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
Strikes in the public sector
Options
Comments
-
Just to point out that the levy is applied to all public+ civil service workers regardless of whether they are in the pension scheme or not. Another myth dispelled about golden jobs and cast iron pensions. Even if I could leave the pension scheme in the morning I'd still have to pay 200+ a month and would get zero in return. If that isn't fair then I don't know what is?0
-
nhughes100 wrote: »Just to point out that the levy is applied to all public+ civil service workers regardless of whether they are in the pension scheme or not. Another myth dispelled about golden jobs and cast iron pensions. Even if I could leave the pension scheme in the morning I'd still have to pay 200+ a month and would get zero in return. If that isn't fair then I don't know what is?
It would be your personal choice to leave and does nothing to reduce the €2 Billion a year and rising, we already pay for existing pensions.
The Govt. really did a terrible job in explaining the pension time bomb.Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.
0 -
It is natural for anyone to try and hang on to whatever they have and use whatever means at their disposal to do so. I'm sure if Quinn and the golden circle have their income threatened they will have words in certain ears and lobby in their own way. Since the average public worker isn't in the tent at the Galway races they have to act together marching or by striking. It would be a lot easier to swallow if the pain actually was being shared fairly. So far its just the easy targets, the old, students and the public service.0
-
The strike today should have just been about pointing out the relative inequity of how the levy was enacted across grades - by be being to seen kicking up a fuss about having to take any sort of a cut (whilst others elsewhere have, including my firm), they're actually doing the whole "divide and conquer" routine far more effectively than they think Cowen is doing it.
I dont see how you can say that the unions are trying to divide and conquer when they support private sector workers and speak out against the government in their defense as well.0 -
Yes but, as you'd see if you read through the read, the pain isn't being shared fairly across the private industry either - some have had pay raises, others have had job losses. It's what your employer can pay.It would be a lot easier to swallow if the pain actually was being shared fairly. So far its just the easy targets, the old, students and the public service.
We've pointed out this in the previous posts and there are, thankfully, PS/CS staff who can see the reality of the issues at hand without immediately resorting to the favoured mantras of "it's not fair" , "we didn't cause this" and "divide and conquer". I was talking to a friend yesterday and, despite being a public servant, supported the levy because it's a necessary reaction to the fiscal crisis - something kippy is aware of too for example. Happy? No, but he understands that in the grand scheme it's a relatively light hit to take against the large cuts elsewhere.
Well let's take the proposed national strike for example - that's going to damage many private sector workers who, not being in unions, need to get into work those days. They won't have the luxury of being able to strike.I dont see how you can say that the unions are trying to divide and conquer when they support private sectors and speak out against the government in their defense as well.
The force through of the NWA, which is more common in the public than private sector, is just going to push up costs at a time when they need to lowered - but this is something in ICTU's "there's another way" plan. Yes, they are trying to guard private sector pensions, but a lot of the stuff seems geared towards those private sector companies who are already unionised rather than the many who aren't.0 -
Advertisement
-
It would be your personal choice to leave and does nothing to reduce the €2 Billion a year and rising, we already pay for existing pensions.
The Govt. really did a terrible job in explaining the pension time bomb.
Well you see that's part of the problem, I nor anyone else has a choice in leaving the scheme because the governments in the past never actually put the pension money away for when people retire but use it to pay the existing pensioners. One wonders why we bother having a census, this demographic has been coming for a long time.0 -
It doesn't matter what is fair anymore. We are facing economic oblivion. Whatever about the inadequecies of this government over the last ten years to mitigate the damage facing us now, they are still procrastinating and communicating badly. They need to be playing hardball now. All cuts and tax increases need to be calculated now, today, and introduced today. They need to calculate based on worse case and adjust down not up all the time. Patnership talks are out the window, we need a leader.0
-
Join Date:Posts: 17305
The main gripe I have is the following:
Once the Levy kicks in there is no guarantee from the Gov that it will be removed from law when times are back being good. This means we will pay this money for life regardless.
If I had a choice on having a pension then fair enough but if I opted out of this pension I still have to pay the pension levy, is that fair?
It is stupid to be striking because of the levy because the government simply don't care, once their mates in the banks etc get off scot free they feel they have done their job and don't care who they hurt in the process.0 -
Would you have prefered a pay cut then? It would seem more honest.If I had a choice on having a pension then fair enough but if I opted out of this pension I still have to pay the pension levy, is that fair?
No it's because this levy needs to be implemented because the finances of the country are screwed. It's not about saving their friends - really they're not paid €1bn (which is the levy saving) - but about saving the economy, as much as it can be saved at this point. Saving the economy will ultimately save us all. This is Step 1. Many more, for all, to follow.It is stupid to be striking because of the levy because the government simply don't care, once their mates in the banks etc get off scot free they feel they have done their job and don't care who they hurt in the process.0 -
Langerland wrote: »The OP is correct here in his assumption that some (if not many) Public Sector workers do not (or choose not to) grasp the absolute gravity of the situation and therefore, many truely do not know why they are on the picket lines in the first place.
I can only speak from experience here before any public sector ring leaders come in and start shooting me down.
I have quite a few friends and relatives who work in the public sector and while they all hate this levy with a vengeance (and the apparent inequity of it), they still accept that it is an absolute necessity as a first step in getting the country out of this hole. They all know people like me who are in far worse off situations, working in companies that are on the line, who do not have a guaranteed job next month, who do not have a pension because they cannot afford one, who have not had a pay rise in 2 or more years, etc etc.
Now, what bothers me most is that there are ring leaders (call them union reps whatever you want) in the public sector. And while they are not aggressively forcing people onto the pickets, they are being over zealous in their methods. They can use emotional blackmail and many other intangible methods to make workers feel like they have to do this.
Example, my mother works in the public service. She is almost at retirement age and all her family work in the private sector. I'm on the bread line, my brother was let go from his job after xmas, sister is working but her husband is out of a job now and I've another sister who has had to emigrate. Now, my mother feels the pain of the private sector every day worrying about us and our future and her grandchildren s future. She has seen bad times before and accepts that pain must be felt. That the levy is one such pain that people must endure. Like unemployment, like high taxes (to come), etc. etc.
So naturally she did not want to protest last Saturday. Yet (and I saw this), 10 missed calls and text messages on her mobile from various individuals in work on that day asking where was she, was she coming out to support them and all this crap. From these "reps" or ringleaders who are following some totally different agenda.
So why was the support so big on that protest and other pickets? 1. Because some people are genuinely upset about the levy and cost cuts BUT 2. Unions with their own warped and unrealistic agendas!
I think the protests are more about equity in pain rather than having to take pain and also about the performance of the government...that was my take anyway.0 -
Advertisement
-
nhughes100 wrote: »Well you see that's part of the problem, I nor anyone else has a choice in leaving the scheme because the governments in the past never actually put the pension money away for when people retire but use it to pay the existing pensioners. One wonders why we bother having a census, this demographic has been coming for a long time.
YEP, another thing the Govt. ignored.
They do have the Pension fund.Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.
0 -
No it's because this levy needs to be implemented because the finances of the country are screwed. It's not about saving their friends - really they're not paid €1bn (which is the levy saving) - but about saving the economy, as much as it can be saved at this point. Saving the economy will ultimately save us all. This is Step 1. Many more, for all, to follow.
So why don't they just come out and say the following:
Lads, here's the score...
(1) February 2009, introduction of Public Service Pension Levy.
(2) May 2009, reintroduction of 3rd level fee's.
(3) July 2009, emergency budget, 2% going on both income tax rates, also, everyone who works now pays tax, no more people outside the tax net, if you use public facilities & services, you must make a fair contribution, end of story. Also, corporation tax going up 2.5% to 15%. No more pandering to the multinationals, we're in a crisis now and everyone must play ball.
(4) September 2009, introduction of a property tax.
Why why why why why are they treating us all like children and not telling us the plan??? If I can do the above in 5 minutes, how come a whole government who are paid stupid money, with advisors and media consultants and all the rest of it, cannot do the same???0 -
I am aware that the pension levy has to come in but a few things that make my blood boil and goes to show that fairness does come into it
http://www.tribune.ie/article/2009/feb/22/decision-to-abandon-semi-state-pension-levy-will-c/
http://www.irishexaminer.com/text/story.asp?j=ojaumhsnidsnidau&p=5x39957x&n=50399669
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2009/0205/1233787117549.html
In relation to the last story over 34k salary entitles you to the relief. I honestly think there should be no relief. its an emergency vital levy.
Also can anyone answer whether or not anglo irish (now a public sector company) staff have to pay the pension levy?0 -
I'm worried it's because they're clueless and don't have a proper plan. Their incompetence is clear at this point, but they really need to take the finger out and start doing something along the lines of what you were able to whip up - the whole thing is directionless right now and people are right to be annoyed but, at the same time, be ready for the hits coming. They should be doing a lot more than they are though, a lot more.Why why why why why are they treating us all like children and not telling us the plan??? If I can do the above in 5 minutes, how come a whole government who are paid stupid money, with advisors and media consultants and all the rest of it, cannot do the same???0 -
How can they justify a stance like that
Most don't feel like they really have to, they spout things like we didn't cause this mess so why should we suffer like who caused the situation actually matters.
The simple fact is that leaving things as they are is not sustainable, some do not let logic get in the way of a good argument though.
Remember the train drivers for example who threatened to strike because they were going to add on 2 extra carriages to the trains (cause commuters were packed in like sardines), ye'd swear they were shovelling the coal to run the train themselves, these are the kind of people who'll happily go out on strike again, right or wrong0 -
Join Date:Posts: 17305
Would you have prefered a pay cut then? It would seem more honest.
No it's because this levy needs to be implemented because the finances of the country are screwed. It's not about saving their friends - really they're not paid €1bn (which is the levy saving) - but about saving the economy, as much as it can be saved at this point. Saving the economy will ultimately save us all. This is Step 1. Many more, for all, to follow.
Personally I would prefer a pay cut once the Gov actually said straight up "This is a pay cut".
The money rasied from the pension levy has nothing to do with Pensions and that is why alot of people are annoyed, its a form of stealth tax.
Fair enough they don't get paid 1bn but if we have a decifit of 15bn then why on earth give the banks 7bn(this is included in the 15bn figure, which means our finances were better before bailing out the banks). Our decifit would only be 8bn, then the 2bn saved from the levy would make a decifit of 6bn. Then when they intorduce more actions this year it could well be down to around 3bn of a decifit, which is alot more manageable than 15bn.
I would rather see the country look like it was managing its money rather than bailing banks out. I don't see the Gov bailing out any of the private sector companies that were forced to close lately and that would have been my priority for 7bn rather than the banks that helped cause this mess we are in.0 -
colly10
The simple fact is that leaving things as they are is not sustainable, some do not let logic get in the way of a good argument though.
Sorry for the repetition, but i do feel this is worth people knowing.
Ireland is having difficulty borrowing funds. This is because investors think it is likely they wont get paid back. This is not something that needs to be fixed in the next few years this is over the last few days.
from the financial timesSo, Ireland marginally less risky than an acquisitive Swiss pharma group…
Discussions of fairness and equity are important and worth having. But they should not distract from the fact that we are having big difficulties borrowing money to pay for things currently0 -
nhughes100 wrote: »Well you see that's part of the problem, I nor anyone else has a choice in leaving the scheme because the governments in the past never actually put the pension money away for when people retire but use it to pay the existing pensioners. One wonders why we bother having a census, this demographic has been coming for a long time.
That's because it's a defined benefit scheme, that's the way it works. This is why it's a time bomb. It doesn't matter where they put the "pension money", the amount paid into a public service pension by a public servant is not going to cover their actual pension (short of the levy being about 20%).It doesn't matter what is fair anymore. We are facing economic oblivion. Whatever about the inadequecies of this government over the last ten years to mitigate the damage facing us now, they are still procrastinating and communicating badly. They need to be playing hardball now. All cuts and tax increases need to be calculated now, today, and introduced today. They need to calculate based on worse case and adjust down not up all the time. Patnership talks are out the window, we need a leader.
+1The main gripe I have is the following:
Once the Levy kicks in there is no guarantee from the Gov that it will be removed from law when times are back being good. This means we will pay this money for life regardless.
If I had a choice on having a pension then fair enough but if I opted out of this pension I still have to pay the pension levy, is that fair?
Even if you pay the levy for life, that likelihood is that you're going to get all that money back (and more) in the form of a pension. Hence why "pension levy" is a reasonable description. People in the private sector who paid into a "defined contribution" pension in some cases will be lucky to see their hard-earned money come back in the form of a pension - and they don't get any "top-ups" because their pension value has fallen, they just lose out. Why on earth you would want to opt-out of a gauranteed Defined Benefit pension, that pays out significantly more than you pay in to it, is beyond me.So why don't they just come out and say the following:
Lads, here's the score...
(1) February 2009, introduction of Public Service Pension Levy.
(2) May 2009, reintroduction of 3rd level fee's.
(3) July 2009, emergency budget, 2% going on both income tax rates, also, everyone who works now pays tax, no more people outside the tax net, if you use public facilities & services, you must make a fair contribution, end of story. Also, corporation tax going up 2.5% to 15%. No more pandering to the multinationals, we're in a crisis now and everyone must play ball.
(4) September 2009, introduction of a property tax.
Why why why why why are they treating us all like children and not telling us the plan??? If I can do the above in 5 minutes, how come a whole government who are paid stupid money, with advisors and media consultants and all the rest of it, cannot do the same???
Absolutely. And in fact they could choose 4 completely different tax options than the ones you have proposed (which are grand). The point is at least they would appear to actually have a plan.I'm worried it's because they're clueless and don't have a proper plan.
Unfortunately this is exactly what it looks like.0 -
There are many valid points here, too many to quote. I dont want to throw rocks at my public sector counterparts. They are part of the workforce irregardless. However this unionised front has made them the target of backlash from those in the private sector. I never joined a union where I worked, mainly because when I looked at their mandate and principles I felt they didnt represent my interests. There was no talk about union issues in my job either. It may be more relevant in other sectors but I think the unions here have actually lost sight of what is best for their members in the long run. Is there much of an attitude in the CS, that if you're not in a union you're against us? (Thats not a retoricale question by the way)
All im saying is that if I were working in the public sector and looked out at the inferno that was the private sector, I would be humbled by both the speed and nature of the joblosses. There is legislation there to protect me as a worker i.e unfair dismissals act, employment act, labour relations comission, labour court, employment equaliThere are many valid points here, too many to quote. I dont want to throw rocks at my public sector counterparts. They are part of the workforce irregardless. However this unionised front has made them the target of backlash from those in the private sector. I never joined a union where I worked, mainly because when I looked at their mandate and principles I felt they didnt represent my interests. There was no talk about union issues in my job either. It may be more relevant in other sectors but I think the unions here have actually lost sight of what is best for their members in the long run. Is there much of an attitude in the CS, that if you're not in a union you're against us? (Thats not a rhetorical question by the way)
All im saying is that if I were working in the public sector and looked out at the inferno that was the private sector, I would be humbled by both the speed and nature of the joblosses. There is legislation there to protect me as a worker i.e unfair dismissals act, employment act, labour relations commission, labour court, employment equality authority, employment appeals tribunal etc. I dont feel i need the protection of a union, maybe again thats me being naive. Again if i am, correct me.
I have lost my job but i am not going to be bitter. I am going to try harder but its a hard pill to swallow when I turn on the news and see what I am seeingty authority, employment appeals tribunal etc. I dont feel i need the protection of a union, maybe again thats me being naive. Again if i am, correct me.
I have lost my job but i am not going to be bitter. I am going to try harder but its a hard pill to swallow when I turn on the news and see what I am seeing0 -
It doesn't matter what is fair anymore. We are facing economic oblivion. Whatever about the inadequecies of this government over the last ten years to mitigate the damage facing us now, they are still procrastinating and communicating badly. They need to be playing hardball now. All cuts and tax increases need to be calculated now, today, and introduced today. They need to calculate based on worse case and adjust down not up all the time. Patnership talks are out the window, we need a leader.
+20 -
Advertisement
-
I'm a member of the public service and of course I'd rather not pay the 7% but I understand we have to.
Its the way the govt are going about it that angers me, firstly its not a pension levy its a pay cut and i would be happier if they were at least honest enough to call it what it is. secondly In the same month that I'm told i have to give up 7% of my wages (which aren't great to begin with) I'm told were just giving billons to the banks (to bail out these "fat-cats") while cutting special needs programs in our schools, and funding to our hospitals0 -
It doesn't matter what is fair anymore. We are facing economic oblivion. Whatever about the inadequecies of this government over the last ten years to mitigate the damage facing us now, they are still procrastinating and communicating badly. They need to be playing hardball now. All cuts and tax increases need to be calculated now, today, and introduced today. They need to calculate based on worse case and adjust down not up all the time. Patnership talks are out the window, we need a leader.
+3
But there is no evidence of one on the horizon. I do think the government bad as they are will grasp the nettle. If there's an election and they go down. The new government will have be grasp the same nettle. It's all very well the opposition posturing but they know full well what's required. That's why the government is now basically ignoring the threats from the unions in the Public service. They have no choice. If we are to avoid the intervention of the IMF, it has to be done.
I'm very pessimistic about the short term. I'd say by this time next year, employment will be so high that there may be soup kitchens out there. But in the long run, this may be the making of us. We really did need to get rid of the 'Ah sure, it'll be alright' mentality, 'golden circles' and the rip off Ireland. Not to mention a bloated and inefficient public service. This country is still rather backward compared to almost every other country in Europe. I personally blame successive Fianna Fail governments going right back to the fifties. But then who voted for these self serving corrupt incompetents? Well it wasn't me but you know who you are!0 -
I'm told were just giving billons to the banks (to bail out these "fat-cats")
When are people going to realise that giving money to the banks is not bailing out fat-cats. :mad:
Banks are vital to the running of the economy, without them you won't have to worry about your levy because you won't have a job. The banks must be kept operating because the money they lend is the driving force of any economy. Almost every business needs to borrow at some time or other. If they can't they close. Simple as that. If you want to buy a house you must borrow money. If you want to buy a car, you need to borrow money. It's basic economics.0 -
Foghorn Leghorn wrote: »I'm told were just giving billons to the banks (to bail out these "fat-cats") while cutting special needs programs in our schools, and funding to our hospitals
people need to get away from this mindset that we are giving 7bln to fat cats in banks.
the money is to stop them failing and start lending which affects every citizen of the state. the money is not going into somebody's back pocket0 -
See that's partially what's wrong - we're bailing out banks, yes, and it's a lot to do with the mistakes of the fat cats, yes, but we're not doing it to bail out just the fat cats. We're doing it to allow money to flow from the banks again so that businesses can once more aquire loans and capital to try and help invigorate the economy, or so that private pension funds can breathe again. There's a lot more to it than the appearance of helping out a few over-achievers in the banks and this needs to be made clear so we don't have unions, etc. implying it's only to help out some big-salaried risk-takers in the financial sector.Foghorn Leghorn wrote: »In the same month that I'm told i have to give up 7% of my wages (which aren't great to begin with) I'm told were just giving billons to the banks (to bail out these "fat-cats") while cutting special needs programs in our schools, and funding to our hospitals
What is annoying though is the lack of response for the government, telling us they're going to enforce much more strict regulation to ensure this doesn't happen again because their mistakes (which, incidentally, helped many of us out for a while) cannot be repeated.0 -
That's because it's a defined benefit scheme, that's the way it works. This is why it's a time bomb. It doesn't matter where they put the "pension money", the amount paid into a public service pension by a public servant is not going to cover their actual pension (short of the levy being about 20%).
But the post 95 public sector worker is now paying around 20% towards a pension as they now pay 6.5% pension, then another 6 or 7 % pension levy plus 6.5% PRSI. PRSI contributions go towards a state pension. The money received from the State pension is then deducted from a public sector pension which means unless you are one of the top boys in the public sector, The actual public sector pension received won't be a lot. The State pension will make up the bulk of your pension.Even if you pay the levy for life, that likelihood is that you're going to get all that money back (and more) in the form of a pension. Hence why "pension levy" is a reasonable description. People in the private sector who paid into a "defined contribution" pension in some cases will be lucky to see their hard-earned money come back in the form of a pension - and they don't get any "top-ups" because their pension value has fallen, they just lose out. Why on earth you would want to opt-out of a gauranteed Defined Benefit pension, that pays out significantly more than you pay in to it, is beyond me.
Yeah right :rolleyes: Maybe you will get it back if you are a pre 95 employee but you wont if you are post 95. Colleagues of mine on contract will have to pay the levy even though they aren't in the pension scheme. How are they gonna get the money back? Its a pay cut under a different name.
The private sector going on about their pensions is just ranting. Their pensions are not value for money because the financial institutions are taking bigger commissions and investing your money in higher risk investments.0 -
Foghorn Leghorn wrote: »secondly In the same month that I'm told i have to give up 7% of my wages (which aren't great to begin with)
The second part of this statement contradicts the first.
You would have to be on a very good salary to have a 7% deficit in your take home pay. (like 70k+) (see sample calculations at the end of the article here)
For someone on a modest salary (let's say ~26k) the net effect is 4% not 7%.
There's no getting away from the poor implementation and the net unfairness on lower paid workers (that's typical of the half-a*sed panicky and ill-thought out reactionary methodology of this government), but you still can't say you're getting a 7% hit *and* that you already have a low wage.0 -
But the post 95 public sector worker is now paying around 20% towards a pension as they now pay 6.5% pension, then another 6 or 7 % pension levy plus 6.5% PRSI. PRSI contributions go towards a state pension. The money received from the State pension is then deducted from a public sector pension which means unless you are one of the top boys in the public sector, The actual public sector pension received won't be a lot. The State pension will make up the bulk of your pension.
Yeah right :rolleyes: Maybe you will get it back if you are a pre 95 employee but you wont if you are post 95. Colleagues of mine on contract will have to pay the levy even though they aren't in the pension scheme. How are they gonna get the money back? Its a pay cut under a different name.
Look, you just cannot get away from this, it doesn't matter if you were pre-95 or not, a state-guaranteed, defined benefit pension is a big advantage over private sector jobs (see here for example)
And PRSI does not equal "pension" btw.
It has been estimated that in order to actually fund a DB pension, an employee would have to put away between 22%-28% of their salary every year (article above & here). This is not the same as 6-7% (pre tax relief) pension levy. And this doesn't even account for the fact that the pension increases in line with the salary of the position retired from! Or the 1.5 * salary tax free on retiring!
Edit: Oh, and I forgot to add a major point, that being that the final salary you retire on is likely to be a good bit larger than the salary that you were paying x% on for the first 20 years employment. So yes, as it stands, you will get that money back pre or post 95 (so long as you don't pop your clogs at 60 of course!)The private sector going on about their pensions is just ranting. Their pensions are not value for money because the financial institutions are taking bigger commissions and investing your money in higher risk investments.
That barely merits a response. There are global downtrends across the board in all asset classes (shares, residential property, commercial property, commodities, etc) across all geographies (E.U., U.S., AsiaPac, & emerging markets). There aren't many low-risk investment opportunities left for large pension funds. (bank share used be thought of as low-risk by some ffs!)0 -
-
Advertisement
-
Look, you just cannot get away from this, it doesn't matter if you were pre-95 or not, a state-guaranteed, defined benefit pension is a big advantage over private sector jobs (see here for example)
And PRSI does not equal "pension" btw.
An article from the Indo? :rolleyes: It must be right so! The public sector examples are for people on 80k salaries. Your average Joe won't get those kind of benefits.
BTW PRSI contributions pay for your state pension.!
[QUOTE=Naz_st;59213127It has been estimated that in order to actually fund a DB pension, an employee would have to put away between 22%-28% of their salary every year (article above & here). This is not the same as 6-7% (pre tax relief) pension levy. And this doesn't even account for the fact that the pension increases in line with the salary of the position retired from! Or the 1.5 * salary tax free on retiring!
Edit: Oh, and I forgot to add a major point, that being that the final salary you retire on is likely to be a good big larger than the salary that you were paying x% on for the first 20 years employment. So yes, as it stands, you will get that money back pre or post 95 (so long as you don't pop your clogs at 60 of course!)!)[/QUOTE]
For a start you need 40 years service to get the pension at the full rate. How many people will get 40 years service up? Of course it matters if you are post or pre 1995! Post 1995 employees have the amount they receive from their state pension Deducted from whatever they are entitled to from their public sector pension (The Indo conveniently leave that bit out ). Pre 95 don't pay PRSI and are not entitled to Social Welfare payments. It is NOT like with like.0
Advertisement