I am paying more for somebodys public sector pension than my own Private pension

solice

jimmmy wrote: »

Ah...but some in the public service do....take grahamo for example....he implies he is in the public service and earns more than the 966 average, and he was a regular contributer during the day ( earlier this week he spent 20 / 25 minutes one morning posting....he trried to explain it as his tea break but then I pointed out he got an awful lot of long tea breaks !....now he is afraid to post during the day for the first time in ages! So while there are no doubt some who would not be " wasting their free time on an internet messaging board trying to highlight the truths about the Public Sector" as you say, we all know of p.s. people / friends etc who willingly admit they do not spend all their time at work as productively as they should . Ah shure I am sure you will justify that by saying the private sector is the same.

Jimmy, I agree with your argument, I think the pension situation is a disgrace and alot more needs to be done. The salaries also need to be looked at.

But you have a terrible way of presenting yourself and your arguments.

grahamo

jimmmy wrote: »

....not very clear grammar there. Maybe the point you are trying to make is that you are not on the average public sector wage of 966 per week, which is the average as confirmed by their own C.S.O., no less.




Ah...but some in the public service do....take grahamo for example....he implies he is in the public service and earns more than the 966 average, and he was a regular contributer during the day ( earlier this week he spent 20 / 25 minutes one morning posting....he trried to explain it as his tea break but then I pointed out he got an awful lot of long tea breaks !....now he is afraid to post during the day for the first time in ages! So while there are no doubt some who would not be " wasting their free time on an internet messaging board trying to highlight the truths about the Public Sector" as you say, we all know of p.s. people / friends etc who willingly admit they do not spend all their time at work as productively as they should . Ah shure I am sure you will justify that by saying the private sector is the same.

:D Entertaining as always Jimmmy, although you are starting to scrape the barrel a bit now.:rolleyes:

Whats wrong, can you not find a post to plagiarise? :rolleyes:

Oh, by the way, I don't post so much lately as I'm getting seriously bored with having to reply to exactly the same copied and pasted posts over and over again.
I do check back occasionally though to find out if you have backed up any of your claims. I see you still haven't!:)

Riskymove

grahamo wrote: »

:D Entertaining as always Jimmmy, although you are starting to scrape the barrel a bit now.:rolleyes:

Whats wrong, can you not find a post to plagiarise? :rolleyes:

Oh, by the way, I don't post so much lately as I'm getting seriously bored with having to reply to exactly the same copied and pasted posts over and over again.
I do check back occasionally though to find out if you have backed up any of your claims. I see you still haven't!:)

+1

I was hoping when there hadn't been much activity on the thread since yesterday evening that it may be finally dwindling away but alas!!

I am surprised that jimmy can be so personal in his comments with such impunity though!

jimmmy

solice wrote: »

The salaries also need to be looked at.

Do you agree that pay and pensions need to be cut in the public sector or not? If so, and bearing in mind that public expenditure has more or less doubled since 2003, how much do you think the cuts should be, on average?

jimmmy

grahamo wrote: »

Oh, by the way, I don't post so much lately as I'm getting seriously bored with having to reply to exactly the same copied and pasted posts over and over again.
I do check back occasionally though to find out if you have backed up any of your claims. I see you still haven't!:)

I have backed up all of my claims. The claim that you spent 20 / 25 minutes one morning earlier this week posting, during one of your frequent public service "tea breaks", can easily be verified by looking at your posting history.:D Possibly if I went back further than this week I could find more, but I cannot be bothered.

grahamo

Riskymove wrote: »

+1

I was hoping when there hadn't been much activity on the thread since yesterday evening that it may be finally dwindling away but alas!!

I am surprised that jimmy can be so personal in his comments with such impunity though!

They couldn't possibly punish him for his posts. I think the mods, just like the rest of us, must find his rants entertaining and amusing:D:D

jimmmy

You cannot argue with facts, grahamo. Anyway, do not feel guilty about being on the net during the day so much, during your long tea breaks etc. I am sure whoever pays your wages etc etc does not mind, shure everyone does it a bit

grahamo

jimmmy wrote: »

I have backed up all of my claims. The claim that you spent 20 / 25 minutes one morning earlier this week posting, during one of your frequent public service "tea breaks", can easily be verified by looking at your posting history.:D Possibly if I went back further than this week I could find more, but I cannot be bothered.

Where did you back up your claims Jimmmy? I must have missed those posts:rolleyes:

Riskymove

jimmmy wrote: »

You cannot argue with facts,

but you can certainly try to make them up:pac:

jimmmy

grahamo wrote: »

Where did you back up your claims Jimmmy?

Which claim did I not back up grahamo ? Please back up your claim that "I have not backed up any of my claims"......as it does not take much reasearch to see I have indeed backed up at least some of my claims.

See, caught out again , grahamo:D. And to think that you are one of the better paid ( paid more than the € 966 average per week : source c.s.o ) public servants. What hope is there.

grahamo

jimmmy wrote: »

You cannot argue with facts, grahamo. Anyway, do not feel guilty about being on the net during the day so much. Your boss said he does not mind everyone does it a bit

Finally you got me Jimmmy,:eek: like thousands of others I posted on boards between 9-5!
:D LOL!

What facts can I not argue with Jimmmy? You haven't posted any facts!
Just the same old sweeping, baseless generalisations dressed up as fact and posted repeatedly with monotonous regularity!:rolleyes:

Very Entertaining though!:D:D:D

PS I see you still haven't backed up your claims

Riskymove

jimmmy wrote: »

Which claim did I not back up grahamo ? Please back up your claim that "I have not backed up any of my claims"......as it does not take much reasearch to see I have indeed backed up at least some of my claims.

See, caught out again , grahamo:D. And to think that you are one of the better paid ( paid more than the € 966 average per week : source c.s.o ) public servants. What hope is there.

No jimmmy, you should back up your claim that you backed up some of your claims in order to back up your claim that grahamo's claim is not backed up.......

grahamo

Riskymove wrote: »

No jimmmy, you should back up your claim that you backed up some of your claims in order to back up your claim that grahamo's claim is not backed up.......

:D:D:D

Celticfire

.

solice

jimmmy wrote: »

Do you agree that pay and pensions need to be cut in the public sector or not? If so, and bearing in mind that public expenditure has more or less doubled since 2003, how much do you think the cuts should be, on average?

No, and I never said they should be cut for the sake of cutting them and bending over to preceived public opinion. What I did say was that another benchmarking report should be made and depending on that, salaries in the PS should be cut, maintained or increased. We all have to take pain in the current climate, but the pain has to fairly distributed and equitable.

Unless you are working for one of the big 5 accountancy firms or work in the Dept. of Finance, neither you nor I have the ability to say that pay should be cut and decide by how much.

I have my own personal opinions, but I cannot back them up with facts so im not going to post them.

Jimmy im on your side in this but with the petty arguments that you are throwing up about posting during working hours, the length of tea breaks, cost of flights and B&Bs in Australia you have really dragged this thread way off topic and unless it is brought back I would ask that the mods lock it and we can restart another one which encompases fantasy and fiction.

grahamo

Very good post solice. I think its time to lock this thread up though. Its going round in circles.

P. Breathnach

grahamo wrote: »

Very good post solice. I think its time to lock this thread up though. Its going round in circles.

In circles? It's nothing like as tidy as that.

Fighting Irish

grahamo wrote: »

Very good post solice. I think its time to lock this thread up though. Its going round in circles.

let people discuss what they want

jimmmy

grahamo wrote: »

Finally you got me Jimmmy,:eek: like thousands of others I posted on boards between 9-5!
:D LOL!

I caught you out on that long before now grahamo

grahamo wrote: »

What facts can I not argue with Jimmmy? You haven't posted any facts!

The other day I say you frequently posted during the day at work, and you said it was during your tea break. Nice long tea break, when your posting records indicate you posted at 10.38, 10.44, 10.49, 10.57, 10.59 am etc Is that not a fact grahamo ?

grahamo wrote: »

PS I see you still haven't backed up your claims

Have I not now ? As I said earlier "Which claim did I not back up grahamo ? Please back up your claim that "I have not backed up any of my claims"......as it does not take much reasearch to see I have indeed backed up at least some of my claims."

Riskymove

jimmmy wrote: »

Have I not now ? As I said earlier "Which claim did I not back up grahamo ? Please back up your claim that "I have not backed up any of my claims"......as it does not take much reasearch to see I have indeed backed up at least some of my claims."

:rolleyes::rolleyes:

grahamo

jimmmy wrote: »

It still has not sunk in with all the public service though ( well, not grahamo anyway ), or else they will not admit the facts, as outlined more eloquently by Eddie Hobbs, George Lee , that RTE programme on the public sector pensions etc than I could ever hope to.

Groan! Here we go again! Jimmmy we all know your idea of backing up claims is to post something along the lines of the above :rolleyes:

grahamo

Maybe you can back up the claims you made here, Jimmmy?
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055525434

You actually went to the trouble of coming up with a story that 2 of your mates got jobs, 1 public sector, 1 private sector in a 'American Multinational'
They met up again and of course got straight down to the business of comparing holidays:D (As you would :rolleyes:) and surprise! The public sector worker got 31 days leave while the private sector worker only got 21 days leave . You then go on to point out that the private sector worker got no pension, was paid less, got no sickies :rolleyes: and no flexitime and had to work longer hours

Now, I have worked in an American multinational where I found the annual leave to be fine, the pension scheme to be excellent as they match your contributions and then some and they were very accommodating when it came to flexitime. All this is in total contrast to your 'mate' from the American multinational. As far as I was aware Jimmmy ALL the ' American Multinationals' had pension schemes. I put it to you Jimmmy that your claims here are complete BS:) and that you can't back any of it up.
It was a crappy attempt at a wind-up. No wonder the mods closed it:D

Count Dooku

Surrender, and your lives will be spared (C) me :D
ie demand benchmarking yourself, or jimmy will bash you to the end

Count Dooku

Rob67 wrote: »

The unions, by which I am not represented as I don't have that right, got that wrong, agreed. But it must be pointed out that a very strong media campaign was waged against the PS prior to the imposition of the pension levy, ensuring that public support would not be available as everyone would be suitably enraged to care as to what happens to the PS.

As to the racism against PS workers? It can be said that PS workers have been subjected to some unwarranted verbal attacks that could be considered to be a result of the recent reporting, I have personally been abused whilst carrying out my duties in public, it surprised me to hear the venom in one individuals voice and the complicit agreement by others around him. I wouldn't call it racism but sometimes it seems certain people want to make me think that somehow I'm supposed to feel guilty for doing a job that no-one else wanted. Strange that.

Unions were threatening government by strikes for long time.
I don’t like FF at all, but I don’t think that government had any other choices, rather then start attack first and hit with maximum power. Otherwise, country would be paralysed by strikes. I know few CPSU members (and socialists at the same time), they were ready to fight to the end in hope that public will stay away from this fight.
I know that it wasn’t nice, but I hope that it was first and last time. Fat cats from unions should think twice before proposing any strike in public services in future.

jimmmy

grahamo wrote: »

Maybe you can back up the claims you made here, Jimmmy?

That was a different thread and I am certainly not going to post the personal details of other individuals. However as others could well testify what I illustrated is indeed not untypical of the current difference between public + private sector in this country.

grahamo, nice to see you still get the odd break at your p.s. job , long enough to post again today at 15.54, 15.34, 14.47, 13.43, 13.39, 13.30, 13.21 etc.

Anyway, as this tread is going around in circles, and as it seems to be using up an awful lot of otherwise productive p.s. time, I am not going to post anymore on this thread. Any points I wanted to make have been made, and I have over the course of this thread backed up most if not all of my points made with links, sources etc.

P. Breathnach

jimmmy wrote: »

... I am not going to post anymore on this thread...

That's good to hear.

... Any points I wanted to make have been made...

Many, many times.

... and I have over the course of this thread backed up most if not all of my points made with links, sources etc.

That's complete bollocks. The few sources given have been borrowed from other people's posts and sometimes dressed up a bit.

MikeC101

grahamo wrote: »

Maybe you can back up the claims you made here, Jimmmy?
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055525434

You actually went to the trouble of coming up with a story that 2 of your mates got jobs, 1 public sector, 1 private sector in a 'American Multinational'
They met up again and of course got straight down to the business of comparing holidays:D (As you would :rolleyes:) and surprise! The public sector worker got 31 days leave while the private sector worker only got 21 days leave . You then go on to point out that the private sector worker got no pension, was paid less, got no sickies :rolleyes: and no flexitime and had to work longer hours
it:D

Not really wanting to wade in on any particular side here, but when I worked for an American multinational (well, international bank), holidays were 21 days, no flexitime, no pension scheme for the first two years (if you stayed for two years then the company would put you on the pension scheme). Longer hours than in the contract were expected alright, and no overtime for them (you could claim it, and they'd pay it - but we were made very aware chances for progression would be affected if you did). Sick days were very much discouraged, but they couldn't come out and stop you taking them. So I wouldn't find it that hard to believe.

But, I'd be of the opinion that this is an area where the public sector is ahead of the private sector. I'd look on flexitime and good holidays as a positive thing for both the worker and the company, so rather than moaning about the public sector having these things, I'd be far more inclined to moan about the private sector not having them.

grahamo

jimmmy wrote: »

Public sector ones more than have, as you well know. Not only that, public sector expenditure by the government doubled between 2003 and now.



And a lot of that money goes towards now paying the government and its employees and their big pensions. Not everything has doubled...eg look at car prices, petrol, oil, clothes, televisions, sports equipment, holidays, air fares ...the price of many things was never cheaper in real terms. eg the typical Irish public servant can easily afford a return trip to Australia and a few nights b+b thrown in for good measure for just one weeks gross salary. What other average public servant from any other country in the world is as well off / could afford that on one weeks gross salary?

How about backing up this absolute gem of a quote Jimmmy?

Or getting back on topic maybe you could explain how Public Sector pensions are subsidised now that workers are paying pension contributions, PRSI and now a pension levy?

PS I'm not looking for personal details of your 'mates'. Maybe the name of that multinational might back up your argument!!!

jimmmy

grahamo wrote: »

How about backing up this absolute gem of a quote Jimmmy?

The general thrust of the quote above ( which you have "adjusted" somewhat ) about the relative cost of a trip to Oz is backed up on the thread " Is the cost of living really that high in 2009 ? " on the Irish economy forum.

Also while you distort quotes ( for example I never said the person in the American multinational " got no sickies ", which you alledge I said ) I will certainly not name the American multinational. Suffice to say I agree with the poster who wrote " Not really wanting to wade in on any particular side here, but when I worked for an American multinational (well, international bank), holidays were 21 days, no flexitime, no pension scheme for the first two years (if you stayed for two years then the company would put you on the pension scheme). Longer hours than in the contract were expected alright, and no overtime for them (you could claim it, and they'd pay it - but we were made very aware chances for progression would be affected if you did). Sick days were very much discouraged, but they couldn't come out and stop you taking them."

Anyway, I just thought I would explain that...I am not posting again on this thread....if you want an explanation and breakdown of the trip to Australia cost in terms of average gross pay p.w. for p.s., see post referred to.

grahamo

jimmmy wrote: »

The general thrust of the quote above ( which you have "adjusted" somewhat ) about the relative cost of a trip to Oz is backed up on the thread " Is the cost of living really that high in 2009 ? " on the Irish economy forum.

Also while you distort quotes ( for example I never said the person in the American multinational " got no sickies ", which you alledge I said ) I will certainly not name the American multinational. Suffice to say I agree with the poster who wrote " Not really wanting to wade in on any particular side here, but when I worked for an American multinational (well, international bank), holidays were 21 days, no flexitime, no pension scheme for the first two years (if you stayed for two years then the company would put you on the pension scheme). Longer hours than in the contract were expected alright, and no overtime for them (you could claim it, and they'd pay it - but we were made very aware chances for progression would be affected if you did). Sick days were very much discouraged, but they couldn't come out and stop you taking them."

Anyway, I just thought I would explain that...I am not posting again on this thread....if you want an explanation and breakdown of the trip to Australia cost in terms of average gross pay p.w. for p.s., see post referred to.

you made it up then?