Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
How to deal with the public sector and the unions
Options
Comments
-
Banks will be further in deep bankruptcy if that mortgage thing was ever allowed. Coupled with their balance sheets going seriously into the red, they will find it extremely difficult to borrow from the markets as after all who would loan us money for joe soap activity if some of it is been written off?0
-
hallelujajordan wrote: »I can't tell you how refreshing it sounds to hear two Public Sector workers acknowledge the need for wage cuts within the Public Sector, however within both of your posts you demonstrate some of the thinking that is across the Public Sector that is just not realistic or sensible in today's society and that really needs to be challenged . .
- The public sector have not had any decrease in their wages (other than some roles, like our politicians). You have had a decrease in your take home pay because you have been asked to contribute to a pension scheme that, frankly should never have been in place, and is entirely at odds with anything those who work in the private sector have available to them . . (I would happily take a 7% cut in my take home pay for an equivalent pension !)
- The Incentivised Career Break scheme : Why ? Why should the taxpayer pay for you or anyone else in the Public Sector to take a holiday for one year, two years or three years. If there is not enough work for you to do and if your department can manage without you for 1-3 years then why don't we save the taxpayer some money and make you redundant. I know this sounds harsh but why should the taxpayer continue to pay for people who are not needed and maintain an inflated public sector.
- 4 Day week with dole for the fifth day . . Seriously, if we are going to pay you for the 5th day why would we not expect you to work for that day too ? ?
- The principle that the higher paid should contribute more : Why ? This is a philosophy that the Unions spout all the time, particularly in reference to the Private Sector. Can we not recognise that (at least in the private sector) those who are highly paid are usually those who are more skilled and/or more experienced and/or contribute more to their organisations. They are often motivated at least in part by their salaries and that's not a bad thing. In a free market economy you have a right to earn a higher salary if you are able to and if we over-penalise such people we a)take money out of the economy and b)force them to take their skills to alternative economies. For any economy to become successful we have to allow people to grow their wealth and their lifestyle in line with their skills and experience.
The Public Sector believe (and you both in your own way demonstrate that belief) that you are entitled to maintain your positions and entitlements long term regardless of how much society need your services and it is exactly this mindset that needs to be broken down; We need to create a Public sector that can operate to a private sector business model.
Well firstly I have a 2 mates who work for PTSB who took that 3 year career break scheme that was on offer a while back. Each getting €10,000 a year. Why should a private sector company offering a career break scheme as an alternative to job cuts be fine whereas its not accepable in the public sector.
Would it better for the country if instead of the government giving me €7000 to leave for a year on a career break they make me redundant for say €5000(just making that figure up) and then I claim €200 a week on dole for a year while trying to get another job?
Secondly how many people in the private sector have been put on shorter working weeks??? Too many unfortunately but it is my understanding that they are also allowed to claim the dole for the days they are not working. Again why should there be a difference between private and public on this?
You seem to resent the fact that our wages are paid from taxes. I pay taxes also. And how exactly do think the government should pay public servant wages if not with taxes and revenue collected?0 - The public sector have not had any decrease in their wages (other than some roles, like our politicians). You have had a decrease in your take home pay because you have been asked to contribute to a pension scheme that, frankly should never have been in place, and is entirely at odds with anything those who work in the private sector have available to them . . (I would happily take a 7% cut in my take home pay for an equivalent pension !)
-
any guard i know had two choices this past ten years , shovell cement for a grand a week with no pension entitlements and no job security or pull motorists for tax with extremley generous pension entitlements and absolute job security for 1200 per week
so going by your logic a Garda just has to turn up on day one at templemore and pick up over 60 Grand a year. all gardai do a year with no pay for starters and then start on a basic €26500. a garda with ten years service is nowhere near 60 grand a year. Dont blame gardai who chose this option instead of the quick fast cash and dont think about the future option that the building site worker had. as you say they had a choice.0 -
You seem to resent the fact that our wages are paid from taxes. I pay taxes also. And how exactly do think the government should pay public servant wages if not with taxes and revenue collected?
I resent the fact that my wages pay for a Public Sector that does not deliver a high level of service, despite my HIGH taxes, and their HIGHER salaries/benefits!0 -
I resent the fact that my wages pay for a Public Sector that does not deliver a high level of service, despite my HIGH taxes, and their HIGHER salaries/benefits!
Yes my taxes are high too. I'm not sure why you decided to highlight that. Your not the only person in the country paying taxes. I do my job to the best of my ability and I can't speak for anyone else. If your not happy with how someone is treating you or the service you are receiving from them then you should complain to their manager. Not sure what else you expect from me on that.0 -
Advertisement
-
Yes my taxes are high too. I'm not sure why you decided to highlight that. Your not the only person in the country paying taxes. I do my job to the best of my ability and I can't speak for anyone else. If your not happy with how someone is treating you or the service you are receiving from them then you should complain to their manager. Not sure what else you expect from me on that.
And who is the manager of the Public Sector?
Is it Cowen... or are the real leaders the unions bosses/bullies?
And I know most of us pay tax too. I do know mine would be a lot less in another country!
And all I ever expect from anyone (union bosses and mouthpieces too) is integrity! It just seems that lately, when the good of the country and our children's futures hang in the balance, no one in the public eye has any integrity!0 -
-
And who is the manager of the Public Sector?
Is it Cowen... or are the real leaders the unions bosses/bullies?
And I know most of us pay tax too. I do know mine would be a lot less in another country!
And all I ever expect from anyone (union bosses and mouthpieces too) is integrity! It just seems that lately, when the good of the country and our children's futures hang in the balance, no one in the public eye has any integrity!
Well if you where speaking to me on the phone and you where not happy with the service I was providing you could ask to speak to my superviser and make a complaint about me. Not sure how that would differ from any other company and again not sure why there is confusion over that.
Secondly you don't know me at all and if you did you would certainly not accuse me of not having integrity. I guarantee you anybody that knows me would back me up on that. I have lived and worked in Ireland all my life and never done anything that would make people doubt my integrity.0 -
-
Well if you where speaking to me on the phone and you where not happy with the service I was providing you could ask to speak to my superviser and make a complaint about me. Not sure how that would differ from any other company and again not sure why there is confusion over that.
Secondly you don't know me at all and if you did you would certainly not accuse me of not having integrity. I guarantee you anybody that knows me would back me up on that. I have lived and worked in Ireland all my life and never done anything that would make people doubt my integrity.
I don't question your integrity either, at all!!
I do question the integrity of Begg, O'Connor et al! and of the dopey Brians also!
The REAL difference between complaining to a public sector supervisor is, it is futile.
In a private sector job, customer complaints about you, will result in a negative appraisal, reduced earnings, hindered career etc....
What would ultimately happen in a similar public sector position? Honestly?0 -
Advertisement
-
P. Breathnach wrote: »I think you need something explained to you: participating in discussion here leads to your integrity being cast in doubt.
Come on dude.. focus on the posts as the mod says.
And don't be childish!
And read the post again. Show me where I questioned the posters integrity!!!0 -
I don't question your integrity either, at all!!
I do question the integrity of Begg, O'Connor et al! and of the dopey Brians also!
The REAL difference between complaing ta poublic sector supervisor is, it is futile.
In a private sector job, customer complaints about you, will result in a negative appraisal, reduced earnings, hindered career etc....
What would ultimately happen in a similar public sector position? Honestly?
Ok well in furture you should specifically say whos integrity is in question.
Secondly if there was a complaint made about me then there would be a meeting with my supervisor to discuss it. If it happened again then the matter would be raised with HR and I would be given a warning that my behaviour was unacceptable and that I would be monitored. If it happend again then, as per HR policies, I can be sacked. There is more to it than that put basically its the exact same as any private sector job I have ever worked in.0 -
Ok well in furture you should specifically say whos integrity is in question.
Secondly if there was a complaint made about me then there would be a meeting with my supervisor to discuss it. If it happened again then the matter would be raised with HR and I would be given a warning that my behaviour was unacceptable and that I would be monitored. If it happend again then, as per HR policies, I can be sacked. There is more to it than that put basically its the exact same as any private sector job I have ever worked in.
That's good to know.
So basically, if we want to reduce the numers in the Public sector, we should just all call the HSE and complain about the service? (Joking!)
Has anyone actually ever been sacked in your experience?0 -
Well I have only worked here a year and havn't seen anybody sacked but I do know it has happened in the past here.
We have lost about 20 percent of our staff because they where all contractors who are now gone as their contracts where not being renewed. As a result we are seriously busy and not really sure we could lose many more and still function. Goes back to my earlier point that it should be easier in the public service to move departments to help keep an even balance of staff.0 -
Well I have only worked here a year and havn't seen anybody sacked but I do know it has happened in the past here.
We have lost about 20 percent of our staff because they where all contractors who are now gone as their contracts where not being renewed. As a result we are seriously busy and not really sure we could lose many more and still function. Goes back to my earlier point that it should be easier in the public service to move departments to help keep an even balance of staff.
I understand that the workload is heavier... but, on average, how many hours do people in your office work a week..?
By contrast, the only reason I am posting here today is because I am in an Airport (again) waiting for a flight home. I have already worked 60-something hours this week..0 -
Secondly how many people in the private sector have been put on shorter working weeks??? Too many unfortunately but it is my understanding that they are also allowed to claim the dole for the days they are not working. Again why should there be a difference between private and public on this?
You can claim dole for the 2 days you are unemployed from your 5 day week. If you work 4 days, then you cannot claim any social welfare allowance for the one day you are unemployed.
When you are classed as a systemic casual worker, i.e. one whose working week has been reduced from 5 days to 3 days, the SW payment is based on a 5 day week. If you are unemployed and get a job for 3 days a week, you receive SW payments for 3 days, Saturday is included.0 -
Thanks for clearing that up. I was obviously a bit off with 4 day week thing and the dole. Didn't realise it had to be a 3 day week.
You can't seriously be saying that its the norm in the private sector to work 60 hour weeks for €25,300 a year? I have worked in the private sector for many years and have never seen that except on rare occasions. I am sorry that you work so many hours but there is nothing I can do about that.0 -
Well I have only worked here a year and havn't seen anybody sacked but I do know it has happened in the past here.
We have lost about 20 percent of our staff because they where all contractors who are now gone as their contracts where not being renewed. As a result we are seriously busy and not really sure we could lose many more and still function. Goes back to my earlier point that it should be easier in the public service to move departments to help keep an even balance of staff.
If you all take reduced pay the government will be able to hire more staff. The reason you've lost 20% if because of your unions the government has begun reducing the PS pay bill by the only way available to them - numbers. The other way is reduced pay.
I take your point though - there should be much more redeployment and i'd like to see the government hire more front-line staff, reduce pay for everyone and, using natural attrition, get rid of back office staff, administrators, and levels of managment0 -
I think taking reduced pay and then subsequently hiring more staff would be counter productive with regards to cutting costs.
But hopefully the unions sensibly push for things like easier re-deployment intead of constantly taking an aggressive stance. For what its worth I have raised this in Union meetings and ask them to look at things like that.0 -
Theboinkmaster;62862390]If you all take reduced pay the government will be able to hire more staff. The reason you've lost 20% if because of your unions the government has begun reducing the PS pay bill by the only way available to them - numbers. The other way is reduced pay.
If you reduce pay, the govt would never hire more staff! The point is to reduce cost/expenditure, to do so the govt is going to do cut pay AND staffing numbers in all areas of the public service and not bother about the consequences of their actions and the effect it will have on personnel and more importantly, services.I take your point though - there should be much more redeployment and i'd like to see the government hire more front-line staff, reduce pay for everyone and, using natural attrition, get rid of back office staff, administrators, and levels of managment
Govt will not hire more front-line staff, they will wait until there is a crisis before they will do that, just to show the populace that they are a 'pro-active' govt and are concerned for the well being of the people who are adversely affected by it.
Pay will be cut and personnel will be reduced, services will suffer as a result.
But that will only come after the entire general public complain in sufficient numbers to warrant it.
Due to the media savvy war that the govt waged against the public service over the last 18 months, I don't expect a lot of people will be in support of the ordinary PS worker, front-line and back-room.
Just looked this and I realised how aggressive it looked, I'm beginning to sound like a union rep!
Anyhoo... I used to be in the public sector and I worked in an area that was cut wayyy back in 98, personnel wise. As a result, I ended up doing a job that included taking on responsibilities that were, in some cases, 3-4 levels above mine and yet I was still held responsible if things went awry even though I never received pay commensurate with the job! I finally decided I'd had enough and walked away from it this year to go into the private sector.
The point I'm trying to make is, even though you can make people work for less money and do more work, eventually they'll get ticked off and walk. I can guarantee you though it won't be the slackers who'll leave, it will be the staff who do the job to the best of their ability who will go, leaving the slackers (who will not work any faster or harder) in the job. Thus, services will be affected.0 -
Advertisement
-
like them or loathe them, the unions are necessary. Without them, the employers would have carte blanche screw the workers in every way possible.0
-
I think taking reduced pay and then subsequently hiring more staff would be counter productive with regards to cutting costs.
But hopefully the unions sensibly push for things like easier re-deployment intead of constantly taking an aggressive stance. For what its worth I have raised this in Union meetings and ask them to look at things like that.
Sorry let me clarify - I think the government should begin a process whereby they cut pay over 5 years, and quite drastically too. Using this process to but the pay bill.
Then, from naturaly attrition of managers, admin and back-office staff, they should hire more front-line staff in their place. So the cost saving of natural atttrition will be offset by new employees, but in the areas where they are needed. There should also be significant redployment where possible.
Therefore over the next 5 years they would:
1) Reduce overall PS pay bill by reducing everyones pay
2) Improve the service (as per above they would hire more front-line staff like nurses and gardai but lose lines of managers and admin staff)
So we'd have a better PS for less0 -
If you reduce pay, the govt would never hire more staff! The point is to reduce cost/expenditure, to do so the govt is going to do cut pay AND staffing numbers in all areas of the public service and not bother about the consequences of their actions and the effect it will have on personnel and more importantly, services.
Govt will not hire more front-line staff, they will wait until there is a crisis before they will do that, just to show the populace that they are a 'pro-active' govt and are concerned for the well being of the people who are adversely affected by it.
Pay will be cut and personnel will be reduced, services will suffer as a result.
But that will only come after the entire general public complain in sufficient numbers to warrant it.
Due to the media savvy war that the govt waged against the public service over the last 18 months, I don't expect a lot of people will be in support of the ordinary PS worker, front-line and back-room.
See my above post - you can cut costs by reducing pay without any effect on service and you'd hire more front-line staff in the place of managers, admin staff etc who leave or retire (cost neutral)0 -
I think taking reduced pay and then subsequently hiring more staff would be counter productive with regards to cutting costs.
But hopefully the unions sensibly push for things like easier re-deployment intead of constantly taking an aggressive stance. For what its worth I have raised this in Union meetings and ask them to look at things like that.
I salute you sir!
Well done. but i have to ask. How was your rational suggestion greeted by the union faithful?0 -
Well firstly I have a 2 mates who work for PTSB who took that 3 year career break scheme that was on offer a while back. Each getting €10,000 a year. Why should a private sector company offering a career break scheme as an alternative to job cuts be fine whereas its not accepable in the public sector.
Would it better for the country if instead of the government giving me €7000 to leave for a year on a career break they make me redundant for say €5000(just making that figure up) and then I claim €200 a week on dole for a year while trying to get another job?
Secondly how many people in the private sector have been put on shorter working weeks??? Too many unfortunately but it is my understanding that they are also allowed to claim the dole for the days they are not working. Again why should there be a difference between private and public on this?
You seem to resent the fact that our wages are paid from taxes. I pay taxes also. And how exactly do think the government should pay public servant wages if not with taxes and revenue collected?
A private company has the right to measure risk and implement such schemes on the basis that they will need those people back in their workforce in the future and the cost of replacing them in 3 years time will be greater than the cost of supporting their career break. They need to justify this decision in financial terms to their shareholders.
The public service is different. I do not believe that there will be a need to retain these people over the longer period and the career break scheme is nothing other than a short sighted money saving opportunity taken by a government who are not willing to tackle the real issue and implement the redundancies that are required.
There is also a difference between the private sector claiming dole as a result of a shorter working week and the public sector. In the case of the public sector your salary / dole is paid from the same source (the taxpayer). Why on earth should the taxpayer pay you for a 4 day week and a 5th day on the dole as opposed to just decreasing your salary and retaining you for the full working week . . . that just does not make any sense. . .
Look at it this way, my employer could put me on a 4 day week and then pay me a reduced salary to not come into work on the 5th day . . Why would they do that ? Why would they not just reduce my salary and retain me for a full 40 hour week . .
This mentality is nuts and it is endemic within the public sector and right accross the unions . . . the same mentality that believed it made sense to deliberately understaff certain services so that the workers could make a small fortune in overtime !!0 -
like them or loathe them, the unions are necessary. Without them, the employers would have carte blanche screw the workers in every way possible.
I strongly disagree on this one.
I have never worked for an employeer that was cruel or out to get me. And I have NEVER been in a union. It is that type of fear-mongering that causes the knee-jerk dislike of unions.
Every boss I had always rewarded me for effort, and was never unfair.
Be a good employee, and you will be valued.
In todays world, the unions only protect the lazy and no productive workers. If you are productive and useful, you probably don't need a union!0 -
I'm new to boards so bear with me, I got notice of redundancy last week for the second time in a year. I work in the civ eng industry so its no surprise, I did well to get this far!! I will be on the scratcher for Christmas. My wife works a three day week, her hours were reduced earlier this year. She had no option, no choice and she doesn't get any dole for the days she doesn't work. She is probably going to lose her job early in the new year and unfortunatley due to the fact that she was self employed for a brief period some time ago there is a strong chance will not be entitled to any dole for some time. I would take any work opportunity that came along but there is nothing out there, I have been looking for some time, for anything, in advance of redundancy. So when I hear union bleaters cry and wail and moan it boils my p**s!! If people fully understood the nature and depth of the crisis we face, there would not be a discussion about cuts to pay, spending and numbers in the public sector. What needed to happen would happen and as a country we could move on, hopefully towards a position of some stabillity, unfortunatley while unions and government continue to circle each other more people lose their jobs. There are nearly 500,000 people unemployed at present and this will rise. Just consider that figure for one second. So to people like deadalus to quote George Hook "....you just dont get it..." and I dont want to hear the union line of "...we sympathise with people who have lost jobs but...blah blah blah..."0
-
I strongly disagree on this one.
I have never worked for an employeer that was cruel or out to get me. And I have NEVER been in a union. It is that type of fear-mongering that causes the knee-jerk dislike of unions.
Every boss I had always rewarded me for effort, and was never unfair.
Be a good employee, and you will be valued.
In todays world, the unions only protect the lazy and no productive workers. If you are productive and useful, you probably don't need a union!
I am not in a union either, have had no need to join one thus far. But it is good to know that they are there to help you out in a time of need. Pay aside, I've heard enough stories of manager bullying workers and making life hard for them. And of course, without unions what's to stop bosses slashing pay right down, both for the productive and for non-productive?
Human nature is human nature: if people want to screw you they will, and you need some protection against this.0 -
I'm new to boards so bear with me, I got notice of redundancy last week for the second time in a year. I work in the civ eng industry so its no surprise, I did well to get this far!! I will be on the scratcher for Christmas. My wife works a three day week, her hours were reduced earlier this year. She had no option, no choice and she doesn't get any dole for the days she doesn't work. She is probably going to lose her job early in the new year and unfortunatley due to the fact that she was self employed for a brief period some time ago there is a strong chance will not be entitled to any dole for some time. I would take any work opportunity that came along but there is nothing out there, I have been looking for some time, for anything, in advance of redundancy. So when I hear union bleaters cry and wail and moan it boils my p**s!! If people fully understood the nature and depth of the crisis we face, there would not be a discussion about cuts to pay, spending and numbers in the public sector. What needed to happen would happen and as a country we could move on, hopefully towards a position of some stabillity, unfortunatley while unions and government continue to circle each other more people lose their jobs. There are nearly 500,000 people unemployed at present and this will rise. Just consider that figure for one second. So to people like deadalus to quote George Hook "....you just dont get it..." and I dont want to hear the union line of "...we sympathise with people who have lost jobs but...blah blah blah..."
maybe if there was a union to protect your rights you wouldn't have been made redundant so easily?0 -
Advertisement
-
Advertisement