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
2007-public-private pay gap was 48%!
Options
Comments
-
the media may report on the pay gap between public and prvate sector but its the unions who have turned such reporting of facts into some sort of conspirocy
They cannot justify why they themselves and their members are so highly paid - relatively speaking - so try to deflect the argument in an effort to stall for time before public sector wages are re-adjusted....and all the time they and their members are beneffiting massively from the 400 million per month being borrowed by the government.0 -
union representatives have long gone away form the noble principles of why unions were initially formed, they were to protect workers rights in times of rapid industrial and social reform. Now have come along way from when workers could not read or write, lacked education and needed someone to look out for them..nowadays organisations have to comply with EU workers rights rules, have HR departments, Health and Safety etc etc..
SIPTU, IMPACT all these trade unions are a business in themselves, paying contributions to the heads of these unions are nonsensical. Look at the FAS board and the union bosses who were on that and the way they acted, its criminal.
Intel were under the spotlight recently because they do not acknowledge unions in their companies, yet the employees have some of the best conditions of any company and i'd say would baulk at the idea of paying some oul fella to go on the radio and say..no to this, no to that, no to everything.. the fact it that these union bosses are on more money than your government minister these days and they dont want that to change..
Unions nowadays only represent a minority of workers public and private so why should we give them the time of day anymore!!0 -
union representatives have long gone away form the noble principles of why unions were initially formed, they were to protect workers rights in times of rapid industrial and social reform. Now have come along way from when workers could not read or write, lacked education and needed someone to look out for them..nowadays organisations have to comply with EU workers rights rules, have HR departments, Health and Safety etc etc..
SIPTU, IMPACT all these trade unions are a business in themselves, paying contributions to the heads of these unions are nonsensical. Look at the FAS board and the union bosses who were on that and the way they acted, its criminal.
Intel were under the spotlight recently because they do not acknowledge unions in their companies, yet the employees have some of the best conditions of any company and i'd say would baulk at the idea of paying some oul fella to go on the radio and say..no to this, no to that, no to everything.. the fact it that these union bosses are on more money than your government minister these days and they dont want that to change..
Unions nowadays only represent a minority of workers public and private so why should we give them the time of day anymore!!
Very true
Can anyone tell me what the various union bosses, the main ones anyway are earning both from union work and their little nixers on the boards of FAS, Central Bank etc??0 -
sorry tipp man i'cant tell you, but i'm sure there all names we heard about on the radio, read about.
in my opinion, the union bosses are a watered down version of Tony Soprano.. when we would go and shake down the contractors, officials etc, thats all what social partnership was...a legal shakedown.. Bertie aherne has a lot to answer for, but he probably forgets now.0 -
sorry tipp man i'cant tell you, but i'm sure there all names we heard about on the radio, read about.
in my opinion, the union bosses are a watered down version of Tony Soprano.. when we would go and shake down the contractors, officials etc, thats all what social partnership was...a legal shakedown.. Bertie aherne has a lot to answer for, but he probably forgets now.
Actually i did a little goggling myself, don't know how reliable these figures are or if they are just for union work or for everything, but let me tell you these union boys aren't doing too badly for themselves
First couple of paragraphs says it all
http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/union-chiefs-on-big-wages-unite-against-pay-cuts-1613952.html0 -
Advertisement
-
Unions nowadays only represent a minority of workers public and private so why should we give them the time of day anymore!!
I agree 100%. It is annoying that the p.s. unions seem to have been running the country this last few years. On RTE, every time there is a suggestion of change in govt policy eg the McCarthy reports, the unions get their say in. Who is speaking for the silent majority in the country, who have no union ? The ordinary private sector worker, employed or self-employed, who pays cheques to the govt instead of getting money from the govt ?0 -
Anyone out there on a building site?
I'm an engineer. Working 50 hours a week - a minimum of 8 - 6 every day. With a full qualification. No overtime pay, I'm facing months of weekend work ahead. Carry lots of responsibility on my shoulders, answer to a lot of bosses etc, etc, etc. That's life right?
On site you find various different tradespeople. Now I know unions have been created to protect these people for various diferent reasons. I'm okay with that. But i found myself wondering the other day, when did it become a disadvantage to go to college? As I watched someone with no trade, or qualifications whatsoever, leave at 4 , having started at 8. Because if he stays past 4 he gets overtime pay and we can't afford that right now. He has no responsibilities at all. He's given a task every day, and does it. And he still gets paid more than me every week, just doing basic hours because of union rates. (although he thinks I make loads of money - so not true). Furthermore if he works Saturdays, he gets extra money. I'd be laughed at if I asked for money for weekend work. I regularly miss breaks at work, due to, well, work. He doesn't. Ever.
So....what has happened to our unions? When did they become such incredibly greedy institutions, demanding all the rights with no responsibilities????
Don't get me wrong here though. I understand the need for them. I understand the need for that person who I spoke about - somebody has to do the dirty work, and they are fully entitled to their rights too. But some days I feel like I wasted 4 years of my life working my ass off to get a good qualification. I am speaking here about someone who has no trade, no qualifications at all.Nothing. But who doesn't need to try and get any, becuase the union is making sure he's very well looked after.
And worse? I actually quite like this guy - he's a good worker and a nice guy. And I feel so incredibly guilty and such a horrible person for even thinking stuff like that. But some days, I just have to wonder.
I know this isn't entirely relevant to the conversation, but it begs the same question - when did the unions become so greedy and self-serving, and get away with it???0 -
-
I don't think unions are that greedy (with a few exceptions like teachers and the ESB). It's not greedy to ask to be paid a fair day's wage for a fair days work. Without unions, those guys on the building site most certainly would be screwed by their employers.
I can understand why other people don't like unions and would rather not go down that route. But I think the biggest mistake that professionals like engineers and IT people make is that they have no guild/trade association/lobby group to fight the battles against employers on their behalf. So they get screwed on an individual basis in a race to the bottom. You don't see that happening with lawyers, pharmacists and doctors. They don't have unions per se. But they do have have their own lobby groups who stand up for them against employers.0 -
MysticalRain wrote: »I don't think unions are that greedy (with a few exceptions like teachers and the ESB).
You are entitled to your opinion....most of the 2.1 million people in the country are not in unions and are entitled to a fair share of the national pie too.MysticalRain wrote: »It's not greedy to ask to be paid a fair day's wage for a fair days work.
Many people ask to be paid a fair day's wage for a fair days work, and they get in from non-unionised employers, or by working for themselves. One of the main problems with our economy at the moment is that the government is borrowing 20 to 22 billion per year, and squandering much of it by paying itself + its employees more than " a fair day's wage".0 -
Advertisement
-
Anyone out there on a building site?
I'm an engineer. Working 50 hours a week - a minimum of 8 - 6 every day. With a full qualification. No overtime pay, I'm facing months of weekend work ahead. Carry lots of responsibility on my shoulders, answer to a lot of bosses etc, etc, etc. That's life right?
On site you find various different tradespeople. Now I know unions have been created to protect these people for various diferent reasons. I'm okay with that. But i found myself wondering the other day, when did it become a disadvantage to go to college? As I watched someone with no trade, or qualifications whatsoever, leave at 4 , having started at 8. Because if he stays past 4 he gets overtime pay and we can't afford that right now. He has no responsibilities at all. He's given a task every day, and does it. And he still gets paid more than me every week, just doing basic hours because of union rates. (although he thinks I make loads of money - so not true). Furthermore if he works Saturdays, he gets extra money. I'd be laughed at if I asked for money for weekend work. I regularly miss breaks at work, due to, well, work. He doesn't. Ever.
So....what has happened to our unions? When did they become such incredibly greedy institutions, demanding all the rights with no responsibilities????
Don't get me wrong here though. I understand the need for them. I understand the need for that person who I spoke about - somebody has to do the dirty work, and they are fully entitled to their rights too. But some days I feel like I wasted 4 years of my life working my ass off to get a good qualification. I am speaking here about someone who has no trade, no qualifications at all.Nothing. But who doesn't need to try and get any, becuase the union is making sure he's very well looked after.
And worse? I actually quite like this guy - he's a good worker and a nice guy. And I feel so incredibly guilty and such a horrible person for even thinking stuff like that. But some days, I just have to wonder.
I know this isn't entirely relevant to the conversation, but it begs the same question - when did the unions become so greedy and self-serving, and get away with it???
I sympathise with you but your story shows why workers do need unions. You say you have a lot of responsibility and answer to a lot of bosses, working weekends with no overtime pay and missing breaks. You say someone needs to do the dirty work but it sounds like you are being expoited to be honest.0 -
I never said they weren't.You are entitled to your opinion....most of the 2.1 million people in the country are not in unions and are entitled to a fair share of the national pie too.Many people ask to be paid a fair day's wage for a fair days work, and they get in from non-unionised employers, or by working for themselves. One of the main problems with our economy at the moment is that the government is borrowing 20 to 22 billion per year, and squandering much of it by paying itself + its employees more than " a fair day's wage".
And many don't get paid a fair days work. Especially in the current climate. We are in the middle of a recession after all. So it's an employers market and they can pretty much demand whatever they feel like, no matter how unreasonable.
I don't disagree that there are some fat cats in the public sector with an unjustifiable sense of entitlement. But that's not everybody. For every overpaid teacher or hospital consultant, there's clerk earning very low wages. Wages aren't everything. The public sector probably has too many people, especially bureaucrats in the health sector. The problem isn't so much their wages. But whether or not those jobs are necessary in the first place.
Like I said, I don't disagree that the public sector probably is overpaid for what they do. I just find it hard to take that the same government is happy to drop multiples of that number on zombie banks that have no benefit to our country whatsoever. Then they play the divide-and-conquer strategy by setting private and public workers against each other in the hopes that we will be too busy fighting each other to notice what the government is up to. If they wanted to really tackle wages in the public sector, they should've gone after the guys at the top, like themselves, hospital consultants and CEOs. Instead they are screwing the middle and low paid workers and using them as a scapegoat.One of the main problems with our economy at the moment is that the government is borrowing 20 to 22 billion per year, and squandering much of it by paying itself + its employees more than " a fair day's wage".0 -
...so you think everyone , especially the under-paid, should get higher wages. Do you think the country could afford high wages for everyone ? Our minimum wage is one and a half times that of our closest neighbour, a G7 country and yet you say " many don't get paid a fair days work " . Our public service is paid the highest in the known world ( € 966 p.w. : source c.s.o. ) ....maybe you think there should be a law passed to bring average industrial wage up to that level ? :rolleyes:MysticalRain wrote: »I never said they weren't.
I agree with you though : "If they wanted to really tackle wages in the public sector, they should've gone after the guys at the top, like themselves, hospital consultants and CEOs.".
The govt should set the example themselves. Change has to come from the top down.0 -
-
I think some guy breaking his back on a building site should be paid well for the work. It's not like the developers can't actually afford to pay, even in a downturna. And if some billionaire developer expects his minions to work past four o'clock, he should bloody well pay them for it, rather than expect them to work for free like the hapless engineer mentioned earlier in this thread....so you think everyone , especially the under-paid, should get higher wages. Do you think the country could afford high wages for everyone ? Our minimum wage is one and a half times that of our closest neighbour, a G7 country and yet you say " many don't get paid a fair days work " . Our public service is paid the highest in the known world ( € 966 p.w. : source c.s.o. ) ....maybe you think there should be a law passed to bring average industrial wage up to that level ? :rolleyes:
I agree with you though : "If they wanted to really tackle wages in the public sector, they should've gone after the guys at the top, like themselves, hospital consultants and CEOs.".
The govt should set the example themselves. Change has to come from the top down.
As for the public sector, I don't have a problem paying teachers well in theory because that's an investment in our society and our children's future. However, the downside of unions means that it's only a one-way deal. Teachers get the big wages. But we still have a dreadful secondary and primary school system because a crap teacher is still paid the same amount as a really good one.
I think nurses and clerks are paid about right for what they do (and we are still talking about low wages compared to other professions). Same for the Guards.
Hospital consultants and judges can kindly go fcuk themselves. They are easily payed twice as much as they should be compared with other countries. Same for TD's and all the other fatcats. Those are the people who really bankrupting the country.
There are probably too many bureaucrats in the public sector. So like I said, cutting numbers in certain areas actually makes more sense to me than cutting wages of the middle and low earners. Of course it's less politically palatable to lay people off benefits cut their wages. So you'll never see the politicians doing that.
You can cut the minimum wage. But that just drives people into drawing the Dole. You can cut the Dole as well, but in times like these where we have 100,000 disappointed and shell-shocked middle-class folks out of work,plus plenty more angry, seething working-class people who never benefited much from the Celtic Tiger...well let's just say that's a recipe for revolution and putting Fianna Fail out of power for the next 20 years.0 -
Sure people working hard on building sites should be paid well for the work. But why should union members get a much easier ride and a far bigger share of the cake for their expertise / effort?MysticalRain wrote: »I think some guy breaking his back on a building site should be paid well for the work.MysticalRain wrote: »It's not like the developers can't actually afford to pay, even in a downturna.
Actually it is not commercially viable for most developers in Ireland to pay high "union type wages" to everyone ......Most employers, inc developers, are not making much money...many are losing money...hence the lengthening dole queues etcMysticalRain wrote: »As for the public sector, I don't have a problem paying teachers well in theory because that's an investment in our society and our children's future. .MysticalRain wrote: »I think nurses and clerks are paid about right for what they do.MysticalRain wrote: »Same for the Guards..
Ah shure all these public servants you mention deserve all they get...shure so what if they are amongst the highest paid teachers, nurses, clerks and police in the known world.... its only our children + grandchildren who will have to repay the money ( + interest ) we are borrowing now so they can be paid.MysticalRain wrote: »You can cut the minimum wage. But that just drives people into drawing the Dole. You can cut the Dole as well, but in times like these where we have 100,000 disappointed and shell-shocked middle-class folks out of work,plus plenty more angry, seething working-class people who never benefited much from the Celtic Tiger...well let's just say that's a recipe for revolution and putting Fianna Fail out of power for the next 20 years.
They got themselves + the country in to the mess by benchmarking, having the minimum wage 50% more than in the UK for example, and the dole ( and old age pensions etc ) approx three times higher than it is in N. Ireland.0 -
Sure people working hard on building sites should
Sure people working hard on building sites should be paid well for the work. But why should union members get a much easier ride and a far bigger share of the cake for their expertise / effort?[/
That's the whole point of unions. Without some form of collective bargaining, workers get screwed. If your profession doesn't have a union, then the alternative is to form a lobby group like the doctors and lawyers do. If you're on your own, then you are completely at the mercy of employers. If you want to be paid well, then you have to fight for it. I know, I've been there myself. I've never been a member of the union.
Clerks, nurses and police are paid roughly equivalent to similar industrialized countries from what I can see. I think you're scapegoating the lowly paid for the sins of the fat cats higher up in the public sector.Ah shure all these public servants you mention deserve all they get...shure so what if they are amongst the highest paid teachers, nurses, clerks and police in the known world.... its only our children + grandchildren who will have to repay the money ( + interest ) we are borrowing now so they can be paid.They got themselves + the country in to the mess by benchmarking, having the minimum wage 50% more than in the UK for example, and the dole ( and old age pensions etc ) approx three times higher than it is in N. Ireland.
Actually, no. I'm not saying benchmarking didn't go to far. But let's face it, if it wasn't for the developers and banks losing the run of themselves, we wouldn't even be in this mess in the first place. If we had developed a vibrant export sector instead of squandering money on a pathological obsession with houses, we probably could actually afford what we're paying public-sector workers right now.
I'm not opposing cuts here. But I think there's way too much scapegoating going on. What we're paying for Nama right now would pay for several years worth of public sector wages.0 -
MysticalRain wrote: »I never said they weren't.
And many don't get paid a fair days work. Especially in the current climate. We are in the middle of a recession after all. So it's an employers market and they can pretty much demand whatever they feel like, no matter how unreasonable.
I don't disagree that there are some fat cats in the public sector with an unjustifiable sense of entitlement. But that's not everybody. For every overpaid teacher or hospital consultant, there's clerk earning very low wages. Wages aren't everything. The public sector probably has too many people, especially bureaucrats in the health sector. The problem isn't so much their wages. But whether or not those jobs are necessary in the first place.
Like I said, I don't disagree that the public sector probably is overpaid for what they do. I just find it hard to take that the same government is happy to drop multiples of that number on zombie banks that have no benefit to our country whatsoever. Then they play the divide-and-conquer strategy by setting private and public workers against each other in the hopes that we will be too busy fighting each other to notice what the government is up to. If they wanted to really tackle wages in the public sector, they should've gone after the guys at the top, like themselves, hospital consultants and CEOs. Instead they are screwing the middle and low paid workers and using them as a scapegoat.
if thier are beauracrats in the hse who are not needed , then surely thier wage is an issue , if you paying someone you dont need 13k a year , its still a big waste0 -
MysticalRain wrote: »I think some guy breaking his back on a building site should be paid well for the work. It's not like the developers can't actually afford to pay, even in a downturna. And if some billionaire developer expects his minions to work past four o'clock, he should bloody well pay them for it, rather than expect them to work for free like the hapless engineer mentioned earlier in this thread.
As for the public sector, I don't have a problem paying teachers well in theory because that's an investment in our society and our children's future. However, the downside of unions means that it's only a one-way deal. Teachers get the big wages. But we still have a dreadful secondary and primary school system because a crap teacher is still paid the same amount as a really good one.
I think nurses and clerks are paid about right for what they do (and we are still talking about low wages compared to other professions). Same for the Guards.
Hospital consultants and judges can kindly go fcuk themselves. They are easily payed twice as much as they should be compared with other countries. Same for TD's and all the other fatcats. Those are the people who really bankrupting the country.
There are probably too many bureaucrats in the public sector. So like I said, cutting numbers in certain areas actually makes more sense to me than cutting wages of the middle and low earners. Of course it's less politically palatable to lay people off benefits cut their wages. So you'll never see the politicians doing that.
You can cut the minimum wage. But that just drives people into drawing the Dole. You can cut the Dole as well, but in times like these where we have 100,000 disappointed and shell-shocked middle-class folks out of work,plus plenty more angry, seething working-class people who never benefited much from the Celtic Tiger...well let's just say that's a recipe for revolution and putting Fianna Fail out of power for the next 20 years.
your right about hospital consultants being grossly over paid , university lecturers ditto but guards and nurses are paid far in acess of what they would get in other countries too , countries which are richer than us i might add0 -
MysticalRain wrote: »That's the whole point of unions. Without some form of collective bargaining, workers get screwed.
Not always. I know several multinationals in Ireland - American companies - who do not have unions and their workers do not get screwed.
Problem at the moment, by the 300,000 plus people in the public service having their weekly guaranteed wage of € 966 ( source : c.s.o. ) plus perks ( eg pension, security ), the whole country is getting screwed as its having to borrow 20 / 22 billion per year to keep the show on the road / its employees paid etc0 -
Advertisement
-
Not always. I know several multinationals in Ireland - American companies - who do not have unions and their workers do not get screwed.
Problem at the moment, by the 300,000 plus people in the public service having their weekly guaranteed wage of € 966 ( source : c.s.o. ) plus perks ( eg pension, security ), the whole country is getting screwed as its having to borrow 20 / 22 billion per year to keep the show on the road / its employees paid etc
jimmmy your full of crap..........
are you saying everyone in the public service makes at least 966 euro per week?0 -
Those multinationals might be the exception. But I know plenty of people also working for multinationals who get paid peanuts.
Let's take your figures at face value, and ignore the fact that the CEO's and fatcat consultants are skewing your CSO figures making clerks and nurses appear just as bad. Let's assume that you can cut the public sector wages bill by about 25%. Let's put aside the negative effect that cutting people's wages would have on the economy. You're still only saving 5 billion or so a year, which is roughly 10% of what we are paying for NAMA and a similar amount to what the government gave to Anglo Irish Bank a couple of months ago (and I would be highly surprised if we ever saw even 50% of that money returned to taxpayers).0 -
jimmmy your full of crap..........
are you saying everyone in the public service makes at least 966 euro per week?
No he is just deliberately trying to provoke outrage, probably by quoting "average" figures. I used to be a public servant myself, after 5 years in the job I wasn't earning anything like this per week before or after tax.
Ask him if you were to compile similar average figures for private sector employees including upper management wages how the average figures would compare.
Using averages like this is a very poor way of comparing anything. Not even a good first approximation.0 -
jimmmy your full of crap..........
less of the personal insults pleaseare you saying everyone in the public service makes at least 966 euro per week?
No....please get a dictionary and see what the word "average" means.
And it was not me who worked out the statistical average p.s. wage : it was the c.s.o.
Cannot be fairer than that.0 -
but you know as well as i do that the average isnt acurate.
you also know the lower paid ps jobs are no where near 966e per week. yet you still want them to take a large pay cut???
and you can harp on all you want about the country not being able to afford it, but if it can afford NAMA and million euro golden handshakes it can afford to pay emergency workers and essential services a decent wage!0 -
No....please get a dictionary and see what the word "average" means.
And it was not me who worked out the statistical average p.s. wage : it was the c.s.o.
Cannot be fairer than that.
In fairness to murf313, did you actually use the word average in your post?
I didn't see it at first glance. Did you leave it out deliberately because it suited your argument to do so..........or did you just forget?
Or did I miss something? No..still cant see it, ho hum, never mind another day, another dollar.0 -
your right about hospital consultants being grossly over paid , university lecturers ditto but guards and nurses are paid far in acess of what they would get in other countries too , countries which are richer than us i might add
Would disagree with you there; there's a fairly big income gap between contracted and tenured lecturers.0 -
In fairness to the central statistics office, when they produce statistics for the average weekly wage of the 300,000 plus public servants, I would say its accurate enough. After all, the govt knows how much its paying its employees. It could be 965 or 967, but I think 966 is not far off the mark if thats what the c.s.o. says, especially as other reports are consistent with that.but you know as well as i do that the average isnt acurate.you also know the lower paid ps jobs are no where near 966e per week. yet you still want them to take a large pay cut???
Not as large as those at the top.0 -
Having a rather genteel union, university lecturers got a 3% increase in benchmarking, despite being the best educated part of the workforce. This increase has been absorbed twice over in the pension levy. Meanwhile other groups with much less scarcity got benchmarking increases of 6 or 8 times that amount.0
-
Advertisement
-
In fairness to murf313, did you actually use the word average in your post?
I didn't see it at first glance. Did you leave it out deliberately because it suited your argument to do so..........or did you just forget?
I fairness, you are right there ....I did forget....when I mention the 966 figure I usually say average..... but after all, its common sense / everyone knows there is not a minimum wage in the ps of 966 per week.0
Advertisement