JillyQ wrote: » Why would you automatically assume it involves cutting services?
Jawgap wrote: » Ideally, they should be able to charge DSP a fee for each journey undertaken, but that would just mean taxes going through DSP to get to BAC and BE, audits, billing etc - better, from an administrative efficiency point of view, to just agree a lump sum and hand that over.
Jawgap wrote: » Doesn't have to be on Grafton street - there are plenty of publicly owned buildings in the city centre, the State could allocate some space to them in one of them and charge a market rate........
Jawgap wrote: » People think public servants lack ability, imagination and inventiveness
Uncle Ben wrote: » €2k over 2 years. Labour trying to buy votes.
Black Menorca wrote: » This is at best a moderate first step to pay restoration with limited restoration over a future 3 year period. It is progress from the FEMPI cutting fetish and it is pleasing to see the pension pay cut being drastically diminished for lower paid workers. I will await information meetings with the union before deciding on whether to accept this or not.
jank wrote: » I never heard anyone refuse free money with nothing but illusionary reports and reform to be had in return. This carry does not happen on this side of the world. Public sector pay in Australia and NZ is not in the hands of ministers to pay off come an election.
purplecow1977 wrote: » I'm a public service worker and it is very obvious it is a buying votes scam. We are not fooled by it and the new points we have to agree to. Assume unions will have to vote to either accept or reject these proposals or will it run after the HRA?
Black Menorca wrote: » We have to look at the alternatives. FG on their own or in cahoots with FF will not be so quick to restore our pay and an SF, Looney Left cabal will drive the economy back into oblivion.
JillyQ wrote: » Thats what most people seem to want here
Black Menorca wrote: » Then be careful what you wish for would be my advice to them.
JillyQ wrote: » The question we have to ask then is do any of us want to go back to the recession of the 70's & 80's
Captain Chaos wrote: » There were no USC, property taxes or water charges back then no matter how bad people say it was. Yes though VAT and PRSI was alot higher.
JillyQ wrote: » Of course there was. There was a little thing called rates. Alot higher isn't the word people were paying over 60% in income tax.
Mongfinder General wrote: » People are paying over 60% tax now. 40% paye 7% USC 4% PRSI 10.5% Pension Levy (Yes it is a tax. There is no guarantee that an Irish government will be able to fund the intrinsic value of pensions in 30 or 40 years time) Add to this mandatory pension contributions in the public sector and the rate is probably closer to 70%
daithi7 wrote: » No,it is not a tax it is a pension contribution. The only category of worker who pay more tax in this skewed state are the self employed, who pay a higher rate of prsi, on lower allowances. We also pay prsi on things like deposit interest and our own private pension funds are currently being raided of. 6% per annum to fund overpaid public servants. So with ~10% unemployment, the only people being really screwed are the people who actually create wealth and indigenous jobs...... You couldn't make it up!!
purplecow1977 wrote: » Are you generalising ALL public servants are overpaid or did you omit the word 'some'? Because I am certainly not overpaid. I work damn hard for my salary.
daithi7 wrote: » No,it is not a tax it is a pension contribution. The only category of worker who pay extra tax rates in this skewed sector state are the self employed, who pay a higher rate of prsi with lower allowances. They also pay prsi on things like deposit interest. And to really make things totally ridiculous, their own private pension funds are currently being raided by the Irish taxman of. 6% per annum to mostly fund overpaid public servants. So with ~10% unemployment, the only people being really screwed are the people who actually create wealth and indigenous jobsin the Irish economy ...... meanwhile the same paper pushers in the dept of finance, none of whom were fired, and who helped misdirect Ireland into a monumental economic crisis are back getting pay rises.....You couldn't make it up!!
daithi7 wrote: » That's fair enough and probably goes to the kernel of the problem in Ireland. Most public servants are overpaid, but some are not and a lower percentage again are probably underpaid. That is true. What is badly needed Imho, is an independent guideline body on public pay in Ireland, which would benchmark Irish public pay versus EU peers, private sector equivalents here and the exchequer capacity to pay, and to come up with specific recommendations for government every 5 years say (or for every round of public pay ' negotiations ' say) . This body could also be tasked with measuring productivity across the various strands of the public service, monitoring agreed changes in work practices & productivity and carrying out value for money reviews (e.g. University sector, Irish water, etc, etc). Using this body , we could finally see if we are getting good value from our doctors, teachers, lecturers, garda, etc,etc And if they are being paid appropriately. This would be far better than the cat & mouse negotiating con job that has delivered such poor value for the exchequer to date, and has led to a badly run, very disorganised public sector in general, run by insiders for insiders, that is arguably not fit for purpose at all. This proposed body should help transparency and take some of the pressure off Irish politicians to accede to every public sector union demand as they appear to do currently. It would also highlight specific areas of the public service that need urgent addressing. This type of body is an urgent priority imho, yet you'll hardly ever hear any politician calling for it..... Why not!?
daithi7 wrote: » ...What is badly needed Imho, is an independent guideline body on public pay in Ireland, which would benchmark Irish public pay versus EU peers, private sector equivalents here and the exchequer capacity to pay, and to come up with specific recommendations for government every 5 years say (or for every round of public pay ' negotiations ' say) ....
daithi7 wrote: » No,it is not a tax it is a pension contribution.