Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Public Sector Unions to Take Action
Options
Comments
-
I will be voting for industrial action. I think a better deal is available.0
-
BroomBurner wrote: »That's hilarious.
Is there anyone on Boards from the private sector that can see the wood for the trees and understand the inequality behind the pension levy? Noone is objecting to it outright, they are just objecting to the inequality of it.
I know it will be hard for a lot of you to do this, but please stop yourselves from making more smart-arsed comments and just answer the above question.
P.Breathnach, you've no real right to be telling PS workers now to just take the pain when you're not being hit at all. If you were still working and had years to go before you retired, with the possibility that your pension will be scrapped altogether before you do retire (40 years is a long time), then you would be slightly peeved.
I agree to a certain extent, I would have implemented a public sector pay cut across the board of ten per cent. Then everybody takes 10% (pretty simple if you ask me similar to Goodbodys yesterday) Your employer made a balls of it0 -
personally i would have hit EVERY worker across the country with an extra 2% levy. that would sort out the countrys finances perfectly. Pity the Goverment were too spinless to do it.0
-
someone mentioned earlier about organising a counter protest to the ps one that is planned , i would be willing to go to dublin and join in , i heard pat kenny read out a text from someone who wants to organise a counter protest , this thing could grow , pm me if you like
Where do you work, or more pertinantly, do you? How would you like another sector of the economy showing up at your work and protesting that you should take a pay cut?0 -
BroomBurner wrote: »P.Breathnach, you've no real right to be telling PS workers now to just take the pain when you're not being hit at all. If you were still working and had years to go before you retired, with the possibility that your pension will be scrapped altogether before you do retire (40 years is a long time), then you would be slightly peeved.
This is a matter of public significance. It is not for those in the public sector to decide on their own.
I have every right to comment on the issue. You have less right to ascribe to me a formula of words I did not use, and would not use. And I did point out that people who matter to me at a personal level will be paying it. Do you think I don't care about my family?
Some weeks ago I thought my pension would be cut in line with a general cut in public service pay, and I was resigned to that possibility. A different strategy emerged, one which preserved (at least for the time being) the interests of pensioners.
Yes, I am, as you suggest that you are, "slightly peeved" on behalf of those close to me. But I also see the greater good, the need of society.0 -
Advertisement
-
I assume you mean the way it's being implemented? I've commented on that myself. The main problem being the small increases at higher levels and the tax relief - an actual pay cut would have removed all this but annoyed the grey vote...BroomBurner wrote: »Is there anyone on Boards from the private sector that can see the wood for the trees and understand the inequality behind the pension levy?
Actually there are many on the threads from the CS/PS who object to it in its entirety and demand new taxes, etc instead of any cut to their pay.Noone is objecting to it outright, they are just objecting to the inequality of it.0 -
I assume you mean the way it's being implemented? I've commented on that myself. The main problem being the small increases at higher levels and the tax relief - an actual pay cut would have removed all this but annoyed the grey vote...
Actually there are many on the threads from the CS/PS who object to it in its entirety and demand new taxes, etc instead of any cut to their pay.
To be fair I agree with people who have suggested that the CS/PS should not agree to this levy. I don't believe strike action will achieve a lot but I'll support it none the less.
The major problem I see with a lot people is that the "managers" of the nation have basically pointed (in a very public manner the finger) at one community of the workforce and told them to take the hit. I've said time and time again that not every private worker is being hit by the recession. The fact that the Government say they will tackle other sectors is not good enough - they should have announced an industry wide objective to cut wages/raise taxes etc... all at the same time so everyone could (at least from a PR perspective) shoulder the difficulties at the same time.
I have seen several times that people simply say, well the money is just no there, end of. Its fair enough to say that - but the reality of pension levy is that it will exist forever more. It is not the case that the government are saying, "listen lads, we don't got the money so you'll have to take a pay cut for a few yrs until things pick up again". The pension levy will affect every current PS worker and every future worker. Thats the second greatest difficulty people have/will have with it. I think most would have just prefered a pay cut and the matter to be reviewed when things pick up again.
What should have been done was introduce a low percentage level levy on all public sector workers - e.g. 2% and raise tax rates at higher levels and introduce a higher higher tax rate (not duplication). At least that way all public sector workers would contribute and those highest paid would contribute more and those in the private sector not affected or still well off even after a pay cut (eg. 20% reduction on 200k salary) would also pay towards it.
That way everyone contributes. The lowest paid in both sectors contribute the least and as a public sector income levy there could be scope to remove it in the future if we hit boom times again.0 -
BroomBurner wrote: »That's hilarious.
Is there anyone on Boards from the private sector that can see the wood for the trees and understand the inequality behind the pension levy? Noone is objecting to it outright, they are just objecting to the inequality of it.
Maybe you could explain why it is inequitable?
Is requiring people to pay into a fund for a pension inequitable?
From my perspective, public sector workers are guaranteed 50% of final salary as a pension - i can't conceive any reason why they should not pay into that fund, much the same as every one else has to.
I would like your take on it though.0 -
There is no proposal from the Government that the pension levy will be paid into a fund. PS pensions are not funded. Pension contributions go to the Exchequer in the same way as motor tax.0
-
Maybe you could explain why it is inequitable?
Is requiring people to pay into a fund for a pension inequitable?
From my perspective, public sector workers are guaranteed 50% of final salary as a pension - i can't conceive any reason why they should not pay into that fund, much the same as every one else has to.
I would like your take on it though.
First of all, the civil or public service pension for anyone post 1995 is not 50% of their final salary. :rolleyes:
Secondly, everyone already pays 6.5% of their salary towards their pension.
A retiring public servant with 40 years service on a final salary of 50,000euro will have a pension equivalent of €12,983.
They may (like everyone else) also qualify for the standard OAP pension0 -
Advertisement
-
Pre 1995 civil servants do not qualify for the standard old age pension.0
-
-
I dont work in Superannuation, so all I know is I pay €1000 per annum in pension costs. My bf works in the private sector and he pays less in pension contributions. How the "private sector" subsidises mine I dont know. I'll have to root out my Superannuation handbook. Anyway its not going to be much use to me as I'm being let go in the next few months.
What makes you 100% sure that you will be let go in a few months time? If you are good at your job (and managing others jobs who have left) since the positions have not been replaced then you are doing fine and hopefully won't be let go.0 -
monkeytronics wrote: »First of all, the civil or public service pension for anyone post 1995 is not 50% of their final salary. :rolleyes:
Secondly, everyone already pays 6.5% of their salary towards their pension.
A retiring public servant with 40 years service on a final salary of 50,000euro will have a pension equivalent of €12,983.
They may (like everyone else) also qualify for the standard OAP pension
That is a distortion.
Post 1995 people pay less than 6.5%, because there is an adjustment to allow for their payment for a SW contributory OAP. They pay 6.5% of (current pay less twice the current level of Contributory OAP).
As the scheme is constituted at present, when they retire after 40 years they will get a lump sum equal to 150% of final salary and two pensions (Public Service and Contributory OAP) which, combined, amount to 50% of final salary. There is no "may qualify for standard OAP"; they will qualify for Contributory OAP.
Arrangements are different for those appointed before 1995, but the cost and benefit effect is pretty well identical.0 -
monkeytronics wrote: »A retiring public servant with 40 years service on a final salary of 50,000euro will have a pension equivalent of €12,983.
They may (like everyone else) also qualify for the standard OAP pension
You neglected to mention that they'll get a lump sum of €75,000 to start with. They'll also receive a supplementary bonus to their pension if they cannot qualify for the standard OAP pension.
Edit: Also, for people reading this the combination of the Contributory State Pension (which a person with 40 years of service in the Civil service will get) and the Pension quoted above total to just under 25,000 a year which, is 50% of the final salary of this hypothetical civil servant. So even with the changes, they're still getting 50% of their pension, it's just a combination of two pensions now rather than a straightforward single pension for pre-1995 employees.0 -
P. Breathnach wrote: »That is a distortion.
Post 1995 people pay less than 6.5%, because there is an adjustment to allow for their payment for a SW contributory OAP. They pay 6.5% of (current pay less twice the current level of Contributory OAP).
As the scheme is constituted at present, when they retire after 40 years they will get a lump sum equal to 150% of final salary and two pensions (Public Service and Contributory OAP) which, combined amount to 50% of final salary. There is no "may qualify for standard OAP"; they will qualify for Contributory OAP.
Arrangements are different for those appointed before 1995, but the cost and benefit effect is pretty well identical.
There is a disclaimer on the civil service pension modeller that says if you do not qualify for a SW pension through no fault of your own then you may get a supplementary pension. Not sure what cases this would apply to but there must be some if it is there.
But to be fair public sector workers, because of their jobs do not get 50% of their final salary. Through their job they get 25% - the other 25% comes from the OAP. Everyone (or most) in the country qualify for this. so you can't call the second 25% a benefit to public sector workers.0 -
monkeytronics wrote: »But to be fair public sector workers, because of their jobs do not get 50% of their final salary. Through their job they get 25% - the other 25% comes from the OAP. Everyone (or most) in the country qualify for this. so you can't call the second 25% a benefit to public sector workers.
Except for the private sector everyone gets €230 a week from the contributory State pension. Civil servants then get a pension which brings this up to 50% of their salary in total. It's only 25% coming from each for incomes of 50K a year. If you retire on 75K a year you'll get approx 12.5% from the OAP pension and 37.5% from your public sector pension. The benefit is that you always end up with a pension of 50% of your final salary.
Also private sector workers don't get a large lump sum on retirement by default.0 -
Join Date:Posts: 17305
To be honest with this one folks:
BOI went cap in hand to the Gov and got €7 Billion of them and then announced payrises of 3.5%.
ESB, instead of lowering prices so people aren't in trouble they awarded themselves a payrise.
The only way out of this "recession" is to spend our way out of it. If the public service get fleeced with the pension levy then there is less cash to be spent therfore you cannot spend your way out of the recession as their is less money there to spend.
Why on earth should the average joe working hard in the private/public sector have to bring us out of this mess? Simple: because the gov don't want their buddies held accountable.
Public sector workers have no problem taking a hit but a "levy" that applies to only the public sector is cruel. Why not lump up PAYE across the board? Why not take away some of the stupid idiotic "Tax breaks" that are making people Millions in this country.
Why on earth do the Ministers and TD's take a hit out of their own wages? Enda Kenny told them he didn't want his payrise and not one of the other fools in power follwed suit to show they really wanted to help this country out. The TD's and Ministers are still flying all over the world using taxpayers money and spending outragous amounts of money when there is no needs for it. Do I see anyone calling for them to stop this? No I don't!!
I don't see why on earth people can't just see the bigger picture with all this, the private and public sector workers should unite together to get out of this mess not fight with each other.
The main problem in this country has always been the same, the rich get richer while the poor get poorer.0 -
Except for the private sector everyone gets €230 a week from the contributory State pension. Civil servants then get a pension which brings this up to 50% of their salary in total. It's only 25% coming from each for incomes of 50K a year. If you retire on 75K a year you'll get approx 12.5% from the OAP pension and 37.5% from your public sector pension. The benefit is that you always end up with a pension of 50% of your final salary.
Also private sector workers don't get a large lump sum on retirement by default.
And a clerical officer at the highest point of the scale gets a pension of 7,992euro per annum, + the state pension so you'll find that its a lot less than 25% for those. And so far the CPSU are the only ones to formally propose industrial action.0 -
And is it not also true that their pension is tied to the current wage of their position? So it could increase well above inflation, if another round of bench marking kicks in?Except for the private sector everyone gets €230 a week from the contributory State pension. Civil servants then get a pension which brings this up to 50% of their salary in total. It's only 25% coming from each for incomes of 50K a year. If you retire on 75K a year you'll get approx 12.5% from the OAP pension and 37.5% from your public sector pension. The benefit is that you always end up with a pension of 50% of your final salary.
Also private sector workers don't get a large lump sum on retirement by default.0 -
Advertisement
-
monkeytronics wrote: »And a clerical officer at the highest point of the scale gets a pension of 7,992euro per annum, + the state pension so you'll find that its a lot less than 25% for those. And so far the CPSU are the only ones to formally propose industrial action.
Indeed. I've never argued that COs got luxurious pensions. However it is not like someone is stuck as a CO forever and you do stand a decent chance of getting to a higher scale if you want it. Also, it's a guaranteed pension with a guaranteed generous lump sum at the end of it. That in itself is worth a lot. Your pension also will (most likely) increase as it's tied to the present pay in your old job which is very nice and again worth a lot.0 -
monkeytronics wrote: »And a clerical officer at the highest point of the scale gets a pension of 7,992euro per annum, + the state pension so you'll find that its a lot less than 25% for those. And so far the CPSU are the only ones to formally propose industrial action.
And also, the following grades (all part of the CPSU) all earn less than 50,000 at their maximum (some a lot less):
Staff Officers
An Post:Senior SecretaryEircom workers
Business Support Officer
Staff Officer
Aviation Execs
Aviation Officer.
I think the max scale for Garda and nurses would be fairly similar?
So to be fair these people are not getting the huge pension benefit that everyone seems to think they get.0 -
And is it not also true that their pension is tied to the current wage of their position? So it could increase well above inflation, if another round of bench marking kicks in?
To some extent, I think it's the call of the present Minister of Finance how much the pensions go up by, generally it's been parity.0 -
Maybe you could explain why it is inequitable?
Is requiring people to pay into a fund for a pension inequitable?
From my perspective, public sector workers are guaranteed 50% of final salary as a pension - i can't conceive any reason why they should not pay into that fund, much the same as every one else has to.
I would like your take on it though.
I agree with what Monkeytronics said in that there should have been a raft of measures that would affect everyone, not just picking on the public sector becasue they are easy. Also, I believe that the pension levy should be smaller for those on less money than what it is currently. People losing ~100 - 140 a month off their take home pay, when their take-home pay is small enough already, could be the cost of paying a bill. If anyone don't think losing €140 a month is a lot, then they are clearly earning a lot of money.
The inequality stems from the lack of "togetherness" that Cowen wants. What he REALLY wants, is "togetherness" from the PS to take a financial cut, while those in other sectors that aren't affected (there are plenty), to keep on making whatever they want. How do you find that equal?
On your pension question, if I retire after 40 years of service, and the current pension system is still in place (no guarantees), than this is how my pension will brake down:
50% will be 50% of my wage when I retire
50% will be standard Social Welfare pension that everyone else gets
Everyone here that works in the private sector have plenty of opportunity to raise an even higher pension for themselves, so long as they manage their money properly and trust those that are investing for them. Or even SAVE!!! Wow, that must be a new concept for anyone whinging about public sector pensions and their lack of one. Why is it OUR fault you can't be bothered to manage your own finances?
Had to get that off my chest.0 -
Indeed. I've never argued that COs got luxurious pensions. However it is not like someone is stuck as a CO forever and you do stand a decent chance of getting to a higher scale if you want it. Also, it's a guaranteed pension with a guaranteed generous lump sum at the end of it. That in itself is worth a lot. Your pension also will (most likely) increase as it's tied to the present pay in your old job which is very nice and again worth a lot.
As far as I know, and to be honest its not something I have definitives on but the three people I know have retired in recent years have told me that the tie into the current salary does not apply after a certain time period (3 years ? i think was mentioned) - I can't verify that for definite - maybe someone else with the info can help on that one.
To be fair, the majority of people are stuck at CO level forever. I would say some (a good proportion) of that is down to inability to perform higher responsibities and/or fear of the additional responsibility. Thats not to say they are not good performers at CO level though.
And for others its just extremely difficult to get promoted. In a Dept of circa 900 - 1000 staff there has only been 3 promotions in almost 3 years from CO to EO and none and 1 from CO to SO. For other Depts this could be slightly more but for a lot it would be less.
It is not easy to get promoted.0 -
monkeytronics wrote: »And a clerical officer at the highest point of the scale gets a pension of 7,992euro per annum, + the state pension so you'll find that its a lot less than 25% for those. And so far the CPSU are the only ones to formally propose industrial action.
The CO also gets the lump sum, and at present pays well below 6.5% because of the deduction of 2*COAP before reckoning pensionable pay.
I said earlier
The CPSU would serve its members' interests better if it argued the case for rectification of the anomaly rather than pressing ahead with a strike motion and alienating the public.There are some anomalies in the levy, particularly for people recruited post 1995 to the lower-paid grades and who have no expectation of promotion before retirement age (such people do exist, typically people of middle or mature years who returned to the workforce). The Taoiseach signalled on the day the levy was announced that some re-balancing was possible, but nothing seems to have been done about it.0 -
monkeytronics wrote: »As far as I know, and to be honest its not something I have definitives on but the three people I know have retired in recent years have told me that the tie into the current salary does not apply after a certain time period (3 years ? i think was mentioned) - I can't verify that for definite - maybe someone else with the info can help on that one.
It's at the discretion of the Minister of Finance I believe (though P. Breathnach should know more being only of those lazy public sector pensioner types...)monkeytronics wrote: »To be fair, the majority of people are stuck at CO level forever. I would say some (a good proportion) of that is down to inability to perform higher responsibities and/or fear of the additional responsibility. Thats not to say they are not good performers at CO level though.
And for others its just extremely difficult to get promoted. In a Dept of circa 900 - 1000 staff there has only been 3 promotions in almost 3 years from CO to EO and none and 1 from CO to SO. For other Depts this could be slightly more but for a lot it would be less.
It is not easy to get promoted.
I don't know, from talking to friends of mine in the service they are confident of getting promoted in the medium term. It probably varies hugely from department to department though.0 -
To be honest with this one folks:
BOI went cap in hand to the Gov and got €7 Billion of them and then announced payrises of 3.5%.
ESB, instead of lowering prices so people aren't in trouble they awarded themselves a payrise.
The only way out of this "recession" is to spend our way out of it. If the public service get fleeced with the pension levy then there is less cash to be spent therfore you cannot spend your way out of the recession as their is less money there to spend.
Why on earth should the average joe working hard in the private/public sector have to bring us out of this mess? Simple: because the gov don't want their buddies held accountable.
Public sector workers have no problem taking a hit but a "levy" that applies to only the public sector is cruel. Why not lump up PAYE across the board? Why not take away some of the stupid idiotic "Tax breaks" that are making people Millions in this country.
Why on earth do the Ministers and TD's take a hit out of their own wages? Enda Kenny told them he didn't want his payrise and not one of the other fools in power follwed suit to show they really wanted to help this country out. The TD's and Ministers are still flying all over the world using taxpayers money and spending outragous amounts of money when there is no needs for it. Do I see anyone calling for them to stop this? No I don't!!
I don't see why on earth people can't just see the bigger picture with all this, the private and public sector workers should unite together to get out of this mess not fight with each other.
The main problem in this country has always been the same, the rich get richer while the poor get poorer.
jonnt24ie there is no point saying that around here. simply because what you say makes sense.
any point i have seen by anyone to try and suggest the private sector also maybe take more then a 1% levy has either been ignored or shrugged off.0 -
monkeytronics wrote: »As far as I know, and to be honest its not something I have definitives on but the three people I know have retired in recent years have told me that the tie into the current salary does not apply after a certain time period (3 years ? i think was mentioned) - I can't verify that for definite - maybe someone else with the info can help on that one.
The link to current salaries is not guaranteed within the terms of the scheme, and the "official side" (the Department of Finance) has made some efforts to limit its implementation. But, for the most part, the link has been maintained.To be fair, the majority of people are stuck at CO level forever. I would say some (a good proportion) of that is down to inability to perform higher responsibities and/or fear of the additional responsibility. Thats not to say they are not doo performers at CO level though.
There seem to be typos in this paragraph that obscure your intended meaning. A failure to get promotion does not, and should not, reduce a person's entitlement to pension.And for others its just extremely difficult to get promoted. In a Dept of circa 900 - 1000 staff there has only been 3 promotions in almost 3 years from CO to EO and none and 1 from CO to SO. For other Depts this could be slightly more but for a lot it would be less.
It is not easy to get promoted.
That is currently true, has been true for the past couple of years, and will probably remain true into the medium term.0 -
Advertisement
-
Firstly I think it's a bit unfair to say the whole PS + CS are going to strike over the pensions levy, the union named in the first post of this thread are one of the smallest in the country, at no point has Impact, Siptu or Unite said they are going to ballot on strike action to my knowledge. In fairness I think they are disputing the unfair way in which the levy penalises lower paid workers and they are correct in this assumption.
Secondly I've heard plenty of people on all sorts of salaries now saying they want out of the pension scheme. But they can't get out, you have no choice, you can't even limit your contributions and receive a reduced pension when you retire. I was talking to a colleague this morning whose partner is a teacher and their total pension contribution every month is approx 500euro. That's 6 grand a year. Over 40 years that's nearly a quarter of a million. Now I don't see why they can't take that money, stick it under the mattress or in the credit union or do what they like with it and drop out of the pension scheme.
Seriously you'll still be able to claim the oap state pension since you'll have paid PRSI all your life, what will you need a huge pension for. Your mortgage should be paid off. I think if I was offered I'd drop out myself.
Lastly, there is money, lots of money. 20 billion in social welfare for a start. That could easily be knocked by 20%. They have to start means testing and capping childrens allowance after 3 kids. All these single parent supplements have to be reviewed. We're not here to pay for your mistakes. The huge money that is wasted on subsidised housing by county councils.0
Advertisement