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
Public sector workers willing to take pay cuts?
Options
Comments
-
If you are a public servant, not in gross pay, not yet. You are only contributing more towards your pension.
In fairness, it's a reduction, it is technically a pay cut. It's what ya have leftover for spending that's important, and I think it's safe to say every worker in Ireland has less money to spend than 2 years ago.0 -
Don't attack you?! Then dont make silly statements. Public servants pay taxes.
No im not wiling to take a further pay cut. Not when the top earners in the public service are still getting pay a bucket load and the civil servants who are on low pay are being hit again, from all angles. When there was a boom the private sector didnt give a crap that we were being paid less than them. We chose these jobs for job security and put up with the low wages. Now that the economy has gone belly up the private sector conveniently focuses on us because we atill have jobs and a wage. Why do you care so much now? we have taken a cut already from out already low wages and we will be paying all the extra taxes that everyone else will be paying...so why would you want to hit our wages even more...do you want all of us to strike? why didnt you all join the civil service years ago if you wanted to make sure you would have a job in crisis times? because the pay is crap thats why!
its a fabricated lie by the unions that the pay was crap in the civil service compared to the private sector , it obviously suits you to regurgitate this myth0 -
The public service has had pay cuts too.
If will if the low paid are hit again and they strike.
Why do you have such a Public v's Private mentality? why dont we all take a 5% pay cute then, Public and private. Do it all evenly across the board. Or do you just want the low paid int he public service to pay out again and get into even more financial trouble.
The nurses and gardai were already on low wages, you expect them to take another pay cut and still work long hours, put themselves at risk and look after you?
you really do spout some horrid ****e , nurses and guards in this country are extremley well paid , the highest in europe and over a grand a week on average , thier are thousands of unemployed people who would fill those possitions in hearbeat for less money , you public servants are quite replacable0 -
Im just saying think abot how much you need the public service and think about how if will actually affect your life if you dont have the resources available to you that you are used to. if the low paid get cut again they wont be happy and the resources will be gone...
I do value the public service that we have and I'd like to keep it. I just don't think you're joining the dots.
There simply isn't enough money to pay for it. We can't go on the way we are, borrowing billions to pay for public services. There isn't scope for tax rises to pay for it. Something has to give.
It may not be fair. It may also be very tough if we cut public services, but I just don't see any way we can maintain our services at current levels. Do you?0 -
The money is gone out of my pocket, I will not see it again. My pension payment when I reach 65 wont increase. That money is going into the exchequer not being invested to safeguard pensions.
Therefore it is a pay cut.
no , you are just contributing more towards your pension than you used to , the sum you recieve at the end is not reduced , baschically , the tax payer isnt paying as much towards your pension as they were a year ago , they are still paying the bulk of it though0 -
Advertisement
-
The money is gone out of my pocket, I will not see it again.
.
You will when you retire. Your pension is still being subsidised. Do you think the old system was better for public finances, eg people who retired in the past few years and who got / are getting huge pensions compared to the money they ever put in to it ? eg a Guard taking early retirement now has a pension pot worth over a million.0 -
No I'm sorry, but if you're getting paid €100 and all of a sudden you're being paid €90 and no other conditions have changed, that is a pay cut, you can call it what you want but it is a pay cut.
to take the point yis made earlier about public servants not paying tax... now that individuals are contributing more to the pension fund, less is coming from public finances to fund pensions, to me that looks like, yup, a pay cut!
One note on the pensions, the options available for a public sector worker at retirement are limited, whereas there are quite a lot options for a self employed person or person paying into a regular pension. a public sector pension doens't form part of their estate, once they die it's gone, whereas there are options available to others that the pension(if there's any left!) would form part of their estate and could be passed on.
In saying that, public service pension is still miles better than a private pension. I think in years gone by with people dying younger, this would have menat the pension bill was considerably lower. Public service pensions do need an overhaul.0 -
Moderators, Category Moderators, Music Moderators, Regional East Moderators, Regional Midlands Moderators, Regional Midwest Moderators, Regional Abroad Moderators, Regional North Mods, Regional West Moderators, Regional South East Moderators, Regional North East Moderators, Regional North West Moderators, Regional South Moderators Posts: 8,032 CMod ✭✭✭✭
Join Date:Posts: 7308
no , you are just contributing more towards your pension than you used to , the sum you recieve at the end is not reduced , baschically , the tax payer isnt paying as much towards your pension as they were a year ago , they are still paying the bulk of it though
So I contribute substantially more, but get no extra benefit for that extra payment at retirement time? Still cant see how me missing a chunk of my wages every fortnight is not a pay cut.You will when you retire.
No I wont. The terms of my pension scheme have not changed. I'll get the payments I was going to get in the first place, but will have paid in nearly one and a half times more than I had expected too.
That's providing nobody comes up with the brainwave of clawing some more back from me when I do retire.0 -
Once again, some people are adapting to the whole "i took a paycut" pointless arguement . .
If they want to get into the pensions levy arguement, then they should realise that they are still 15% or so off in paying for the actual value of this pension . . The country subsides a huge chunk of their pension . .
Ive already said we should cancel the pension levy and just get rid of the overly generous guaranteed pension public servants get. There you go, no "paycut" and billions saved in state coffers . . Does that sound fair ? Or are you "entitled" to that pension because everybody in the private sector was milking it in the good years ! ! :rolleyes:
Once again i ask. .
Where do we shore up the 20billion deficit in the budget if we are not to touch the poor old public servants ?0 -
you really do spout some horrid ****e , nurses and guards in this country are extremley well paid , the highest in europe and over a grand a week on average , thier are thousands of unemployed people who would fill those possitions in hearbeat for less money , you public servants are quite replacable
so do you! guards are on payscales like all public servants and to be getting a grand a week they have to be very high ranking or else doing a hell of a lot of overtime.
so again, as I said earlier i think its the higer paid that should be cut not the lower paid. they took a hit already.....are you actually reading my posts correctly or just lashing out because you think your view point is the only one right!0 -
Advertisement
-
so do you! guards are on payscales like all public servants and to be getting a grand a week they have to be very high ranking or else doing a hell of a lot of overtime.
so again, as I said earlier i think its the higer paid that should be cut not the lower paid. they took a hit already.....are you actually reading my posts correctly or just lashing out because you think your view point is the only one right!
YOU still haven't provided an alternative way to cut €20bn without cutting ALL PS pay somehow0 -
If none of your working conditions changed and you suddenly found yourself earning less would you consider it a pay cut? I think to not admit that the pension levy is a paycut is stubborn and weakens your argument.0
-
so do you! guards are on payscales like all public servants and to be getting a grand a week they have to be very high ranking or else doing a hell of a lot of overtime.
so again, as I said earlier i think its the higer paid that should be cut not the lower paid. they took a hit already.....are you actually reading my posts correctly or just lashing out because you think your view point is the only one right!
considering the modest level of education which they require , both guards and nurses are highly paid public servants in mine and most peoples book , they are paid close to 30% more than in countries richer than us and before you start rabbiting on about the cost of living , the way it works is , wages must come back before the price of goods does , thats the way it works , thier are a lot more nurses and guards than judges and consultants so wages must be cut from not only the very top in the public sector , politicians must come 1st though0 -
dearg lady wrote: »If none of your working conditions changed and you suddenly found yourself earning less would you consider it a pay cut? I think to not admit that the pension levy is a paycut is stubborn and weakens your argument.
Hi,
It is a "paycut",
However what it also is making public servants pay more for their pension as what they pay into it was far far less than they could possible get out. This is why you'll find the "no, you have to take an actual pay cut" be so vocal on it.
Of course, people who put this forward have ideas that all public servants have a "gold plated" pension, without actually realising that:
a. (Outside of the Gardai) You have to put in the full 40 years to get the full benefit of the pension. Outside of that 40 years the drop offs in pension earnings are significant.
b. You Absolutely HAVE to graduate up through all the salary scales available to you, staying at the bottom for as long as possible, they shooting up to the higher end of the scale in your last few years working, to benefit from paying the least amount in and getting the most out, people on low grades all their lives are NOT gettting such a "Gold plated" pension.
c. Public Servants pension figures also include the state pension, which everyone gets. However the amount is taken off the annual pension of a public servant where as you would get this in ADDITION to a private pension.
d. Public servants also pay into a "Spouse and Child" Pension, one which, if they never marry and/or never have kids they will never see again. Nevermind the legal repurcussions nowadays with less people marrying.
e. Public Servants do pay "into" the "pension scheme"
f. Public servants have NO options to "take" their money out of the scheme,
The pension levy has pretty much doubled the contribution to the scheme for everyone.
They guys just in the the Public service will be the ones who pay most into it over the course of their career. Its obviously a very quick and easy way for the government to rais funds also. Personally, I have no issues paying it, Id rather not but what choice do I have.
Paycuts are required in the Public Service.
Its that or:
1. Redundancies.
2. Reduced hours.
3. More schemes for voluntary redundancy, early retirement, worksharing, increased working hours.
4. A complete review of what is needed, what is not, what is an absolute waste of money, and how better to save money.
Frankly I'd like to see a combination of all of that.
IT is needed, we all know there has been and still is a complete cesspit of wastage in certain areas of the PS and that money can be saved all over the place, whether it is through wage cuts or otherwise.0 -
dearg lady wrote: »If none of your working conditions changed and you suddenly found yourself earning less would you consider it a pay cut? I think to not admit that the pension levy is a paycut is stubborn and weakens your argument.
You still have not got the point, have you. Your gross pay is still the same. As said earlier, "Your pension is still being subsidised. Do you think the old system was better for public finances, eg people who retired in the past few years and who got / are getting huge pensions compared to the money they ever put in to it ? eg a Guard taking early retirement now has a pension pot worth over a million. "0 -
First of all,You still have not got the point, have you. Your gross pay is still the same. As said earlier, "Your pension is still being subsidised. Do you think the old system was better for public finances, eg people who retired in the past few years and who got / are getting huge pensions compared to the money they ever put in to it ? eg a Guard taking early retirement now has a pension pot worth over a million. "
Have you anything to back up that data?
Second of all,
What assumptions are you making about the Guard?
I aint disagreeing with your general point, however some level of balance is needed.0 -
First of all,
Have you anything to back up that data?
.
There was a link on this very board, probably in one of the threads about public service pensions a few months ago, showing a link to a report from a pension company which showed that. By Guard taking early retirement I mean in his fifties, as more than a few do. I do not have the time to look that up now , but certainly would believe what I read, it being consistent with a guesstimate of likely salary levels, life expectancy, public pension entitlements re percentages etc.0 -
ok if there is a guard that retired with a million for pension, then he must have been very high ranking and for a very long time, teres no way he served his time on traffic duty. so my point again, the ones who can afford it should be hit.
do you think it would be fair to go into a private business and cut the recepionists wages by the same amount as the CEO or the Director, say a 5%cut for everyone working in the business no matter what their function? Course not, the receptionist would feel the brunt of the blow, whereas the higher earners wouldn't. So why cut the public service across the board when the higher earners can afford to take the hit. Maybe half of you on here dont work in the public service and dont know how things actually work.0 -
Of course, people who put this forward have ideas that all public servants have a "gold plated" pension, without actually realising that:
.
I know exactly what these "gold plated" pensions offer and more often then not it is better then Defined Contributions. . It costs the state over 1 billion a year to subsidise shortfalls in this pension fund (so its not paying for itself).
People in a D.C. scheme dont get any state help when their fund bombs and loses half its value . .
For every year worked, those in the P.S. pension scheme are entitled to 1-40th of their final salary. This is guaranteed.
Its already been established that the benchmarking thats gone on in recent years has meant irrespective of how well you have been doing your job, not only has your salary gone up, but your pension enitlements increase (perhaps thats why so many people in the public service believe they are entitled to so much).
What you receive at the end of your service is guaranteed . .
Not really sure what your point on "P.S not having the choice to take their money out of the scheme" as the only employees allowed to get their money back are the ones in a company pension scheme with less then 2 years contributions (and they are taxable returns)!!
Im not really sure what your post was about. . Its widely awknowledged (by anybody with any sort of understanding of pensions) that the state pension that Public servants get is better then the D.C. pensions that the majority of Private workers get. In fact, the only people in the private sector who would get a Defined benefit pension akin to the public service are high net work directors and companies who like spending a fortune on the top pension schemes for their employees (which is nearly non existant)>
I worked in an insurance company and I can assure you that the kind of pension scheme that Public servants get nowadays has all but dissapeared in the private sector because of the cost to maintain the benefits.
When Im retiring as an employee of a private company, my pension will be decided on:
- How much I have put in
- How well my fund has performed
- The interest rates at the time
- The Pension rate being offered by the insurance companies at that time
- My final Salary
- If I want spouses pension I will have to pay more and receive a smaller Pension
Right now, for a 65 year old female to get a pension of €12,000 a year on top of their state pension they would require a fund of €207,370. That doesnt include any spouses or childrens benefits.
To get a fund of €207k a 30 year old female would need to contribute roughly €300 a month. Now thats assuming that the fund grows 5% per compounded. For a spouses pension it goes up to €230k. (Im not even discussing the tax free lump sum!).
Now anybody in D.C. pensions in the last two years will of been hammered if they are in anything other then Cash or Government bonds. Whereas anybody with a state pension doesnt have to worry about that as the government have their back . .
if you work in the state for 20 years and have a final salary of 60k, you would be entitled to €20,000 per annum when you retire, irrespective of fund performance, contributions . . . .
To be honest . . I could go on . . But I will leave it there . .
All I need to say is that this kind of pension arrangement is costing the state over €1 billion a year to fund. . I have no problem with dropping the state levy and changing your pension arrangements to D.C. like everybody else.
But you know what, watch the unions change their stance on the levy, if this suggestion ever does come on the table. You always see how valuable a "perk" is when its been threatened to be taken away . .0 -
Once again i ask. .
Where do we shore up the 20billion deficit in the budget if we are not to touch the poor old public servants ?
As a civil servant I think a few things could be done:
Cut job seekers allowance by 5%. For every year an individual is unemployed cut their job seekers allowance by 10% down to a minimum of 50%.
Tax lump sum pension payments across the board.
Put public sector workers on 5 year renewable contracts and if they don't perform, their contracts are not renewed. Hard workers will have nothing to fear.
Increase corporation tax to 15% and invest heavily in Irish start-ups.
Introduce the property tax to put further downward pressure on property prices. There must be thousands of first time buyers who simply couldn't afford the boom prices but could buy at a reduced price.
Retrain a number of civil servants to be able provide professional childcare to those on lone parents allowance which should help these re-enter the workforce.
Name and shame social welfare fraudsters in the national media and make them repay this money financially and through community service.
Restrict further the ability of individuals and lawyers to bring judicial review proceedings against the State.
In the future offer voluntary redundancy to public sector workers.
Benchmark public sector workers with like for like private sector workers.
These are just a few ideas anyway. Expenditure from here on in will be a lot less anyway on the public sector payroll side of things through the pension levy, retirements and non-replacement of staff, no term-time workers, 3 year career breaks, no promotions, extra unpaid annual leave which a lot of people where I work have availed of anyway. Public sector workers are working a lot harder despite these changes and daily headline criticism in the media. If the payroll is not reduced it is the politicians that people should direct their anger towards!
How do we reduce the budget deficit without going into a deflationary spiral is probably a better question to ask in my opinion.0 -
Advertisement
-
its early retirement, lets remember he is in his fifties, like many Gardai who take early retirement. The study from the insurance industry found that Guards taking early retirement in their fifties would have an average pension pot worth 1 million. ...if they had to have had a private pension, it would need to be worth over 1 million to provide them with the lump sum and half the annual retirement salary ( which incidentally increased with benchmarching in the past for those who retired say 5 or 10 years ago ) for their life expectancyok if there is a guard that retired with a million for pension,
No actually, thats not true, given Garda pay, life expectancy etc....he would not be superintendant or anything like that.then he must have been very high ranking
Actually it would not matter if he was high ranking for a short time or for a long time. His pension would be the same.and for a very long time,0 -
Good post, have not time to go through it all now but a few comments egAs a civil servant I think a few things could be done:
Cut job seekers allowance by 5%. For every year an individual is unemployed cut their job seekers allowance by 10% down to a minimum of 50%.
Tax lump sum pension payments across the board.
Put public sector workers on 5 year renewable contracts and if they don't perform, their contracts are not renewed. Hard workers will have nothing to fear.
Increase corporation tax to 15% and invest heavily in Irish start-ups.
Introduce the property tax to put further downward pressure on property prices. There must be thousands of first time buyers who simply couldn't afford the boom prices but could buy at a reduced price.
Retrain a number of civil servants to be able provide professional childcare to those on lone parents allowance which should help these re-enter the workforce.
Name and shame social welfare fraudsters in the national media and make them repay this money financially and through community service.
Restrict further the ability of individuals and lawyers to bring judicial review proceedings against the State.
In the future offer voluntary redundancy to public sector workers.
Benchmark public sector workers with like for like private sector workers.
These are just a few ideas anyway. Expenditure from here on in will be a lot less anyway on the public sector payroll side of things through the pension levy, retirements and non-replacement of staff, no term-time workers, 3 year career breaks, no promotions, extra unpaid annual leave which a lot of people where I work have availed of anyway. Public sector workers are working a lot harder despite these changes and daily headline criticism in the media. If the payroll is not reduced it is the politicians that people should direct their anger towards!
How do we reduce the budget deficit without going into a deflationary spiral is probably a better question to ask in my opinion.
"Cut job seekers allowance by 5%"....do you think this is enough, given it is 300 % of the UK rate ?
"How do we reduce the budget deficit without going into a deflationary spiral is probably a better question to ask in my opinion"....many people want deflation in certain things ie prices to come down, if wages come down.0 -
Good post, have not time to go through it all now but a few comments eg
"Cut job seekers allowance by 5%"....do you think this is enough, given it is 300 % of the UK rate ?
"How do we reduce the budget deficit without going into a deflationary spiral is probably a better question to ask in my opinion"....many people want deflation in certain things ie prices to come down, if wages come down.
Personally I would like job seekers allowance cut a lot more and those on this allowance can't exactly strike. Normally it would be political suicide to slash jobseekers allowance but FF might just do it as they are on the way out anyway.
I'm all for deflation to improve competitiveness, but it has to be controlled or we will get into even deeper trouble.0 -
As a civil servant I think a few things could be done:
Cut job seekers allowance by 5%. For every year an individual is unemployed cut their job seekers allowance by 10% down to a minimum of 50%.
Tax lump sum pension payments across the board.
Put public sector workers on 5 year renewable contracts and if they don't perform, their contracts are not renewed. Hard workers will have nothing to fear.
Increase corporation tax to 15% and invest heavily in Irish start-ups.
Introduce the property tax to put further downward pressure on property prices. There must be thousands of first time buyers who simply couldn't afford the boom prices but could buy at a reduced price.
Retrain a number of civil servants to be able provide professional childcare to those on lone parents allowance which should help these re-enter the workforce.
Name and shame social welfare fraudsters in the national media and make them repay this money financially and through community service.
Restrict further the ability of individuals and lawyers to bring judicial review proceedings against the State.
In the future offer voluntary redundancy to public sector workers.
Benchmark public sector workers with like for like private sector workers.
These are just a few ideas anyway. Expenditure from here on in will be a lot less anyway on the public sector payroll side of things through the pension levy, retirements and non-replacement of staff, no term-time workers, 3 year career breaks, no promotions, extra unpaid annual leave which a lot of people where I work have availed of anyway. Public sector workers are working a lot harder despite these changes and daily headline criticism in the media. If the payroll is not reduced it is the politicians that people should direct their anger towards!
How do we reduce the budget deficit without going into a deflationary spiral is probably a better question to ask in my opinion.
Thats the best post I have seen with good alternatives . . It actually addresses the "paycut" arguement and is fair . .
Good Post . .0 -
considering the modest level of education which they require , both guards and nurses are highly paid public servants in mine and most peoples book , they are paid close to 30% more than in countries richer than us and before you start rabbiting on about the cost of living , the way it works is , wages must come back before the price of goods does , thats the way it works , thier are a lot more nurses and guards than judges and consultants so wages must be cut from not only the very top in the public sector , politicians must come 1st though
No we are getting somewhere, yea the politicians should come first and the high paid public servants, Judges, Semi State CEO's, Fas Directors etc etc etc...
why you are so eager to cut the low paid is beyond me. what if the public service was out of bounds and the money could not be touched. where would we find the money then...from somewhere else! there is always another option but the easy option is to just on the band wagon and say oh yea cut the public service it worked last time, lets do it again...that means that maybe my job in the private service might be ok! Dont try to act like everyone on here isnt trying to keep there own corners nice and tidy so they stay above water....but instead of getting on your high horse irish bob why dont you provide a solution to the problem that means leaving the people who do great jobs on low wages alone...or maybe you could tell us where you work and how much of a cut you would be willing to take? if you have lost your job then you should understand that its the low paid that are struggling at the moment.0 -
Hi,
Paycuts are required in the Public Service.
Its that or:
1. Redundancies.
2. Reduced hours.
3. More schemes for voluntary redundancy, early retirement, worksharing, increased working hours.
4. A complete review of what is needed, what is not, what is an absolute waste of money, and how better to save money.
Frankly I'd like to see a combination of all of that.
IT is needed, we all know there has been and still is a complete cesspit of wastage in certain areas of the PS and that money can be saved all over the place, whether it is through wage cuts or otherwise.
Good post. I'd add a root and branch review of the HSE to remove all the dead wood and people with no work to do - too many layers of management and not enough front line staff.First of all,
Have you anything to back up that data?
Second of all,
What assumptions are you making about the Guard?
I aint disagreeing with your general point, however some level of balance is needed.
Don't mind Jimmy, he quotes all sorts of figures, some of which he makes up himself, some of which he calculates on the back of an envelope, and I've yet to see him post a link to back up ANY of his "facts".its early retirement, lets remember he is in his fifties, like many Gardai who take early retirement. The study from the insurance industry found that Guards taking early retirement in their fifties would have an average pension pot worth 1 million. ...if they had to have had a private pension, it would need to be worth over 1 million to provide them with the lump sum and half the annual retirement salary ( which incidentally increased with benchmarching in the past for those who retired say 5 or 10 years ago ) for their life expectancy
No actually, thats not true, given Garda pay, life expectancy etc....he would not be superintendant or anything like that.
Actually it would not matter if he was high ranking for a short time or for a long time. His pension would be the same.
Very selective to use the guards isn't it. A tiny portion of the public service who get to retire after 30 years service. The rest of us have to put in 40 years to get a full pension.0 -
-
ok if there is a guard that retired with a million for pension, then he must have been very high ranking and for a very long time, teres no way he served his time on traffic duty. so my point again, the ones who can afford it should be hit.
do you think it would be fair to go into a private business and cut the recepionists wages by the same amount as the CEO or the Director, say a 5%cut for everyone working in the business no matter what their function? Course not, the receptionist would feel the brunt of the blow, whereas the higher earners wouldn't. So why cut the public service across the board when the higher earners can afford to take the hit. Maybe half of you on here dont work in the public service and dont know how things actually work.
speaking of receptionists who work in the private sector , they earn a lot less than the likes of clerical officers in the ps who,s duties are quite similar , something that is often overlooked is that the gap in pay is greatest at the bottom between the two sectors0 -
No we are getting somewhere, yea the politicians should come first and the high paid public servants, Judges, Semi State CEO's, Fas Directors etc etc etc...
why you are so eager to cut the low paid is beyond me. what if the public service was out of bounds and the money could not be touched. where would we find the money then...from somewhere else! there is always another option but the easy option is to just on the band wagon and say oh yea cut the public service it worked last time, lets do it again...that means that maybe my job in the private service might be ok! Dont try to act like everyone on here isnt trying to keep there own corners nice and tidy so they stay above water....but instead of getting on your high horse irish bob why dont you provide a solution to the problem that means leaving the people who do great jobs on low wages alone...or maybe you could tell us where you work and how much of a cut you would be willing to take? if you have lost your job then you should understand that its the low paid that are struggling at the moment.
i dont believe thier is anyone in the public sector on low wages and i think guards and nurses are far too well paid compared to countries which are wealtheir than us0 -
Advertisement
-
Advertisement