Public Sector Unions to Take Action

Kimbot

Carlow52 wrote: »

Hence if the Public sector persists with its strike action it is time to for the unemployed and the private sector to ostracise the public sector at the individual level. Deal with them only as required, but having them in our homes and places of business as friends who can be relied upon in such difficult times: NO THANKS.

As a public service employee i resent what you are saying!

No 1: I am working in an area where odd hours are the norm, I work in IT, today I could put 7 hours in, tomorrow I can put 14 hours in. I don't get paid any extra for this.

No 2: For 8 years I have been in the service, gained 2 promotions through competitions and still only earning around €35,000 a year. I worked hard for 8 years to get to this point. If I satyed in my private secotr job my wages would be well above this by now.


No 3. As stated a million times, private sector employees gloated at how public service jobs were below them when the boom was on and now their jobs are in jeopardy they are screaming for the public servants to take the brunt of the mess.


I have stated a tonne of times before the only way out of this mess is if the private sector and public sector join together and once and for all sort out the mess that is this country.

nesf

jonny24ie wrote: »

As a public service employee i resent what you are saying!

No 1: I am working in an area where odd hours are the norm, I work in IT, today I could put 7 hours in, tomorrow I can put 14 hours in. I don't get paid any extra for this.

No 2: For 8 years I have been in the service, gained 2 promotions through competitions and still only earning around €35,000 a year. I worked hard for 8 years to get to this point. If I satyed in my private secotr job my wages would be well above this by now.


No 3. As stated a million times, private sector employees gloated at how public service jobs were below them when the boom was on and now their jobs are in jeopardy they are screaming for the public servants to take the brunt of the mess.


I have stated a tonne of times before the only way out of this mess is if the private sector and public sector join together and once and for all sort out the mess that is this country.

The problems you describe are shared my many other groups though. There is a hostility towards separate "professional grades" in the civil service for things like IT and Economics* which forces people who have specific and separate professional qualifications in their area into the same pay grade as people who lack such specialisation. You can essentially blame the unions for this.


*Gareth Fitzgerald had an excellent piece in the Irish Times a few weeks ago about how there are onlythree PhD qualified economists in the Department of Finance (where economic analysis forms the basis of much taxation policy) due specifically to this lack of a professional grade for trained Economists. Someone with a PhD in Economics doing extremely technical analysis gets paid the same as anyone else in the same pay grade whose work would be general and unspecialised in nature.

BroomBurner

Carlow52 wrote: »

Did not do what exactly?

The Public sector DID do this: Government Polices coupled with a failure of regulation, let the banks lend, nothing more nothing less.

The cost of the public service is funded by the sweat of the private sector.

Public sector job numbers, salaries and benefits all increased in // with the increases in private sector and now that the country is bankrupt [ Tax receipts in free fall: 29 bill bad debts in Anglo 17 in AIB 23 18 in INW 19 in IP] the public service expects to keep all it got and expect a much reduced private sector to keep it in the style to which it has become accustomed and to which it obviously feels entitled.

Hence if the Public sector persists with its strike action it is time to for the unemployed and the private sector to ostracise the public sector at the individual level. Deal with them only as required, but having them in our homes and places of business as friends who can be relied upon in such difficult times: NO THANKS.

Are you a troll? I'm not asking that to be provocative, I'm just wondering about the last paragraph.

It's ok though, I'm sure the PS will be happy to not have to deal with you. That includes teachers, lecturers, nurses, doctors, Gardaí, Firemen, those that deal with your tax, those that help you when you're stranded abroad, those that help you get abroad in the first place, those that collect your bin (unless you've gone private, obviously), the list goes on and on.

Don't cut your nose off to spite your face.

Hillel

pajodublin wrote: »

In my particular job in the CS i get paid 30% less than my friends doing the exact same job in the Private sector

Why not move to the private sector, then? There's no way I'd stay in my current job if I could do the "exact same job" elsewhere and get paid 30% more.

jonny24ie wrote: »

For 8 years I have been in the service, gained 2 promotions through competitions and still only earning around €35,000 a year. I worked hard for 8 years to get to this point. If I satyed in my private secotr job my wages would be well above this by now.

What attracted you to the public service? Why did you not stay in the private sector, if it is better paid? Why don't you return to the private sector?

Hillel

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).

+1

P. Breathnach wrote: »

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.

And all index-linked, not bad! (and no, I don't begrudge it to you.:))

In the private sector only the privileged, or extremely lucky, few, will have sufficient money in their pension plan to fund a final salary which actuarially represents ~ 2/3rds of final salary. Even fewer will have the luxury of having their pension, whatever it amounts to, index-linked for life. For many the Contributory OAP will be all that's standing between them and penury in old age.

NewDubliner

Hillel wrote: »

And all index-linked, not bad! (and no, I don't begrudge it to you.:))

We need to do away with this misleading term 'index-linked'. It gives the incorrect impression that it's liked to the cost-of-living index. It's linked to the salary of the grade the person served in.

Or should I say 'was'.

Going forward the precedent has been established that public service terms and conditions can be raided to find more money to bail out the friends of FF.

DARKIZE

Nightwish wrote: »

I'm a public sector employee and not a member of any union. I dont agree with the pension levy nor do I agree with industrial action. I believe the public are too polarised in the pro and anti public service camps. I dont believe there'll be any support and I think in essence its going to be a futile move on behalf of the unions. I am one of the low paid workers who pays their pension and this levy is a kick in the teeth. I cant afford it. If only the government had the balls to call it a pay cut.

This is the nub of the problem and the reason why it had to be tackled. Public sector employees make a small contribution to their pension, relative to the real cost. The balance is funded by the public purse; hence the €20billion pay/pensions bill. Of course the simplest solution would be let workers opt out and fund a private penson as they wish......the unions would have a collective canary.

NewDubliner

DARKIZE wrote: »

This is the nub of the problem and the reason why it had to be tackled. Public sector employees make a small contribution to their pension, relative to the real cost. The balance is funded by the public purse; hence the €20billion pay/pensions bill. Of course the simplest solution would be let workers opt out and fund a private penson as they wish......the unions would have a collective canary.

And private sector pensions: where does the amount over and above what is paid in by the employee come from? How is it invested and who funds the interest and capital appreciation?

Hillel

NewDubliner wrote: »

We need to do away with this misleading term 'index-linked'. It gives the incorrect impression that it's liked to the cost-of-living index. It's linked to the salary of the grade the person served in.

You're absolutely correct, the term can be misleading. A lot of people, including many in the public sector, simply do not understand just how "gold-plated" the Public Sector pensions are. Any increase that a particular grade gets, which can and does exceed the cost-of-living index, is reflected in pensioners pay. This linkage takes no account of why a particular increase was given.

Say, the role of an AP changes, most likely after long and arduous negotiation. He/She is expected to take on greater responsibility, attain additional qualifications, whatever. In compensation, the AP salary scale is increased. What possible justification can there be for increasing the pension of retired AP's, in this case? There is none!

Public servants are probably safe with this one, though. There is simply no political will, among any party, to change this. Why would there be, the same pensions conditions apply to TD's and Senators. (They have it even better, they can draw a salary and a pension from the public purse, at the same time.)

Let me be very clear. This type of pension is way beyond what workers in the private sector can dream of. Most would gladly pay the Pension Levy in return for the similar pension guarantees. I have a suggestion for the Minister for Finance. Offer every public servant the option of moving to a defined contribution pension in line with the very best pension of this type in the private sector. In return he/she would not have to pay the levy. (I don't think anyone would be trampled on in the stampede to take up the offer!)

Nermal

NewDubliner wrote: »

We need to do away with this misleading term 'index-linked'. It gives the incorrect impression that it's liked to the cost-of-living index. It's linked to the salary of the grade the person served in.

Or should I say 'was'.

Going forward the precedent has been established that public service terms and conditions can be raided to find more money to bail out the friends of FF.

Are you implying that linking to ever-expanding PS salaries is somehow less generous to pensioners than linking HICP/RPI? You're wrong.

The government should retrospectively break the link between PS salaries and pensions, linking pensions to HICP, cutting them in a deflationary environment.

But only after cutting PS salaries by 30%, of course.

Steviemak

Hillel wrote: »

I have a suggestion for the Minister for Finance. Offer every public servant the option of moving to a defined contribution pension in line with the very best pension of this type in the private sector. In return he/she would not have to pay the levy. (I don't think anyone would be trampled on in the stampede to take up the offer!)

This is something i suggested previously. It would stop all the whining in the PS straight away. I would suggest virtually no Public servants would take it up but at least then they would have nothing to complain about as the choice to pay the levy would be theirs.

I would pay 25% of my gross income for a PS pension.

Darragh29

jonny24ie wrote: »

I have stated a tonne of times before the only way out of this mess is if the private sector and public sector join together and once and for all sort out the mess that is this country.

+100. I'm a private sector worker (self employed) and will be attending any protest or strike on this matter. Yes there is wastage in the public sector but I don't expect a cop or a nurse in this kip to take a 10% pay cut, which is what this public service levy is. Hopefully all workers will unite and resist and reject this pathethic attempt by a fat useless c*nt to play hard working Irish employees off against each other.

eoinbn

Darragh29 wrote: »

+100. I'm a private sector worker (self employed) and will be attending any protest or strike on this matter. Yes there is wastage in the public sector but I don't expect a cop or a nurse in this kip to take a 10% pay cut, which is what this public service levy is. Hopefully all workers will unite and resist and reject this pathethic attempt by a fat useless c*nt to play hard working Irish employees off against each other.

So public sector works shouldn't share any of the burden? Interesting.

Personally I think the country is sunk. Nobody is interested in taking any hit on their income. Nobody wants to cut anything. We need to find €20b over the next 5 years and we have come unstuck on the first €1b. "We all need to put our shoulder to the wheel, BUT", and there is ALWAYS a but, and then they procede to say why they shouldn't be forced, or the group they represent, to pay the price.

So march, get the practice in. Within 18 months we will be Iceland and the only thing we will have to do is march and protest- so when the time come lets be good at it!!

Samson1

Well said Darragh29 & also BroomBurner. With all the IBEC types, FF spinners and people 'pretending' to be Public Servants on here whilst running down the Public Service, its pointless to have normal people viewing or responding to these threads. You know who you are, you are spinning an Employer's / Govt agenda & wasting your time - workers, public & private, see it for what it is.

K-9

Darragh29 wrote: »

+100. I'm a private sector worker (self employed) and will be attending any protest or strike on this matter. Yes there is wastage in the public sector but I don't expect a cop or a nurse in this kip to take a 10% pay cut, which is what this public service levy is. Hopefully all workers will unite and resist and reject this pathethic attempt by a fat useless c*nt to play hard working Irish employees off against each other.

Suggestions then, 10% tax rise in overall terms?

Samson1

K-9 wrote: »

Suggestions then, 10% tax rise in overall terms?

Nice try K9. When you already know that €10 a week from all workers would do it & not a 10% tax rise.

gurramok

Tax revenues will nosedive further if you raise income tax by 5% or 10% on everyone as the spending power will be eroded.

It is indeed the 80's all over again if taxes are raised across the board as that did not work before, it prolonged the 80s recession to a depression.

We're snookered on this one.

K-9

Samson1 wrote: »

Nice try K9. When you already know that €10 a week from all workers would do it & not a 10% tax rise.

Unfortunately there was uproar over a 1% levy on minimum wage, €3.50, so not all sections want to pay €3.50, never mind €10.

Samson1

K-9 wrote: »

Unfortunately there was uproar over a 1% levy on minimum wage, €3.50, so not all sections want to pay €3.50, never mind €10.

Again - not the point. Don't be threatening 10% tax rises when an average €10 per head would do. And as its an average, whats wrong with the wealthy paying slightly more to cushion the low-paid??

K-9

Samson1 wrote: »

Again - not the point. Don't be threatening 10% tax rises when an average €10 per head would do. And as its an average, whats wrong with the wealthy paying slightly more to cushion the low-paid??

Nothing, nothing wrong with €3.50 on Minimum wage either, a wage with no Tax or PRSI. 1% is fair on that wage.

Samson1

Is it strange how the IBEC etc trolls who have posted all over every thread on the public service have gone quiet?? Can't take the truth - or all gone to bed for a busy day lashing their workers or spinning against them tomorrow????

K-9

Samson1 wrote: »

Is it strange how the IBEC etc trolls who have posted all over every thread on the public service have gone quiet?? Can't take the truth - or all gone to bed for a busy day lashing their workers or spinning against them tomorrow????

Quoting posts or actually replying to substantive points is better.

Otherwise you risk being called a SIPTU troll.

nesf

gurramok wrote: »

Tax revenues will nosedive further if you raise income tax by 5% or 10% on everyone as the spending power will be eroded.

It is indeed the 80's all over again if taxes are raised across the board as that did not work before, it prolonged the 80s recession to a depression.

We're snookered on this one.

Well, what we need to do is to start closing the gap. We're going to have to run harsh deficits for a good few years before we can balance the budget again but thankfully this isn't the 80s and whatever else you can say about FF (and you can say a lot) we didn't start this with a huge public deficit versus GDP.

nesf

Samson1 wrote: »

Is it strange how the IBEC etc trolls who have posted all over every thread on the public service have gone quiet?? Can't take the truth - or all gone to bed for a busy day lashing their workers or spinning against them tomorrow????

Calling people trolls on here is a good way of getting yourself banned, attack the post not the poster please.

K-9, this goes for you too.

Samson1

K-9 wrote: »

Quoting posts or actually replying to substantive points is better.

Otherwise you risk being called a SIPTU troll.

Fair point K9 - just someone who believes there is an agenda going on here the size of a mountain & believes that its not being run by workers either private or public - rather by people pretending to be something they are not.

K-9

nesf wrote: »

Calling people trolls on here is a good way of getting yourself banned, attack the post not the poster please.

K-9, this goes for you too.

Indeed, was actually attacking the actual post, not the poster.

But I take your point.

nesf

K-9 wrote: »

Indeed, was actually attacking the actual post, not the poster.

But I take your point.

You were, the warning was mostly because I want to indicate publicly that this isn't on because it's a very short step from speculation about the existence of trolls to calling anyone who strongly disagrees with you one. People are close enough to each other's throats as is.

Samson1

For light relief - New York is discussing this as we speak ...

Plan to Raise Taxes on the Rich Is Gaining Momentum
By JEREMY W. PETERS
A group of Senate Democrats plans to introduce a bill on
Tuesday that would impose an income tax of 10.3 percent
on the highest-earning New Yorkers.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/10/nyregion/10millionaires.html?th&emc=th

Lplated

BroomBurner wrote: »

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.

With respect, this does not explain how requiring people to pay for the pension that are guaranteed is inequitable.

In your first paragraph, you contend that the private sector hasn't been affected - I know its been kept a secret, but tens of thousands of private sector workers have lost their jobs (not just a salary cut), and many more have agreed, reluctantly or otherwise to accept pay cuts. I would only 'find that equal' as you put it, if some amount of public servants were to lose their jobs too.

You then say that your pension will be made up by "50% of my wage when i retire" - this is the point - why should you not pay for this? The 6.5% that public servants pay already does not cover the cost of this 50% of final salary, the extra percentage that is now being taken will go some way to make up the balance - but you consider this inequitable? You seem to argue that you should get 50% of final salary whether you have paid for it or not. Now that is inequality.

future_plans

I think everybody has to take their blinkers of for a minute here. This type of tunnel vision approach from people in both the public and private sectors will only lead to further further wedges being driven between them.

First of all, everybody has to agree that the process needs to be equitable and viewed as equitable from both sides. To do that, we need to recognize and respect the pains that will be experienced by both sides over the next few years.

Now, making ever worker in both private and public pay €10 a week is hardly equitable considering the lower salaries and job uncertainty of the majority of people working in the private sector. Not to mention the tens of thousands who have already moved from private sector jobs to the dole queues. So the private sector has taken a very hefty hit already. Those working in the Public sector need to recognize this. I think the union leaders do and I think they have to reinforce this with their members before moving forward.

Now, for those working in the public sector, the Gardai, the nurses, the teachers, etc. Is it fair that they take this kind of hit on their monthly take home pay without any fore warning and also when the lower paid are to be hit heavier than the higher paid? Private Sector workers have to recognize that this is not a fair strategy either. Granted, they will not lose their jobs and also they will have a nice pension to retire on. But such a sudden heavy hit on lower paid workers is also not an equitable solution.

I think the unions have to go back to the Government instead of striking. That is only going to be counter productive and deteriorate the situation further. The door is open.

This slanging match between the sectors is never going to solve the issue.