Some Questions for The Public Sector Bashers

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.