The Public Sector is sick

Praetorian Saighdiuir · 24-10-2009 2:22pm

Ooooohhhhhhh the poor private sector workers!!

I know a woman IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR, who gets a €30,000+ bonus at Christmas EVERY year, TAX FREE might I add!!

YES, she also got it last Xmas, and YES she is guaranteed to get it this Xmas...

...and it is not just her working there, everyone gets similar bonuses that are not tied in to their annual salary. She works middle management.

EXPLAIN THIS ONE JIMMMY!

mickoneill30 · 24-10-2009 2:35pm

A lot of daft posting going on here.

If your employer is profitable then the worker should get paid reasonably. If they're not then they let people go or cut wages.

Which category does the government come into? Obviously it's not working for a profit but it needs to break even. It's not coming near breaking even.

The options are
cut expenditure by letting people go or cutting wages or reducing services
or
tax the hell out of everyone else so that those who are profitable either raise prices, become unprofitable and let people go or close down or move to cheaper countries. In these cases what happens to the public service then when we're back to square one?

mickoneill30 · 24-10-2009 2:37pm

benwavner wrote: »

Ooooohhhhhhh the poor private sector workers!!

I know a woman IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR, who gets a €30,000+ bonus at Christmas EVERY year, TAX FREE might I add!!

This is one of those daft posts.

Not everybody in the private sector is making €30000 bonuses. I'd guess you knew that.

Also I've no idea what her job is. Suppose this woman saved her company €1000,000. Should she not get a huge bonus?

If the €30,000 is AFTER TAX (if it's TAX FREE as you say above then somebodys fiddling so just report them to revenue) then the bonus was about €55K. Great. That's a fair chunk of change gone to the government to help pay some more bills.

jimmmy · 24-10-2009 2:38pm

benwavner wrote: »

Ooooohhhhhhh the poor private sector workers!!

I know a woman IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR, who gets a €30,000+ bonus at Christmas EVERY year, TAX FREE might I add!!

YES, she also got it last Xmas, and YES she is guaranteed to get it this Xmas...

...and it is not just her working there, everyone gets similar bonuses that are not tied in to their annual salary. She works middle management.

EXPLAIN THIS ONE JIMMMY!

I do not know her or know anything about her. If she is not paying tax you should report her. What industry does she work in ?

Nodin · 24-10-2009 2:42pm

mickoneill30 wrote: »

This is one of those daft posts.

Not everybody in the private sector is making €30000 bonuses. I'd guess you knew that.

Also I've no idea what her job is. Suppose this woman saved her company €1000,000. Should she not get a huge bonus?

If the €30,000 is AFTER TAX (if it's TAX FREE as you say above then somebodys fiddling so just report them to revenue) then the bonus was about €55K. Great. That's a fair chunk of change gone to the government to help pay some more bills.

I believe that Bens post was satirical in nature......

jimmmy · 24-10-2009 2:44pm

so more public servants telling fibs?

mickoneill30 · 24-10-2009 2:44pm

Nodin wrote: »

I believe that Bens post was satirical in nature......

Hope so.

Praetorian Saighdiuir · 24-10-2009 2:53pm

mickoneill30 wrote: »

This is one of those daft posts.

Not everybody in the private sector is making €30000 bonuses. I'd guess you knew that.

Also I've no idea what her job is. Suppose this woman saved her company €1000,000. Should she not get a huge bonus?

Thats the point I am trying to make. Not all Private Sector are getting that crazy type of bonus...........and on the other hand..........not all Public sector workers are raking it in, claiming crazy sub and allowance, staying off work for the craic, or living the good life.

The €30,000 bonus is true, i doubt the not taxed bit is true.

elDiablo79 · 24-10-2009 3:30pm

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

So, public servants are worth double their pay?

Yeah, come work in a hosptial for a day. Were actually worth triple our pay

glaston · 24-10-2009 3:43pm

P. Breathnach wrote: »

They get less money than they used to, and the pension package is the same as it was before. That amounts to a pay cut.

An investment with a guaranteed return and PS workers are still bitchin and moaning about it.

Defined benefit pensions are dropping like flies, in a few years they will be a thing of the past everywhere but the public sector.

I think its the sense of entitlement that winds people up the most.

jimmmy · 24-10-2009 4:10pm

elDiablo79 wrote: »

Were actually worth triple our pay

So you think an Irish consultant should be paid 6 times a german consultant ?
An Irish nurse 9 times a Portugese nurse ?

( see the comparisons between existing pay versus thiose countries public services in the Saturday Irish Independent paper recently. )

Dream on...if you think you are actually worth triple your pay !

Half more like it.

nesf · 24-10-2009 4:29pm

Ok, this thread is about sick leave in the public sector. Please do not derail this thread into a general bitching session about either the public or private sector. I'm sick of you lot being at each other's throats, take a breath and leave the topic lie for a while.

Any further dragging off-topic of this thread and it'll be locked and the offenders potentially banned.

PJW · 25-10-2009 12:00am

benwavner wrote: »

The point I am making is, everyone is different. If you are sick, you are sick. I doesnt matter what sector you work in.

Oh but it does matter, if there are way more people working in the private sector with less sick leave this means that sick leave is being abused in the public sector

tallaght01 · 25-10-2009 2:27am

PJW wrote: »

Oh but it does matter, if there are way more people working in the private sector with less sick leave this means that sick leave is being abused in the public sector

It doesn't have to mean that at all.

IN my experience, the private sector pressurises people to go back to work earlier than they should. This, combined with the fact that you're using "averages" without adjusting for age and chronic disease status makes the whole argument essentially balls from a statistical point of view.

nesf · 25-10-2009 2:36am

tallaght01 wrote: »

IN my experience, the private sector pressurises people to go back to work earlier than they should. This, combined with the fact that you're using "averages" without adjusting for age and chronic disease status makes the whole argument essentially balls from a statistical point of view.

Silly man and your belief in facts actually having to be accurate!

MaceFace · 25-10-2009 8:14am

tallaght01 wrote: »

IN my experience, the private sector pressurises people to go back to work earlier than they should. This, combined with the fact that you're using "averages" without adjusting for age and chronic disease status makes the whole argument essentially balls from a statistical point of view.

Lads, your sounding very childish here. Things are never black and white.
It is true in some places that there is a pressure to come back to work early and at the same time there is sections in certain professions that completely abuse their job security.

Anyone who takes more than 3 days off in a row in any job should produce a doctors cert and anyone who takes more than 5 sick days a year should have to explain themselves. It doesn't matter who it is or where they work.

NewDubliner · 25-10-2009 9:22am

MaceFace wrote: »

Anyone who takes more than 3 days off in a row in any job should produce a doctors cert

That's the current rule and the 90% of the sick leave was medically certified.

The real issue must be why so many people in the PS have medically certified health problems compared to private sector.

Perhaps the private sector discriminates against such workers?

mickoneill30 · 25-10-2009 10:01am

MaceFace wrote: »

Anyone who takes more than 3 days off in a row in any job should produce a doctors cert and anyone who takes more than 5 sick days a year should have to explain themselves. It doesn't matter who it is or where they work.

The problem (for any employer) there is if you go down to your local doctor it's not hard to get a cert out of them.

mickoneill30 · 25-10-2009 10:04am

NewDubliner wrote: »

Perhaps the private sector discriminates against such workers?

I'm presuming that's tongue in cheek. :P

If not how could an employer discriminate against hiring someone who's frequently sick? If you're hiring someone you can't tell if they're going to take frequent sick days in the future.

NewDubliner · 25-10-2009 5:28pm

mickoneill30 wrote: »

If not how could an employer discriminate against hiring someone who's frequently sick?

By not hiring women or people with disabilities?

mickoneill30 · 25-10-2009 6:17pm

NewDubliner wrote: »

By not hiring women or people with disabilities?

Now that's discrimination.

Do people with disabilities take more sick days? Having a disability doesn't mean you're going to be sick.

Are the people in the public service who are averaging more than 14 days per year sick all people with disabilities? I'd be willing to bet they're not.

dresden8 · 25-10-2009 6:28pm

mickoneill30 wrote: »

Now that's discrimination.

Do people with disabilities take more sick days? Having a disability doesn't mean you're going to be sick.

Are the people in the public service who are averaging more than 14 days per year sick all people with disabilities? I'd be willing to bet they're not.

It would be interesting to see the stats with maternity related sick-leave taken out.

mickoneill30 · 25-10-2009 6:33pm

dresden8 wrote: »

It would be interesting to see the stats with maternity related sick-leave taken out.

When they were quoting the stats on the radio were maternity related sick days left in for the private sector or was it taken out for that segment?

old boy · 25-10-2009 7:57pm

i had a medical report by an orthapedic surgon thorn up by a company head, who said he did not have to accept it, saying it was not worht the paper it was written on.

nesf · 25-10-2009 8:27pm

mickoneill30 wrote: »

Now that's discrimination.

Do people with disabilities take more sick days? Having a disability doesn't mean you're going to be sick.

Do you think that after a year's probation, where someone with a disability has shown that they require well above average sick leave for genuine reasons that an employer is justified in letting them go purely because of the amount of sick leave this person will need?

mickoneill30 · 25-10-2009 9:22pm

nesf wrote: »

Do you think that after a year's probation, where someone with a disability has shown that they require well above average sick leave for genuine reasons that an employer is justified in letting them go purely because of the amount of sick leave this person will need?

How exactly is that question relevant to this thread?

NewDubliner · 25-10-2009 9:48pm

mickoneill30 wrote: »

How exactly is that question relevant to this thread?

We're trying to figure out why public servants are more often sick than private sector. Apart from exposure to health risks being different, another possible answer is demographic.

jimmmy · 27-10-2009 12:05pm

NewDubliner wrote: »

We're trying to figure out why public servants are more often sick than private sector.

:D:D
Correction. There is no proof they are more often sick. What is clear is that public servants take more sick days. Big difference.

nice_guy80 · 27-10-2009 12:13pm

only in certain public sector areas

Example: Social and Family Affairs. I could imagine how the stress in this department far outweighs other areas. Same with Health professions working on the frontline

Teaching: standing in front of 25 children, most of whom are sniffling, coughing, sneezing

Dannyboy83 · 27-10-2009 12:41pm

HSE pays worker €1.3m for doing nothing since 2003

http://www.independent.ie/health/latest-news/hse-pays--worker-836413m--for-doing-nothing-since-2003-1924917.html

AN HSE worker has been paid more than €1.3m -- €200,000 a year -- while on leave since 2003.

It can also be revealed that another health service worker has been paid since 1996 -- and is now moving into the 14th year of salaried absence.

Nearly 90pc of paid leave in the health service is sickness-related, with the bill for all absences of more than six months now topping €11m.

It is unclear if those on leave have been replaced on a "temporary" basis. If they have, it would mean taxpayers footing the bill on the double.

The extraordinary case of one employee being paid €1,303,068 since 2003 is certain to renew focus on how the HSE manages itself.

The person has not been identified and their former level of responsibilities is not known. Neither is it clear whether they have been continuing to receive full pay in all that time.

Almost 150 HSE workers have been out on continuing leave for more than six months -- at an accrued cost of €11m. That is €1m more than the cost of a cervical cancer vaccination programme cancelled by Health Minister Mary Harney last year.

It is not clear what verification procedures the HSE has in place for illness, or the extent to which some employees may be on a reduced rate due to prolonged absence.

But the new figures reveal that 147 employees have been on paid leave for more than six months, including 127 on long-term sick leave.

The figures are the HSE's own, produced in a written reply to a TD's parliamentary question.

One worker has been on paid leave for 13 years -- or nearly one-third of the normal working life. And 41 staff are responsible for more than €8m of the €11m paid out since 1996.

Another staff member has received more than €400,000 since 2006. That's equivalent to €133,500 a year.

Astounding

Fine Gael health spokesperson Dr James Reilly said last night: "A pay bill of €11,229,668 for employees who are on leave from the health service is astounding.

"How is this remotely justifiable when a cervical cancer vaccination programme, which would cost less than this amount, has been cancelled for budgetary reasons?"

For so many health workers to be out sick for so long was "a glaring example of mismanagement and HR incompetence" in the health service, he said.

Dr Reilly said it was important to acknowledge that people did fall ill and needed to be looked after from time to time. But he added: "There will be some cases here where people are just receiving their due entitlements, but the numbers involved sound serious alarm bells.

"I would be interested to know if unresolved industrial relations issues are part of the problem here and the Minister for Health needs to provide an explanation."

Sean McGrath, national director of human resources for the HSE, said: "Employees have statutory and contractual entitlement to paid leave, covering a number of circumstances."

These included annual leave, maternity leave, sickness absence, health and safety leave, adoptive leave, and special leave with nominal pay for specific humanitarian purposes.

The above is one of the first things to stun me in a while.
There really is no question as to why we have such an appalling health service in this country, with stuff like the above.
I wonder what other boards this stretches into.
It seems every week there is another scandal or controversy in the PS, I've almost come to expect it at this stage.
No doubt there will be HSE people trying to defend the above.

How can this type of thing be tackled?
Perhaps Quinn Health Insurance could set up a publicly funded NGO to monitor this type of wasteful spending?

Seriously, get Michael O Leary in there, god knows how much money we can save by cleaning up the Health services and Education alone, we mightn't need to touch the Public Sector wages. Maybe this is the reform that Cowen was talking about.
Why was it allowed to go on the first place?

The Public Sector is sick

Comments