Public sector pay threatens economic viability - ISME

TempestSabre

vesp wrote:

.......potential does not put food on the table. the hundreds of thousands of people in the private sector who earn much less than those supported by their taxes in the public sector will tell you that.

Potential means you have to work for it. The opportunity is there, celtic tiger and all that. Apparently the country is awash with money, especially the private sector.

Theres also big numbers of people in the public sector who earn less than their equivilents in the private sector. The public sector pays the same taxes.

I guess because you hear of people with a couple of houses and big company cars, we should assume that everyone in the private sector lives that way?

RainyDay

vesp wrote:

As well as everyone knows, its statistics. Even Eddie Hobbs mentioned it on his programme on the telly there about a month ago, how public sector workers are paid more than private sector workers, despite the differences in job security, pensions etc etc

You really don't want to blindly believe everything you watch on telly? Eddie needs to start comparing like with like? Did he happen to mention the proportion of public sector workers who have 3rd level qualifications by comparison to the private sector? No, I thought not.

SimpleSam06

TempestSabre wrote:

Potential means you have to work for it. The opportunity is there, celtic tiger and all that. Apparently the country is awash with money, especially the private sector.

I have to say here, bollocks, in fairness. The country is awash with DEBT not money, and where do you think all of these swarms of immigrants are getting employed? The public sector? Where have they been learning the gaeilge so? Or maybe they are flooding the PRIVATE SECTOR and keeping wages artificially depressed?

Bah I honestly think sometimes we'll have half the country pushing pencils around an office in Dublin and the other half on the dole living off the taxes of immigrants here on a rotating door basis... Public sector wages are out of control, and have only gotten so because they do not have to be competitive with any other sector, and they are not jobs that immigrants can apply for.

The only thing paying for the civil service is the insane amount of money the government has gained from the recent property boom, and when that falls apart, as it is in the process of doing, you will be left with the government increasing taxes on everyone else to pay for it. Public sector wages are so high that getting a loan to cover them is laughable at best.

Of course when you do that, a lot of people will just up stakes and leave the country, as they did only 20 years ago.

Then the civil service might find their jobs are not so permanent after all, and economic rules apply to countries just as much as corporations.

TempestSabre

Not a fan of sweeping generalisations then?

Consider then that the average salary does not mean that the everyone, or even the majoirty in the public sector are paid more then the private. I know one guy who left the public sector and jumped over 10k by moving to the same position in the private sector.

In one dept I'm familar with heres quite a few non nationals and their numbers are steadily increasing. For some recent positions the majoirty of applications were non nationals and in general they had great qualifications. The lack of Irish applicants would seem to because the salary wasn't attractive, and there was little interest in moving to the decentralisation location. There were no applicants from the decentralised location.

vesp

TempestSabre wrote:

Not a fan of sweeping generalisations then?

Consider then that the average salary does not mean that the everyone, or even the majoirty in the public sector are paid more then the private.

It means that the average salary in the public sector is way more than in the private, despite the perks like security, pensions etc.

TempestSabre wrote:

I know one guy who left the public sector and jumped over 10k by moving to the same position in the private sector.

Big deal. One exception does not make the rule. For that one person there are dozens of people overpaid and underworked compared with their private industry colleagues.

SimpleSam06

TempestSabre wrote:

Consider then that the average salary does not mean that the everyone, or even the majoirty in the public sector are paid more then the private.

Actually thats exactly what it means. Public sector pay has been growing on average THREE TIMES FASTER than private sector pay for the last five or six years.

TempestSabre wrote:

I know one guy who left the public sector and jumped over 10k by moving to the same position in the private sector.

Ah the joys of personal, unsupported anecdotes. Get him posting up here and we'll see.

TempestSabre wrote:

In one dept I'm familar with heres quite a few non nationals and their numbers are steadily increasing. For some recent positions the majoirty of applications were non nationals and in general they had great qualifications.

What department was that? Bus drivers? thats the only one I can immediately think of with a high immigrant population. I'm a big fan of details by the way, the more the merrier.

TempestSabre

Actually its an IT department. But I've seen the same in a few areas. I know quite a few who've left the public sector and are better paid.

SimpleSam06

TempestSabre wrote:

Actually its an IT department. But I've seen the same in a few areas. I know quite a few who've left the public sector and are better paid.

I worked in an IT department in a branch of the civil service back in 2000, and I was getting paid better than my contemporaries in the private sector back then. With a 3x faster rate of pay growth since that (remember benchmarking?), I guarantee you the public sector is a better place to be.

I've never met a civil servant or government employee that didn't have plenty of time to complain about the misery of their position and the meagreness of their pay, however. The entire beaurocracy should be gone over with a fine tooth comb, to be honest, and the dead wood weeded out.

TempestSabre

SimpleSam06 wrote:

I worked in an IT department in a branch of the civil service back in 2000, and I was getting paid better than my contemporaries in the private sector back then. With a 3x faster rate of pay growth since that (remember benchmarking?), I guarantee you the public sector is a better place to be....

Ah the joys of personal, unsupported anecdotes, and sweeping generalisations I'm temporarily in a public IT dept now not 6 yrs ago, and I could easily earn more in the private sector. Many of my colleagues have already left to better money elsewhere. Our dept is understaffed by about 40-50% (according to an external 3rd party review) and so because we can't get staff we outsource the work, or have contractors in. We expect the majority of the work will eventually be outsourced. Most of us have come from the private sector we don't have any problems with returning to it.

SimpleSam06

TempestSabre wrote:

Ah the joys of personal, unsupported anecdotes, and sweeping generalisations

Every bit as valid as your own!

TempestSabre wrote:

I'm temporarily in a public IT dept now not 6 yrs ago, and I could easily earn more in the private sector. Many of my colleagues have already left to better money elsewhere. Our dept is understaffed by about 40-50% (according to an external 3rd party review) and so because we can't get staff we outsource the work, or have contractors in. We expect the majority of the work will eventually be outsourced. Most of us have come from the private sector we don't have any problems with returning to it.

I have never heard of anyone being "temporarily" in a place for 6 years, to be honest. If the grass is so much greener in the private sector, why haven't you moved already? I left it because the civil service isn't a meritocracy, its a brown nosery, and theres more to life than that... There are a lot of claims being made here, none of which are being substantiated. So here are a few to back up my point...

separating out the costs of 38,000 additional workers on the public payroll since 2001, public service salaries have increased by 38%. The comparable rise in the average industrial wage was 19%...In addition, 900,000 workers in the private sector, have no occupational pension.

Property related taxes and levies may amount to €9 billion this year - almost 19% of total Government spending in 2006. We are building a record number of new housing units and approximately 1 in 8 people (12.6%) are employed in Ireland, in work in construction. This compares with an EU average of less than 8%.

Irish public service salaries have risen by 59% in the past five years and the payroll has expanded by 38,000 extra staff... The increase in the average industrial wage for a male worker in the period 2001-2005, was 19%.

Tell me again how hard life is in the civil service, so...

I hate to say it but what we need in this country in some ways is a Margaret Thatcher, she at least had the stones to face down the civil service in the UK. I can't see our own Dear Leader in the same light!

RainyDay

vesp wrote:

It means that the average salary in the public sector is way more than in the private, despite the perks like security, pensions etc.

SimpleSam06 wrote:

Irish public service salaries have risen by 59% in the past five years and the payroll has expanded by 38,000 extra staff... The increase in the average industrial wage for a male worker in the period 2001-2005, was 19%.

Tell me again how hard life is in the civil service, so...

As pointed out above (and apparently ignored by you), comparisons like this are meaningless, unless you include (amongst other things) the average level of qualifications - If I recall correctly, more thant 60% of public sector staff have 3rd level degrees, compared to less than 25% in the private sector.

Sonnenblumen

RainyDay wrote:

more than 60% of public sector staff have 3rd level degrees

Unbelieveable and was wondering if you have any stats on:

- where are these people?
- what % had a degree at entry?
- what are the most popular qualifications?
- what percentage have positions relevant to his/her 3rd level qualification?

But what puzzles me most, is why so many bothered with 3rd level!

SimpleSam06

RainyDay wrote:

As pointed out above (and apparently ignored by you), comparisons like this are meaningless, unless you include (amongst other things) the average level of qualifications - If I recall correctly, more thant 60% of public sector staff have 3rd level degrees, compared to less than 25% in the private sector.

That was ignored because it was inane in a sector that includes health services (41%), for which a third level qualification is required for entry (Edit: although now that I think of it, its not really for a lot of the health services). Note that many of the statistics already given exclude the health services. And even with that in mind, here ya go...

The Irish Examiner reports that graduate workers in the public sector are earning as much as 30% more than their counterparts in private industry.

It also emerged, in the report, that those working in the public sector worked fewer hours.

And here is yet more exciting public sector information...

A private sector worker can provide for the equivalent of a public service pension for a maximum of two-thirds of final salary for retirement. However, 28% of salary would have to be put aside every year for 40 years to do so. Not many people can afford to save this amount.

The average weekly earnings for the total public sector (ex Health) was €848.87 - €44,000 annually. The average in the Semi-State sector was €901.53.

The average weekly earnings for all employees in the Industrial Sector including Managerial staff in December, was €693.95 - €36,000 annually.

A particularly striking finding was that the estimate of the public sector premium for Ireland was more than twice as large as the available estimates for other countries.

There are no performance targets and there are jobs for life.

The gas part about all this is that nothing on this earth will ever convince civil servants that they are not deserving of more than the productive workforce. I could sit here and wave facts in their faces until my arm falls off, to no avail.

The straggling private sector is already totally uncompetitive globally, which means Eddie has it right.

Then you've got a public sector service that is medieval in its productivity. In the last six years, we've had 260,000 new jobs created of which 100,000 were in the public sector. But there is no productivity increase.

SimpleSam06

And one more thing, any posts disputing mine had better have links to reliable sources included in them if they expect a response. Theres far too much unsubstantiated guff coming from the public service apologists around here. That means both RainyDay and TempestSabre.

Edit: I will say, however that I am always open to other points of view, and if they are adequately well supported, I'll even change my own, although I'd have to say thats unlikely in this case.

TempestSabre

SimpleSam06 wrote:

Every bit as valid as your own!

Yes that was my point, thanks for repeating it

SimpleSam06 wrote:

I have never heard of anyone being "temporarily" in a place for 6 years, to be honest.

You worked in 2000 which is 6 years ago.... I never said how long my own "temporarily" was.

SimpleSam06 wrote:

If the grass is so much greener in the private sector, why haven't you moved already? I left it because the civil service isn't a meritocracy, its a brown nosery, and theres more to life than that... ....

Well it must be greener because people including yourself have moved to it.

I'm not long in the public sector and don't intend staying in it. But meritocracy isn't exclusive to the public sector. As a I said quite a few posts back, sweeping generalisations aren't that informative, especially when they are based on a small sector and very limited personal experience. For instance my department is very progressive, but that doesn't mean that I think all departments are the same. Likewise when I worked in a sweat shop in the private sector, or a in very progressive company, I don't assume they are all that like.

I've never had much interest in it before. But the context of those pay increase which you fail to mention, as you well know are the Various Social Partnerships and agreements that have come into effect over that time. I never really paid that much attention to them before...

Partnership 2000 1997 to 2000
Programme for Prosperity and Fairness (PPF) 2000 to 2003
Sustaining Progress 2003 to 2005

But it would seem to me, and perhaps I'm wrong, they are the cause of the increases. My understanding is that were/are intended to bring public sector pay in line with the private, and make it competitive. Were the pay levels equal across both sectors to begin with? Isolating the figures to % increases seems to me to be deliberately telling half the facts.

Measuring performance is a tough nut. As its easy (in both public and private sectors) to set low standards, or vague standards which are easy to satisfy. That said to those that do measure such things, Ireland Public Sectors performance seems on a par with other countries, perhaps even better than average.

http://www.scp.nl/english/publications/books/9037701841.shtml
http://www.forfas.ie/ncc/reports/ncc_productivity_1980-2005/ncc_productivity_1980-2005.pdf

I don't entirely trust such reports. But there you go.

When you see that private companies are making millions, and even billions in profit, and reducing their staffs benefits, and pensions. Why is that a call to reduce the conditions of the public sector. Why do you want to see pensions and other working conditions reduced for everyone?

TempestSabre

SimpleSam06 wrote:

Th....I could sit here and wave facts in their faces until my arm falls off, to no avail...

If it does fall off, you might be better going privately so...;)

SimpleSam06

TempestSabre wrote:

You worked in 2000 which is 6 years ago.... I never said how long my own "temporarily" was.

Apologies, might I advise the use of a bit more punctuation so..."I'm temporarily in a public IT dept now, not 6 yrs ago".

TempestSabre wrote:

Well it must be greener because people including yourself have moved to it.

Yes, I think I already explained why I left the public sector, and it wasn't because of the pay.

TempestSabre wrote:

But meritocracy isn't exclusive to the public sector.

The public sector is about as far from a meritocracy as you are likely to find outside of the court of King Louis back in his day.

TempestSabre wrote:

As a I said quite a few posts back, sweeping generalisations aren't that informative, especially when they are based on a small sector and very limited personal experience.

Which is why I quoted a variety of research papers and newspaper reports, with some very very specific information in them indeed. If you have an issue with the factual information given above, feel free to rebut it any time...

TempestSabre wrote:

Were the pay levels equal across both sectors to begin with? Isolating the figures to % increases seems to me to be deliberately telling half the facts.

Did you even read the posts above? What part of

The average weekly earnings for the total public sector (ex Health) was €848.87 - €44,000 annually. The average in the Semi-State sector was €901.53.

The average weekly earnings for all employees in the Industrial Sector including Managerial staff in December, was €693.95 - €36,000 annually.

didn't make sense? Even better when you factor in Health service pay, the average public sector wage goes UP, and removing managerial wages from the equation puts private down somewhere around €32,000. And thats just in terms of hard cash, excluding other items like the aforementioned pensions.

TempestSabre wrote:

Measuring performance is a tough nut.

Not really. You'd better let Eddie Hobbs know you he was wrong in his analysis of the public sector perfomance so, I'm sure it will be a great weight off his mind.

TempestSabre wrote:

When you see that private companies are making millions, and even billions in profit, and reducing their staffs benefits, and pensions.

Ah the perennial battle cry of the poor civil servant, sure isn't the country awash with money, don't I read about the celtic tiger in the papers? Where's my slice? :rolleyes:

The country is not awash with money, its awash with debt, which I already mentioned, and as for these phenomenal billions these magic corporations are making, that concerns Irish workers not at all. Unlike the public sector, the private sector needs to remain competitive, or said corporations will just haul off to Poland or somewhere. The only reason they are still here even now is because they get massive tax breaks, which other governments (like the US from where we get something like 80% of our manufacturing and export industry) are working towards removing. Not to mention other countries saw what we did there and are doing the same thing themselves. Which means no jobs for anyone, welcome back to the 1980s.

TempestSabre wrote:

Why is that a call to reduce the conditions of the public sector. Why do you want to see pensions and other working conditions reduced for everyone?

Because when the massive cash bonanza the government is reaping from the housing bubble collapses, there will be no way to pay for the massively bloated civil service, without raising the taxes for everyone else to pay for these unaccountable lifers. That money should have been invested in infrastructure, home grown industry, entrepreneurs here in Ireland, not petty empire building to increase their own power base.

Its a millstone around the neck of the country.

TempestSabre

SimpleSam06 wrote:

Apologies, might I advise the use of a bit more punctuation so..."I'm temporarily in a public IT dept now, not 6 yrs ago".

I thought the maths might have given it away.

SimpleSam06 wrote:

Yes, I think I already explained why I left the public sector, and it wasn't because of the pay.

I just said greener. Theres more reasons than money to move to any job, regardless of sector.

SimpleSam06 wrote:

The public sector is about as far from a meritocracy as you are likely to find outside of the court of King Louis back in his day.

Yes an all those family business'es and corporate politics are a model of meritocracy

SimpleSam06 wrote:

Which is why I quoted a variety of research papers and newspaper reports, with some very very specific information in them indeed. If you have an issue with the factual information given above, feel free to rebut it any time...

SimpleSam06 wrote:

Did you even read the posts above? What part of

didn't make sense? Even better when you factor in Health service pay, the average public sector wage goes UP, and removing managerial wages from the equation puts private down somewhere around €32,000. And thats just in terms of hard cash, excluding other items like the aforementioned pensions.

What part of the benchmarking and pay agreements did you not understand? Did you expect it to reduce public sector pay and make harder to attract staff and retain them? Because I thought it was intended to do the opposite.

SimpleSam06 wrote:

Not really. You'd better let Eddie Hobbs know you he was wrong in his analysis of the public sector perfomance so, I'm sure it will be a great weight off his mind.

I gave you research papers. But if you prefer TV personalities....:)

SimpleSam06 wrote:

Ah the perennial battle cry of the poor civil servant, sure isn't the country awash with money, don't I read about the celtic tiger in the papers? Where's my slice? :rolleyes:

Actually my point was that your argument will drive down the conditions of everyone. My point was not that the public sector needs to get some. :cool:

SimpleSam06 wrote:

The country is not awash with money, its awash with debt, which I already mentioned, and as for these phenomenal billions these magic corporations are making, that concerns Irish workers not at all. Unlike the public sector, the private sector needs to remain competitive, or said corporations will just haul off to Poland or somewhere....

Because when the massive cash bonanza the government is reaping from the housing bubble collapses, there will be no way to pay for the massively bloated civil service, without raising the taxes for everyone else to pay for these unaccountable lifers. That money should have been invested in infrastructure, home grown industry, entrepreneurs here in Ireland, not petty empire building to increase their own power base.

Its a millstone around the neck of the country.

I must be living in a different economy. So basically to ensure that the big corporations stay here, and continue to make billions in profit which they don't pass back to the workers, you reckon the public sector should go back to its pre benchmarking state. I don't see how that helps the average joe at all. The debt bubble is being created and fuelled by the banks, and property developers. Yes the public sector has done well out of benchmarking, and that will likely be addressed in the next round of pay agreements.

SimpleSam06

TempestSabre wrote:

I thought the maths might have given it away.

wut.

TempestSabre wrote:

Yes an all those family business'es and corporate politics are a model of meritocracy

Well first of all, if a business was owned by a family, they own it. Equal ownership is not an issue there. This point is so simple I'm stunned I have to make it. And in order for a business to remain competitive, the best must rise to the top, or else another business with better people will cream them. Hence, a meritocracy. This is a concept you seem to have great difficulty wrapping your mind around, I'd imagine because you are in the civil service.

TempestSabre wrote:

What part of the benchmarking and pay agreements did you not understand? Did you expect it to reduce public sector pay and make harder to attract staff and retain them? Because I thought it was intended to do the opposite.

Hahahahah, if you're holding up benchmarking as your gold standard, for, well, anything, I've a bridge you might be interested in taking off my hands.

What you are saying here, and lets be very clear on this, is that you feel civil servants deserve it.

TempestSabre wrote:

I gave you research papers. But if you prefer TV personalities....:)

You gave me about 15 seconds of googling. I gave you someone who has studied the situation in a great deal more depth than you or I combined, and who speaks about it on national television, where anyone who has a problem with his points can rebut them. If you feel you are being somehow wronged here, feel free to email Eddie...

TempestSabre wrote:

Actually my point was that your argument will drive down the conditions of everyone. My point was not that the public sector needs to get some. :cool:

Errr, why would it drive down the conditions for everyone? Reining in the civil service doesn't mean business are going to be able to drop their wages. This comment just made no sense, like quite a bit of your post.

TempestSabre wrote:

I must be living in a different economy. So basically to ensure that the big corporations stay here, and continue to make billions in profit which they don't pass back to the workers, you reckon the public sector should go back to its pre benchmarking state. I don't see how that helps the average joe at all. The debt bubble is being created and fuelled by the banks, and property developers. Yes the public sector has done well out of benchmarking, and that will likely be addressed in the next round of pay agreements.

Did you completely miss what I was saying? Changing public sector conditions isn't going to change private sector conditions! I mean, what? While you're slapping yourself on the back and buying a round of drinks for having "done well out of it", the iceberg is looming off the port bow.

And of course any mention of competitiveness I make is roundly ignored. Thats what I am talking about.

The number of people employed in the public sector needs to be reduced, and the pay increases need to be stopped dead in their tracks. Accountability, efficiency and an end to this "jobs for life" malarky need to take precedent. If all of these things come to pass, I'll pipe down.

Edit: Oh yes, you got a response last time for making at least some sort of an effort to back up your points. If you can't maintain that effort, I'll just assume you don't want to discuss the topic any more, for whatever reasons.

TempestSabre

2006-2000 = 6

nepotism

I'm not. Public sector. Temporarily.

Not all private sector companies rise to the top, and not all of them fail because of it. Not everyone in the Public sector sits around all day doing nothing, and there is work being done, which is why the system functions. If everyone did nothing, the system would simply stop. Its the sweeping generalisations of everyone that I have great difficulty with. I might as well say everyone in the private sector owns a couple of houses and has a 4x4.

By being clear you mean lets make stuff up? Actually I'm giving the context in which those increases occurred. There's a relevant point to be made that benchmarking hasn't just kept pace with the private sector but actually exceeded it. But that's not the point you are making. I feel wronged that you demand stats, facts then ignore them.

I was saying that conditions don't improve for people in the private sector just because a company like a bank makes huge profits and are highly competitive. In fact they've got worse in some cases. I don't see how dis improving the conditions for the public sector will get those bank workers better conditions. The banks have never had it so good or been so competitive. So the argument for increasing competitiveness seems to be an argument for more profits for big business. IMO.

Yes I don't get it at all. What Ice berg? Its not the economy and distribution of wealth is lopsided in one or two sectors like building or anything. Isn't the govt taking the long term view with all the careful managing of public funds? Or do you feel that the lowly clerical officer, the public servant, is squandering the countries wealth by living in the lap of luxury, driving around in their flash new mercs. They are the ones really to blame. I assumed you meant competitiveness against other public sectors in other countries. Hence the links to the reports. If you meant vs the private sector I dunno how you'd compare something like social security to the private sector.

There's been recruitment embargo's for a long time now. Perhaps they'll out source work to more efficient private sector consultants and computer systems. Its seems to have worked in the past. If you reduce the wages, (back to pre 2000) levels and take away job security, how will you get people into the public sector. People won't have a problem finding new work since there's "zero" unemployment.

The response I got wasn't worth the effort since you never bothered to comment on what you asked for. Maybe if I can find some TV celebs quotes that might be of interest. Ummmm.

rkevin

It quite simple
We as public sector workers are not taking the fall for what private sector employers in section such as the banks/ property and retail and service sector caused. You can read other post on this as see what the cost of going for a meal and the cost of a pint in Dublin €5.50 and one guy was charged €8.50 for a glass of wine
The private sector employers ripped off Irish people and all out visitors to out Great County and hence made us uncompetitive
The banks were in bed with the estate agents and mortgage advisers to see how much they could get a person to pay for a house
us in the public sector we out priced in the housing marked by private sector workers who were moving from one employee to another and getting a 25% pay rise
Yes it was my choice to become a public sector employee and stick with it when all my mate were jumping ahead on pay and taking 4 holiday a year and big new cars and house in the nice area and even a second house but now it is our turn to have a safe well paid job
Private sector employees should have saved for the rainy day but no there were to busy with there cash
Well the game is up and let start at the top of rich list if you want to get things back on track
wait till we see what goggins will get to leave bank of ireland one example of private sector greed

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

D'Peoples Voice wrote: »

To coin a phrase from Monty Pontin's Life of Brian,
Making it worse, how could it possibly be worse!
The civil service doesn't work now, for god's sake man. I'm STILL waiting on my credit card sized driving licence almost 3 years after the civil service were to send it out to me!
Then take the elctoral register, the government have thrown another EUR 12 million at the civil service to get it right. I have a unique number & address on my (recent)passport, I have a unique PPS number and address on any tax related document, likewise with my motor taxation cert, and what happens the civil service send me a form to fill in stating where I live! I ask you! So the two of us fill in the form, guess what, the civil service leaves one of us off the register. There were only two names on the form!
Therefore IMO there is almost nothing the government can do to make the situation worse. Sack them all and out source the work to competent people.
The good news is that the EU will continuously push for greater privatisation, and hence we can only hope many of these scumbags will be sacked!
All that and I never even had to mention An Post!
Oh TempestSabre another thing, you need to say that the 1 billion cost is gross of ANY sale price they achieve from selling the Government buildings in Dublin & and the present value of any cost savings made from cheaper annual rent of their buildings into the future- it's cheaper to rent a premises in Kanturk than St. Stephens Green!

They are scumbags because why? They landed a secure pensionable job, with reduced hours and increased benifits? They qualify as scumbags? Nice...

You might want to attack those responsible for the mess, the government, oh, you might also want to direct your vote to another party. I will be doing the same

No point blaming people that are working in the public sector. It's rediculous.

passive

what the sweet **** is wrong with you? this thread is 2 years old! :mad:

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Never even noticed. I don't read when threads are posted. Never thought anything of it, ha.

jerryob

I find it quiet ironic that unions have suddenly forgot the term 'benchmarking'. Today, bringing public salaries/'defined benefit pensions' bill to a par with private sector salaries/'defined contribution pensions' implies public sector wage bill cuts.

asdasd

Never even noticed. I don't read when threads are posted. Never thought anything of it, ha.

How do you even find these old threads? did you search?

I find it quiet ironic that unions have suddenly forgot the term 'benchmarking'.

+1

byrne0f56789

We have to remember that the private sector pays for the public sector. If the private sector feels that they are paying too much for public sector services then the public sector should respect that.

The current level of public sector spending must be cut because the public finances are in such a bad way. The government burden on the private sector is currently too high to be sustained.

Public sector workers must look at the bigger picture. In the end, it all comes down to fairness. If public sector employees do not compromise then private sector sentiment will turn against them. This will probably work out worse for the public sector in the long run.

Therefore, it's in the public sector's long term interest to accept pay cuts.