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

kippy

ardmacha wrote: »

Since you seem well informed on this matter, why don't you post this information and an explanation of the various grades, the people in them, any bonus payments etc and details on the pensions scheme.

Yeah, I wouldnt mind seeing this information either.
Jimmy has been know to post "facts" before which have later turned out to be half truths.

K-9

kippy wrote: »

Jimmy,
Do you Understand the concept of living costs and the links it has with wages?
Its a circle that needs to be broken in THIS country.
House prices/Rents/Car Prices/Food and Essentials prices are ALL higher here than they are in Germany,services etc (in the most general of terms)
If these prices were kept low or lower I would consider the fact that wages IN GENERAL in this country are higher than they are elsewhere is a bad and unfair thing. That doesnt seem to be the case however.
The reason the Public service wanted "MORE" was because their private sector colleagues were doing well in the good times, thus forcing the costs of living up. I have no problems with benchmarking the other way, but really living costs HAVE to come down to help justify that.
Kippy

House prices are coming down, up to 40% in one report, as have interest rates. The problem is many are paying for inflated house prices in their mortgage now and will be for 20/30/40 years.

Rents are down, I'd advise anybody paying rent to negotiate a reduction with their landlord.

Second hand car prices are way down, some great value out there.

Food prices are down as well.

kippy

K-9 wrote: »

House prices are coming down, up to 40% in one report, as have interest rates. The problem is many are paying for inflated house prices in their mortgage now and will be for 20/30/40 years.

Rents are down, I'd advise anybody paying rent to negotiate a reduction with their landlord.

Second hand car prices are way down, some great value out there.

Food prices are down as well.

And as I said,
I have no problems with benchmarking down to reflect that.......
However,
I very much doubt they are lower than that in Germany, in general, even now......
Kippy

jimmmy

K-9 wrote: »

House prices are coming down, up to 40% in one report, as have interest rates. The problem is many are paying for inflated house prices in their mortgage now and will be for 20/30/40 years.

Rents are down, I'd advise anybody paying rent to negotiate a reduction with their landlord.

Second hand car prices are way down, some great value out there.

Food prices are down as well.

So is oil ( compared to last Summer / Autumn ) and many other things. We are in the EU, there is nothing to stop public servants or anyone else shopping in other EC countries. Many Rep. of Ireland people do ; witness the amount of southern cars in N.I. , the expansion of online shopping etc. Living costs have come down ; if the Irish taxpayer did not have to carry the overpaid public sector they would come down more. If a public servant thinks someone in private industry is ripping him / her off, why not set up in business and make your fortune ? lol

jimmmy

kippy wrote: »

Jimmy has been know to post "facts" before which have later turned out to be half truths.

That is a serious allegation and I would like you to prove it.

Naz_st

dresden8 wrote: »

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.

Forgive me if I misinterpreted (this whole area is unnecessarily confusing IMHO), but don't your numbers assume a single-income, two-person household with the spouse having no social welfare entitlement of their own? (e.g. not every pensioner has an adult dependent and not all adult dependents have no income of their own, be it pension or otherwise)

Without the relevant statistics on the percentage of households that conform to the above, shouldn't you really only take the first number as the state pension component for this analysis?

This would obviously change the numbers significantly.

jimmmy

kippy wrote: »

The reason the Public service wanted "MORE" was because their private sector colleagues were doing well in the good times, thus forcing the costs of living up.

awwww....so you think "their private sector colleagues were doing well in the good times". How sweet. Please can you show me the statistics to show how well they were doing. George Lee says ( on the RTE news last week if u want to know ) that the average public sector wage is € 966 per week. This does not take in to account the still subsidised pension, and the job security, and the average shorter week, and the average more sickies taken. Was the average private sector worker making more than 966 p.w. even during the good times ?

K-9

jimmmy wrote: »

awwww....so you think "their private sector colleagues were doing well in the good times". How sweet. Please can you show me the statistics to show how well they were doing. George Lee says ( on the RTE news last week if u want to know ) that the average public sector wage is € 966 per week. This does not take in to account the still subsidised pension, and the job security, and the average shorter week, and the average more sickies taken. Was the average private sector worker making more than 966 p.w. even during the good times ?

Interestingly the first benchmarking actually showed it was Public Sector workers who were doing well in 2001/02. Of course, that was brushed under the carpet.

ixoy

I haven't seen any mention of the lump sum given out on retirement here - is that only for the civil service or the public service as a whole? I believe it's 3/80 per year of service up to 40 years (i.e. 150% of the final annual wage).

kippy

jimmmy wrote: »

That is a serious allegation and I would like you to prove it.

You are the one talking about German public servents on half the money that Irish Public servents are on. You prove it.
Lets say for Clerical Officer. Bottom of the scale in both countries. Do a comparison there now, good man.

jimmmy wrote: »

awwww....so you think "their private sector colleagues were doing well in the good times". How sweet. Please can you show me the statistics to show how well they were doing. George Lee says ( on the RTE news last week if u want to know ) that the average public sector wage is € 966 per week. This does not take in to account the still subsidised pension, and the job security, and the average shorter week, and the average more sickies taken. Was the average private sector worker making more than 966 p.w. even during the good times ?

Obviously not all of them were doing well in the "good times" but on a like for like basis they were actually doing very well. I am speaking about, like for like jobs here. No point in making a comparison between an unqualified shop assistant versus a Sys Admin with a degree, multiple professional qualifications and a few years experience behind them.

The average private sector worker isnt as well qualified as the majority of new entrants to the Public sector. Again, your lack of comparison between like with like is shocking.
You've already been knocked down TIME AND TIME again on this and other thread on pension entitlements. You chose to ignore what you are being told.

jimmmy wrote: »

So is oil ( compared to last Summer / Autumn ) and many other things. We are in the EU, there is nothing to stop public servants or anyone else shopping in other EC countries. Many Rep. of Ireland people do ; witness the amount of southern cars in N.I. , the expansion of online shopping etc. Living costs have come down ; if the Irish taxpayer did not have to carry the overpaid public sector they would come down more. If a public servant thinks someone in private industry is ripping him / her off, why not set up in business and make your fortune ? lol

Indeed there isnt, but really can you see anyone going to buy a residence in Germany and working in Ireland, or spending the time and money to get to Germany to buy a car or to head to Germany to buy their daily shopping.......
For the UMPTEENTH TIME the IRISH TAXPAYER also includes members of the PUBLIC SERVICE. We ALL pay tax here.
If a private sector worker things that the Public Service is such a good number why they HELL didnt they join them when they could?

jimmmy wrote: »

That is a serious allegation and I would like you to prove it.

1. "If the Irish taxpayer did not have to carry the overpaid public sector they would come down more."
2. You've stated in this and other threads absolute mistruths about the Irish Pensions System. you've been corrected multiple times but still chose to ignore what actually happens.
3. Public Servant holidays. On Multiple threads you state that holidays in the PS are routinely 31 days per Annum. They are not, this has been pointed out many times.
4. You routinely state that, like in your last post, that the average public sector wage is 966 which is true, without taking into account the amount of HIGHLY qualified people working in the Public sector.
5. There are others too numerous to mention. All to help with your vendetta against the public service.

I've said umpteen times, I agree with some of your stand points but the way you go about articulating them is plainly wrong.

By the way, where were you for the last 10 years when the government gave away all these raises to PS and other sectors (including Private sector workers)?

kippy

K-9 wrote: »

Interestingly the first benchmarking actually showed it was Public Sector workers who were doing well in 2001/02. Of course, that was brushed under the carpet.

Interesting, have you a link to this? wouldnt mind a read of this as it was before me starting in the Public service.

NewDubliner

jimmmy wrote: »

That is a serious allegation and I would like you to prove it.

For examble, You've stated on at least one occasion, if not more, that

jimmmy wrote: »

Over 50% of the people in the private sector do not have a pension.

K-9

kippy wrote: »

Interesting, have you a link to this? wouldnt mind a read of this as it was before me starting in the Public service.

No bothers. Statistics and all that , but still they appear to raise serious questions about the process.

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

NewDubliner wrote: »

For examble, You've stated on at least one occasion, if not more, that

He is actually correct on the over 50% part.

Mary Hanafin of all people.

http://www.finfacts.ie/irishfinancenews/article_1013829.shtml

kippy

K-9 wrote: »

No bothers.

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



He is actually correct on the over 50% part.

Mary Hanafin of all people.

http://www.finfacts.ie/irishfinancenews/article_1013829.shtml

Thanks for that will have a read of that later.
Surely everyone working (paying PRSI) is entitled to a state pension of some sort?

Kippy

K-9

kippy wrote: »

Thanks for that will have a read of that later.
Surely everyone working (paying PRSI) is entitled to a state pension of some sort?

Kippy

Actually was going to edit my post to reflect that as it would be brought up.

Indeed, that is what PRSI is for.

Indeed, everybody is entitled to a pension, PRSI paid or not, obviously they have to satisfy a means test though.

Unless we should have no state pensions, I don't see it as a valid point?

NewDubliner

K-9 wrote: »

He is actually correct on the over 50% part.

Mary Hanafin of all people.

http://www.finfacts.ie/irishfinancenews/article_1013829.shtml

Are you certain it's not just referring to 'occupational pensions'?

kippy

K-9 wrote: »

Actually was going to edit my post to reflect that as it would be brought up.

Indeed, that is what PRSI is for.

Indeed, everybody is entitled to a pension, PRSI paid or not, obviously they have to satisfy a means test though.

Unless we should have no state pensions, I don't see it as a valid point?

But surely, if a person in the private sector (working) doesnt have a pension scheme of some sort or aren't putting away money for retirement, it is their own fault (or perhaps that of their employer)?
The employers of the public sector, the state, force their employees to pay into a pension fund whether they like it or not and for the benefit of their spouse and child whether they have them or not (I am not complaining about this, just pointing out the difference between private and public workers in this regard) They can off course supplement this if they like with AVC's or other schemes.

There are/were/have been plenty options to set up a pension scheme for ones self for the last number of years. (Based on loses of most of these schemes of late it is perhaps a better time to set one up now, in safer assets.)

As I said, there could be better uses made of money people pay into pension schemed, both private and public however I dont see any of that happening (sadly) any time soon.

I cant see how a private sector worker not having a pension scheme can be blamed on Public sector pensions......surely it is a failure of regulation, administration of that scheme and generally a failure by those that govern to properly monitor these areas?

K-9

NewDubliner wrote: »

Are you certain it's not just referring to 'occupational pensions'?

As against?

kippy wrote: »

But surely, if a person in the private sector (working) doesnt have a pension scheme of some sort or aren't putting away money for retirement, it is their own fault (or perhaps that of their employer)?

Considering 20/25% of the Private Sector are on minimum wage and a majority are on less than the av. industrial wage, I think the above is a nice ideal, how achievable it is when they pay the high house prices/rent/car prices/food prices that you referred to earlier, I don't know.

The article does give ideas on increasing pension cover.

kippy wrote:

The employers of the public sector, the state, force their employees to pay into a pension fund whether they like it or not and for the benefit of their spouse and child whether they have them or not (I am not complaining about this, just pointing out the difference between private and public workers in this regard) They can off course supplement this if they like with AVC's or other schemes.

There are/were/have been plenty options to set up a pension scheme for ones self for the last number of years. (Based on loses of most of these schemes of late it is perhaps a better time to set one up now, in safer assets.)

As I said, there could be better uses made of money people pay into pension schemed, both private and public however I dont see any of that happening (sadly) any time soon.

I cant see how a private sector worker not having a pension scheme can be blamed on Public sector pensions......

Blame? I don't know were you got that from?

Private Sector employers actually pay pension contributions as do employees. It's PRSI. It may be too low, but they still pay it.

It actually should be a good time to set up a pension, well at least until the next crash that always happens!

NewDubliner

kippy wrote: »

But surely, if a person in the private sector (working) doesnt have a pension scheme of some sort or aren't putting away money for retirement, it is their own fault (or perhaps that of their employer)? ...
I cant see how a private sector worker not having a pension scheme can be blamed on Public sector pensions......

At a minimum, private sector workers DO have a pension plan, it's compulsory and part-funded by PRSI contributions. The pension is gold-plated, state-guaranteed and index-linked.

In addition to this, some private sector workers pay some money into occupational pension plans, sometimes with additional payments made on their behalf by their employers. This provides an extra pension in addition to the state pension.

For the public sector, the staff generally don't pay anything extra and the employer (the state) guarantees a pension of up to 1/2 salary (when the PRSI-funded state pension is factored in) to those who survive to to claim it.

The issue is that now that some employers are no longer contributing to employee pension schemes and are no longer guaranteeing the amount of the eventual pension. As a result of this, the private sector employees want the same disadvantages imposed on public sector employees, but not on those private-sector employees fortunate enough to have equally good pension plans.

Those who are only certain of the (non-means-tested) state pension, exaggerate their position by claiming that they have 'no pension'.

kippy

K-9 wrote: »

Considering 20/25% of the Private Sector are on minimum wage and a majority are on less than the av. industrial wage, I think the above is a nice ideal, how achievable it is when they pay the high house prices/rent/car prices/food prices that you referred to earlier, I don't know.

I was there long enough, I know how it feels. I worked and studied my way into a better paid job. Sorry, I do hate to be harsh about these things, but thats the reality. Unless you are intending to pay everyone the same no matter what they do then this is reality.

[/quote]

K-9 wrote: »

The article does give ideas on increasing pension cover.

Will check that out later if I have a chance.

K-9 wrote: »

Blame? I don't know were you got that from?

Private Sector employers actually pay pension contributions as do employees. It's PRSI. It may be too low, but they still pay it.

It actually should be a good time to set up a pension, well at least until the next crash that always happens!

This whole post is about blame from what I can see......
As you said, "Unless we should have no state pensions, I don't see it as a valid point? " , in relation to PRSI.
It should be higher no doubt and the cap should be taken off it also. But we all pay it.

K-9

NewDubliner wrote: »

At a minimum, private sector workers DO have a pension plan, it's compulsory and part-funded by PRSI contributions. The pension is gold-plated, state-guaranteed and index-linked.

As do post 95 PS'ers. Not being smart, but what's the point? Unless you think they shouldn't get it?

NewDubliner wrote:

In addition to this, some private sector workers pay some money into occupational pension plans, sometimes with additional payments made on their behalf by their employers. This provides an extra pension in addition to the state pension.

Sorry, that was never under dispute. You specifically pointed out Jimmmys post on less than 50% of the Private Sector not having Pension cover. I'm pointing out he was indeed correct. Other than you having some point about State Pensions, he is indeed correct.

If you disagree, maybe you can post a link?

NewDubliner wrote:

For the public sector, the staff generally don't pay anything extra and the employer (the state) guarantees a pension of up to 1/2 salary (when the PRSI-funded state pension is factored in) to those who survive to to claim it.

The issue is that now that some employers are no longer contributing to employee pension schemes and are no longer guaranteeing the amount of the eventual pension. As a result of this, the private sector employees want the same disadvantages imposed on public sector employees, but not on those private-sector employees fortunate enough to have equally good pension plans.

Those who are only certain of the (non-means-tested) state pension, exaggerate their position by claiming that they have 'no pension'.

That does seem to be the Public Servant view alright. Again, unless they shouldn't have a right to a state pension, I don't see your point.

kippy wrote: »

I was there long enough, I know how it feels. I worked and studied my way into a better paid job. Sorry, I do hate to be harsh about these things, but thats the reality. Unless you are intending to pay everyone the same no matter what they do then this is reality.


Will check that out later if I have a chance.

This whole post is about blame from what I can see......
As you said, "Unless we should have no state pensions, I don't see it as a valid point? " , in relation to PRSI.
It should be higher no doubt and the cap should be taken off it also. But we all pay it.

Yep, the cap is ridiculous.

K-9

kippy wrote: »

I was there long enough, I know how it feels. I worked and studied my way into a better paid job. Sorry, I do hate to be harsh about these things, but thats the reality. Unless you are intending to pay everyone the same no matter what they do then this is reality.

Again I'm unsure of your point. I've explained to you why over 50% don't have pension cover. I don't really see what your point is. Ideally nobody should be on minimum wage or less than the av. ind. wage but there you are! The joys of capitalism!

I noticed though how you pointed to high house prices/rent/food prices when benchmarking down was pointed out, but when I point out the exact same thing to you, it's tough!

Kippy wrote:

This whole post is about blame from what I can see......

Not really, just pointing out information, that's all.

bobbbb

K-9 wrote: »

Considering 20/25% of the Private Sector are on minimum wage and a majority are on less than the av. industrial wage

Those people have only themselves to blame for the fact that they cont sort out their pensions for themselves and the fact that they are on minimum wage.

Pay attention in school kids. When your teacher tells you that you need to do well in education and work at your career to get ahead they mean it.

You cant make a career out out of crying when someone else worked at it and has reaped the rewards.

K-9

bobbbb wrote: »

Those people have only themselves to blame for the fact that they cont sort out their pensions for themselves and the fact that they are on minimum wage.

Pay attention in school kids. When your teacher tells you that you need to do well in education and work at your career to get ahead they mean it.

You cant make a career out out of crying when someone else worked at it and has reaped the rewards.

So if everybody pays attention at school, nobody will be on minimum wage?

NewDubliner

K-9 wrote: »

Sorry, that was never under dispute. You specifically pointed out Jimmmys post on less than 50% of the Private Sector not having Pension cover. I'm pointing out he was indeed correct. Other than you having some point about State Pensions, he is indeed correct.

So other than being wrong, he's right. :rolleyes:

K-9

NewDubliner wrote: »

So other than being wrong, he's right. :rolleyes:

Not really. Everybody, Public and Private Sector get the State contributory pension if they have paid enough PRSI. Therefor I can't really see why it is being made a point of.

Indeed everybody, PRSI or not is entitled to an universal pension, with means test conditions.

NewDubliner

K-9 wrote: »

Not really. Everybody, Public and Private Sector get the State contributory pension if they have paid enough PRSI. Therefor I can't really see why it is being made a point of.

Because, he claimed that 50% of private sector workers had no pension, when in fact they do.

It's significant misrepresentation.

K-9

NewDubliner wrote: »

Because, he claimed that 50% of private sector workers had no pension, when in fact they do.

It's significant misrepresentation.

OK then, everybody has a pension!

NewDubliner

K-9 wrote: »

OK then, everybody has a pension!

Good. But the point was that jimmmy wanted proof that he spread half-truths.


This is true:
Some pensions (public sector and private sector) are better than others.

K-9

NewDubliner wrote: »

Good. But the point was that jimmmy wanted proof that he did not spread half-truths.


This is true:
Some pensions (public sector and private sector) are better than others.

And it's far to bloody high, or, more accurately, you get very little extra for all those years of PRSI.

I'm sure Jimmmy will clarify, but I think on that one, you are being a bit harsh and semantic.

Unless you think we shouldn't have state pensions?