34,000 public servants want 3.5% pay rise

Drumpot

Amacca. .

Before I say anything, there needs to be cuts in the public service pay bill. Doesnt matter whereever else we make savings, its inflated and needs to be reduced .

I really agree with alot of what you wrote, but we cant afford to get emotional on a topic like our economy . .

However, what you speak of is a human desire, not an immediate requirement to get the country back on track financially.

The main reason people want heads to roll (Im in that bracket) now is because it will give them some sort of immediate satisfaction. But , as a country, we need to grow up .

We need to look on this like a surgery . .

We have a dieing patient on our table. Do we work out whos fault it is that they are dieing and prosecute the perpetrator and risk losing the patient, or do we fix them up and let the inquest happen afterwards . .

It has to be considered in this manner. If we demand it (in one years time) we will get our heads, believe you me . . It wont go away unless we let them forget . . But I believe is your worry, that in one years time people will be too busy looking after their own, that they wont bother making anything of the seanis fitz etc.

The problem isnt the system, its the people that accept it. When we are being looked after, we bury our heads collectively (as a nation) and hope that we can get as much out of life as possible.

If we were able to focus on the things that matter now . . Getting the country back on track . .

And in a year or two time when we no longer have to focus on the crippled coffers . .

We will of earned the right to go back and truly judge those who have robbed our country of so much . .

Until then, taking our eyes off the patient to fullfill a non vital personal desire, is as big a sin as giving them the wrong medicine. .

Sin1981

Amacca,


Totally agree with your post. However, can I make a point regarding social welfare recipients.
I know several people in their 20's who are on the dole, who are getting €205 per week, living with their parents, getting fed etc, and spending the money on themselves. Eg, I know someone who "doesnt' want to get a job because it will affect (her) social life". fact.
Now, I totally totally believe there are 1000's of people of all ages claiming dole, in v difficult positions, with mortgages and kids, who prob need all the help why can get. but please, please can we tackle these young people living at home who are not bothering their behinds to get jobs, cos they're enjoying the wee holiday they're having right now. Can these people be means tested in some way, so that they can only claim around 60-70€ per week, and maybe then we will see them looking for jobs. How much would be saved by doing that? In the UK, dole for the likes of them is around £55 per week.

amacca

Sin1981 wrote: »

Amacca,


Totally agree with your post. However, can I make a point regarding social welfare recipients.
I know several people in their 20's who are on the dole, who are getting €205 per week, living with their parents, getting fed etc, and spending the money on themselves. Eg, I know someone who "doesnt' want to get a job because it will affect (her) social life". fact.
Now, I totally totally believe there are 1000's of people of all ages claiming dole, in v difficult positions, with mortgages and kids, who prob need all the help why can get. but please, please can we tackle these young people living at home who are not bothering their behinds to get jobs, cos they're enjoying the wee holiday they're having right now. Can these people be means tested in some way, so that they can only claim around 60-70€ per week, and maybe then we will see them looking for jobs. How much would be saved by doing that? In the UK, dole for the likes of them is around £55 per week.

I couldn't agree more, that's exactly what I'm advocating in that section of the post, those that don't deserve it, haven't earned it shouldn't receive it. This could even lead to an increase for deserving recipients (recently unemployed/ disabled etc).

I would think that a young person with no dependents who doesn't want to get a job for fear it will affect his/her social life falls without doubt into the category of undeserving. The kind of crazy welfare system that doesn't have checks and balances built in to prevent something like this happening is immoral and a recipe for all sorts of social problems imo.

I agree totally with the sentiment you expressed and if that wasn't clear from that section of post then I wish to clarify what I meant now.

However on a relate note I thought that of you were living at home then your payment was reduced. (probably by not half enough though)

Sin1981

I think if you're living at home, you're assessed depending on your previous contributions, parents income etc. but with a lot of these being recent graduates etc, or youngsters who's one or both parents on the dole, you might well get most/all of the 205.
I know one fella, who's been living at home, doing nothing for almost 2 years (this includes a good year or more pre-recession when there were jobs). the mother got the fella the dole form a while back, he lost it.....:eek:
more recently, however, the Dad is out of work, so the young fella is getting the full 205, to sit and play computer games all day....
It's sick.

It's a twisted unjust country we live in. there are messers in all avenues in this country, the corporate gangsters, greedy politician's, lazy people who wont' work, and then there's the rest of us just trying to get ahead... but unfortunately we're all living beyond our means, and we all have to take some kinda pay cut. I'm happy with that, because I know that i'm well paid by European standards. I just wish the PS would take that on board.

on a separate issue, I also think we in this country will never have good public services until we start paying the kinda tax rates that they do in Scandinavian countries for example. I'm happy to pay more tax and get a good education/health system, but alas, we just cannot trust Irish politician's to not waste the money or pocket the money themselves....

amacca

Drumpot wrote: »

Amacca. .

Before I say anything, there needs to be cuts in the public service pay bill. Doesnt matter whereever else we make savings, its inflated and needs to be reduced .

Agreed, we may not agree on the level of cuts or where they should be applied but I agree they are inflated and should be cut. That much should be obvious to any fair minded person. I tend to have disagreements with the Irish Bobs and Jimmmys of this world.

Drumpot wrote: »

I really agree with a lot of what you wrote, but we cant afford to get emotional on a topic like our economy . .

I agree, you are of course correct, getting too emotional never serves a useful purpose especially with a delicate economy at stake.

Drumpot wrote: »

However, what you speak of is a human desire, not an immediate requirement to get the country back on track financially.

hmmmm......you could be right, there also could be more to what I say than fallible human emotion and a desire for vengeance although I admit I could be wrong.

The problem as I see it is that in order to get the country back on track financially you have to cut public sector wage bill right? (or at least it has to be part of the solution)

I think this would be accomplished in a shorter time frame if it wasn't just working people (public and private sector) bearing the brunt. If its important to get these things done with a minimum of disruption then I think the oh lets call them "working class stiffs" need to see other sections of society feeling the pain, particularly those at the top levels.

Unfortunately I think that the human desire for consequences to be applied for mismanagement/misappropriation etc needs to be satisfied in order for the cuts to be even partway accepted in a speedy fashion. fail to achieve this step and watch it all crumble because it seems as if there will be a groundswell and when this gets going properly the last thing you will see is cool calm heads acting unemotionally in the best interests of the economy imo. unfortunately for all noses will be cut off to spite faces. When it comes down to it I think we are a petty shortsighted species in the main. Occasionally capable of magnificent ideas and actions but all to often unable to see past the end of those noses we have just cut off. I think if it was happening across the board (perhaps even just with some token sacrificial lambs) there would be more acceptance of paycuts....the situation as it is remains intolerable..to me anyway. You must at least toss the baying crowd someone to hang...its the way of things unfortunately.

Drumpot wrote: »

The main reason people want heads to roll (Im in that bracket) now is because it will give them some sort of immediate satisfaction. But , as a country, we need to grow up.

I have an ideological difference here, I think it is immature to want to park consequences for bad actions for any reason (whether the consequences are economic or as a result of a criminal justice system functioning properly with a minimum of shennanigans)

Lack of consequences for poor decision making/greed/crime is what got us into this mess in the main

Lack of consequences for the above is what is prolonging this mess.

Lack of consequences will make it harder for us to extricate ourselves from this mess.

and lack of consequences will probably land us in a similar situation down the road.

btw, im not talking draconian here, just something that matches the crime.

I also think that a majority of people wont grow up out of this...its human nature...perhaps another couple of thousand generations and we will be more sophisticated but over the next couple of months...unlikely

Drumpot wrote: »

We need to look on this like a surgery . .

We have a dieing patient on our table. Do we work out whos fault it is that they are dieing and prosecute the perpetrator and risk losing the patient, or do we fix them up and let the inquest happen afterwards . .

If I could use your analogy I would be of the opinion that if you dont prosecute the perpetrator he will go out and when you have finished fixing up the first patient the perpetrator will have supplied you with two more patients to work on...etc

whereas if you act now you will have prevented him from commiting more crime..these people dont care, they spot any weakness, they will exploit it....I believe an undue delay in dealing with them is more suffering for largely innocent people but act fast and you will have created a deterrant and the problem will be many orders of magnitude easier to deal with.

I believe any undue delay will also delay necessary cuts

Drumpot wrote: »

It has to be considered in this manner. If we demand it (in one years time) we will get our heads, believe you me . . It wont go away unless we let them forget . . But I believe is your worry, that in one years time people will be too busy looking after their own, that they wont bother making anything of the seanis fitz etc.

Respectfully, I disagree totally, if its left for a year it will go away. Mark my words the majority of these people will melt silently into the background while working people (to borrow an Eddie Hobbs phrase) "take it in the neck" In fact they will probably be writing newspaper articles for the sunday world telling people that they should tighten their belts further. perhaps one or two being investigated by appleby will be unfortuante enough to be singled out as fall guys but im not even holding out much hope of this either.

And yes I think that people wont bother campaigning to have something done about the seanie fitzs etc in a years time..unfortuantely I am a cynic and I am rapidly losing all faith in humanity.

Drumpot wrote: »

The problem isnt the system, its the people that accept it. When we are being looked after, we bury our heads collectively (as a nation) and hope that we can get as much out of life as possible.

Agreed. Yes, the citizens should stand up and demand proper order, yes it is our country and yes there were a hell of a lot of people either living in castles in the sky or stuck head first in a pile of s#it of their own making. That is what sickens me....part of what sickens me is that I was partly to blame, I could have done something, I could have objected to our ridiculous legal system..but who would have been with me? its the way of things..I would just have been another lunatic on O'Connell St with a placard and a megaphone.

Drumpot wrote: »

If we were able to focus on the things that matter now . . Getting the country back on track . .

And in a year or two time when we no longer have to focus on the crippled coffers . .

We will of earned the right to go back and truly judge those who have robbed our country of so much . .

Until then, taking our eyes off the patient to fullfill a non vital personal desire, is as big a sin as giving them the wrong medicine. .

Disagree regretfully, you seem a fair minded person but I have to speak my mind. I think it is vital to achieve your aims also.

Justice to me is not something that should be put off for a year. The impetus is lost, those who were doing wrong have longer to perpare their case, weasel out of it etc. imo actually tackling it now in tandem with cuts will help get us back on track faster as it should lead to less resistance.

I think we dont have to earn the right to apply consequences for undesirable actions...we have that right now..it should be part of the prescription. Its a two pronged solution. I think both should be done at the same time or else we should prepare for a botched job and a distressed patient.

gerry28

Sorry but this drives me mad. The benefit remained the same after the pension levy was introduced, there was no increase, yet people now take fewer € home every month. When money is taken away and you don't get an increased benefit that is a cut.

I agree totally - if we are asked to contribute an additional sum of money 'x' towards our pension yet we still only get the same pension we would have gotten anyway then it is most definitely a pay cut (just under a fancy name).

On the subject of the 3.5% increase - as a public servant i cringed when I heard of this request by SIPTU.

schumacher

Sin1981 wrote: »

Amacca,


Totally agree with your post. However, can I make a point regarding social welfare recipients.
I know several people in their 20's who are on the dole, who are getting €205 per week, living with their parents, getting fed etc, and spending the money on themselves. Eg, I know someone who "doesnt' want to get a job because it will affect (her) social life". fact.
Now, I totally totally believe there are 1000's of people of all ages claiming dole, in v difficult positions, with mortgages and kids, who prob need all the help why can get. but please, please can we tackle these young people living at home who are not bothering their behinds to get jobs, cos they're enjoying the wee holiday they're having right now. Can these people be means tested in some way, so that they can only claim around 60-70€ per week, and maybe then we will see them looking for jobs. How much would be saved by doing that? In the UK, dole for the likes of them is around £55 per week.

I agree with some of what you said but we dont want to encourage people to have children to get the dole. As well as that young people shouldnt be pinished for the situation we now find ourselves in. There is a lot of college graduates who cant find a job and just because they didnt pay for an overpriced house and had children they cant afford should they be punished? I dont think so. Punish people who dont bother looking for a job but not people who didnt make foolish choices during the boom.

irish_bob

NewDubliner wrote: »

Because it's bailing out the banks and helping distressed property speculators.

even the banks here were ran canadian style , the issue of public spending would still have to be adressed but then you already know that

irish_bob

Drumpot wrote: »

You see . . I am lumping you in the same bracket as a majority of the public servants because you are generalising . .

1 "Why should P.S's have their pay cut"
2 "you think there should be reverse benchmarking"
3 " I didnt benefit during these years"
4 "you and your likes were laughing at us accepting a miserly wage".

Thank you , thank you , thank you. .

You may not even know it but you have simply stated points thats ill educated rhetoric that the unions have actually programmed into the public servants (whether you are with them or not).

1. Why has my wife had to take a 30% paycut and go on short time. Shes a receptionist, not a builder or a banker. I worked in the private sector for 8 years, have a degree, a QFA, A stockbroking diploma and never earned more then 26k per annum. I know many many people who had similar qualifications and never earned much more.

2. Why should benchmarking only be used when it suits the public servants? Whoever benefited from it upwards, cant complain if its done downwards.

3. I didnt benefit during these years either. Neither did hundreds of thousands of private workers.

4. I went for several public service jobs in 2002 at the peak of the celtic tiger. 450 of us went for 10 public service positions. This doesnt represent every job that was available in the public service, but I wasnt laughing when I had to start on a wage of 20k with no job guarantees as opposed to a min starting wage of 25k in the public service .

You need to do some more research if you think that people in the public service were laughed at by a majority of us stuck in lower paid jobs in the private sector . .

A big differance in these discussions is that the vast majority of the under paid (below 25K) in the private sector have no voice and are conveniently forgotten by the public servants when they are banging their pitty drums. . There are hundreds of thousands of us envying those in lowly paid public service jobs . . The problem was these people were too busy worrying about private workers who were earning more then them (which were the minority). Keeping up with the Jones's .

Im sick and tired of reading the same BS and hearing it on the radio from public servants that simply cant properly justify why they shouldnt take the hit like the rest of us . .

hawker or thousands of other public servants dont give a seconds thought to half the one liners they come out with , YOU LAUGHED AT OUR WAGES DURING THE BOOM , this cliche ridden rhetoric they all spout like clones to the last man and woman is just another example of how thier unions have indoctrinated them into being on message at all times , im serious when i say i have yet to meet a single one with any independant thought

Drumpot

Amacca,

Despite what I believe are "cosmetic" differances between our views I believe we see eye to eye on the main points.

I too fear that this nation is too fickle to strike and demand for justice after a certain timeframe. . I mean whats to stop us demanding Bertie's pension back (and get real inquests going into his dodgy dealings!)..

I do believe if we , as a nation, demanded justice, we would eventually get it. Problem is that we are not interested in Justice unless its something that just happened, or something the media are ramming down our throats! Very very sad .

And this is the key to my belief. You think that getting them now is the best thing for the country. While it would be great, I think a more mature nation would let these guys think they got away with it, sort out their most important problems and come back to the bad guys down the line. I mean can you imagine Seanie Fitz in his box in croker (or wherever), smug as sht, watching next years all ireland final. The guarda come in and arrest him over "crimes against the state" or whatever. Wow, the satisfaction . .

If the "bad guys" think that after a month or two if they havent been prosecuted , they will get away with things, then all they need do is committ the crime and dissapear until the heat is gone. In my (allbeit wishful) way, the risks of breaking the rules would be more severe as even after a year or so, you still might get done for it . .

That said, I know Im just dreaming. This country hasnt a clue . . . You get the government you want and a government mirrors its people. I love the way people say the government never take responsibility for their actions . . Hello. . . How many people blame builders, bankers etc for their "negative equity". I could go on, but there are many ugly traits the government has that, as a nation we selfishly indulge.

Until we sit down on a couch and accept WE have a problem, we will only ever make mistake after mistake and simply keep voting in those who tell us what we want to hear, as opposed to the people who might be able to help the long term stability of the country . .

NewDubliner

irish_bob wrote: »

even the banks here were ran canadian style , the issue of public spending would still have to be adressed but then you already know that

Wouldn't the cuts be more acceptable if we were not handing over billions to the same banks and the same executives who have demonstrated such a poor ability to manage their businesses?

Long Onion

NewDubliner wrote: »

Wouldn't the cuts be more acceptable if we were not handing over billions to the same banks and the same executives who have demonstrated such a poor ability to manage their businesses?

In an ideal world - the reality is that cuts will never be palatable for the population, we are not happy giving over our hard earned cash to the government, no matter what the reasons are.

irish_bob

NewDubliner wrote: »

Wouldn't the cuts be more acceptable if we were not handing over billions to the same banks and the same executives who have demonstrated such a poor ability to manage their businesses?

they would but im not interested in hypotheticals , im interested in solving our fiscal crisis

ps , the problem with the banks was yet again a problem of state , the politcians urged the financial regulator to look the other way and the politicians also urged as many people as possible to get into property but at the end of the day the politicians would never have been in a possition to engage in such reckless policys if they hadnt been elected in the 1st place

jimmmy

NewDubliner wrote: »

Wouldn't the cuts be more acceptable if we were not handing over billions to the same banks and the same executives who have demonstrated such a poor ability to manage their businesses?

The billions you mention are in exchange for property which is being acquired for considerably less than its market value two years ago. You were not criticising the ability of the bank executives to manage their business when they were reporting healthy growth and profits in the good days.

NewDubliner

jimmmy wrote: »

You were not criticising the ability of the bank executives to manage their business when they were reporting healthy growth and profits in the good days.

I did, actually, and so did many more people. But the lemmings got their way in the end.

Drumpot

irish_bob wrote: »

they would but im not interested in hypotheticals , im interested in solving our fiscal crisis

ps , the problem with the banks was yet again a problem of state , the politcians urged the financial regulator to look the other way and the politicians also urged as many people as possible to get into property but at the end of the day the politicians would never have been in a possition to engage in such reckless policys if they hadnt been elected in the 1st place

You do know that the answer to this whole problem is :

1. Strike on the streets to show the whole world that we will not stand for paycuts of any sort & to send a message to the world that we will not take part in this recession . . hooo raaaa . . Afterall we didnt get us into this mess. It was the elected officials that ran the country down.

Ok .

Well we did get us into this mess, but I didnt vote FF (at least thats what I say publically) , so I shouldnt have to be part of the cuts!

2. Vote in Labour and FG as quickly as possible. Dont ask or demand any better of them. Once they arent FF they are bound to do a better job and look after our money prudently. And sure they say what we like to hear, so of course they will look after the people!

ok.

I know that Bertie told us all what we wanted to hear and he bought the public sector votes, but that was just differant . .

3. Vote no to Lisbon. That will show the world that we are capable of being spiteful and casting a vote based on something completely different to what we are actually voting on.

ok.

If the referendum was on something like " should we beat children" or not it would be too important to vote the wrong way simply to have a go at FF, but this is differant . . .

4. Let the banks go under. . Its just plain obvious, why are we bailing them out ?

OK . ..

No other major country has let the banks go under and we are a small nation reliant on freedom of trade etc, but I just cant stomach the banks getting this money so it makes sense not to give it to them . .



What international corporation could resist investing and setting up in a country with such a "radical" population!

timbel

rumour wrote: »

How is this fair??? On what planet is this fair???

The private sector have taken pay cuts. The private sector have taken 500,000 job losses.

The public sector have taken no job losses, the public sector have taken no pay cuts. The public sector are paid more on average than any other public sector in Europe. So much so the Government cannot afford the bill.

Your version of fair is instead of reducing what the public sector are paid to even a rational european average (we should have the lowest paid PS in Europe because we can least afford it) we should all be taxed.

So no pay reduction in the public sector just more taxes on the private sector to make the public sector feel good.

Why must the private sector pay for a bunch of overpaid unproductive spoilt bunch of leeches that operate completely contrary to their title of servants.

WHY?

Sorry, I didn't say increase taxes, I said pay cut is required across the board.

timbel

Long Onion wrote: »

I am all for leading by example, the country needs more principled leaders but what irks me is all this talk about 'ordinary workers' and 'average joe's' without any thoughts as to what classifies one thus. Is the single factory worker on €25k who lives at home and drinks his money any more worthy of protection than the highly qualified manager on €80k who has a wife and 3 kids and works long hours?

It's the outdated rhetoric that gets in the way of progress.

I dont see what the issue is here with terminology.
And I am not protecting anyone, just making the hit as affordable as possible depending on your earnings.
Whether a guy pisses his 25k up a wall, or works his backside off for 80k doesn't come into it for me.
The hardworking guy will progress career wise for his hardwork, while the other guy will not if his drink affects his work.

irish_bob

Drumpot wrote: »

You do know that the answer to this whole problem is :

1. Strike on the streets to show the whole world that we will not stand for paycuts of any sort & to send a message to the world that we will not take part in this recession . . hooo raaaa . . Afterall we didnt get us into this mess. It was the elected officials that ran the country down.

Ok .

Well we did get us into this mess, but I didnt vote FF (at least thats what I say publically) , so I shouldnt have to be part of the cuts!

2. Vote in Labour and FG as quickly as possible. Dont ask or demand any better of them. Once they arent FF they are bound to do a better job and look after our money prudently. And sure they say what we like to hear, so of course they will look after the people!

ok.

I know that Bertie told us all what we wanted to hear and he bought the public sector votes, but that was just differant . .

3. Vote no to Lisbon. That will show the world that we are capable of being spiteful and casting a vote based on something completely different to what we are actually voting on.

ok.

If the referendum was on something like " should we beat children" or not it would be too important to vote the wrong way simply to have a go at FF, but this is differant . . .

4. Let the banks go under. . Its just plain obvious, why are we bailing them out ?

OK . ..

No other major country has let the banks go under and we are a small nation reliant on freedom of trade etc, but I just cant stomach the banks getting this money so it makes sense not to give it to them . .



What international corporation could resist investing and setting up in a country with such a "radical" population!

having read the above post , i 1st felt but now i just feel

lmimmfn

last i checked public servants are exactly servants of the public, we determine their wages and if the dont like it they can lump it and find another job or join the dole queue like a lot of other private workers have had to.

We need a dictator for a while that would sort this crap out.

NewDubliner

lmimmfn wrote: »

last i checked public servants are exactly....

Where did you check that? Link please?

lmimmfn wrote: »

We need a dictator for a while that would sort this crap out.

Dictators usually increase the size of the PS.

It takes a lot of people to maintain an efficient network of informants spying on the public. Then, the secret prisons need staffing, disappearances need to be arranged (the red tape for these is just unbelievable) and executions, messy business, the disposal of bodies....really expensive. And those American consultants on interrogation techniques - hard currency, cash only.:rolleyes:

SkepticOne

lmimmfn wrote: »

last i checked public servants are exactly servants of the public

NewDubliner wrote: »

Where did you check that? Link please?

The clue is in the name surely.

efb

My sister in law has had her hours reduced. She works for a multinational.

She didn't cause the recession, neither did her employer. Why should she pay?

Surely her employer should just borrow money to pay her and her collegues wages???

amacca

Drumpot wrote: »

Amacca,

Despite what I believe are "cosmetic" differances between our views I believe we see eye to eye on the main points.

I too fear that this nation is too fickle to strike and demand for justice after a certain timeframe. . I mean whats to stop us demanding Bertie's pension back (and get real inquests going into his dodgy dealings!)..

I do believe if we , as a nation, demanded justice, we would eventually get it. Problem is that we are not interested in Justice unless its something that just happened, or something the media are ramming down our throats! Very very sad .

And this is the key to my belief. You think that getting them now is the best thing for the country. While it would be great, I think a more mature nation would let these guys think they got away with it, sort out their most important problems and come back to the bad guys down the line. I mean can you imagine Seanie Fitz in his box in croker (or wherever), smug as sht, watching next years all ireland final. The guarda come in and arrest him over "crimes against the state" or whatever. Wow, the satisfaction . .

If the "bad guys" think that after a month or two if they havent been prosecuted , they will get away with things, then all they need do is committ the crime and dissapear until the heat is gone. In my (allbeit wishful) way, the risks of breaking the rules would be more severe as even after a year or so, you still might get done for it . .

That bit about an unsuspecting Seanie Fitz sitting in a box in Croker a year on gave me a warm fuzzy feeling inside. I like your style. But you cant do anything to Seanie you know, hes a made guy! and in more ways than one.

Yes I believe we do see eye to eye, if you had the power to implement this strategy it would be a delicious solution but as you said the masses wont remember for a year (unless the media does it for them), they probably don't even remember last Tuesday they have so much of their own problems to deal with...it just wont happen, that's why Id love to see the people demand justice on this issue now...if workers have to shoulder this burden then workers should demand that the main culprits should suffer the consequences of their actions too...................very very sad.

NewDubliner

efb wrote: »

Surely her employer should just borrow money to pay her and her collegues wages???

That's what many private sector companies are doing, or they're dipping into reserves. It's one way to keep expensively trained and selected staff who they'll need again when things pick up. People are assets, not liabilities.

graduate

My sister in law has had her hours reduced

OK. let's close the schools and hospitals for half the day. That's a good solution.

efb

They are not closing cetain days, just working on reduced staffing levels...

There is far more to the PS than Schools and Hospitals, but they don't pull the same heartstrings I suppose...

efb

NewDubliner wrote: »

That's what many private sector companies are doing, or they're dipping into reserves. It's one way to keep expensively trained and selected staff who they'll need again when things pick up. People are assets, not liabilities.

dipping into reseves is not sustainable and not workable for current expenditure.

Some people are assets , some not, but primarly all are costs.

thebman

These threads are getting old, has there been agreement in any of them?

Don't think so. The government should just announce their plans now so people know where they will stand.

francish

While it clearly is only a tactic, it still make my blood boild to hear of unions talk of pay rises. I believe it will back fire in that it only turns the private sector more against them.

I dont get any pleasure in seeing people getting a wage cut, the reality is public service must suffer a wage cut.