Government to reverse some Public Secor Pay cuts

James esq · 23-09-2014 03:23AM

The emergency is over so can we expect a repeal of

"Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest Act 2009"

next month

Peter Flynt · 23-09-2014 09:27AM

James esq wrote: »

The emergency is over so can we expect a repeal of

"Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest Act 2009"

next month

Big Deal - That's more of a political move designed to benefit the Labour Party and the Unions.

FEMPI was never required as the unions sold their members down the Swanee.

chopper6 · 23-09-2014 09:31AM

Peter Flynt wrote: »

Big Deal - That's more of a political move designed to benefit the Labour Party and the Unions.

FEMPI was never required as the unions sold their members down the Swanee.

More money in the members pockets= good news for all!

Peter Flynt · 23-09-2014 09:34AM

chopper6 wrote: »

More money in the members pockets= good news for all!

You do realise that's not going to happen with the repeal of FEMPI.

All that FEMPI was was a huge stick that would be taken out of the cupboard to be delivered to public sector workers if they didn't sign up to various "agreements" designed to cut their pay and make worse terms and conditions of employment.

The union leaders hadn't the balls to let the Government use FEMPI and let them tie the political consequences for they're more fixers for the Government than representatives of those who pay their wages.

You've got it arseways if you think FEMPI repeal means "more money in pockets" for anyone.

James esq · 23-09-2014 04:51PM

Regardless of what it was or did, the agreement ifs for it to go by 2017. So what do you think will it go in this budget or next years.

ezra_pound · 23-09-2014 05:42PM

Peter Flynt wrote: »

You do realise that's not going to happen with the repeal of FEMPI.

All that FEMPI was was a huge stick that would be taken out of the cupboard to be delivered to public sector workers if they didn't sign up to various "agreements" designed to cut their pay and make worse terms and conditions of employment.

The union leaders hadn't the balls to let the Government use FEMPI and let them tie the political consequences for they're more fixers for the Government than representatives of those who pay their wages.

You've got it arseways if you think FEMPI repeal means "more money in pockets" for anyone.

If any fempi act is repealed then any pay cuts legislated for in that act will be reversed. Why do you think they'd reverse a fempi act but but not the cuts it introduced?

Godge · 23-09-2014 06:34PM

Peter Flynt wrote: »

You do realise that's not going to happen with the repeal of FEMPI.

All that FEMPI was was a huge stick that would be taken out of the cupboard to be delivered to public sector workers if they didn't sign up to various "agreements" designed to cut their pay and make worse terms and conditions of employment.

The union leaders hadn't the balls to let the Government use FEMPI and let them tie the political consequences for they're more fixers for the Government than representatives of those who pay their wages.

You've got it arseways if you think FEMPI repeal means "more money in pockets" for anyone.

You obviously don't understand the premise of FEMPI and have never read the Act or the Dail debates at the time.

FEMPI and the pay cuts are only legal and constitutional once there is an economic crisis. Once the economic crisis is over, the pay cuts must be restored, bit by bit.

Peter Flynt · 24-09-2014 12:58AM

Godge wrote: »

You obviously don't understand the premise of FEMPI and have never read the Act or the Dail debates at the time.

FEMPI and the pay cuts are only legal and constitutional once there is an economic crisis. Once the economic crisis is over, the pay cuts must be restored, bit by bit.

I have read the act. The Dail debates are irrelevant.

Various pay cuts were installed in the "agreements" which had nothing to do with FEMPI.

FEMPI was simply an act for a Minister to implement cuts and charges if public sector workers did not vote for them.

noodler · 24-09-2014 08:52AM

FEMPI only applies to the latest round of pay cuts (Haddington Road) and such cuts had an income requirement of 65,000 +.

Godge · 24-09-2014 10:01AM

Peter Flynt wrote: »

I have read the act. The Dail debates are irrelevant.

Various pay cuts were installed in the "agreements" which had nothing to do with FEMPI.

FEMPI was simply an act for a Minister to implement cuts and charges if public sector workers did not vote for them.

http://www.per.gov.ie/croke-park-agreement/

Croke Park Agreement included FEMPI revision in its provisions

"1.16 The position concerning Public Service pay, including any outstanding adjudication findings, will be reviewed in Spring 2011 in accordance with the statutory requirement under both the Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest Acts of 2009 to review the operation, effectiveness and impact of the Acts before 30 June 2011, and every year thereafter. In addition to the criteria set out in those Acts, that review will take account of sustainable savings generated from the implementation of this Agreement and of the
agreements in each sector. Those savings will be independently verified by the
Implementation Body. In the event of sufficient savings being identified in the Spring 2011 review, priority will be given to public servants with pay rates of €35,000 or less in the review of pay which will be undertaken at that stage."

From Haddington Road, the commitments to review are repeated.

http://www.per.gov.ie/haddington-road-agreement/

"2.3 When economic circumstances allow and the public finances are restored to a sustainable position, the pay measures that have applied to public servants, including those under this Agreement, will be reviewed. As was stated in Paragraph 1.16 of the Public Service Agreement 2010 –2014, it is reaffirmed that priority will be given to public servants with pay rates at €35,000 or less in that review. "

noodler wrote: »

FEMPI only applies to the latest round of pay cuts (Haddington Road) and such cuts had an income requirement of 65,000 +.

http://www.oireachtas.ie/documents/bills28/acts/2009/a4109.pdf

FEMPI applies to all of the pay cuts. Here is the 2009 pay cuts in FEMPI.

noodler · 24-09-2014 10:41AM

Godge wrote: »

http://www.per.gov.ie/croke-park-agreement/

Croke Park Agreement included FEMPI revision in its provisions

"1.16 The position concerning Public Service pay, including any outstanding adjudication findings, will be reviewed in Spring 2011 in accordance with the statutory requirement under both the Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest Acts of 2009 to review the operation, effectiveness and impact of the Acts before 30 June 2011, and every year thereafter. In addition to the criteria set out in those Acts, that review will take account of sustainable savings generated from the implementation of this Agreement and of the
agreements in each sector. Those savings will be independently verified by the
Implementation Body. In the event of sufficient savings being identified in the Spring 2011 review, priority will be given to public servants with pay rates of €35,000 or less in the review of pay which will be undertaken at that stage."

From Haddington Road, the commitments to review are repeated.

http://www.per.gov.ie/haddington-road-agreement/

"2.3 When economic circumstances allow and the public finances are restored to a sustainable position, the pay measures that have applied to public servants, including those under this Agreement, will be reviewed. As was stated in Paragraph 1.16 of the Public Service Agreement 2010 –2014, it is reaffirmed that priority will be given to public servants with pay rates at €35,000 or less in that review. "

http://www.oireachtas.ie/documents/bills28/acts/2009/a4109.pdf

FEMPI applies to all of the pay cuts. Here is the 2009 pay cuts in FEMPI.

The legislation introduced to encourage acceptance of Haddington Road is what I am referring to and is what most unions want abolished.

If it was identical to the one linked (for the 2009/2010 pay cuts) then surely there would not have been the uproar there was when it was introduced. I mean, wasn't the one introduced last year supposed to have particular unilateral powers?

Godge · 24-09-2014 10:53AM

noodler wrote: »

The legislation introduced to encourage acceptance of Haddington Road is what I am referring to and is what most unions want abolished.

If it was identical to the one linked (for the 2009/2010 pay cuts) then surely there would not have been the uproar there was when it was introduced. I mean, wasn't the one introduced last year supposed to have particular unilateral powers?

Both sets of legislation have the same basis.

Rightwing · 24-09-2014 12:00PM

I'd be hoping there's no easing up on austerity. Country is very far from out of the woods. Cuts of up to 20% for the welfare and sections of the public sector should be enforced. But I doubt they are up to it.

Godge · 24-09-2014 01:11PM

Rightwing wrote: »

I'd be hoping there's no easing up on austerity. Country is very far from out of the woods. Cuts of up to 20% for the welfare and sections of the public sector should be enforced. But I doubt they are up to it.

There is no rational basis for 20% cuts in welfare or public sector pay when we are now in a position to consider tax cuts.

ezra_pound · 24-09-2014 01:49PM

Noodler and Peter Flynt do not have a clue what they're talking about.

Idbatterim · 24-09-2014 02:01PM

I'd be hoping there's no easing up on austerity. Country is very far from out of the woods. Cuts of up to 20% for the welfare and sections of the public sector should be enforced. But I doubt they are up to it.

Fairness never came into the cuts, in fact the entire political set up here has been about anything but fairness! The off the wall higher income tax rates, low entry point to marginal rate and the ridiculous rates that the self employed pay and the problems it creates, should be one of the first port of calls!

K-9 · 24-09-2014 02:16PM

ezra_pound wrote: »

Noodler and Peter Flynt do not have a clue what they're talking about.

Mod:

Not particularly helpful, either expand on why you think that or don't bother posting stuff like the above at all.

James esq · 24-09-2014 02:37PM

The act will go by 2017 - yes it refers to some pay cuts (not the 10% pension levy)

For the purpose of claity below is an extract of the act

2.— (1) This section applies to a person—
(a) who—
(i) is a public servant on 1 March 2009, or
(ii) is not a public servant on that date but after that date is appointed or otherwise becomes a public servant, and
(b) who, on 1 March 2009 or at any time afterwards—
(i) is a member of a public service pension scheme,
(ii) is entitled to a benefit under such a scheme, or
(iii) receives a payment in lieu of membership in such a scheme.
(2) In this section, a person to whom this section applies is referred to as a “relevant person”.
(3) The person who is responsible for, or authorises, the payment of remuneration to a relevant person shall deduct or cause to be deducted an amount at the applicable rate or rates specified in the Table in this subsection—
(a) in the case of the period 1 March 2009 to 31 December 2009, in respect of that period, and
(b) in the case of the year 2010 and each subsequent year, in respect of the year concerned,
from the remuneration from time to time payable to the relevant person during that period or any such year.
TABLE
Amount of Remuneration
Rate of deduction
Up to €15,000
3 per cent
Any excess over €15,000 but not over €20,000
6 per cent
Any amount over €20,000
10 per cent

ezra_pound · 24-09-2014 02:51PM

James esq wrote: »

The act will go by 2017 - yes it refers to some pay cuts (not the 10% pension levy)

For the purpose of claity below is an extract of the act

2.— (1) This section applies to a person—
(a) who—
(i) is a public servant on 1 March 2009, or
(ii) is not a public servant on that date but after that date is appointed or otherwise becomes a public servant, and
(b) who, on 1 March 2009 or at any time afterwards—
(i) is a member of a public service pension scheme,
(ii) is entitled to a benefit under such a scheme, or
(iii) receives a payment in lieu of membership in such a scheme.
(2) In this section, a person to whom this section applies is referred to as a “relevant person”.
(3) The person who is responsible for, or authorises, the payment of remuneration to a relevant person shall deduct or cause to be deducted an amount at the applicable rate or rates specified in the Table in this subsection—
(a) in the case of the period 1 March 2009 to 31 December 2009, in respect of that period, and
(b) in the case of the year 2010 and each subsequent year, in respect of the year concerned,
from the remuneration from time to time payable to the relevant person during that period or any such year.
TABLE
Amount of Remuneration
Rate of deduction
Up to €15,000
3 per cent
Any excess over €15,000 but not over €20,000
6 per cent
Any amount over €20,000
10 per cent

The section you are referring to IS The pension levy!

ezra_pound · 24-09-2014 02:53PM

The fempi 2009 no.2 act brought in traditional pay cuts. The fempi no. 1 act 2009 you are quoting refers to the pension levy.

Peter Flynt · 24-09-2014 05:24PM

Godge wrote: »

http://www.per.gov.ie/croke-park-agreement/

Croke Park Agreement included FEMPI revision in its provisions

"1.16 The position concerning Public Service pay, including any outstanding adjudication findings, will be reviewed in Spring 2011 in accordance with the statutory requirement under both the Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest Acts of 2009 to review the operation, effectiveness and impact of the Acts before 30 June 2011, and every year thereafter. In addition to the criteria set out in those Acts, that review will take account of sustainable savings generated from the implementation of this Agreement and of the
agreements in each sector. Those savings will be independently verified by the
Implementation Body. In the event of sufficient savings being identified in the Spring 2011 review, priority will be given to public servants with pay rates of €35,000 or less in the review of pay which will be undertaken at that stage."

From Haddington Road, the commitments to review are repeated.

http://www.per.gov.ie/haddington-road-agreement/

"2.3 When economic circumstances allow and the public finances are restored to a sustainable position, the pay measures that have applied to public servants, including those under this Agreement, will be reviewed. As was stated in Paragraph 1.16 of the Public Service Agreement 2010 –2014, it is reaffirmed that priority will be given to public servants with pay rates at €35,000 or less in that review. "

http://www.oireachtas.ie/documents/bills28/acts/2009/a4109.pdf

FEMPI applies to all of the pay cuts. Here is the 2009 pay cuts in FEMPI.

Croke Park and Haddington Road are irrelevant to FEMPI.

The worse terms and conditions of employment (brought in under Croke Park & Haddington Road) will remain long after FEMPI is gone.

Godge · 24-09-2014 05:55PM

Peter Flynt wrote: »

Croke Park and Haddington Road are irrelevant to FEMPI.

The worse terms and conditions of employment (brought in under Croke Park & Haddington Road) will remain long after FEMPI is gone.

I agree that the conditions of employment are unlikely to change - I cannot understand why the unions agreed to them. That is their stupidity.

But the pay cuts under Croke Park and Haddington Road will be restored.

ezra_pound · 24-09-2014 06:09PM

Godge wrote: »

I agree that the conditions of employment are unlikely to change - I cannot understand why the unions agreed to them. That is their stupidity.

But the pay cuts under Croke Park and Haddington Road will be restored.

There were no pay cuts under croke park and only a limited pay cut to income over 60k in Haddington road.

Godge · 24-09-2014 06:10PM

ezra_pound wrote: »

There were no pay cuts under croke park and only a limited pay cut to income over 60k in Haddington road.

See para 1.16 of the Croke Park Agreement which implicitly endorses the FEMPI pay cuts. There are other paragraphs in that Agreement which refer to the parties accepting the state the country is in.

ezra_pound · 24-09-2014 06:26PM

Godge wrote: »

See para 1.16 of the Croke Park Agreement which implicitly endorses the FEMPI pay cuts. There are other paragraphs in that Agreement which refer to the parties accepting the state the country is in.

Yes it recognises the existence of the cuts but it doesn't create them. The cuts were around for over a year by then.

James esq · 25-09-2014 06:58PM

The public service saved Ireland from ruin caused by the private sector banks and developers.

barneystinson · 25-09-2014 07:39PM

James esq wrote: »

The public service saved Ireland from ruin caused by the private sector banks and developers.

We did?! Do tell.

mr_seer · 25-09-2014 08:39PM

James esq wrote: »

The public service saved Ireland from ruin caused by the private sector banks and developers.

Yeah it is a good thing the regulator and the politicians covered themselves in glory to make up for them

Monife · 25-09-2014 09:04PM

If pay is restored, will civil service workers employed post 2009 get an increase in salary to bring them in line with the payscales of their colleagues? Would they go on the 1st point of the scale or whatever point they are on depending on service?

Pocoyo · 25-09-2014 09:08PM

Will they just abolish the universal social charge FFS!!!!!!

Government to reverse some Public Secor Pay cuts

Comments