17,000 job cuts proposed... Does this sound like insanity to anyone else?

jprender

Soldier wrote: »

oh ya here we go again the public sector rant. it wasnt the public sector who got us into this mess it was the government and the greedy bankers. Many of the public sector employees are on peanuts not everyone is at the top. i didnt hear the people in the private sector complaining when they were receiving their big bonuses in the boom though oh no it was ok then but as soon as the sh** hits the fan its the public sectors fault. its not the employees fault they decided to go for security in their jobs over bonuses. everyone had a choice to make to go for the public or private sector so dont winge about the choice you made now that the country is going down the toilet.

I agree that "it's not your fault", however the simple fact of the matter is

We don't have enough money to pay all the public service


This point really has to be understood.

hatrickpatrick

How the hell did this turn into a public vs private sector debate? All I was trying to say was that ANY further rise in unemployment is a disaster, it's already far too high. The government can't force the private sector to stop laying people off, but seriously, could they have picked a worse time to start laying MORE people off themselves?

run_Forrest_run

jprender wrote: »

I agree that "it's not your fault", however the simple fact of the matter is

We don't have enough money to pay all the public service

This point really has to be understood.

That's the core of it but the civvies are too self-centered to accept that. Benchmarking was the start of this cancer to the civil service and now we are paying for it so when I hear those crying that " we didn't cause the mess we are now in.." drivel I just get annoyed.

Listen, we ALL contributed to the mess we are in, all of us, myself included and I'm not a millionaire property tycoon or rich fat cat...I'm just realistic because I work in the private sector. I've taken a pay cut, indefinite cut of ALL other bonus packages etc...and not protected by a union, I could lose my job in the morning like thousands of others in the private sector.

Time to wake up and realise this country is shagged.

rumour

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

How the hell did this turn into a public vs private sector debate? All I was trying to say was that ANY further rise in unemployment is a disaster, it's already far too high. The government can't force the private sector to stop laying people off, but seriously, could they have picked a worse time to start laying MORE people off themselves?

We are running out of money as a country. The private sector has none and the public sector are spending it, borrowing in our childrens names to pay for todays excesses. How difficult is it to realise that at some point the people giving us millions per day to support salaries and proviosions that other countries dream of will at some point actually say 'screw you'.

The only way we will be saved then is with the IMF, which if you look at Latvia introduced 40% pay cuts in the public sector. Is this where you want us to go??? Are you mad.

run_Forrest_run

rumour wrote: »

We are running out of money as a country. The private sector has none and the public sector are spending it, borrowing in our childrens names to pay for todays excesses. How difficult is it to realise that at some point the people giving us millions per day to support salaries and proviosions that other countries dream of will at some point actually say 'screw you'.

The only way we will be saved then is with the IMF, which if you look at Latvia introduced 40% pay cuts in the public sector. Is this where you want us to go??? Are you mad.

excellent starting post

DTrotter

I'm actually proud no one (not on here I mean) has blamed immigrants yet.

jprender

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

How the hell did this turn into a public vs private sector debate? All I was trying to say was that ANY further rise in unemployment is a disaster, it's already far too high. The government can't force the private sector to stop laying people off, but seriously, could they have picked a worse time to start laying MORE people off themselves?

They have to lay people off because.....


they dont have the money to pay them.


Seriously.

briktop

it needs to be 170 000 not 17. fecking thousand

and put the useless fcukers to work - proper work ,
not ' oh god if i have to answer more than 3 calls a day i will crack work '



and why we havent pulled this government out by the ears and shot them all is a real wonder to me .

MysticalRain

c montgomery wrote: »

These "groups" as you call them were everywhere. If matt cooper had an economist on saying the property market was overheating he would have another 2 saying th opposite. You had eddie hobbs on the tv and radio with shows showing how to spend money wisely and then trying to sell shares in a shopping complex in germany which he was fronting.
I can take responsibility for my actions but i was misled by the media and government in taking these actions.
Can you not see the point im trying to make????Or is its all average joes fault for falling for it?????

I despise FF as much as anybody else. But what's not sinking in here is that a certain point you need to start taking responsibility for your own decisions and stop blaming other people.

You believed what the politicians told you
You believed what you heard in the media
You believed what the salespeople in the property market told you

Spot a pattern here? All three groups are vested interests with a proven track record of lying to further their own agenda. You were gullible enough to be taken in by their bull**** and now you're paying the price for it. Anyone who bought a house from 2004/5 onward should've had their head examined. This property bubble wouldn't have been half as bad as it was if so many lemmings hadn't jumped on the bandwagon. Now we're all paying for it. Even those of us who who saw through it at the time.

hatrickpatrick

Surely it's better to take wage cuts then to push more people into unemployment though? I just can't see how hammering the figures UP anymore can help anything. Everyone has always said that our focus should be on job creation to get those people off the unemployment register. Sacking another 17,000 people is not going to make that job any easier.

jprender

briktop wrote: »

it needs to be 170 000 not 17. fecking thousand

and put the useless fcukers to work - proper work ,
not ' oh god if i have to answer more than 3 calls a day i will crack work '

That's a bit harsh imo. The majority (vast) of public servants do a fine job. And remember, they are human too with families. It really is a bitter pill to be forced to swallow.

I dont like to see people lose jobs so i would like to see the number kept to a minimum.

However it needs to be a number that means we can afford to pay the remainder.

jprender

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Surely it's better to take wage cuts then to push more people into unemployment though? I just can't see how hammering the figures UP anymore can help anything. Everyone has always said that our focus should be on job creation to get those people off the unemployment register. Sacking another 17,000 people is not going to make that job any easier.

it would be interesting to see what percentage paycut all of the staff would need to take in order to make the same level of savings. And then there is the pension issue to deal with also. I dont think it was within the remit of Snip to look at the area of pay though.

Boskowski

While there certainly need to be cuts in the public sector I think we have to be very careful about blindly adopting the 'party line'. I agree the HSE needs serious alterations and I would like you to look at this for example: http://www.publicjobs.ie. Just click on 'Current Jobs' and then open the 'Medical Consultant – Hospital/Community' bracket. These wages are insane. Similar we have overpaid jobs in the education sector, if not to the same extent but on a much larger scale. Don't forget 75% of public spending goes into Education and Health, more or less at equal shares. Only 13% goes to the people who are actually 'running this country'. The people who are taking your wheelie bins, repairing your roads, processing your rent supplement forms etc.

Also - again - with regards to the 'party line'. Guys, you are all bending over to the 'divide and conquer' policy of our criminal politicians. It has to be said as bluntly as this, 'criminal'. And what's happening here in this forum is exactly what they want in order to divert attention from this: http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2009/0703/1224249965637.html

This is where the money of the current and then next generations is being spent on, don't fool yourselves.

jmayo

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Seriously... I accept we need to save public money, but more unemployment? Nice way to prolong the vicious cycle of falling profits for companies = more redundancies to break even... Those 17,000 people will take more money out of circulation and add a further strain to the social welfare bill. Whatever we do to fix our economy, this cannot possibly be the right way forward...

Opinions?

And where do you think the money to pay the salaries, expenses, allowances of these employees is coming from, exactly ?
Not alone will there have to massive layoffs, there will have to be a reversal of all the bogus benchmarking awards that has resulted in a very highly paid public sector.

FFS the head of our Defense Force, Dermot Early, earns more than the head of the British Army, and probably heads of most EU armies I bet.
That is just one example without ever mentioning department sectaries and policiticans, consultants, etc, etc.
And the same over payment has leaked all the way down the chain.
Look at ESB workers and no BS about how they are private sector company, they aer owned by the state and report to a governmnet department.

c montgomery wrote: »

Slightly off topic but:

3 years ago i bought an appartment for myself as the thinking was if i dont get one now ill never be able to afford one. The only place i could afford was 22 miles from where i work and 20 miles from where i grew up and where my friends live.
Since buying the house i have had my wages reduced, shift rate cut and a number of extra taxes put on me.
I am currently in negative equity of about 100,000!!!
I hate where i live.
I hate the appartment.
I am now in a 2.5 year relationship and would like to start a family but with this much negative equity and living in an appartment its just not possable. I feel trapped and its starting to take its toll on me.

This is what i have gotten from the celtic tiger.

I ****1n hate the government but the opposition are little better.
They have screwed me up for the next decade at least.

No YOU screwed yourself up.

Sorry if it hurts, but it is time some people took some f**king responsibility for their decisions.
Nobody forced you to buy, you listened to propaganda and you jumped into a market that to most sensible people was a bubble with a limited lifespan.

A lot of people got greedy as well (not saying this about you since dopn't know anything about you) and thought I can flip to some other buyer and make a few quid or else I can rent out to all those lovely foreigners.

realcam wrote: »

While there certainly need to be cuts in the public sector I think we have to be very careful about blindly adopting the 'party line'. I agree the HSE needs serious alterations and I would like you to look at this for example: http://www.publicjobs.ie. Just click on 'Current Jobs' and then open the 'Medical Consultant – Hospital/Community' bracket. These wages are insane.
...
Also - again - with regards to the 'party line'. Guys, you are all bending over to the 'divide and conquer' policy of our criminal politicians. It has to be said as bluntly as this, 'criminal'. And what's happening here in this forum is exactly what they want in order to divert attention from this: http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2009/0703/1224249965637.html

This is where the money of the current and then next generations is being spent on, don't fool yourselves.

Don't worry most of us that want cuts in public sector salaries want it down the line starting with the fat 4 at the top table i.e. clowen, lenihan, coughlan and that useless bent harney.

The HSE is a disgrace as once again displayed yesterday in the report that conveniently came out the same day as bord snip report.
How people can fade in anonymity because it might damage or taint their carrer is inexcusable.

The over payment is endemic and was allowed flurish under thay sleeveen aherne who should be chased out of this country.

Ms Happy

briktop wrote: »

it needs to be 170 000 not 17. fecking thousand

and put the useless fcukers to work - proper work ,
not ' oh god if i have to answer more than 3 calls a day i will crack work '

Words fail me :rolleyes:

rumour

run_Forrest_run wrote: »

excellent starting post

Thank you. I normally refrain but our collective blindness in acknowledging the seriousness of our prediciment and that we all had a part to play in this fiasco is frustrating.
Our political leaders (all of them) promised us all proverbial 'castles in the sky' for years and we the electorate voted for it, therefore it is our responsibility. And now unfortunately I see vast sectors of the public service who do not comphrehend that this country is in a full scale depression of our own making, we all borrowed too much money. We did not make money.

DTrotter

rumour wrote: »

Thank you. I normally refrain but our collective blindness in acknowledging the seriousness of our prediciment and that we all had a part to play in this fiasco is frustrating.
Our political leaders (all of them) promised us all proverbial 'castles in the sky' for years and we the electorate voted for it, therefore it is our responsibility. And now unfortunately I see vast sectors of the public service who do not comphrehend that this country is in a full scale depression of our own making, we all borrowed too much money. We did not make money.

I remember someone asking me last October, where did the money go? Is it really a case of it being a glorified pyramid scheme, especially when you see the trouble developers are in?
At the last general election people looked at their current (didn't look ahead) lifestyle and voted accordingly.

rumour

Also - again - with regards to the 'party line'. Guys, you are all bending over to the 'divide and conquer' policy of our criminal politicians. It has to be said as bluntly as this, 'criminal'. And what's happening here in this forum is exactly what they want in order to divert attention from this: http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2009/0703/1224249965637.html

This is where the money of the current and then next generations is being spent on, don't fool yourselves.[/quote]

Have you any idea what happens if our banks become insolvent? Unpalatable as it is, it is absoluely necessary that we retain our banks. One consequence is the deeds of half or more of the nations property fall into foreign hands. How do we deal with people unable to pay mortgages? Do we uphold eviction laws for foreign landlords or do we tell them we're not paying. If we take this course of action noone will lend to us not for the public service, not even for food. Please think about what you advocate.

greener&leaner

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Not so. The highest point on the scale for teachers in Ireland is €55132; in France it is €49155 (2006 rates, the most recent published comparisons -- See www.oecd.org/edu/eag2008 ). That looks to me like a difference of just over 12%.

[I see in a later post you widened the claimed gap to 75%, making the inaccuracy even greater.]

You cannot look at the "common basic scale" to make comparisons. That is only the starting point for the salary calculation.


The highest point on the scale for teachers isn't E55,132.
It is E63,361 on point 25 of the scale, note point 25 is not year 25 teaching. A degree counts for your first three points on the salary scale.

After 10 years on point 25 is another increment which actually brings the maximum basic salary up by another E2446, which brings the maximum up to E65,807

That is not the peak salary for teachers though.

Every teacher has a degree, for a pass degree a teacher receives an extra E1,939 a year, for an honours degree a teacher receives an extra E5,177.

In addition almost every teacher in a permanent role has a H.Dip.
For a pass H.Dip a teacher receives an extra E622 per year
For an honours H.Dip a teacher receives an extra E1301.

A normal teacher will earn an extra E6,400pa for just being qualified to do the job.

A teacher with honours starting out will earn, E34909+6400 = E41,309

http://www.into.ie/ROI/InformationforTeachers/Salaries/CommonBasicScale/

ETA - A normal teacher would earn E55,132 after about 9 years teaching.

Boskowski

rumour wrote: »

Have you any idea what happens if our banks become insolvent? Unpalatable as it is, it is absoluely necessary that we retain our banks.

Have you even read this? Even if you did, you have obviously fallen for the spin then. What can I say?

DTrotter

realcam wrote: »

Have you even read this? Even if you did, you have obviously fallen for the spin then. What can I say?

Give facts why you think he/she is wrong. Just saying they have fallen for spin isn't an arguement ender.

Tim Robbins

I think 17,000 is quite a low figure considering the amount let go in the private sector.

Also, bear in mind these people will be given big redundancies and will probably only leave through voluntary redundancy. In my place, people were just an email, called to meeting told they were redundant and just given statutory.

It's a pity pay cuts weren't in the remit of this report.

P. Breathnach

greener&leaner wrote: »

You cannot look at the "common basic scale" to make comparisons. That is only the starting point for the salary calculation....

And you cannot use figures from 2008 to refute a comparison of 2006 figures, figures that were supplied by the DES to the OECD to enable it to compare aspects of the education provision in its member states.

I left my point at a simple level because a full comparison would be tedious. Yes, Irish teachers generally get more payments than those on the common basic scale. So also do teachers in France: I know that fact, but I don't know the figures. I could bother some of my French friends who work as teachers, but I'm not minded to. I am satisfied that my basic point is solid, that the differential between teachers' pay in Ireland and in France is nowhere near the 55% or 75% claimed in this thread.

jumpguy

People here are doing comparisons with other countries for things such as teacher's wages. It is impossible to do a comparison with any other Western European countries, as Ireland is suffering more than some Eastern European countries in this recession. France, for example, has a larger economy and although it has been hit hard, it's not nearly as hard as Ireland. Also, no other country's (in Western Europe) public finances are so out of control that I know of and the property bubble was unique to Ireland. People will sadly have to suffer more here.

GUIGuy

To me 17,000 is very low. Lets do some simple sums.

There are about 370,000 in the public sector.http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/politics/average-public-sector-pay-hits-50600-95212.html

If you take the average career as ~40years then we need to hire 9500 per year to keep even. Don't hire anyone new and the numbers drop by the same amount.

This 17,000 figure was to be over 5 years. So natural wastage would be 45000 over the same period. So they will still be hiring 28000 people over the next 5 years.

Ok it's a 'Snip' hardly really a cut. No major job cuts at all.

gurramok

Soldier wrote: »

oh ya here we go again the public sector rant. it wasnt the public sector who got us into this mess it was the government and the greedy bankers. Many of the public sector employees are on peanuts not everyone is at the top. i didnt hear the people in the private sector complaining when they were receiving their big bonuses in the boom though oh no it was ok then but as soon as the sh** hits the fan its the public sectors fault. its not the employees fault they decided to go for security in their jobs over bonuses. everyone had a choice to make to go for the public or private sector so dont winge about the choice you made now that the country is going down the toilet.

Wrong, you had a part to play. You accepted generous benchmarking over the years without anything in return, i never heard anyone saying stop.

the_syco

Soldier wrote: »

Many of the public sector employees are on peanuts not everyone is at the top.

Starting wage for public sector is what? €22,000? Minimum wage is about €18,000 for the private sector.

Soldier wrote: »

everyone had a choice to make to go for the public or private sector so dont winge about the choice you made now that the country is going down the toilet.

The public sector winged that they weren't getting the same money as those in the private sector. They wanted the same money as the private sector, and to still have their job security. They still winge that they didn't get their benchmarked wages.

If a company does badly, money-wise, they let people go, as they can't afford to pay them. If the country does badly, money-wise, don't be surprised that they let people go.

irish_bob

c montgomery wrote: »

No its their fault for letting the property market spiral out of control. Its their fault that due to planning laws theirs loads of people in a similar boat as myself living in commuter towns like myself with which they have no links.
I could have rented but at the time it seemed like a good investment due to the government spawned perception the good times were here to stay.
Plus at the time i was paying less in a mortage that i would have been renting you patronising Pr1ck.

if you come on here whinging about foolish descisions you made , dont bitch when you get blunt replies

irish_bob

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

How the hell did this turn into a public vs private sector debate? All I was trying to say was that ANY further rise in unemployment is a disaster, it's already far too high. The government can't force the private sector to stop laying people off, but seriously, could they have picked a worse time to start laying MORE people off themselves?

i explained the logic of it to you on the 1st page , if you fire a civil servant whos is on a wage of 25 k , you save close to 10 k for the exchequer as they are then paid 11 k in dole ( 204 per week ) and about 4k more in other unemployment benefits , accomodation allowance , medical card etc , by your logic , the goverment should employ all 300 thousand from the private sector who have lost thier jobs as that would mean not having to pay them dole , dont you get it , paying a civil sevant 25 k from the public finances is much more expensive than paying them 15 k in social wellfare

irish_bob

Tim Robbins wrote: »

I think 17,000 is quite a low figure considering the amount let go in the private sector.

Also, bear in mind these people will be given big redundancies and will probably only leave through voluntary redundancy. In my place, people were just an email, called to meeting told they were redundant and just given statutory.

It's a pity pay cuts weren't in the remit of this report.

sacking a public servant has political ramifications , it means some union asshole is on the phone to whatever minster ordered it , it means a loss of votes for the local td from the canned civil servants entire family , just think what sacking thousands of them means , thier lies the difference