Tonights Prime Time on Pensions: The Public Sector Pay Parity Gravy Train

P. Breathnach

jimmmy wrote: »

... You are quite correct in that the Taoiseach's pay rate was increased way out of proportion to pay rates generally, like all public sector pensions. ...

That's the distortion. The Taoiseach's pay rate (and the linked pension) grew out of proportion to other public service pay rates, so it is not a true indicator of public service pensions.

Mr.Micro

jimmmy wrote: »

Sorry to inform you but as anyone who knows anything about the economy will tell you, the losses made on the financial markets are much bigger than any tiny little gains made this last week or two. Peoples savings ( personal or through a pension fund ) in bank shares ( eg AIB, B of I, Anglo , Irish Life etc ) have shrunk by so much from market peak you must have heard about that ?

How very patronizing. Small gains in share prices 3 to 15% and people can take the gains( or losses) on a daily basis. Without public money there would be no banks now and the share prices mostly can only go up in future. What other institutions can boast of a Government guarantee backed by the taxpayer? Gains are gains no matter how small in a tough economic climate

People should not have put all their savings into one basket ( as in eggs ). They will have had a lesson in life's uncertainties.

jimmmy

Mr.Micro wrote: »

How very patronizing.

Its not, its the reality. The losses made on the financial markets are much much bigger than any whatever gains made this last week or two...if stocks gain for a few days they often if not usually go down again, such has been the volatility this last few months.

Mr.Micro wrote: »

Small gains in share prices 3 to 15% and people can take the gains( or losses) on a daily basis.

So because there are now shares that are say 1.15 now, having been 1.00 a week or two ago, and say 18.00 8 months ago, people who relied on shares as part of their investment portfolio ( for retirement, kids education or whatever ) are laughing ?

Mr.Micro wrote: »

Without public money there would be no banks now and the share prices mostly can only go up in future.

" the share prices mostly can only go up in future " lol lol

Mr.Micro wrote: »

People should not have put all their savings into one basket ( as in eggs ). They will have had a lesson in life's uncertainties.

Most people did not. They still lost heavily.....well, compared with public sector pensions anyway.

Mr.Micro

jimmmy wrote: »

Its not, its the reality. The losses made on the financial markets are much much bigger than any whatever gains made this last week or two...if stocks gain for a few days they often if not usually go down again, such has been the volatility this last few months.

Its a plus that the decline has halted, the banks are still in business, thanks in part to the stalwart taxpayer.That's reality.

So because there are now shares that are say 1.15 now, having been 1.00 a week or two ago, and say 18.00 8 months ago, people who relied on shares as part of their investment portfolio ( for retirement, kids education or whatever ) are laughing ?

Anybody investing in shares has to be prepared to risk and lose the lot.


Historically bank shares will rise again as they are an essential part of the economic fabric of society. Shares rose in all previous recessions, this one will be no different. It may take time as all excesses have to be purged.

From todays ISEQ. good news at least a silver lining for now ( subject to change) if one has bank shares.




In Dublin, the ISEQ index of Irish shares continued its recent upward trend to stand 0.9% higher at 2,385. Banks were once again to the forefront, with AIB adding 25% to €1.02, Bank of Ireland also gaining 25% to 85 cent and Irish Life & Permanent rising 12% to €1.72.


http://www.rte.ie/business/reports/marketupdate.html

meditraitor

Maybe I was dreaming but I heard them say on the program that a few years ago they implemented a 5% contribution(from 0%) on the Civil service pension and to offset this they gave themselves a 5% rise!
WTF

I do feel sorry for the bord na mona workers, brutal

jimmmy

Mr.Micro wrote: »

Its a plus that the decline has halted, the banks are still in business. That's reality.

Some banks overseas are not in business. The Irish banks are still in business....though that is not of much consilation to the pensioners whose shares are now almost worthless. Most people who have have part of their money invested in the "blue chip" Irish banks ( as they were called) have lost very heavily. If shares are volatile around approx one euro from a high of 18 euro , that proves my point. You do not seem to understand that. You wrote " share prices mostly can only go up in future ". Can you give a guarantee share prices will "mostly go up in future" ? Do you have a crystal ball ? Will you bet some of the value of a public sector pension on it ? Will public sector workers share some of the pain ? Put their money where their mouth is ?

ardmacha

I have nothing against public sector workers, but they need to be benchmarked back DOWN, and a lot of them need to be made redundant. It doesnt make sense that in the biggest recession that this country has ever seen that there should be one sector that is completely immune to it.

Public sector workers have had an effective pay cut and will pay more taxes like everyone else. Their after tax income will fall by 10-12%, which is the amount that GNP is declining. This is the average effect of the recession. yes, some people will have suffered much more, but others will not have any pay cut at all.

A new benchmarking is appropriate, but the last one was a farce wit the increases proportional to union strength rather than anything else. If a new benchmarking was was on some of the misinformation in this thread it would be farce also.

Mr.Micro

jimmmy wrote: »

Some banks overseas are not in business. The Irish banks are still in business....though that is not of much consilation to the pensioners whose shares are now almost worthless. Most people who have have part of their money invested in the "blue chip" Irish banks ( as they were called) have lost very heavily. If shares are volatile around approx one euro from a high of 18 euro , that proves my point. You do not seem to understand that. You wrote " share prices mostly can only go up in future ". Can you give a guarantee share prices will "mostly go up in future" ? Do you have a crystal ball ? Will you bet some of the value of a public sector pension on it ? Will public sector workers share some of the pain ? Put their money where their mouth is ?

You appear to have a naive way of looking at the stock market with respect. Nothing is guaranteed in the stock market. As I posted bank shares in time will go up, whether they survive in their current set up or have to merge is another matter. When pensioners invested in bank shares they took the risk in a private company with NO guarantees as to their returns or even their initial investment.

bottlerocket

JonathanAnon wrote: »

EVERYONE in the private sector knew that it was a temporary boom.

Sorry but thats just nonsense.

If this were true then why were people continuing to spend heavily on houses in a peaking market from 2005-7? Must have those public sector workers, going round with their heads in the clouds, living in their bubble who were buying all the houses, cars, holidays, racking up credit card debts.

JonathanAnon wrote: »

I have nothing against public sector workers, but they need to be benchmarked back DOWN, and a lot of them need to be made redundant. It doesnt make sense that in the biggest recession that this country has ever seen that there should be one sector that is completely immune to it. I dont think Cowen will have the balls to do the job.

Much better. I daresay some should be marked down and some should be made redundant. I work in front line services for the public sector, make less than average industrial wage for long hours in a difficult job. I've lost 6.5% through the 'levy' and fair enough, something had to be done so I accepted it (voted no on the strike ballot too). I also will get hit with all the other tax increases that everyone else gets and expect to take a further hit of something in the region of 10% before all this is over. Yes I will have a decent enough pension at the end of it, for which I contribute 11.5% of my income. But for the OP to use a former Taoiseach as the marker for all public sector workers is disingenuous and dishonest. There is a case for some reform in the pensions system, but to demonise public sector workers because the banks destroyed the pensions of other workers is unfair and misses the point. There has been downright shameful, cowardly politics from the government on this issue and I am sick to death of the demonisation of the public sector. Of course some of the administrative staff should be let go, work practices should be reformed and the public sector as a whole made more efficient. Nobody I work with disputes this, nobody is against reform. The idea that we don't live in the real world is ludicrous. Yes we have job and pension security but we are acutely aware of this but we should not be the focus of demonisation as a result. Of course we have to be realistic, flexible and willing to play our part through new work practices, pay cuts, whatever is needed. We should not be made to suffer unduly for the sins of others, we didn't create this mess.

Carlow52

Carlow52 wrote: »

http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0402/primetime_av.html?2519581,null,230

The earlier part of the program has the Economist predicting bankruptcy unless there is mega pain on 7th

However what i found most illuminating is the The Public Sector Pay Parity Gravy Train
eg: Garret Fitz retired on 18.5k and inflation would have made it 34k now but the pay parity scandal means he is on 105k:mad:
It can be seen at time 09:20 on the clip.

This applies to all public servants and the scandal is exacerbated when you have people on receipt of multiple ministerial and other pensions

All public servants? My dad does a job for the public service that he'd earn three times as much if he went private. By going private I mean he'd be hired by the public service on a contract at a ludicrous rate. (he's one of the only people in the country who can do his job)

I've worked many a job in my lifetime, and some of those jobs were public service jobs. The ratio of people who worked hard and people who deserved firing was almost the same.

This PS crap needs to stop. Most of the anti PS crew havn't got a clue what theyre talking about..

meditraitor

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

This PS crap needs to stop. Most of the anti PS crew havn't got a clue what theyre talking about..

You seem like a knowledgable and experienced chap so can you answer a question for me

I watched the program last night and they said that a few years ago the pension for public sector jobs was a 0% contribution and then when they changed it to a 5% contribution the public sector gave themselves a 5% pay rise to offset it.

Is this true?

Yeah my dad got a pay rise alright.

He actually got back payment for that too. Something like 20k. Only because all the medical grades are linked. Which is a terrible system.

A medical scientist should definitely not be on the same scale as a nurse..

We voted in the party who legislated this though, remember that..

meditraitor

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

Yeah my dad got a pay rise alright.

He actually got back payment for that too. Something like 20k. Only because all the medical grades are linked. Which is a terrible system.

A medical scientist should definitely not be on the same scale as a nurse..

We voted in the party who legislated this though, remember that..

So you understand the resentment out in the real world towards the PS and the reason some people get a bit pissed of with anyone who tries to defend the indefensible.

The OP used the word GRAVY TRAIN and i could not think of a more apt word for the perks the PS enjoy.

Its the good times are over so why should the gravy train be continued?

My dad has given his entire life to the PS. He works in the blood bank btw. I know exactly what you mean though. When I spent a summer there I could have walked in and fired half the staff with a 0% fall in productivity.

Common sense politics has just gone out the window at the moment. And we need it back.

jimmmy

meditraitor wrote: »

So you understand the resentment out in the real world towards the PS and the reason some people get a bit pissed of with anyone who tries to defend the indefensible.

The OP used the word GRAVY TRAIN and i could not think of a more apt word for the perks the PS enjoy.

Its the good times are over so why should the gravy train be continued?

I do not think anyone can continue to justify the gravy train, considering our massive national borrowing and the economic situation. Even a few friends who are retired public servants and who told me of their very high pensions, ( which even they admitted were way too high ) did not try to justify it.

dresden8

jimmmy wrote: »

I do not think anyone can continue to justify the gravy train, considering our massive national borrowing and the economic situation. Even a few friends who are retired public servants and who told me of their very high pensions, ( which even they admitted were way too high ) did not try to justify it.

How many? How much?

We don't want names, just a few facts.

Suffice to say it is far more than they can spend, even with numerous luxury holidays abroad etc.

Seriously? You're having a laugh.

Gumbo

meditraitor wrote: »

You seem like a knowledgable and experienced chap so can you answer a question for me

I watched the program last night and they said that a few years ago the pension for public sector jobs was a 0% contribution and then when they changed it to a 5% contribution the public sector gave themselves a 5% pay rise to offset it.

Is this true?

that cant be true???

my sister in law told me that she has been paying 6.5% of her wages since 1997. (13% now with the levy)

im relatively new to the PS so cant comment on going ons before 2006!

jimmmy wrote: »

I do not think anyone can continue to justify the gravy train, considering our massive national borrowing and the economic situation. Even a few friends who are retired public servants and who told me of their very high pensions, ( which even they admitted were way too high ) did not try to justify it.

considering your on an internet forum, i think you really could mention the job they retired at and what they claim to be earning in a pension. i can then check if its the truth on our pay scale in work. (no privacy issues, all salaries are displayed on our internet, listed by tob title and grade)

P. Breathnach

meditraitor wrote: »

So you understand the resentment out in the real world towards the PS ...

What do you mean by "the real world"? That group that shares your particular set of prejudices? Do those with a different point of view inhabit an unreal world?

When people adopt the techniques of propagandists, it becomes difficult to have a rational debate.

dresden8

Just to throw some facts and figures around Jimmmy's propaganda.

Take a HEO on 57,000. This is as high as most people can hope to reach and higher than a lot will go.

After 40 years of contributions, taxes, levies and whatnot the pension will work out at 28,000 per annum. Contrary to what Jimmmy says most people would have absolutely no problem spending that in a year.

Wow, 28,000 you might say, that's a lot. But hang on, what about the State Pension that comes out of that. (Contrary to what you might hear Civil Servants don't get both, whoever told you they do is a liar)

State Contributory Pension

Personal Rate 230.3 by 52 = 11,975.60
Adult Dependant Rate 206.3 by 52 = 10,276.60

Total State Pension 22,252.20

So out of 28,000 A HEO would get 22,252 from the State Pension and their "Gilt edged" Gold plated public sector pension would give around 6,000 a year.

Obviously for an EO on a max of 48,000 the state pension is nearly all their pension.

I don't know the max for an SO but a CO will only end up with the State Pension and maybe something small above that, or not.

For that six grand a year they're paying

Pension Levy 158 by 26 (fortnightly) = 4,108
Superannuation 32 by 26 = 832
PRSI 56 by 26 = 1,456

Total 6,396


Whoop de doo.

Obviously there's advantages if the missus is dead.

Forgot to say, post 95's are paying more PRSI and superannuation.

dresden8

Oh and of course, private sector do get their state pension and their private pension (what's left of it).

NewDubliner

jimmmy wrote: »

I do not think anyone can continue to justify the gravy train, considering our massive national borrowing and the economic situation. Even a few friends who are retired public servants and who told me of their very high pensions, ( which even they admitted were way too high ) did not try to justify it.

Right, you've got your pathological anti-PS dig in, now contribute something to the discussion.

Let's, for now, let's ignore excessive private sector pensions (especially in the financial sector) which we all have been paying for in terms of higher prices for goods and services, not to mention bank-bailouts from the public pension fund.

What is you solution for pension provision in the PS? To what extent should the government renege on the pledges given to staff when they took up employment? Should it cap pensions? Cut payments to existing pensioners? Give credit to existing staff and then levy them from now on?

If they must pay a contribution, where does this get invested and how does it get protected against mismanagement (as happened to private-sector funds) or being pillaged (as is happening to the public-sector fund)?

dresden8

Oh, and I forgot, that's if you have your 40 years done. A lot of recruits in recent years have been older and will not get the full ps pension, so like the CO's no matter how much pension levy they pay, they will end up with the state pension equivalent.

A guy I work with is paying 50 euro a week pension contributions for 30 euro a week above the state pension levels.

Gold plated or what?

Jimmmy? Jimmmy?

Where are you Jimmmy?

Have your public sector pensioner friends taken you around the world in a vain attempt to spend their pensions?

Jimmmy?

dresden8

FFS, I forgot to clarify.

Their pension will be a state pension, which will be fully paid for through their PRSI contributions. The levy will gain them nothing.

Jimmmy, still waiting for your numbers. And your Gareth Fitzgerald analogy is a sham, nobody's falling for it.

Compute away.

dresden8

dresden8 wrote: »

FFS, I forgot to clarify.

Their pension will be a state pension, which will be fully paid for through their PRSI contributions. The levy will gain them nothing.

Jimmmy, still waiting for your numbers. And your Gareth Fitzgerald analogy is a sham, nobody's falling for it.

Compute away.

Well, anyone there since before 95 gets about half their wage and then the state pension on top.

NewDubliner

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

Well, anyone there since before 95 gets about half their wage and then the state pension on top.

That's not correct. They don't get the state pension.

dresden8

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

Well, anyone there since before 95 gets about half their wage and then the state pension on top.

No, that's another lie. It is simply not true. It is crap. It is an untruth.

No. No. No.

Pre-95's qualify for practically no insurance schemes, not even dental or optical, never mind the state pension.

FFS, the amount of crap out there is scary.

dresden8

dresden8 wrote: »

No, that's another lie. It is simply not true. It is crap. It is an untruth.

No. No. No.

Pre-95's qualify for practically no insurance schemes, not even dental or optical, never mind the state pension.

FFS, the amount of crap out there is scary.

I'm not just pulling this out of my arse. My dad (My only real source for this PS information) is on half his salary when he's leaving and the state pension too.

Works out at about 70k a year or something ridiculous like that.

dresden8

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

Well, anyone there since before 95 gets about half their wage and then the state pension on top.

Pre-95 civil servants are class B empolyees

People within Class B
Permanent and pensionable civil servants recruited prior to 6 April 1995
Registered doctors and dentists employed in the Civil Service
Gardaí, recruited prior to 6 April 1995
Class B benefits
Widow’s or Widower’s (Contributory) Pension
Guardian’s Payment (Contributory)
Limited Occupational Injuries Benefits
Bereavement Grant
Carer’s Benefit

http://www.welfare.ie/EN/Publications/sw19/Pages/sw19_sect1.aspx

dresden8

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

I'm not just pulling this out of my arse. My dad (My only real source for this PS information) is on half his salary when he's leaving and the state pension too.

Works out at about 70k a year or something ridiculous like that.

The number of public service employees on 140,000 per year is minimal. Do not dare quote this as normal.

Sure I know of 1 private sector employee with a pension pot of 28 million, doesn't make it normal, quotable or even in any way freaking relevant.

ntlbell

dresden8 wrote: »

Oh and of course, private sector do get their state pension and their private pension (what's left of it).

don't private sector's pay for all 3

they pay into their own pension.

they pay for the public sector's pension

and they pay into what will be their state pension?