability and realism of the suggestion.

    For example. On fire chiefs for example. Say there's 75 in the country and the suggestion to save a few million a year is to sack 70 of them. That's hardly workable is it? And it's a case of well let's suggest everything that doesn't have an impact on our pay and conditions. Obviously I don't know what their suggestions are but it's likely that some are not realistic.

    Its workable where there is a will to do so.

    NI has 2 fire chiefs.
    We have dozens.

    However the Unions & government refused to allow compulsory redundancies.

    The Croke Park 1 agreement has already covered all of the "low hanging fruit", the easy savings to make.

    All that is left is renumeration.


  • #3618
    barneystinson
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,686 ✭✭✭barneystinson


    Vizzy wrote: »
    it must be easy to find €20m or €30m in taxes fraud or social welfare fraud.
    Thats €100m or thereabouts in 3 relatively small actions.

    Also,when don't the Gov ask Public Service workers to come up with savings themselves.You would be surprised how many PS workers are proud of what they do and would be only too willing to come up with ideas to minimise wastage and improve efficiency.

    And in that vein I'm all ears as to what stone I should look under for this "easy" €20m in tax fraud that's been eluding me all this time..?!?


  • #3619
    woodoo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,219 ✭✭✭woodoo


    spank_inferno wrote: »
    Cos increased taxes always creates growth and jobs.

    Whats the matter does the thought of tax increases scare you.. money out of your pocket then. Much easier to bang on about taking money out of other peoples pockets. We can all play at that game.


  • #3620
    spank_inferno
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,884 ✭✭✭spank_inferno


    woodoo wrote: »
    Whats the matter does the thought of tax increases scare you.. money out of your pocket then. Much easier to bang on about taking money out of other peoples pockets. We can all play at that game.


    Game?
    Cool post bro.

    Yes,more tax,as you suggest makes me pee my pants.

    All it would do is reduce everyones discretionary expenditure..... Cost jobs...... Thus decreasing economic activity..... Thus decreasing growth.......and the cycle of decline continues.

    More tax does not a recovery make.
    It is that simple.

    And if something that simple goes over your head, you should move to the caribbean and make a fine living as a limbo-dancer.


  • #3621
    sarumite
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,909 ✭✭✭sarumite


    ardmacha wrote: »
    Oh right, and the cure for this is to cut everyone, those who work, those who don't work, those who have cooperated to get savings, those who have not, those whose salary is higher than comparable jobs, those who are not. That will help manage performance. You could call it the Howlin model, it could become a leading management theory.

    Doesn't the CPA have the same broad brush approach to the PS, protecting all the above people? I believe it was the broad brush approach that you are now against, that many people found irksome about the CPA.


  • Advertisement
  • #3622
    Dreamertime
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 425 ✭✭Dreamertime


    hallelujajordan wrote: »
    Answer me this . . in the current situation why do you think it is fairer to ask me (a private sector worker, whose performance is measured on an ongoing basis) to pay more tax in order to maintain public sector workers (who will stay in their jobs regardless of their performance) on a salary premium of +17%

    Get the heck over yourself.

    Who made you the moral authority around here.

    Those self assertive classes you got from Eddie hobbs are really working :D

    By living and working of this state you automatically agree to pay the rates of tax legislated by the Oireachtas, to fund the Public Service.

    Note the phrase Public Service, not Gordon Gecko Inc.

    I am proud of the work I do and serve the Country (yes, including you) for my €382 a week.

    you know I often hear beligerant/ignorant Hawks say "if you're not happy with your pay join the Private sector".

    Well if you're not happy funding my lavish €382 a week why don't you up sticks and go to Greece....:)


  • #3623
    hallelujajordan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,080 ✭✭✭hallelujajordan


    Dreamertime wrote: »
    Get the heck over yourself.

    Who made you the moral authority around here.

    Those self assertive classes you got from Eddie hobbs are really working :D

    By living and working of this state you automatically agree to pay the rates of tax legislated by the Oireachtas, to fund the Public Service.

    Note the phrase Public Service, not Gordon Gecko Inc.

    I am proud of the work I do and serve the Country (yes, including you) for my €382 a week.

    you know I often hear beligerant/ignorant Hawks say "if you're not happy with your pay join the Private sector".

    Well if you're not happy funding my lavish €382 a week why don't you up sticks and go to Greece....:)

    I'm happy to pay my taxes and I'm happy that my taxes fund the public service . . Are you suggesting that I have no right to ask for value for money ? That those people whose wages my taxes pay should not be measured to make sure they are performing adequately ? That there are not twice as many of them as are needed. . . ? That their salary should not be equivalent to what their equivalents are paid in the private sector ?


  • #3624
    Dreamertime
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 425 ✭✭Dreamertime


    hallelujajordan wrote: »
    That their salary should not be equivalent to what their equivalents are paid in the private sector ?

    I apologise for my previous post. It was too personal.

    Now, why should my wages be set by the going rate in the profit driven Private Sector?


  • #3625
    ardmacha
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,476 ✭✭✭ardmacha


    Doesn't the CPA have the same broad brush approach to the PS, protecting all the above people? I believe it was the broad brush approach that you are now against, that many people found irksome about the CPA.

    Given that 3 years have passed, one expects a refined process in phase 2 not a worse one.


  • #3626
    hallelujajordan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,080 ✭✭✭hallelujajordan


    Dreamertime wrote: »
    I apologise for my previous post. It was too personal.
    No problem
    Dreamertime wrote:
    Now, why should my wages be set by the going rate in the profit driven Private Sector?

    Because there is no reason why I should pay more for a service just because the employer happens to be the government. .

    Because in most countries (that are not bankrupt) public sector wages are actually less than those in the private sector. The difference being the price public sector workers pay for longevity and job security.

    The unions constantly and deliberately confuse the governments role as social protectors with their role as employers . . They are different. As employers they should run the public service as efficiently as it would be run in the private sector and as social protectors they should take care of society - all aspects of society, public, private, unemployed etc . .


  • #3627
    Tea drinker
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,818 ✭✭✭Tea drinker


    Dreamertime wrote: »
    I apologise for my previous post. It was too personal.

    Now, why should my wages be set by the going rate in the profit driven Private Sector?
    What do you think it should be benchmarked to Dreamertime? Several recent reports after we entered bailout land cited PS pay/conditions as too high here. Have you heard of any of this stuff, I guess you did? You disagree - on what basis?
    Yes Ireland is a bit more expensive than some other EU countries - I'll give that one straight away.


  • #3628
    spank_inferno
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,884 ✭✭✭spank_inferno


    Dreamertime wrote: »
    Now, why should my wages be set by the going rate in the profit driven Private Sector?


    Because the "going rate" is the real value of your labour.
    And as tax payers we are all entitled to see the best value be delivered for our money.

    That is the pact people have with their governments.
    They take our money and they are trusted to deliver the best service for the best value.
    Otherwise tax is little more than confiscation.

    Why should it be otherwise?


  • #3629
    Dreamertime
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 425 ✭✭Dreamertime


    Tea drinker wrote: »
    What do you think it should be benchmarked to Dreamertime? Several recent reports after we entered bailout land cited PS pay/conditions as too high here. Have you heard of any of this stuff, I guess you did? You disagree - on what basis?
    Yes Ireland is a bit more expensive than some other EU countries - I'll give that one straight away.

    Keep it at present levels, within the current incremental structures.


  • #3630
    Dreamertime
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 425 ✭✭Dreamertime


    spank_inferno wrote: »
    Because the "going rate" is the real value of your labour.
    And as tax payers we are all entitled to see the best value be delivered for our money.

    That is the pact people have with their governments.
    They take our money and they are trusted to deliver the best service for the best value.
    Otherwise tax is little more than confiscation.

    Why should it be otherwise?

    Do you really think cutting my wages from €382 a week to € 350 a week will get more productivity out of me?


  • Advertisement
  • #3631
    n97 mini
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,991 ✭✭✭n97 mini


    Dreamertime wrote: »
    Do you really think cutting my wages from €382 a week to € 350 a week will get more productivity out of me?

    If you do the same amount of work (or even marginally less), it will amount to a productivity increase as you do more work per euro paid.


Advertisement