Some Questions for The Public Sector Bashers

MaceFace

jimd2 wrote: »

Question for all of ye that have suddenly come out of the woodwork to bash those of us working (very hard I might add) in the Public Sector....

I will answer but I hope you actually listen to honest (hopefully sane opinion).
BTW: Yes - many people in the public sector work a lot harder than a lot of people in the private sector, but it is very easy to slag off the public sector with so many low lives who do nothing all day or just play politics and are protected. The public sector needs to look at themselves and weed out these people in the same way the private sector would.

jimd2 wrote: »

Why did you not try and get a job in the Irish Public Sector during the boom and when they were recruiting quite a lot?

Besides job security and comparable wages, there is no reason to work there. I work in an industry that will allow me to grow my talents and hopefully one day achieve something I could never in the public sector (without playing the politics game). I am in the IT sector and imo no one serious about IT would go into the PS.

jimd2 wrote: »

Were you so happy with your private sector bonuses and rapid promotions that I know many people were getting?

I have had one bonus in the last 10 years and that was about 1.5% of my salary. There is no massive promotions. If there was then you would see the private sector full of chiefs and no Indians. It does happen in some places, but these companies always find out the hard way the problems this creates.

jimd2 wrote: »

Did the Public Sector seem an area that was not exciting enough for your undoubted talents?

Yes. I am in IT and what the hell would I be doing in the PS? Many of the jobs that are in this area are farmed out to consultant companies and the feedback I have had from the people who work for these consultant companies have led me to believe that people who work in IT in the PS are layabouts who do nothing most of the day or are not good at their jobs because they have no need to be (no promotion based on talent, no bonuses based on talent)

jimd2 wrote: »

Why were you not opening threads on forums / fora such as this venting your opinion about how the Public sector were going to ruin the country?

Because the general public did not care in much the same way as Joe Soap on the street today doesn't care cause it doesn't affect them. If you were to say to people that we are borrowing €400m a week to run this country and that will mean that every man woman and child will have to pay an extra €100 a week and they saw this come out of their pay/welfare this would soon get their attention.

jimd2 wrote: »

Were you objecting to the rapidly increasing house prices and the obvious effects this was having on mortgages and consequently wages in this economy?

Yes. Big time. I have said since 2000 that the house prices in this country and ridiculous and I would be very happy to see house prices plummet to be what they should be (whether through rental yields or times salary) - and I am a house owner.

jimd2 wrote: »

Did you vent your feelings about Public Sector workers the last time you had an ineraction with a nurse, teacher, guard, dole office staff, social worker etc.?

No because they will always play on your feelings about the job they do. It is interesting that you choose the front line jobs. Why not say about the bureaucrats or office workers?
When the nurses went on strike for more pay a number of years ago I was completely against them. I revile people who go into a career and complain afterwards about it. Go in with your eyes open. Same for the Guards.

jimd2 wrote: »

Are your opinions on the Public Sector workers influenced by the slow drip feed of negatives being conveniently and continuously being released to the media in recent times?

No. I know full well what is involved. I toyed with the idea of going into the PS back in 1999 when the IT bubble burst but when I found out what was involved I soon gave up. Don't believe that the frustration of people today is new.

jimd2 wrote: »

What are your thoughts regarding those uindividuals that have avoided paying their taxes for many years in this country in spite of earning many multiples of Public Sector wages.

Send all tax dodgers to jail.
If they have not done anything illegal I think it is very two faced to single out rich who used tax avoidance measures and not the ordinary people. Have you heard the adds on the radio for paylesstax.ie?
I do though think the government give in too easily to the tax avoidance schemes.

jimd2 wrote: »

What are your thoughts about workers in banks whose effects on tis economy is much more stark but are now getting pay rises?

[/QUOTE]
They are wrong but again this is the governments fault - not the company. A bank is a private company like your local corner shop, just much bigger. The government should have been a lot stronger with them than they have.

Count Dooku

imme wrote: »

(1) are you sure?
the average industrial wage in Ireland would appear to be €32k, not €23k that you quote, where did you get €23k from?

Sorry for typo
It is 32K, but is not change anything –
80% of PS worker have salary more the industrial average wage and average PS salary is only growing
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/civil-servants-got-47pc-pay-hike-in-past-year-1923550.html
Rising wages will strengthen Government's case for cuts

Count Dooku

dresden8 wrote: »

Makes sense to me. Your point?

My point is that PS workers deserves average salary not more then industrial average salary.
If they want to have more – they have to work harder to create better condition for private sector. No advance payment as IMPACT is proposing. Civil servants will find thousands of explanations why they cannot achieve it.
Lenihan decided to change his mind and increase taxes, without imposing any cuts on public sector. It is good. It means that country will be bankrupted much quicker and in two years time majority of PS workers will be happy to work for 1.84 per hour.

imme

Count Dooku wrote: »

Sorry for typo
It is 32K, but is not change anything –
80% of PS worker have salary more the industrial average wage and average PS salary is only growing
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/civil-servants-got-47pc-pay-hike-in-past-year-1923550.html
Rising wages will strengthen Government's case for cuts

the Irish Indo article you reference says the average industrial wage is €42k. Whatever about using statistics to say whatever you want or to back up an argument, one seems to be able use the internet to prove anything. I found the €32k figure on a different site, not a government/official site.
Anyway, 80% of PS staff do not earn the average industrial wage. Starting off grade in the PS is clerical officer, these people make up the bulk in staff terms of the PS. Their starting wage is €23k.

irish_bob

imme wrote: »

the Irish Indo article you reference says the average industrial wage is €42k. Whatever about using statistics to say whatever you want or to back up an argument, one seems to be able use the internet to prove anything. I found the €32k figure on a different site, not a government/official site.
Anyway, 80% of PS staff do not earn the average industrial wage. Starting off grade in the PS is clerical officer, these people make up the bulk in staff terms of the PS. Their starting wage is €23k.

how could clerical officers make up the bulk of public sector staff , perhaps you mean they make up the bulk of civil service staff

the average public sector worker ( which includes the civil service ) earns over 49 k per year

imme

irish_bob wrote: »

how could clerical officers make up the bulk of public sector staff , perhaps you mean they make up the bulk of civil service staff

the average public sector worker ( which includes the civil service ) earns over 49 k per year

yes true, sorry for confusion. where did you get the €49k figure?

population

The_Thing wrote: »

(A) - Pride:
Men were too proud to be seen sweeping the streets, collecting other people's filthy bins, cleaning drains, picking up dead animals off the roads, etc, etc.

Let me explain my answer, jimd2.

I have been employed with a local authority for almost twenty years in their outdoor section and the very first task I was given when I started was sweeping the streets. Apart from the fact the streets needed cleaning this was also a test - a test to see if you really wanted the job and that you'd stick it out. You would be suprised the number of guys who would do a disappearing act as soon as they were told to go sweeping.

On another occasion I was asked about a litter warden's job that had been adverised. When I mentioned the fact that it would involve picking up waste which had been illegaly dumped and examine it for evidence to prosecute those involved, the person asking was no longer interested in applying.

If the above was happening in my local authority then I am fairly certain that it was happening all over the country too.

Yup and there are absolutely zero private sector jobs with unsavoury work conditions:rolleyes:

glaston

dresden8 wrote: »

Sigh.

The "pension levy" has nothing to do with pensions.

It does not go into a pension pot.

It confers no pension entitlements.

It is levied against payments which are not pensionable.

It is levied against employees who have no pension entitlements.

You might find it frustrating that this payment isn’t really related to your pension. It’s equally frustrating for the rest of us that your eventual entitlement is equally unrelated to your contributions, investment performance, avc’s etc. So Joe public who pays into dc scheme with no guarantee will end up footing the bill to guarantee your pension.
Sigh indeed.

irish_bob

imme wrote: »

yes true, sorry for confusion. where did you get the €49k figure?

e.r.s.i

diverdriver

Look Dresden and others. Don't you understand? You can argue until the cliches and lies come home to roost. But the simply reality is this:

There is no money to pay your salaries anymore. The government is borrowing €400 million a week to pay you.

The people who used to pay all the taxes that kept the PS working are on the dole or gone home to Poland or wherever.

It's pointless arguing that some private sector employees are getting pay rises. If they are, (with the exception of AIB, which is a disgrace), then it's because those companies are still making money. That isn't unfair, it's the way things are. My wife was promoted recently and got a payrise. She is also getting a nice bonus. Her first in five years, I might add. Is that unfair? No because her employer is still making profit. What's interesting is that the equivalent department to hers in the PS works shorter hours, has more people and is much less efficient. Oh and they are better paid overall.

That's the problem in a nutshell. The PS must take pay cuts because there is no money to pay them. No amount of argument is going to change that.

ChewChew

diverdriver wrote: »

There is no money to pay your salaries anymore. The government is borrowing €400 million a week to pay you.

Even if the Government got rid of the few top earners who really are not needed, they won't save €400 million a week.

diverdriver wrote: »

That's the problem in a nutshell. The PS must take pay cuts because there is no money to pay them. No amount of argument is going to change that.

So the PS MUST (as you put it) take ANOTHER pay cut? Because there are a few knobheads who are incompetent at running a system and managing budgets? Who think it's ok to give Drumm a €70k bonus? For Cowen to earn the big bucks he is earning?

Gosh, that really is fair!

ei.sdraob

diverdriver wrote: »

Look Dresden and others. Don't you understand? You can argue until the cliches and lies come home to roost. But the simply reality is this:

There is no money to pay your salaries anymore. The government is borrowing €400 million a week to pay you.

The people who used to pay all the taxes that kept the PS working are on the dole or gone home to Poland or wherever.

It's pointless arguing that some private sector employees are getting pay rises. If they are, (with the exception of AIB, which is a disgrace), then it's because those companies are still making money. That isn't unfair, it's the way things are. My wife was promoted recently and got a payrise. She is also getting a nice bonus. Her first in five years, I might add. Is that unfair? No because her employer is still making profit. What's interesting is that the equivalent department to hers in the PS works shorter hours, has more people and is much less efficient. Oh and they are better paid overall.

That's the problem in a nutshell. The PS must take pay cuts because there is no money to pay them. No amount of argument is going to change that.

i gave up trying to argue

let them dig own grave the IMF or whoever will have to clean this up will sort them out down the road, or worse their children will pay for this

theres a thread here with damning numbers > http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055720290

showing that good chunk of the PS make for a large proportion of the highest earners in this country

P. Breathnach

diverdriver wrote: »

There is no money to pay your salaries anymore. The government is borrowing €400 million a week to pay you.

Why are you designing posters? This is a discussion forum.

The government is borrowing €400m a week to deal with an exchequer deficit. This is attributable to a number of factors, not solely the public service payroll.

ei.sdraob

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Why are you designing posters? This is a discussion forum.

The government is borrowing €400m a week to deal with an exchequer deficit. This is attributable to a number of factors, not solely the public service payroll.

the growth of the public sector was fueled by taxmoney from the construction sector

do you agree

now that that construction sector is gone, where will the money come from?

#15

Geez, what is wrong with people. It has to be a mixture of growth and cost cutting.

kaymin

#15 wrote: »

Geez, what is wrong with people. It has to be a mixture of growth and cost cutting.

There won't be growth until Ireland is more competitive and Ireland won't become competitive again until we cut costs / salary levels. PS wage levels were one of the reasons for wage inflation in the private sector during the boom. Cutting costs now should be the priority. Growth will follow.

ei.sdraob

kaymin wrote: »

There won't be growth until Ireland is more competitive and Ireland won't become competitive again until we cut costs / salary levels. PS wage levels were one of the reasons for wage inflation in the private sector during the boom. Cutting costs now should be the priority. Growth will follow.

^^ this, welcome to boards @kaymin

dodgyme

ei.sdraob wrote: »

i gave up trying to argue

let them dig own grave the IMF or whoever will have to clean this up will sort them out down the road, or worse their children will pay for this

theres a thread here with damning numbers > http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055720290

showing that good chunk of the PS make for a large proportion of the highest earners in this country

One argument the PS are trying is that we are all in it together BS but that have been discounted however one quote from another thread I did like was

Kama wrote: »

Strange how the universalist rhetoric of 'all being in it together', 'unacceptable at any level' etc only comes out to play when on the way down, when it was atavistic socialist nonsense on the way up...

ei.sdraob

dodgyme wrote: »

One argument the PS are trying is that we are all in it together BS but that have been discounted however one quote from another thread I did like was

yes were are all in this together

but the private sector wages have comedown across the board and alot of people are working half weeks and hundreds of thousands have lost their jobs

in the meantime the public sector hasnt fired anyone despite huge amounts of waste coming to light


whats worse is the Unions are acting like terrorists now holding the country ransom at the threats of strikes

P. Breathnach

ei.sdraob wrote: »

... private sector wages have comedown across the board ...

Any hard data?

ei.sdraob

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Any hard data?

beside 400,000 new unemployed who have now a great salary of €0?

how many of the above came from PS??




lets see how about this

http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055720290


what % of the working population in employed in PS?

and then compare that % to the ratio of people in the PS who are also high earners as per above thread



theres a nice post here from july, pretty much says it al

http://www.ronanlyons.com/2009/07/13/public-sector-versus-private-sector-pay-update/

P. Breathnach

ei.sdraob wrote: »

beside 400,000 new unemployed who have now a great salary of €0?

how many of the above came from PS??




lets see how about this

http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055720290


what % of the working population in employed in PS?

and then compare that % to the ratio of people in the PS who are also high earners as per above thread



theres a nice post here from july, pretty much says it al

http://www.ronanlyons.com/2009/07/13/public-sector-versus-private-sector-pay-update/

I asked for hard data in support of your claim that "private sector wages have comedown across the board".

dresden8

P. Breathnach wrote: »

I asked for hard data in support of your claim that "private sector wages have comedown across the board".

He doesn't need proof, everybody knows.

kaymin

dresden8 wrote: »

He doesn't need proof, everybody knows.

http://www.ibec.ie/IBEC/Press/PressPublicationsdoclib3.nsf/vPages/Newsroom~new-ibec-survey-on-pay-trends-in-the-economy-15-09-2009?OpenDocument

To quote from this article:

'Just over a fifth of employers have implemented pay reductions'

'Pay freezes (59%) and reduced numbers employed (55%) have been put in place in 2009'

'More than half of companies (56%) have reduced their pay bill over the past 12 months by an average of 21%. '

'For 2010, half (48%) expect their pay bill to remain the same and one third (33%) expect it to decrease'

If equivalent actions were taken in the PS then that would be something. Higher pay reductions in the PS than are occurring in the private sector are justified particularly as the public sector pay premium was 19 per cent in 2007 per the CSO and no-one in full employment in the PS is being let-go.

SkepticOne

dresden8 wrote: »

He doesn't need proof, everybody knows.

Not everyone knows. A lot of the public sector are desperately out of touch with the rest of the country.

dresden8

kaymin wrote: »

'Just over a fifth of employers have implemented pay reductions'

So, nearly 80% have not.

Hardly "across the board"

Sconsey

dresden8 wrote: »

So, nearly 80% have not.

Hardly "across the board"

It also says more than half of companies have reduced their pay bill, so while one fifth have reduced pay, a crap-load more have laid off people (not counting the companies that went totally to the wall). I think being laid off is even worse than a pay cut...don't you?

MaceFace

dresden8 wrote: »

So, nearly 80% have not.

Hardly "across the board"

dresden8 - your not winning any friends here. Can you please bring a bit of maturity and honest debate to the discussion rather than relying on nit picking.

dresden8

Sconsey wrote: »

It also says more than half of companies have reduced their pay bill, so while one fifth have reduced pay, a crap-load more have laid off people (not counting the companies that went totally to the wall). I think being laid off is even worse than a pay cut...don't you?

Yes it is.

Not all the private sector has been laid off.

Not all the private sector has taken a pay cut, as above nearly 80% have not. Some are getting raises

The public sector has seen jobs disappear too and everybody in the public sector has taken a paycut.

kaymin

dresden8 wrote: »

Yes it is.

Not all the private sector has been laid off.

Not all the private sector has taken a pay cut, as above nearly 80% have not. Some are getting raises

The public sector has seen jobs disappear too and everybody in the public sector has taken a paycut.

No-one with a full-time job in the public sector has been made redundant. The pay cut in the PS that you refer to is not a pay cut but a contribution to your pension which you will receive back on retirement. Even if it is considered a paycut it doesn't compare to what has happened in the private sector and therefore the PS needs to take more pain in the interests of fairness. Reducing wage levels to the equivalent levels in the private sector is a minimum step - further downward adjustments are justified on the basis that no-one is being made redundant in the PS and the pension entitlements are extremely generous in comparison to the pension entitlements of the average private sector worker.

dresden8

MaceFace wrote: »

dresden8 - your not winning any friends here. Can you please bring a bit of maturity and honest debate to the discussion rather than relying on nit picking.

I was relying on facts and figures.

I realise they're not often used in these threads but I do try to introduce some every so often, for maturity and honesty.

And I don't want to be your friend.

eoinbn

How can so many people be clueless.

The public sector pay bill needs to come down because the government CANNOT AFFORD it's current cost. It's not to 'even the score', which is what alot of people seem to want.

edit: btw IBEC does not represent the whole of the private sector. Also note that some 14 months ago the unions held IBEC to ransom for a pay increase, they wanted 6-7% to match inflation, and got an agreement of 3-4% over 18 months which some companies have been forced to pay even though inflation is now deflation.

ei.sdraob

one thing that the public sector people here need to be pointed out


your salaries are paid by taxation on the private sector and the productivity of this sector


yes yee pay taxes but it all goes back into paying yee in the end

keep that in mind when yee speak of "entitlement"'s

dresden8

ei.sdraob wrote: »

one thing that the public sector people here need to be pointed out


your salaries are paid by taxation on the private sector and the productivity of this sector


yes yee pay taxes but it all goes back into paying yee in the end

keep that in mind when yee speak of "entitlement"'s

Yes master.

kaymin

eoinbn wrote: »

How can so many people be clueless.

The public sector pay bill needs to come down because the government CANNOT AFFORD it's current cost. It's not to 'even the score', which is what alot of people seem to want.

The government can balance the books by taxing the private sector and / or reducing expenditure (i.e. hit the public sector). It is important for the pain to be shared and for that to be evident to both sectors otherwise the country will come to a standstill as a result of strikes.

baalthor

MaceFace wrote: »

No because they will always play on your feelings about the job they do. It is interesting that you choose the front line jobs. Why not say about the bureaucrats or office workers?

Agreed, and that's why we have the "Front line Alliance" - "Don't cut Public Sector pay but HINT HINT if you do, make sure it's the pay of those pen-pushers back in the office"

How do non-front line public sector workers feel about these workers distinguishing themselves from the rest of you?

dresden8 wrote: »

Yes it is.

Not all the private sector has been laid off.

Not all the private sector has taken a pay cut, as above nearly 80% have not. Some are getting raises

The public sector has seen jobs disappear too and everybody in the public sector has taken a paycut.

Pay cuts and lay-offs happen in the private sector mainly due to market conditions. Companies facing loss of business often have no choice either to cut pay or lay off staff or else go out of business.

Pay cuts and job losses in the private sector mean less money goes into the tax pot. This means less money to pay government services including your salary.

So it's definitely not in the interest of public sector to ask for pay-cuts in the private sector

Do you WANT private sector workers to have their pay cut just to make yourself feel better about having your pay cut?

dresden8

baalthor wrote: »

Do you WANT private sector workers to have their pay cut just to make yourself feel better about having your pay cut?

If you examine my posts you'll find I didn't call for private sector pay cuts.

I was countering the "fact" that wage cuts were widespread across the private sector, when nearly 80% have not taken pay cuts.

I realise that not many people on this board are used to dealing with statistics and actual information, they rely on what they know, so I'll forgive you for not recognising them when you see them.

eoinbn

kaymin wrote: »

The government can balance the books by taxing the private sector and / or reducing expenditure (i.e. hit the public sector). It is important for the pain to be shared and for that to be evident to both sectors otherwise the country will come to a standstill as a result of strikes.

By private I assume you mean tax both sector's.

We have already seen a number of tax increases, and I am sure we will see a few more in the next few budgets. However the reality is that there is no way we can raise enough in taxes to bridge the gap. We are paying some of the highest public sector wages, and ditto for welfare, in the world yet we are a financial basket-case that would still be in a deficit sitution even if we cut both by 50%!

kaymin

eoinbn wrote: »

By private I assume you mean tax both sector's.

We have already seen a number of tax increases, and I am sure we will see a few more in the next few budgets. However the reality is that there is no way we can raise enough in taxes to bridge the gap. We are paying some of the highest public sector wages, and ditto for welfare, in the world yet we are a financial basket-case that would still be in a deficit sitution even if we cut both by 50%!

All tax revenue is ultimately derived from the private sector since the public sector doesn't produce anything.

I agree, Ireland is a basketcase. Redundancies in the public sector is the way to go. Only then can the public sector start to feel that they have made a contribution that is approaching adequate.

gerry28

kaymin wrote: »

No-one with a full-time job in the public sector has been made redundant.

Plenty of full time temporary staff have been laid off.

kaymin wrote: »

The pay cut in the PS that you refer to is not a pay cut but a contribution to your pension which you will receive back on retirement.

Plain wrong, this sum of money (pension levy) is not paid back on retirement.

kaymin wrote: »

PS needs to take more pain in the interests of fairness.

Fairness doesn't seem to matter a hoot in all of this. Tens, maybe even hundreds of thousands of people will get off virtually unscathed in this resession.

Sections of the well paid in the public sector might have to give up some of their massive wages (100K and over), but so too should those in the private sector earning similar sums.

drkpower

Remarkable how so many idiots from both sides continue to discuss this issue as if its a competition as to who should suffer more pain, or who deserves it, or whose fault it is.....

Its well past that. Yet ye all squabble like schoolchildren... Ah well.

diverdriver

I kind of knew, even putting in big red letters wouldn't get the message across. Dresden persists in comparing private sector conditions as if that had any relevancy at all. There is only one employer for the PS. There are thousands in the private sector. They make their money in any number of ways. The PS runs entirely on tax revenue provided by the private sector. Tax revenue is down. Something has to give. It really is as simple at that.

I'm not really sure why people cannot take that in? I know why the unions act like they're stupid and pretend there is some airy fairy solution other than pay cuts. But the average person cannot fail to have noticed that it's all gone wrong. Even Dresden?

diverdriver

Plenty of full time temporary staff have been laid off.

No full time permanent staff have been laid off, none zero, zilch. People on temporary contracts are just that; temporary.

Sections of the well paid in the public sector might have to give up some of their massive wages (100K and over), but so too should those in the private sector earning similar sums.

Why? That is typical Irish begrudgery. No one has any business telling a private company what they can or cannot pay their staff. All their profits come from earnings not taxation. If I own a company, I can pay my staff anything I want to if I think they are worth it to my company and if I can afford it. In many cases high earners make more money for the company than they cost. Plus if you don't pay the going rate. They will leave and go to your rival.

Restricting salaries in private companies not in receipt of public is basically Communism. We really don't want that.:eek:

dresden8

diverdriver wrote: »

Dresden persists in comparing private sector conditions as if that had any relevancy at all.

I think you'll find there's quite a bit of comparison of public and private sector pay and conditions and I think you'll find I didn't start it.

Comparisons are trotted out until they are countered and then suddenly it's irrelevant.

Carry on.

gerry28

diverdriver wrote: »

No full time permanent staff have been laid off, none zero, zilch. People on temporary contracts are just that; temporary.

Alot of these people were in permanent positions and would have been made permanent in their 4th year.

diverdriver wrote: »

Why? That is typical Irish begrudgery. No one has any business telling a private company what they can or cannot pay their staff. All their profits come from earnings not taxation. If I own a company, I can pay my staff anything I want to if I think they are worth it to my company and if I can afford it. In many cases high earners make more money for the company than they cost. Plus if you don't pay the going rate. They will leave and go to your rival.

A higher rate of tax would do the trick for both sectors then at the higher pay levels.

NewDubliner

diverdriver wrote: »

No full time permanent staff have been laid off, none zero, zilch. People on temporary contracts are just that; temporary.

Recurring contracts not renewed? Non replacement of permanent staff who leave? The imminent redundancy of hundreds of staff from the state-owned Anglo-Irish bank? Up to 1,000 more permanent due to leave and not be replaced? It might be a lot less than the loss of unnecessary private sector workers, but it's not zilch.

diverdriver wrote: »

Why? That is typical Irish begrudgery. No one has any business telling a private company what they can or cannot pay their staff.

Where do these earnings come from? The public? Unless you're exporting 100%, we pay your wages.

diverdriver wrote: »

Restricting salaries in private companies not in receipt of public is basically Communism. We really don't want that.:eek:

So is state ownership/control of the banks and property market.

wicklowmale

It looks like the government don't have the balls after all.

The indo had an article saying the government were looking at reform, if the unions can come up with proposals. How much bull**** do we have to take?

They also stated taxes may be increased for some ppl.

Here we are again, the government are afraid to stand up to the unions. The private sector continue to suffer and the PS get away with it again.

Do you not think it time for the common people to stand up, united and protest about the PS?

Alas i know this will not happy as the irish ppl will take it as always, i have a friend who is a friend with a well known wicklow politician said 'the irish ppl will complain for a while but eventually they will accept it'.

How much more are we going to take?

SkepticOne

NewDubliner wrote: »

The imminent redundancy of hundreds of staff from the state-owned Anglo-Irish bank?

I'm not sure I would count this since Anglo has only recently been taken over by the state. It is really a private sector failure.

Up to 1,000 more permanent due to leave and not be replaced?

Not really comparable to forced redundancies as have been happening in the private sector.

NewDubliner

SkepticOne wrote: »

I'm not sure I would count this since Anglo has only recently been taken over by the state. It is really a private sector failure.

It's part of the public sector numbers.

SkepticOne wrote: »

Not really comparable to forced redundancies as have been happening in the private sector.

So, coercive lay-offs are better for the economy than voluntary ones? BTW part of the T&Cs of the PS voluntary layoffs are that the workers cannot be re-employed in any part of the PS, thus removing them from any competition with other unemployed people.

imme

ei.sdraob wrote: »

one thing that the public sector people here need to be pointed out


your salaries are paid by taxation on the private sector and the productivity of this sector


yes yee pay taxes but it all goes back into paying yee in the end

keep that in mind when yee speak of "entitlement"'s

people in the PS also pay tax, prsi, dirt tax, vat etc etc etc