My outrage at some members of the public service

irish_bob

Tim Robbins wrote: »

And what makes you think more than 2% of the private sector made a killing from the property boom?

You don't like how the public sector works - move to the private sector!

100% of the public sector made a killing out of the property boom

boodlesdoodles

irish_bob wrote: »

objectivity on display across the board in the above post i see :rolleyes:

Surely Irishbob you're the last one to judge who is and isn't objective. You're hardly the most objective when it comes to public service are ya now?

deen

Retained firefighters in Ireland work on the same system as in England. Paid a retainer for being available and by the hour thereafter. Therefore it depends on the number of calls you get in any given year what your pay is going to be. My pay of €21,000 last year was a good year in terms of pay, some firefighters will have earned a lot less some a lot more.
As for the question as to why I do it, I do it because I like to help people an before I type this I know most of you won't beleive me but when I applied to join I didn't know I would be paid. I only found out at my interview. Would I do it now for no pay? maybe. Will I offer to do it for no pay? No Way. Will I offer to take a pay cut? No. Will I take a pay cut if it comes? Yes.
The point of my post was I don't begrudge anyone public or private sector person what the earn, fair play to them. If people on here think that those in the public sector are paid too much don't bitch about it change the government who decided to pay them this much and put in the party who says they will pay them less.
If you think those in the private sector are paid too much don't buy their products or use their services.
But don't expect those in either sector to agree to wage cuts without a fight.

P. Breathnach

noodler wrote: »

I knew, that despite any precursor I put on the post that someone would either twist it or not read it in context.

Bravo.

You knew that what you said was highly questionable. It doesn't take twisting or reading it out of context to justify challenging it.

opinion guy

Flex wrote: »

Here's the problem with that, as I see it. The rise in tax in April resulted in the government taking in less revenue than they would have had they not raised taxes, which would imply taxes are at the point of diminishing returns

• If you raise income taxes on entrepreneurs and people who have worked hard and took the risk involved in investing and making a successful company then theyll have less revenue to pay their staff with, so theyll hire fewer people or sack current staff, etc.

Well by and large the entrepreneurs and business owners are not as affected by income tax rates as as they are employers they get to do things like have a company car, feed their profits back into company etc.

• I really doubt there are enough people in the country who earn "fat cat" salaries, but at the same time wouldnt pack up and move abroad if income tax was raised to bridge the deficit.
• If you tax the rich even more than they currently are taxed (I think top 4% of earners in this country pay 49% of the governments tax revenue, then the top 10% pay around 75-80%, in fairness to them) theyll just take their money and leave the country to go to other places where they wont be taxed so much and the economy will lose all of that money.

Where did you get those figures from ? I seriously doubt 10% make up that much of the tax revenue.

Wages and salaries need to come down to make us competitive to attract foreign direct investment and multi-national companies which our country relies on extremely heavily given the lack of major indigenous Irish exporters we have (actually, right now off the top of my head I cant think of any major Irish exports outside of agriculture). That catn happen though if one section of the workforce is still being paid the same rate of pay as they were during Celtic Tiger years.

I actually disagree. That ship has LONG sailed. Ten years ago companies were packing up to go cheaper places. We CANNOT compete in the mass manufacturing markets. What we need to do is innovate. We should be encouraging new industries instead of looking abroad for investement - in case you didn't here there is recession abroad too - they don't have money to invest like before. We should be developing new energy technologies, new recycling technologies, new medical technologies and then we shoudl be exporting that skill and expertise at a premium. The country that cracks this stuff first will be at the head of the next boom - mark my words. We have the engineering skill, we have the scientists, we have the talent. We need some leadership with the vision to see this.
But I digress...

I definitely favour reducing government spending than trying to tax our way out of this recession/depression like we tried in the 1980's, but personally would actually gladly pay more tax out of my salary (26k a year with no overtime payments, no bonuses of any kind and 20 days holiday a year ) if it meant sorting out our economy now and over the next few years. And if my employer told me tomorrow Id have to take a paycut of whatever scale Id accept it knowing I was lucky to only get a paycut rather than being made unemployed and get on with work, or else Id quit and find a new job where I believe my skills and qualifications would earn a greater salary. But then again I know, like most others, jobs are extremely few and far between out there. I really dont want to go around lying to myself and pretending its all grand and "the IMF wont touch us" and "the EU will bail us out sooner or later" and so on, just we can eventually have another "Tallaght Strategy" and feel sorry for ourselves because nobody warned us it was coming.

I agree with cutting government spending. But there are smart ways and dumb ways to do that. A pretty dumb way if the force blanket wages cuts, cut services and enforce unpaid leave. PEOPLE WILL DIE. Smarter ways would be to cut inefficiencies in the services. I actually think there shoudl be job cuts in the public service, but targeted ones in overstaffed areas such as HSE management. But I also think there should be new hirings in frontline healthcare services for example. Its not that something doesn't have to be done. Its that it has to be done intelligently. But that's too hard for Fianna Fail it would seem - again we need leadership with vision and we haven't gotten it.

Drumpot wrote: »

Careful now . . You dont want to suggest that Ireland has become a nation full of self absorbed vested interest groups ! ! !:p

The Irish "community" spirit left our country when the values of the church were replaced with the value of the Euro . .

Are you f**king KIDDING ME ? Would this be the community spirit that:
a) fostered systematic abuse
or
b) covered up said abuse
or
c) ran forced labour camps as "laundries" or "factory schools"
or
d) sent children to Australis never to be heard from again.

If those are the values of the church you can keep them frankly.

irish_bob wrote: »

ive rarely come across threads on internet forums or storys in the media about how dangerous the job of a nurse or a guard or a fireman is in ireland untill the whole issue of pay cuts came to the fore , frankly , i believe the whole thing is a ploy by the so called FRONTLINE to try and garner sympathy among the general public as a way of persuading the goverment not to cut wages to nurses , guards or firemen

Seriously ? Are you seriously saying this or is this trolling ? Do you honestly think being a fireman is safe ? Do you think guards don't face physical violence on a regular basis ? Do you think hospital work is safe ? Physical violence from patients, relatives, constant exposure to disease and blood products - does that sound safe. Next friday night take a trip to St James' A & E and see how "safe" it is. They don't make noise about this normally because they are getting on with their work and not looking for medals for doing it. They get loud about it at times like this because they are being financially assaulted by the government, and verbally assaulted by ignorant media and ignorant web forum posters for doing their job in appalling circumstances, circumstances I'd wager you wouldn't be prepared to work in.

irish_bob wrote: »

100% of the public sector made a killing out of the property boom

More trolling ?

The_Honeybadger

opinion guy wrote: »

I agree with cutting government spending. But there are smart ways and dumb ways to do that. A pretty dumb way if the force blanket wages cuts, cut services and enforce unpaid leave. PEOPLE WILL DIE. Smarter ways would be to cut inefficiencies in the services. I actually think there shoudl be job cuts in the public service, but targeted ones in overstaffed areas such as HSE management. But I also think there should be new hirings in frontline healthcare services for example. Its not that something doesn't have to be done. Its that it has to be done intelligently. But that's too hard for Fianna Fail it would seem - again we need leadership with vision and we haven't

Does anybody realise we have by far the most nurses per head of population in the EU, yet everybody seems to think they are stretched to the limit. Not trying to stir up anything but how can this be true with our pathetic health service. Anybody any thoughts?

www.eahp.eu/content/download/25141/163961/.../Management31-34.pdf

LightningBolt

That article is an interesting read. Would health care staff here be expected to take on greater responsibility compared to other countries which would justify a higher salary?

The_Honeybadger

LightningBolt wrote: »

That article is an interesting read. Would health care staff here be expected to take on greater responsibility compared to other countries which would justify a higher salary?

I didn't actually mention their salaries. The reason i checked up on this is because on a recent visit to hospital to see a friend I noticed there were an awful lot of nurses in the ward. Was very surprised when I saw we had far more than most countries, the way they go on would defiantely make one think that they are completely understaffed. How do France (often cited as the worlds best healtcare service) manage with fewer than us?

tudlytops

Just on the "poor" plublic sector, etc.

Even the lowest salary is a nice salary.

http://www.tui.ie/Salary_Scales/Default.286.html#Common

Before tax and that's before over time, bonus, etc., for the lowest wage, what's so wrong with those wages.


http://www.cso.ie/quicktables/GetQui...lProduct=DB_PS

Private sector doesn't get this wages, have to pay for their own pensions, don't get to claim full wages while sick for in some cases years, don't have job security.

Plus when people get 5% raise or so they make jokes like, "oh how should i invest this huge raise" but when they lose the same amount, its "how am i going to pay my mortgage", so is % good or bad?

Dr Galen

there are a lot of reasons, mostly to do with how the different healthcare systems work

tbh, if you speak to a sample of irish based nurses, they'd much prefer to work in say the Dutch or French system. Understaffing on Irish hospital wards is a huge issue. I see it first hand nearly every day.

Best practice research would also point to the fact that the lower the nurse to patient ratio you have, the better outcomes and better mortality rates you'll come out with. This is something that a lot of other countries acknowledge and are actually looking to increase nursing numbers.

K-9

mickeyk wrote: »

I didn't actually mention their salaries. The reason i checked up on this is because on a recent visit to hospital to see a friend I noticed there were an awful lot of nurses in the ward. Was very surprised when I saw we had far more than most countries, the way they go on would defiantely make one think that they are completely understaffed. How do France (often cited as the worlds best healtcare service) manage with fewer than us?

If only getting rid of some management in the HSE was a easy as some make out. The Unions will be the first to oppose it just as they negotiated the permanent contracts for them in the HSE.

opinion guy

tudlytops wrote: »

Just on the "poor" plublic sector, etc.

Even the lowest salary is a nice salary.

http://www.tui.ie/Salary_Scales/Default.286.html#Common

Before tax and that's before over time, bonus, etc., for the lowest wage, what's so wrong with those wages.

Not everyone in the public service makes that. Teachers don't get overtime generally. Not sure about a bonus.

http://www.cso.ie/quicktables/GetQui...lProduct=DB_PS

Private sector doesn't get this wages, have to pay for their own pensions, don't get to claim full wages while sick for in some cases years, don't have job security.

Plus when people get 5% raise or so they make jokes like, "oh how should i invest this huge raise" but when they lose the same amount, its "how am i going to pay my mortgage", so is % good or bad?

Those are average figures. They hide the details - they could be artifically high if the management make a **** load. Here is a break down of wages in the Department of Health and Children:
http://www.dohc.ie/publications/salary_scales_sept2008.html

Note the MASSIVE discrepancies between top and bottom of scale. Also note the management types make series 6 figure sums (page 29 or something like that)

mickeyk wrote: »

I didn't actually mention their salaries. The reason i checked up on this is because on a recent visit to hospital to see a friend I noticed there were an awful lot of nurses in the ward. Was very surprised when I saw we had far more than most countries, the way they go on would defiantely make one think that they are completely understaffed. How do France (often cited as the worlds best healtcare service) manage with fewer than us?

Well I don't know about that. I do know there are shortages of specialist nurses. Not all nurses are equally quaified - a details ignored by those graphs. Its entirely possible France has way more specialist nurses than we do. I also noted Ireland rates near the bottom for number of doctors

opinion guy

K-9 wrote: »

If only getting rid of some management in the HSE was a easy as some make out. The Unions will be the first to oppose it just as they negotiated the permanent contracts for them in the HSE.

Completely agree with you there.

The_Honeybadger

Mystik Monkey wrote: »

there are a lot of reasons, mostly to do with how the different healthcare systems work

tbh, if you speak to a sample of irish based nurses, they'd much prefer to work in say the Dutch or French system. Understaffing on Irish hospital wards is a huge issue. I see it first hand nearly every day.

Best practice research would also point to the fact that the lower the nurse to patient ratio you have, the better outcomes and better mortality rates you'll come out with. This is something that a lot of other countries acknowledge and are actually looking to increase nursing numbers.

Thats a pretty vague answer, it is to do with systems.

Don't understand your last point, it seems a contradiction.

I'm not going to think about it too much but basic logic would say that the more nurses there are the better naturally, yet we have the most in Europe and one of the poorest systems. Just wanted to make people aware of it when you hear nurses complaining i think this point is an important one.

tudlytops

that's what I've been saying the whole time.

The system needs organization.

I've been a patient in private hospitals in Ireland, and it's not that they have more nurses, they are just better organized.

thebman

tudlytops wrote: »

that's what I've been saying the whole time.

The system needs organization.

I've been a patient in private hospitals in Ireland, and it's not that they have more nurses, they are just better organized.

That's management and systems like IT systems which IMO unions are preventing from being introduced and the government has no will to introduce against opposition from unions.

Its the whole, OMG mary might lose her job if we you put a computer system in to do her job. In reality nurses have better things to be doing and the more automated the documentation and tracking can be the better. There isn't a lack of work to be done in health care but we seem to be behind in many areas. Of course all I can say is that because I don't know much about it. Its just my perception of the Health Sector from the outside having never really required it.

opinion guy

thebman wrote: »

That's management and systems like IT systems which IMO unions are preventing from being introduced and the government has no will to introduce against opposition from unions.

Its the whole, OMG mary might lose her job if we you put a computer system in to do her job. In reality nurses have better things to be doing and the more automated the documentation and tracking can be the better. There isn't a lack of work to be done in health care but we seem to be behind in many areas. Of course all I can say is that because I don't know much about it. Its just my perception of the Health Sector from the outside having never really required it.

Nope. Absolutely not. The reason the hospitals don't have proper IT systems is lack of investment plain and simple. Some hospitals have more sophisticaed systems. For example some have computerised xray departments, others don't - resulting in large amounts of wasted time and money dealing with film xrays. Its nothing to do with unions - its lack of investment/poor management.

Dr Galen

mickeyk wrote: »

Thats a pretty vague answer, it is to do with systems.

Don't understand your last point, it seems a contradiction.

I'm not going to think about it too much but basic logic would say that the more nurses there are the better naturally, yet we have the most in Europe and one of the poorest systems. Just wanted to make people aware of it when you hear nurses complaining i think this point is an important one.

i could give you a much more detailed answer, as could many others. This thread isn't the place to do that though IMHO. Suffice to say, the Irish healthcare system is run in a very different way to say the Dutch or German systems. Thats from the top down and the bottom up. Unfortunately, as wonderful as nurses are just because we have more of them, won't automatically make the system better than others. We over rely on nurses and indeed acute based care here, a better system would be to focus more on the primary care sector and to increase our daycases/minor ops and working hours, in turn, we could provide the same service levels with less acute beds

I'm not sure how the last point was a contradiction??

Research has shown that the lower your nurse to patient ratio, you get better patient outcomes.

In some of the countries listed in that report, they agree, and are looking to increase the numbers of nurses to a number more in line with Ireland.

Your right that this appears to be basic logic, but in the medically based professions, as with all science, things tend to be based on evidence and reearch etc, logic and anecdote don't always cut it.

Dr Galen

opinion guy wrote: »

Nope. Absolutely not. The reason the hospitals don't have proper IT systems is lack of investment plain and simple. Some hospitals have more sophisticaed systems. For example some have computerised xray departments, others don't - resulting in large amounts of wasted time and money dealing with film xrays. Its nothing to do with unions - its lack of investment/poor management.

pretty much right. Radiographers love the computer based systems because it makes their job a lot easier. Doc's love it because they can view and x-ray from any PC in the building. Nurses love it because they doc can see the x-ray and figure out what to do with Johnny in bed 5 quicker. Johnny loves it because he can feel better quicker and so on

The pilot scheme for integrated electronic records was actually led by nurses and proven to be workable and cost effective in the long term.........about 4 years ago. The minister then basically sat on her hands, because of the PPARS debacle. You'll find it hard to find a medic, nurse, GP, physio or ward clerk who wouldn't love EPR in the morning

Dr Galen

tudlytops wrote: »

that's what I've been saying the whole time.

The system needs organization.

I've been a patient in private hospitals in Ireland, and it's not that they have more nurses, they are just better organized.

they also treat much less critically and seriously ill patients, and thus have less time pressure on all staff. Private hospitals in this country are really more like clinics that do routine operations

tudlytops

opinion guy wrote: »

Nope. Absolutely not. The reason the hospitals don't have proper IT systems is lack of investment plain and simple. Some hospitals have more sophisticaed systems. For example some have computerised xray departments, others don't - resulting in large amounts of wasted time and money dealing with film xrays. Its nothing to do with unions - its lack of investment/poor management.

It's not just IT.

Why do i have to go to hospital wait an hour or so, to be told the tests were clear? they can send me a letter.

Why do i have to go to the diabetic clinic to have my blood taken, wait average of 2 hours to be told, you doing fine, or you are a bit high, I have a machine and a doctor, I know how I'm doing.

Why do i get an appointment card every time i go to hospital and then they send me a letter to remind me? just send the letter, save on the appointment card.

there are many things that could be resolved by organization and they would save money, a lot of money.

opinion guy

Mystik Monkey wrote: »

pretty much right. Radiographers love the computer based systems because it makes their job a lot easier. Doc's love it because they can view and x-ray from any PC in the building. Nurses love it because they doc can see the x-ray and figure out what to do with Johnny in bed 5 quicker. Johnny loves it because he can feel better quicker and so on

The pilot scheme for integrated electronic records was actually led by nurses and proven to be workable and cost effective in the long term.........about 4 years ago. The minister then basically sat on her hands, because of the PPARS debacle. You'll find it hard to find a medic, nurse, GP, physio or ward clerk who wouldn't love EPR in the morning

Exactly. And add to that the fact that people have to be employed specifically to look after the films, that doctors waste hours looking for films, that films cost money to print and reprint. Throw into that the fact that films go missing, and physical film is more prone to getting put in the wrong packet and leading to errors.

Its a disgrace :mad:

K-9

opinion guy wrote: »

Nope. Absolutely not. The reason the hospitals don't have proper IT systems is lack of investment plain and simple. Some hospitals have more sophisticaed systems. For example some have computerised xray departments, others don't - resulting in large amounts of wasted time and money dealing with film xrays. Its nothing to do with unions - its lack of investment/poor management.

This is what annoys me. Why the feck not?

We can have plenty of administrators and managers, plenty of nurses paid reasonable wages, consultants turning their noses up at €200,000 and we can't have a proper IT system. The system is so out of date it causes misdiagnoses.

The HSE budget will be cut by a Billion Euro and people are objecting to pay cuts!

Fecking Monty Python got it right 30 years ago. THE MACHINE THAT GOES BING.

opinion guy

K-9 wrote: »

This is what annoys me. Why the feck not?

We can have plenty of administrators and managers, plenty of nurses paid reasonable wages, consultants turning their noses up at €200,000 and we can't have a proper IT system. The system is so out of date it causes misdiagnoses.

The HSE budget will be cut by a Billion Euro and people are objecting to pay cuts!

Fecking Monty Python got it right 30 years ago. THE MACHINE THAT GOES BING.

Sorry whats your point here ?
Forcing thru pay cuts will do ZERO to address problems like this - they will persist. In fact it will only further degrade the whole system as will things like unpaid holidays. This kind of issue is a capital development issue and is more to do with Brendan Drumm and Mary Harney than anyone else

tudlytops

opinion guy wrote: »

Sorry whats your point here ?
Forcing thru pay cuts will do ZERO to address problems like this - they will persist. In fact it will only further degrade the whole system as will things like unpaid holidays. This kind of issue is a capital development issue and is more to do with Brendan Drumm and Mary Harney than anyone else

People in the private sector have been asked to take unpaid holidays for a long time, why can't the public sector be asked to do this to.

Everyone likes getting when its going well, but when is time for some pay back, oh no we can't have that.

K-9

opinion guy wrote: »

Sorry whats your point here ?
Forcing thru pay cuts will do ZERO to address problems like this - they will persist. In fact it will only further degrade the whole system as will things like unpaid holidays. This kind of issue is a capital development issue and is more to do with Brendan Drumm and Mary Harney than anyone else

Correct.

A bit late for it now!

opinion guy

tudlytops wrote: »

People in the private sector have been asked to take unpaid holidays for a long time, why can't the public sector be asked to do this to.

Everyone likes getting when its going well, but when is time for some pay back, oh no we can't have that.

I'm sorry what does this have to do with what we are discussing. Pay attention! Unpaid holidays will only make the problems in the public sector worse.

K-9 wrote: »

Correct.

A bit late for it now!

Well no it isn't. Now is when it has to be done. You can either fix the system by improving efficiency and streamlining or you can be lazy and just blanket cut wages and enforce unpaid holidays which i rpomise you will further degrade the system

thebman

opinion guy wrote: »

Nope. Absolutely not. The reason the hospitals don't have proper IT systems is lack of investment plain and simple. Some hospitals have more sophisticaed systems. For example some have computerised xray departments, others don't - resulting in large amounts of wasted time and money dealing with film xrays. Its nothing to do with unions - its lack of investment/poor management.

Well money was pured into health during good times, what did they spend it on other than consultant wages?

ardmacha

For example some have computerised xray departments, others don't

I think this is the point. There are examples of good practice in all parts of the public service, areas which are significantly more efficient than similar depts elsewhere. These better organised sections should be the template for bringing the laggards up to scratch.

You can either fix the system by improving efficiency and streamlining or you can be lazy and just blanket cut wages and enforce unpaid holidays which i rpomise you will further degrade the system

Well we have two out of three, laziness and a blanket cut, just not the unpaid holidays.

MaceFace

tudlytops wrote: »

People in the private sector have been asked to take unpaid holidays for a long time, why can't the public sector be asked to do this to.

Everyone likes getting when its going well, but when is time for some pay back, oh no we can't have that.

The private sector and most of the public sector are very different - the demands in the private sector have plummeted (hence job losses), whereas the demans on the public sector have either stayed the same or increased (with a few exceptions).
Therefore, unpaid holidays in the private sector does not impact the business, but if we give many in the public sector more time off, it will impact on the services offered - the PS can not keep up with the demands as it is especially in Health and Social Welfare.

Pharaoh1

Don't know if this was mentioned before but was anyone watching Prime Time last night.

A couple with three kids, the husband a postman and wife a HSE nurse doing shift work (as far as I can remember) and her saying that at the moment (pre budget) they were just on the threshold of qualifying for FIS and that the budget would push them over the limit.

Is this credible?
To qualify their weekly net income would have to be less than 685 euro. This would include both their salaries and their childrens allowance.
Their childrens allowance would amount to 123.46 per week so we are expected to believe that at present their combined net salaries are around 560 euro per week. They looked like a couple in their mid to late thirties.
This is about as believable as PJ Stone's claim that some Gardai have 8 or 9 euro to live on after deductions.

Anyone notice this - if I am way off the mark here please let me know.

murphaph

opinion guy wrote: »

Nope. Absolutely not. The reason the hospitals don't have proper IT systems is lack of investment plain and simple. Some hospitals have more sophisticaed systems. For example some have computerised xray departments, others don't - resulting in large amounts of wasted time and money dealing with film xrays. Its nothing to do with unions - its lack of investment/poor management.

I guess when you spend all the money on having the best paid nurses and doctors in Europe there's not much left for IT.

My best mate here is an English doctor. Can't believe the salaries Irish medical staff receive. His words "That's vulgar money".

Dublin_Gunner

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

50k for a fireman doesn't seem to unreasonable to me.

They do 24hour shifts, risk their lives in the course of their duties and have extreme psychological trauma in the natural course of their work. They deserve to be compensated well for the risk alone, before you get started on the un-renumerated overtime and being on call.

Teachers on the other hand................:rolleyes:

In fairness, Firepeople (to be PC about it lol) CHOSE the profession, most likely through the severe nepotism in the service.

I could argue that a high-rise window cleaner or a youth worker faces as bad working conditions.

But anyway, I do agree that the fire service is a bad example, but the entire public sector needs reform.

Wage cuts and higher taxes / levy's etc will not alleviate the problem. How about making redundant the 1000's of jobs in the Civil Service where there are office workers on 20K+ doing SFA every day of the week.

One of my friends worked in the Dept. Finance, facilities dept (arranged for light bulbs etc or when there were functions to organise). There were 14, yes, FOOKING 14 of them sitting in the office all day every day, doing pretty much NOTHING! He said, and this is not a word of a lie, that they used to get excited when the phone rang so they might have something to do.

Needless to say, he left, because he's not the type to sit around bored in work for no bloody reason.

Its those sorts of jobs that need to go. And if they did that, there would be no need for pension levy's and sweeping pay cuts.

The Gov need to get up of their ar$es and tackle the unions that are protecting 100's if not 1000's of completely useless jobs.

(these is not meant as a slur against the Civil Service as whole, merely to outline there are far too many people being paid decent wages for contributing NOTHING to the service).

Drumpot

opinion guy wrote: »

Are you f**king KIDDING ME ? Would this be the community spirit that:
a) fostered systematic abuse
or
b) covered up said abuse
or
c) ran forced labour camps as "laundries" or "factory schools"
or
d) sent children to Australis never to be heard from again.

If those are the values of the church you can keep them frankly.

I think most people know what I meant and that you took me completley out of context . .

I was thinking more the 10 commandments and the values they preached . .

The other dark nature of what happened is awful, Im not in anyway condoning it . .

But the church does encourage community spirit . . Im not a particularly religous person, but I know that's the intention, of teaching good ethics to people. . . Since its lost its credibility, nobody is teaching ethics or good morals to anybody . . Its a crying shame . ..

The_Honeybadger

Pharaoh1 wrote: »

Don't know if this was mentioned before but was anyone watching Prime Time last night.

A couple with three kids, the husband a postman and wife a HSE nurse doing shift work (as far as I can remember) and her saying that at the moment (pre budget) they were just on the threshold of qualifying for FIS and that the budget would push them over the limit.

Is this credible?
To qualify their weekly net income would have to be less than 685 euro. This would include both their salaries and their childrens allowance.
Their childrens allowance would amount to 123.46 per week so we are expected to believe that at present their combined net salaries are around 560 euro per week. They looked like a couple in their mid to late thirties.
This is about as believable as PJ Stone's claim that some Gardai have 8 or 9 euro to live on after deductions.

Anyone notice this - if I am way off the mark here please let me know.

I watched the program and thought the exact same thing. Only thing I can think of is that their debts, mortgage and childcare is killing them, or that one of them only works part-time. Cant see how a postman and a nurse both working full-time could be in trouble if they have managed their money properly. Also if indeed their combined income is under the 685 then maybe the PS do have something to complain about. Either way I think there was something they were not telling us.

Pharaoh1

Re the FIS

I checked and the childrens allowance is not counted as income for the FIS payment.
The level of outgoings debt etc.. is not considered

It just seems to be a pattern recently for people to understate their income when it suits.

The_Honeybadger

Pharaoh1 wrote: »

Re the FIS

I checked and the childrens allowance is not counted as income for the FIS payment.
The level of outgoings debt etc.. is not considered

It just seems to be a pattern recently for people to understate their income when it suits.

Another thing I have noticed along with this is PS greatly overstating how much the pension levy has effected their pay. The link below shows that it knocks 40 euro pw off a 60,000 euro wage. PS workers would lead you to believe it is an awful lot more. It was 7-8% off gross wage but was tax deductible so actual contribution is about 4%, some PS workers I talked to told me the effect on their pay was in the hundreds each week. Admittedly they also paid the other levies which effected both public and private.

www.taxcalc.eu

RobbieTheRobber

Drumpot wrote: »

I think most people know what I meant and that you took me completley out of context . .

I was thinking more the 10 commandments and the values they preached . .

The other dark nature of what happened is awful, Im not in anyway condoning it . .

But the church does encourage community spirit . . Im not a particularly religous person, but I know that's the intention, of teaching good ethics to people. . . Since its lost its credibility, nobody is teaching ethics or good morals to anybody . . Its a crying shame . ..

The church has for over a thousand years has not taught anything close to the ten commandments.
Do priests not take a vow of poverty yet the vatican is exceedingly wealthy and has always been for over a thousand years.

The church may foster a sense of belonging to those who are christian and attend mass, but that is very far removed from a "Community spirit".

Intention is not the same as what they practise, yes there may be some well intentioned people in the church but that does not mean that as a whole they actively try to achieve those intentions in fact its quite the opposite.


But thats well off topic

professore

Scofflaw wrote: »

Well, here's the 2007 average pay rates by sector:



cordially,
Scofflaw

This graph ends the conversation. Obviously the Public Sector are paid too much as a group. This also doesn't show the massive unpaid or poorly paid overtime, less holidays, no special bonus top-ups, etc that the private sector have to endure. AND this is 2007 - most private sector employees positions are considerably worse now relative to public sector even with the pension levy.

P. Breathnach

professore wrote: »

This graph ends the conversation...

This is a discussion forum!

deen

noodler wrote: »

Now, I am only going to ask a few questions out of pure curiosity - try not to go all wrathful on me.

As a retained Firefighter, how often afre you called out per week?

Do you have another job? (Probably a personal question but I only ask for the sake of the financial arguments that are raging in the thread).

Now the biggie, without sounding like a total bastard (because I don't actually know), how often are firefighters in this country killed in fires? Is there any figures available? As I said I am not disputing the inherent dangers of entering a burning building but some people work in shops etc in crappy areas where they get held up, threatened etc regularly.

I don't know if it is possible to ask the last paragraph there without somebody going mad but lets see.

No fear of me going wrathful on you, the point of my posts is the waste of time and energy such a reaction would be. If I didn't like your questions then I don't have to answer them. Why would I come back on and get Wrathful, it would only wind you up which in turn would wind me up etc. and you still wouldn't have the answer to your questions so neither of us would be any better off.

1. Can't say how many times a week we are called out, could be weeks without a call, could get 4 calls in the one day. Would be lovely to be able to organise it that we knew when we were going to be called, would save all the hanging around the town just in case. But again hey I knew that when I signed up.

2. Yes I have another job, I'm self employed, doing OK but things are tough at the moment as you know. Again I knew that when I went down the self employed route.

3. I think 3 firefighters have died in the last 2 years before that there hadn't been a death at an incident in years afaik. Thats 3 too many but as I said it can be a dangerous job at times but again I knew that when I joined up.

Make what you will of my answers, I'm a self employed Public Sector worker so I know the argument from both sides. I just don't see the point of both sides having a go at each other its not going to solve anything.

Flex

opinion guy wrote: »

Where did you get those figures from ? I seriously doubt 10% make up that much of the tax revenue.

I had read something along those lines on the forum a while ago, however youre correct, my memory was wrong. I googled it as quickly as I could (as Im on a lunch break at the moment :cool: ) and found a report from 2007 saying that the tax revenue paid by the tope 10% is a bit over 60%

"The record proves that. In 1997, the top 10% of income earners paid 50% of the total income tax take. This year (2007), that share will be almost 60%."

http://www.finance.gov.ie/Viewtxt.asp?DocID=4594&StartDate=1+January+2009

Im afraid I dont have time to reply to the rest of your post, but when Im home later Ill find a more recent source and address the other points.

opinion guy

thebman wrote: »

Well money was pured into health during good times, what did they spend it on other than consultant wages?

Beats me. Amdinistrators perhaps ? That's a good point on consultant wages thou. They've bee an awfuly quiet bunch since getting their new contracts. They've also wasted a load on contract staff when refusing to make people permanent. EDIT: I forgot. The HSE has thee highest marketing budget in the country

murphaph wrote: »

I guess when you spend all the money on having the best paid nurses and doctors in Europe there's not much left for IT.

My best mate here is an English doctor. Can't believe the salaries Irish medical staff receive. His words "That's vulgar money".

The base salaries for NCHD's range from €35k for an intern to €85k for a grade 7 senior registrar (i.e. someone with at least 10 years+ experience and higher qualifications). On top of that they get over time and various allowances.

So ask your mate about the working conditions in Ireland. Ask him how vulgar that is. Fact is many doctors would readily accept pay cuts if their working conditions were improved. Fact is the high wages were/are the only thing keeping many of them here since training, career progression and the chance of a permanent job are all barely existant here and degrading steadily.

If you don't believe me then the Irish Times wrote and article about it:
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/1128/1224259620164.html
From the doctor interviewed in the article:

“I’m going to be earning less in Australia, but it’s more the atmosphere and having a system that is adequately staffed and resourced and where you are not made to feel you are expected to compress all of your work into a shorter timeframe,” he says.

“In the beginning I was looking at going for 12 months but now I do not want to come back to a system that is in chaos and where you feel like you are under attack for doing your job.”

professore wrote: »

This graph ends the conversation. Obviously the Public Sector are paid too much as a group. This also doesn't show the massive unpaid or poorly paid overtime, less holidays, no special bonus top-ups, etc that the private sector have to endure. AND this is 2007 - most private sector employees positions are considerably worse now relative to public sector even with the pension levy.

I ahve already addressed this graph just yesterday. Please read the thread before declaring it is over. This graph shows average wages in each sector. Those public sectors include both the low paid low workers and overpaid management. Blanket cuts are NOT appropriate. Look here if you want to educate yourself on the discrepancies in wages within the public sector:
http://www.dohc.ie/publications/pdf/salary_scales_sept2008.pdf


Edit: I'm really getting sick of posting links to real info and people not reading it and then posting some grand statement ignorant of the facts. This is a complicated problem. Continuing to address it in a lazy simplistic manner, like it seems our government would do, will only end in chaos


Edit 2: I see the British are talking about a once off 50% tax on banking bonus's. Great idea. Punish the people responsible for the problems

noodler

P. Breathnach wrote: »

You knew that what you said was highly questionable. It doesn't take twisting or reading it out of context to justify challenging it.

None of my questions were questionable pal, thats all they were.

deen wrote: »

[/color]

No fear of me going wrathful on you, the point of my posts is the waste of time and energy such a reaction would be. If I didn't like your questions then I don't have to answer them. Why would I come back on and get Wrathful, it would only wind you up which in turn would wind me up etc. and you still wouldn't have the answer to your questions so neither of us would be any better off.

1. Can't say how many times a week we are called out, could be weeks without a call, could get 4 calls in the one day. Would be lovely to be able to organise it that we knew when we were going to be called, would save all the hanging around the town just in case. But again hey I knew that when I signed up.

2. Yes I have another job, I'm self employed, doing OK but things are tough at the moment as you know. Again I knew that when I went down the self employed route.

3. I think 3 firefighters have died in the last 2 years before that there hadn't been a death at an incident in years afaik. Thats 3 too many but as I said it can be a dangerous job at times but again I knew that when I joined up.

Make what you will of my answers, I'm a self employed Public Sector worker so I know the argument from both sides. I just don't see the point of both sides having a go at each other its not going to solve anything.

Thanks for the reply.

kadafi006

_Kooli_ wrote: »

Oh dear. Another thread from someone too sore that they couldnt make a career for themselves that would pay a decent wage, so they want anyone on a decent wage to have a cut.
In the private sector you can make way more than €50k .... if you take an interest in developing your career. tbh anyone in the private sector earning less than €50k has not looked after their career at all.
Stop crying over what others get and sort yourself out.

One of the guys i work with has got a pay cut recently and was off on a rant about the public sector. We chose to give him a pay cut because he is crap. Nobody else will be getting one.

Thats a load of generalized bull****. The OP made a valid point. Firemen are grossly overpaid.

tudlytops

kadafi006 wrote: »

Thats a load of generalized bull****. The OP made a valid point. Firemen are grossly overpaid.

We had a fire last Xmas on the 20/12, have the picture to prof it, and where the fire man good.

Not only did they saved the pets, they knew just what would somehow make it easier for me, what to do and say.

They risk their life's for us, even for our pets, no amount of money can repay for that, what price can you put on a life.

paraletic

Drawing Dead wrote: »

i saw my friends' pay slip.
he's a fireman, and he's been one for just over 3 years, he's set to earn just under 50,000 euro this year.
he was marching last week, protesting against a cut to his pay.
i know people will say firemen do a dangerous job and save lives and they deserve that pay but this is the real world and peoples wages are structured on the amount of qualifications, training and experience you have, and the responsibility bestowed upon you. to put this into context my brother is a civil engineer and has been working in the industry for just over 3 years, same as my fireman friend. he works for one of the biggest civil engineering companies in the country and his work involves being in charge of very large building sites. he is currently being paid about 38,000 euro, he has just taken a 6% pay cut and is working 55hours a week
.

I am sorry i only saw this post tonight

1st- your friend is probably a trained fire fighter and paramedic. you mentioned qualifications, if he really is a friend he might tell you how much training there is and which university gave him his diploma (as hse paramedic i got mine from ucd school of medicine)

2nd you talk about responsability..... your friend literally has huge responsabilities. he's responsible for peoples life/health!!!

3rd to put it into context I too worked for one of the largest civil engineering companies in ireland as an engineer. and worked 55 hrs throughout my time there (they are normal hours for a civil engineer) and i took a huge cut to join the ambulance service.

You should visit the emergency services forum to get some info on ambulance/fire service training, qualifications, etc or visit a fire/ambu station before you decide what we do.