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

jimmmy

bobbbb wrote: »

Its not an attack.
Its an observation of your statements

Do you normally go around spouting personal attacks against people followed by "That guy is just pulling stuff out of his arse. Its brown and it aint the truth. " ?

dresden8

NewDubliner wrote: »

Stick to facts please.

Jimmmy doesn't do facts. All he needs is what some bloke in the pub told him, that, try as they might, they have so much money they can't spend.

Ridiculous.

jimmmy

dresden8 wrote: »

Jimmmy doesn't do facts.

Well stick to what the RTE programme said so. Never mind what the people in your pub say. ( I never mentioned anyone in the pub, so please stick to facts ).

dresden8

Well the RTE programme didn't discuss the facts as raised in this thread, and neither have you.

Repeating "RTE Programme" like a mantra doesn't actually prove anything.

Real figures about real people have been presented. Discuss those facts please. Feel free to destroy them.

P. Breathnach

jimmmy wrote: »

Well stick to what the RTE programme said so...

Including using the unrepresentative example of a Taoiseach's pension, and being inaccurate on the arrangements for pension contributions?

I don't condone the use of vulgar abuse as a method of argument, but neither do I condone playing fast and loose with facts. And your anecdotal evidence isn't worth a whole lot, either. Not to mention your having a pop at me in this thread.

So yes, let's have some decorum here.

bobbbb

jimmmy wrote: »

Few people in the private sector have a "private" pension ( or any other type of pension for that matter ) as generous as the public sector gravy train pension.

And whose fault is this. Their own faults for not getting themselves in a position to sort out a proper pension for themselves.

Some people are just happy to swim around and collect what pittance falls to them, instead of going out and improving their career prospects so they can have some clout.
Others go out and make career decisions which have a future.
And you begrudge them the rewards they get from their career choice.

Shame on you.

jimmmy

dresden8 wrote: »

Well the RTE programme didn't discuss the facts as raised in this thread, and neither have you.

Get back to the original posters point so.
" 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
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 "

Did you not see the programme,dresden8 ?

jimmmy

bobbbb wrote: »

And whose fault is this. Their own faults for not getting themselves in a position to sort out a proper pension for themselves.

So the people who are not on the public service gravy train are to blame because they did not get a job in the public service ? I suppose you are right, the public service employees are the one with "clout", to use your word, and their considerably higher pay, job security and pensions confirms that. If other people go on strike, nobody cares less, the job can be done by someone else.

dresden8

jimmmy wrote: »

Get back to the original posters point so.
" 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
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 "

Did you not see the programme,dresden8 ?

Did you read my numbers? Without pay parity for most public servants their pension level would drop below the state pension levels. And that's for a relatively senior post of HEO. CO's SO's and EO' would drop below almost immediately.

And using the well known example of politicians plundering of the state through multi-ministerial pensions to suit themselves is not a fair example to use.

It's like saying Michael Fingleton has a 28m pension pot. That proves that all private sector employees will retire with millions. That point is as valid as any of yours.

Not all public servants are ex-ministers or ex-Taoisigh, oddly enough.

You haven't mentioned Gardai with houses in a few posts. What's wrong?

jimmmy

dresden8 wrote: »

Did you read my numbers? Without pay parity for most public servants their pension level would drop below the state pension levels. And that's for a relatively senior post of HEO. CO's SO's and EO' would drop below almost immediately.

Do you admit there was pay parity or not, as exposed in the RTE programme.

The public service pension is more than the state pension. On the RTE news yesterday George Lee said the average public sector wage was € 966.

ardmacha

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

This has been repeated over and over again using the example of a Taoiseach, a job with one person in it and perhaps 4 pensioners!!!

The government collects €6, it gives €5 to workers and €1 to its pensioners. Time goes by, wages go up, so it now gives €10 to workers and €2 to pensioners. Explain exactly what is the problem here or why it is pensioners should not share in the growth in the economy.

Do not say that public sector wages are too high, that is a separate debate not directly related to pensions. Do not say that it is unfair on the private sector, that is a reflection on the incompetence of the private sector pension managers, having a pension that grows in line with the economy should not be a very ambitious investment target!

jimmmy

ardmacha wrote: »

This has been repeated over and over again using the example of a Taoiseach, a job with one person in it and perhaps 4 pensioners!!!

As the RTE programme explained though, there was pay parity. Other public servants get the exact same proportion of their salary as pension, do they not ?

ardmacha wrote: »

The government collects €6, it gives €5 to workers and €1 to its pensioners. Time goes by, wages go up, so it now gives €10 to workers and €2 to pensioners. Explain exactly what is the problem here

I think your ratio of 1 to 5 may be a bit out. Ask the CSO. On second thoughts, do not ask them, they would not help you. Problem is the country is borrowing 25,000,000,000.00, this year alone, some of that to pay section of the public sector wages + pensions bill.

ardmacha wrote: »

why it is pensioners should not share in the growth in the economy.

No reason ....but perhaps some with public sector pensions of say € 100,000 and over, if not € 50,000 and over, should share in the contraction of the economy. They mostly have their mortgages paid off, kids educated etc ...why do they need such high pensions ?

ardmacha wrote: »

Do not say that public sector wages are too high,

No, let someone else say it. George Lee for example, says its 966 on average.

ardmacha wrote: »

Do not say that it is unfair on the private sector,

Why ? They are the biggest part of the workforce and do not have the same pay, security , pension etc.

ardmacha wrote: »

that is a reflection on the incompetence of the private sector pension managers

so you think all fund managers in the world are incompetent ? If you think the public sector could do fund management more efficiently ( lol ! ), perhaps it could be nationalised, and EVERYONE in the state could get the equivalent of a public sector pension ?

bobbbb

jimmmy wrote: »

So the people who are not on the public service gravy train are to blame because they did not get a job in the public service ? I suppose you are right, the public service employees are the one with "clout", to use your word, and their considerably higher pay, job security and pensions confirms that. If other people go on strike, nobody cares less, the job can be done by someone else.

You dont get it at all do you. People end up on a career path that either they make happen. Its all about your choices.

If you dont organize a pension for yourself and a decent job, then tough. Its your own fault.

I know who you are now. George Lee

thebouldwhacker

The banks, developers and leaders have SCREWED us all.
What are we doing about it? Are we organising and coming up with solutions?
Is anyone saying since we bailed out the banks every one that has a fixed rate morgage is allowed go back to variable (this would get a lot of families out of trouble today) or maybe help profitable businesses to stay afloat?

NO!

We are being divided and conqured:

Your public, you have a pension
or
Your private, you had the tiger

It was greed and selfishness that got us here and their still guiding us by the look of it.

Many people here are just bitching and moaning, but what are you doing about things?

I am helping my house mate out with his rent when since his hours have been cut in half, I'm involved in other community incentives too which make practical differences.
I'm sure plenty of people are saying oh good for you arn't you just a do gooder, no, I'm just a doer!!

There are every day people out there that can not even feed their family and unless people like you and me start making every day changes we arn't gonna be going very far towards turning this mess around!!!

You think the government are going to do anything? (still think it was co incidence that bertie left when he did, or did he see the train coming???)

Quit yer pointless and destructive splitting & bitchen, blame those who really ARE to blame for this mess and start helping!

dresden8

Jimmy did you not see the RTE Programme where Brian Goggin admitted he was paid 2 million.

Oh my God, the private sector are paid 2 million, the RTE Programme said so!

ardmacha

Other public servants get the exact same proportion of their salary as pension, do they not ?

Not really, as the pension is the difference between 50% of salary and the old age pension the Taoiseach as the highest paid individual gets more pension as a percentage than anyone else.

I think your ratio of 1 to 5 may be a bit out.

As above you pension is the difference between 50% and the OAP. Even being generous and say that the public service pension is twice the OAP, then this is 33% of salary for say 15 years or 5 years pay. You work 40 years, 5/40 is only one eighth, not one fifth.

Problem is the country is borrowing 25,000,000,000.00, this year alone, some of that to pay section of the public sector wages + pensions bill.

True, the private sector, the banks, the builders and the developers have f***ed up big time.

but perhaps some with public sector pensions of say € 100,000 and over, if not € 50,000 and over, should share in the contraction of the economy.

They certainly should, as I said as employees on €50000 have had a cut why should pensioners on €1000000 not also. Salary links should work both ways.

and EVERYONE in the state could get the equivalent of a public sector pension ?

This is the logical conclusion. There should be a compulsory PRSI payments into a pension twice what it is now, people could top this up with further private contributions but they would have a decent pension if these didn't work out.

thebouldwhacker

thebouldwhacker wrote: »

The banks, developers and leaders have SCREWED us all.
What are we doing about it? Are we organising and coming up with solutions?
Is anyone saying since we bailed out the banks every one that has a fixed rate morgage is allowed go back to variable (this would get a lot of families out of trouble today) or maybe help profitable businesses to stay afloat?

NO!

We are being divided and conqured:

Your public, you have a pension
or
Your private, you had the tiger

It was greed and selfishness that got us here and their still guiding us by the look of it.

Many people here are just bitching and moaning, but what are you doing about things?

I am helping my house mate out with his rent when since his hours have been cut in half, I'm involved in other community incentives too which make practical differences.
I'm sure plenty of people are saying oh good for you arn't you just a do gooder, no, I'm just a doer!!

There are every day people out there that can not even feed their family and unless people like you and me start making every day changes we arn't gonna be going very far towards turning this mess around!!!

You think the government are going to do anything? (still think it was co incidence that bertie left when he did, or did he see the train coming???)

Quit yer pointless and destructive splitting & bitchen, blame those who really ARE to blame for this mess and start helping!

I'll say it one more. time.. see if it makes any difference...

Oh and in the last few minutes one of the Fine Gael TD's said 'we dont have to do anything, the government are doing such a bad job all we have to do is turn up with an economic plan'

Yea great alternitive there then:mad:

NewDubliner

ardmacha wrote: »

This is the logical conclusion. There should be a compulsory PRSI payments into a pension twice what it is now,

The money collected to be invested in a special fund, ring-fenced so that it can't be used for other purposes. We could call the fund the 'National Pension Reserve Fund':rolleyes:

K-9

jimmmy wrote: »

Get back to the original posters point so.
" 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
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 "

Did you not see the programme,dresden8 ?

Therein lies the problem. The pensions bill is rising at a higher rate than even the pay bill.

http://www.finfacts.ie/irishfinancenews/article_1015198.shtml

ardmacha wrote: »

The government collects €6, it gives €5 to workers and €1 to its pensioners. Time goes by, wages go up, so it now gives €10 to workers and €2 to pensioners. Explain exactly what is the problem here or why it is pensioners should not share in the growth in the economy.

That isn't the case. As time goes on the Govt. is giving more to pensioers as a percentage of the pay bill.

dresden8

Ok, some more facts that Jimmmy is so fond of. Similar to my earlier post. All are post 95'ers on the standard scale. And yes it is ignoring the lump sum.


State Contributory Pension (Which is paid for by PRSI Contributions)

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 This is paid first and then the public service pension tops up to the amounts below.


Clerical Officer

Max Pay €38,593

Max Pension €19,296

Value of 40 years of superannuation and pension levy = Nil.

Staff Officer

Max Pay €47,906

Max Pension €€23,853

Value of 40 years of superannuation and pension levy = 1,300 per annum or €25 per week.

Executive Officer

Max Pay €49,809

Max Pension €24,904.50

Value of 40 years of superannuation and pension levy = 2,652.30 per annum or €51 per week.

Higher Executive Officer

Max Pay €60,693

Max Pension €30,346

Value of 40 years of superannuation and pension levy = €8,111.80 or €156 per week.


And take into account that a lot of civil servants will not have their 40 years done and will qualify for less, for example a guy who works with me who won't have his 40 years done and is paying €50 a week to get back €30.

The levy is calculated on all payments, even those that do not give any pension entitlement for example, overtime. I wonder if this will make an interesting case in a few years.

And that's with pay parity.

Now Jimmmy must set his sights quite low if that qualifies as a gravy train.

K-9

My view on that would be the State Pension is ridiculously high.

K-9

In 2008-2009, the full basic State Pension is £90.70 a week for a single person and £145.05 a week for a couple, but your individual circumstances may affect the amount you get.
A State Pension forecast will tell you the current value of your State Pension and the amount you may get at State Pension age.


We pay about double the UK Pension.


It is starting to dawn on me that not alone did the Govt. waste the last 5/6 years of Property unsustainable bubble taxes, they have committed us high pay/pension expenditure for the foreseeable future.



From: http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/MoneyTaxAndBenefits/PensionsAndRetirement/StatePension/DG_10014671

dresden8

NewDubliner wrote: »

The money collected to be invested in a special fund, ring-fenced so that it can't be used for other purposes. We could call the fund the 'National Pension Reserve Fund':rolleyes:

Yes, and when rich people get into trouble we can give it to them.

Win win.

bobbbb

ardmacha wrote: »

This is the logical conclusion. There should be a compulsory PRSI payments into a pension twice what it is now, people could top this up with further private contributions but they would have a decent pension if these didn't work out.

I agree 100% with that.

Or at least make it COMPULSORY to pay 10% of your wages into a Pension fund.

meditraitor

p.breathnach wrote:

jimmmy, there is no secret about how public service pensions are computed, yet you post here as if something had been exposed that only public service pensioners and trusted confidants like yourself knew.
In fact, there was an error in the Prime Time report when it was said that the pension scheme was non-contributory before 1995; that was not true for the whole public service.


I have a medium size public service pension. I am not laughing at anybody.

In discussing public affairs, it is inappropriate to demonise people.

And it might seem small to a different set of others.

I have no great interest in the financial situation of Garrett Fitzgerald, and have no idea if the claims made are accurate. But the claim that "this applies to all public servants" involves a distortion, because the Taoiseach's pay rate was increased way out of proportion to pay rates generally.



You are using cheap sarcasm to impute to me an attitude that I do not have.

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.
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.
You consistently make this meaningless comparison. A valid comparison involves like with like.

Including using the unrepresentative example of a Taoiseach's pension, and being inaccurate on the arrangements for pension contributions?

I don't condone the use of vulgar abuse as a method of argument, but neither do I condone playing fast and loose with facts. And your anecdotal evidence isn't worth a whole lot, either. Not to mention your having a pop at me in this thread.

So yes, let's have some decorum here.

I have attached your complete contribution to this thread so you can see what I see!
Vacuos zero value posts which only serve to invoke a feeling that you may be arrogant

When I said people in the real world is was a knee jerk reaction to the fact that when Civil servants were made contribute 5% to the pensions they gave themselves a pay rise of 5%
Can you not see why I was disturbed after being made aware of this fact?
Please address this and give me your honest opinion....

Maybe you should look over the thread and look at the posts made by dresdon for example, he probably has the same views as you but he has changed my begrudgery views slightly by consise and reasoned replys and contributions.

2c

P. Breathnach

meditraitor wrote: »

I have attached your complete contribution to this thread so you can see what I see!

And you stripped everything out of its context and added emphasis in ways that I did not. That makes it a dishonest representation of what I have said.

Vacuos zero value posts which only serve to invoke a feeling that you may be arrogant

Personal abuse is not allowed here.

When I said people in the real world is was a knee jerk reaction to the fact that when Civil servants were made contribute 5% to the pensions they gave themselves a pay rise of 5%

Knee-jerk or not, it's a form of expression that is prejudicial.

Can you not see why I was disturbed after being made aware of this fact?
Please address this and give me your honest opinion....

First off, Civil Servants do not set their own pay. That is done by government, usually after negotiation.

The point about adjusting pay to cover pension contributions is one I have addressed before on this forum. Prior to the 1995 restructuring, civil servants' pension contributions were imputed. By that I mean that they were always there in the background, and in 1995 they were brought into the foreground. There is grade and pay equivalence between local authority staff and civil servants. Prior to 1995 local authority staff had just over 5% more than their civil servant equivalents, but paid pension contributions of 5%, making their remuneration exactly equivalent. In 1995, civil servants were effectively changed to the same payment arrangements as their local authority peer grades.

Maybe you should look over the thread and look at the posts made by dresdon for example, he probably has the same views as you but he has changed my begrudgery views slightly by consise and reasoned replys and contributions.

2c

It would be redundant for me to make the same arguments as somebody else. In any event, despite your suppositions, I don't have quite the same views as dresden8.

dresden8

Lads

You're moving away from the point of the thread into the "I said" NO "you said" form of bullsh1ttery that tends to prevail in threads.

Some important myths have been busted here.

Discuss on!

p.s. And I didn't know the background to the 5%. Good point.

K-9

dresden8 wrote: »

Lads

You're moving away from the point of the thread into the "I said" NO "you said" form of bullsh1ttery that tends to prevail in threads.

Some important myths have been busted here.

Discuss on!

p.s. And I didn't know the background to the 5%. Good point.

Yes, but when the PS point out the 5% extra PRSI part, they never seem to mention they got paid 5% extra to compensate! So it kind of is redundant.

It's akin to me paying the new income levy of 1% but my boss paying me 1% extra! LOL

dresden8

K-9 wrote: »

Yes, but when the PS point out the 5% extra PRSI part, they never seem to mention they got paid 5% extra to compensate! So it kind of is redundant.

It's akin to me paying the new income levy of 1% but my boss paying me 1% extra! LOL

Indeed, but those public sector pensions I quoted include that 5%. What would they be without it? Calculate away.

K-9

dresden8 wrote: »

Indeed, but those public sector pensions I quoted include that 5%. What would they be without it? Calculate away.

Don't need to.

PRSI goes towards the State pension!