Impact rules out public sector pay cuts

mikemac

If my employer is losing money then first I'll get a pay freeze, then I'll see my friends being made redunant and then I'll get a pay cut. This has already been done to me in the private sector but hey, at least I didn't lose my job and for that I'm thankful.
But I'll be the first to admit there are greedy employers cutting wages for staff now that they have an excuse to. Now onto my next point

The Irish state is losing billions, I read 55 million euro a week. So yes cuts have to made.
Maybe it'll be a wage cut for all or maybe it'll be a cut in headcount. Either way, cuts have to and will be made. Your department is losing money so if you're realy invaluable then I hoped you proved it in PDMS or whatever your appraisal system is called

Teacherman

I know the figures. There might be some arguments for public sector pay cuts but leaving the HSE unreformed and overstaffed is a bridge too far. I will strike unless we see an overall reform package. A reform package that would include seeing Cowen gone and real Dail reform

Until these emerge its class war fare

I also reiterate that we will have tax increases-dont be an naive twit(like Fluteeringbantam) in thinking they will not come along with these proposed Pay cuts-not this year but the next.

mikemac

Losing Cowan and cutting the salary and pensions of ministers is a mere drop in the ocean. And I hate using cliches.
I agree, this goverment finds it easier to tax working people then make spending cuts

Since a TD's salary is linked to a civil servants salary then asking for a cut for a TD means a cut for tens of thousands of others. Hope you realize that. Though you are not a civil servant, I realise that.

You're a teacher. And you blame ills on the HSE?
The HSE has a lot to answer for but so does every single public service department.
No department is immune from cuts

NewDubliner

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Obvious answer cost reduction..OK???

Or, give less money to the banks and builders?

zootroid

Teacherman wrote: »

Firstly, I would advise all Public servants not to bother in taking part in these "Debates". Most posters have it out for the sector and are not prepared to listen. They have it out for public sector a variety of reasons, some as mundane as the fact that they failed civil service exam or the big bad teacher shouted at them once.

I never went for the civil service.
I'm 28 years old, I don't think I'd hold a grudge against a teacher for that long.
The country needs to make savings somewhere, therefore all options should be considered.

Secondly-these debates influence nobody important

True.

Thirdly, most opinions are rehashed from the Indo-the biggest cheerleader of the axis of evil-Fianna Fail, Developers and Builders

My opinions are my own.

Fourthly-We all rely on Public servants even if we are one. It gives me no great pleasure to have to fork out for VHI because of our poor health service. Why should I take a pay cut to fund the Third of HSE staff who dont know what they are doing?

Yes, of course we rely on the public sector. It provides some very important services. But that is not to say it should be immune from criticism (just as you have criticised the HSE), nor does it mean that we should not be looking for ways to make it more efficient

FiftlyOur tax base is too low and you would be naive if you believed lenihan's " No new taxes" was a promise that stetches beyond 2009

Our tax base probably looks low when compared internationally to similar sized countries. However, each country is different with its own unique problems. It has been said that further taxes would depress the economy even further.

Lastly-All public servants should strike if only to prevent further cuts. The ERSI data showed only a 7% difference in Public Vs Private Graduate pay and has not taken into account pension levy-which guess what is on Avg around 7%

So all public servants should strike to prevent further cuts? Even though you outline in the paragraph above that you think one third of HSE staff don't know what they're doing? Surely if they are not providing a service, or generating a return then they are expendable? You don't think there is room for any cuts at all then?
AS for the pension levy, workers in the private sector contribute to their own pensions. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect workers in the public sector to do likewise.

I plan to make no further comments-as advised public servants -dont waste time dealing with simplistic drivel here (which 98% of it is)

Would you include your own post under the description "simplistic drivel"?

I have noticed that you haven't put forward any ideas on how the government could reduce the gap between revenue and expenditure. Very easy to criticise without offering any alternatives....

Given your comment about the HSE, would it be fair to say that you wouldn't mind cuts being made there, just as long as your own pay isn't affected? Essentially looking out for your own interests irregardless of what happens to the country? If everyone took that attitude, there wouldn't be any cuts made to government expenditure, and assuming that government revenue remains the same, we continue to borrow 400 million a week just to run the country. Not exactly a nice scenario, building up mountains of debt for the next generation to pay off.

Teacherman

Obviously a public sector pay cut affects all Public sector workers not just HSE.

I have no problem removing permanent job protection for Public sector if you made a proper cull. We dont have excess teachers and we run education sys on a shoe string. We do have excessive admin staff in HSE and groslly overpaid consultants.

You could make argument for reducing teacher salaries to fund education but we have historically underfunded schools so Im not naive in thinking public sector pay cuts will save anything in education. Overall situation is too dire.

There will prob be pay cuts but unless I can count on a health service (surely a basic thing??) then Im inclined to strike.

skaterboy

10,000 TH POST ON POLITICS WOHOO!!

irish_bob

Teacherman wrote: »

Obviously a public sector pay cut affects all Public sector workers not just HSE.

I have no problem removing permanent job protection for Public sector if you made a proper cull. We dont have excess teachers and we run education sys on a shoe string. We do have excessive admin staff in HSE and groslly overpaid consultants.

You could make argument for reducing teacher salaries to fund education but we have historically underfunded schools so Im not naive in thinking public sector pay cuts will save anything in education. Overall situation is too dire.

There will prob be pay cuts but unless I can count on a health service (surely a basic thing??) then Im inclined to strike.

our education system is not ran on a shoestring , the problem is, the vast bulk of expenditure goes towards teachers wages , teachers in ireland are paid 75% more than in france and 55% more than in finland , finland comes 3rd in a list of best education systems , ireland is not even in the top 20 , teachers in ireland like guards and nurses need a 25% pay cut spread over the next three years , this would bring them closer in line with thier counterparts in the uk which i also might add is a richer country than us

the property boom which supllied the revenue which allowed this country claim the title of europes highest paid ps is gone , that era is a whole other country

Soldie

P. Breathnach wrote: »

It's largely incorrect.

A health care service (even one with shortcomings) has value; an education service has value; the provision and maintenance of infrastructure has value; a broadcasting service has value; electricity has value; a transport service has value; policing has value; refuse disposal has value; water and sewage services have value; a court service has value; a prison system has value. That's just a quick off-the-top-of-my-head list.

He said that the public sector doesn't generate wealth - not that roads, schools and hospitals are not valuable. There is a difference. Nevertheless, all of the things you listed can be provided more efficiently by the private sector if the government facilitates it.

Boskowski

DarkJager wrote: »

I'll give you an example, make of it what you will. There is a person in Limerick County Council, earning 40k a year for....putting documents into a scanner and saving them to a hard drive. Tell me in all honesty that this wage packet is justified.

I give you an another example. There is a guy who used to work in the private sector. He engaged in what could only be called criminal activity in his position. He manipulated balance sheets, intertwined personal business with company business and his reckless behaviour will cost the taxpayer billions. He's now sitting on a huge amount of accumulated personal wealth, is looking forward to a massive pension and is playing golf in Spain.

Anecdotal evidence is just that, anecdotal evidence.

ardmacha

our education system is not ran on a shoestring

Typical Boards liberty with the truth. Our education system is run on shoestring. You can make the case that teachers should be paid less, just as you can make the case that almost everyone here should be paid less, in the private and public sectors. However the overall spending on education is low, it does not place an undue overall burden on the taxpayers of this country. It is an insufficiently resourced system where the people in it are reasonably well paid to keep it all cobbled together. You can argue that a well resourced European type system would be preferable where people are motivated to work in it by factors other than simple money, but it would not be less expensive overall.

irish_bob

ardmacha wrote: »

Typical Boards liberty with the truth. Our education system is run on shoestring. You can make the case that teachers should be paid less, just as you can make the case that almost everyone here should be paid less, in the private and public sectors. However the overall spending on education is low, it does not place an undue overall burden on the taxpayers of this country. It is an insufficiently resourced system where the people in it are reasonably well paid to keep it all cobbled together. You can argue that a well resourced European type system would be preferable where people are motivated to work in it by factors other than simple money, but it would not be less expensive overall.

when given the choice between lower class sizes or higher wages , teachers unions on behalf of their members have always chosen higher wages , this to me suggests their prime motivation is money , accept a pay cut and not only will you proove me wrong , the poor kids the union heads speak of will not have to endure such high class sizes or the loss of substitute teachers

jimmmy

turgon wrote: »

This is exactly what is wrong with trade unionism, they just cant admit that cuts will have to be made, and its ironic that trade unions evolved because of the selfish wants of the owners, not look at what happens.

To get back to the original post, yes, trade unionism has ruined the country. Given the unions have given our public service the highest known salaries and pensions in the world, and our little country is borrowing 20 or 22 billion per year to keep public expenditure as high as it is / the show on the road, our economic apartheid in this country can be blamed on nobody else but the unions and their bedfellows, the government, also amongst the highest paid in the world. Cowen is the highest paid prime minister. Our President is also overpaid. And other people in thos sectors were responsible for the mess all the way down....eg the head of the Irish Central bank is the highest paid central banker in the world, getting € 368,703 per year. The head of the US federal reserve Bank gets only € 186,600. The head of the Bank of England gets € 283,564 per year, the head of the European Central bank gets € 345,252 per year. Hang your heads in shame, politicians and union bosses.

ardmacha

To get back to the original post, yes, trade unionism has ruined the country.

Cowen is the highest paid prime minister. Our President is also overpaid. And other people in thos sectors were responsible for the mess all the way down....eg the head of the Irish Central bank is the highest paid central banker in the world, getting € 368,703 per year.

So which union is the Head of Central Bank or the President in?

Greed has ruined the country, and greed is by no means confined to trade unions. Bank heads of all sorts are overpaid, presidents of companies are overpaid just as much as the Head of State.

jimmmy

ardmacha wrote: »

So which union is the Head of Central Bank .

All the heads of the Irish central bank, since its establishment up to the retiring Head ( John Hurley I think his name is ) have a public service background / history. The central bank is certainly not private enterprise. The head of the central bank is paid more than the people below him, who are paid more than the people below that etc in the public sevice

ardmacha wrote: »

or the President in? .

And of course the politicians justify their own pay and pensions that way too

ardmacha wrote: »

Greed has ruined the country, and greed is by no means confined to trade unions.

So Paddy who went to work in America, or the English or the Germans are not as greedy ?

ardmacha wrote: »

Bank heads of all sorts are overpaid, presidents of companies are overpaid just as much as the Head of State.

If a bank head does not perform he can be sacked / his bank lose market share etc. Besides, Bank heads only account for only a tiny tiny tiny percentage of the workforce.

the_syco

NewDubliner wrote: »

Or, give less money to the banks and builders?

Less money to the banks equals less chance a new business will get a loan to start.

=-=

When a company does well, the CEO gets paid lots. When the business goes down the drain, the CEO gets sacked. When the country went though the "Celtic Boom", our politicans voted for a payrise. Now that the country is down the drain, they still get paid the same, some even taking more money...

Nodin

jimmmy wrote: »

To get back to the original post, yes, trade unionism has ruined the country.

Please explain how the housing bubble, the local occurrence of the worldwide phenomena of excessive credit, and Banks overinvesting in property are related to trade unionism.

jimmmy

Nodin wrote: »

Please explain how the housing bubble, the local occurrence of the worldwide phenomena of excessive credit, and Banks overinvesting in property are related to trade unionism.

I also blamed their bedfellows, the politicians.
Who was responsible for the management of the financial system in this country, and the housing bubble ? What was the role of the Central bank / financial regulator ? Why did they stand idly by ? Why did the politicians keep extending the section 23 deadlines etc ?

Nodin

jimmmy wrote: »

I also blamed their bedfellows, the politicians.
Who was responsible for the management of the financial system in this country, and the housing bubble ? What was the role of the Central bank / financial regulator ? Why did they stand idly by ? Why did the politicians keep extending the section 23 deadlines etc ?

emm.....

To get back to the original post, yes, trade unionism has ruined the country. Given the unions have given our public service the highest known salaries and pensions in the world, and our little country is borrowing 20 or 22 billion per year to keep public expenditure as high as it is / the show on the road, our economic apartheid in this country can be blamed on nobody else but the unions and their bedfellows, the government

(my bold)

It's fairly clear where you're trying to place the majority of the blame there, I think.

Again - please explain how the housing bubble, the local occurrence of the worldwide phenomena of excessive credit, and Banks overinvesting in property are related to trade unionism and the public service, given your contention that "yes, trade unionism has ruined the country."

jimmmy

You seem to be a bit confused there Nodin. For example, nobody mentioned how the "worldwide phenomena of excessive credit," as you call it ( how come Germany, for example, did not experience such an "excessive credit" phenomena ? ) being related to trade unionism in this country. Are you blaming the behaviour of the trade unions now, on the
"worldwide phenomena of excessive credit" ? If you think the two are linked, how come other trade unions in other parts of the world did not get their govt members as well paid as Irish govt employees ?

Nodin

jimmmy wrote: »

You (........)employees ?

Waffle. You're (fairly predictably)evading the question. Now, why not try again.....

jimmmy

Actually Nodin, I did answer the question. Oh, and I did not write "You (........)employees ?" as you claim. Now, how about you answering some of the questions put to you, please ?

jimmmy

Back to the thread headline "Impact rules out public sector pay cuts"

Who is ( or should be ) running the country : Impact or the government ?

Martyr

we should definitely give payrise to public sector employees.
they're obviously the hardest working people in the world.

Nodin

jimmmy wrote: »

Actually Nodin, I did answer the question. Oh, and I did not write "You (........)employees ?" as you claim. Now, how about you answering some of the questions put to you, please ?

You didn't answer the questions, and yes, if you look at post 111 you'll see thats what you did say. If you're unaccustomed to the 'snipping' of posts, thats not my problem.

jimmmy

Martyr : "we should definitely give payrise to public sector employees.
they're obviously the hardest working people in the world. "

:D:Donly 19 sick days a year in the HSE . Only 15,000 staff in the dept of agriculture for the 100,000 full time farmers in the country. Only the highest ratio of politicians to electorate in the world ( how many TD's, senators, etc for our population of approx 4 million ) ?

Martyr

Nodin, are you working today? :rolleyes:

joolsveer

jimmmy wrote: »

Back to the thread headline "Impact rules out public sector pay cuts"

Who is ( or should be ) running the country : Impact or the government ?

I don't know about Impact but I doubt if the Government is running the country.

cici81

murphaph wrote: »

Who generates the tax revenue for the exchequer? Not the public sector. The private sector picks up the tab for ALL government expenditure. That's the way it has to be.

Can I just point out how ridiculous this comment is? No offence to the person who put it forward, I've seen the same comment made before a million times. But it's just not true. The public sector pay taxes too! We all do! So the private sector does not pick up the tab for ALL government expenditure. We all do! We All Pay Taxes :rolleyes:

ardmacha

Only the highest ratio of politicians to electorate in the world

Typical inaccurate jimmmy hyperbole. Why bother with facts on the forum?