My outrage at some members of the public service

dresden8

Scofflaw wrote: »

cross-purposes? I think Gurramok is challenging Tony46's reduction:



What Tony46 is doing is taking a PS salary of €50,000, and saying that with a pension levy of 7% it comes down to €46,500. Gurramok is quite correct to challenge that, because the pension levy allows for tax relief, so while the gross has technically fallen, the comparison is not valid - for the reasons you're outlining (I think).

cordially,
Scofflaw

If you're using gross as the starting point it's only fair to use gross deductions to find the new gross. Mixing net and gross as Gurramok is want to do is not equitable.

dresden8

Count Dooku wrote: »

it was 80 applicants in average for each position, advertised in public sector in 2006
Doesn’t looks that nobody wanted it

kickoutthejams wrote: »

The 2004 LC careers booklet thing warned that public sector jobs were getting harder to come by as the economy was slowing down compared to the boom years.

Anyone got any stats for PS applications in the boom years?

Hard to tell from the tables as these also include current public servants going for promotion, but looking at a recruitment grade of "Clerical Grades"

From 2002:

7,253 applications were made for 2,551 appointments. This for a grade that is earning more than 26% above what the private sector is paying allegedly.

2.84 to 1, a far cry from 80 to 1.

http://www.publicjobs.ie/publicjobs/downloads/CivilService_AR2002.pdf

Page 52.


Edit: Only 4,304 bothered to sit the exams. That changes the ratio to 1.69 to 1. Even further from 80 to 1.

Feel free to ignore any facts and figures that don't suit you.

gleep

PoleStar wrote: »

Just to clarify something, which is frequently forgotten, public sector workers have already taken a pay cut.

Yes it may be masquerading as the pension levy but lets look at this for a second. If it is truly a pension levy, it would be calculated on the part of your pay that contributes to your pension, fair is fair. And yet this is not the case. Despite the fact that for example overtime is NON pensionable, it is still taxed with the pension levy.

Ok so say a public sector worker has taken a pension opt out (as many have for example when they join the public sector with already exisiting pension funds), surely they wouldnt have to pay a PENSION levy if they are not going to receive one. Well yes they do, in fact, if you are merely entitled to the public sector pension then you pay the levy.

So yes the public sector has taken a pay cut. And while back at the time there was a alot of mumbling and grumbling about this, it was borne on the chin as public sector workers realised that the proverbial sh1t had hit the fan. And this, despite the fact that we chose the boring jobs that while have good conditions of employment, never offer the perks and potentials of the private sector. And the cuts were accepted despite the fact that it was the PRIVATE sector that caused the mess, institutions such as Bank of Ireland that has given a PAY RISE this year.

So go figure, the public sector is supposed to take FURTHER pay cuts, and via taxes, and NAMA, support the likes of the Banks, Banks who are giving their workers pay rises.

I dont think so.

Fair enough, FF have fuked up majorly, but thats kind of a given, but do you think that the pension levy and pension contributions paid by the public sector are whats paying and will continue to pay the cushy pensions civil servants get on retirement???
NO! The private sector's taxes are supplementing public sector pensions while private sector pensions have mostly been reduced to peanuts! I'm not blaming civil servants for this, I think you just need to take account of it when bringing up the pension levy.

TCP/IP_King

djk1000 wrote: »

I invest in a pension, I invest more than most public servants are paying in a pension levy,

And if you're in the same situation as me, you can claim a nice clawback from the revenue for your contributions. As far as I know this does not happen with government pensions?

gurramok

dresden8 wrote: »

If you're using gross as the starting point it's only fair to use gross deductions to find the new gross. Mixing net and gross as Gurramok is want to do is not equitable.

Huh? Its not my 'want', its my response to the PS worker statement on reductions of their 'paycuts'.

We have PS workers who always quote 'my take home pay is down 7%+ due to the pension levy" which is misleading as its gross pay and their take home pay itself is affected by the tax relief on that pension levy which brings that % lower so can we agree on this?

mike rolite

Drawing Dead wrote: »

i always assumed that all this public sector bashing had to have some truth in it as where there is smoke there is fire. however i always thought that things were exaggerated and people in the public sector weren't really on oversized wages and only sitting about drinking tea all day. i had sympathy for the marchers last week as the unions told us most public sector works are on modest wages but i also know our government hasn't got much of a choice as they have to lower their expenditure, which made me more sympathetic to these people as their modest wages are going to decrease with or without them protesting.
my opinion changed today.
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 as his company is obviously understaffed at the moment with cost cutting measures. he is on a salary so doesn't get paid overtime, just has to work to get the job done. he is doing this because he has a thing i like to call moral responsibility which i feel some public sector workers don't have. if the employees at my brothers company didn't take the pay cuts or work over time the company will go bust and they will all be out of a job.

some people in this country have gotten used to the oversized wages they got during the boom period and we laughed at our European neighbours as we were some of the highest paid workers in the EU. this was obviously silly and now we have to amend our pay structures. it is completely unsustainable to pay people these inflated wages and the knowledge of what my friend actually earns has made me incredibly angry that people can't see past their own selfish gains and instead whinge about having their pay corrected to a normal and sustainable amount.

i know people will say that i'm taring the public sector with one brush, but i don't doubt there are people in the public sector getting paid the amount they are worth. i'm giving out about this one persons pay, and he can't be the only person being paid more than he should be.

Thats the most hilarious email I have read in a long time . You seriously think your brother who is really important because he's 'in charge of very large building sites' is worth more than a man who might one day risk his life running into a burning building to save you? Get real!
Ok so yes there are people who should take pay cuts, but firemen and nurses aren't top of my list.
FYI, I am a civil servant who has just taken a 6% pay cut on a wage of 45k that hadn't increased in eight years. I work about 50 to 55 hours per week and get no overtime. But honest to God, I do not begrudge a fireman his 50k. He may be supporting a family on that. Yes your brother is suffering, we all are, but why don't you attack the greedy bankers, builders and politicians who got us into the mess instead of a fireman?!
Use your vote wisely next time.

_Kooli_

TCP/IP_King wrote: »

And if you're in the same situation as me, you can claim a nice clawback from the revenue for your contributions. As far as I know this does not happen with government pensions?

My company pays 7.5% and i pay another 20% of my salary.
Add in tax relief of nearly 50% and im in for a nice pension plus the state pension of about €900 a month on top too.

And i can opt out whenever i want.

Hate to be public sector

There are plenty of people who get paid more than a fireman, who sit at their desk posting on boards during the day.
My office job for example, is much more highly paid than a firemans, but p1ss easy, when compared to Firemen, Nurses, Teachers, Builders, Guards, warehousemen, waiters, farmers. Why do i get paid more than them? Because i took my career by the horns and purposely moved in the direction where it would be the most money for the easiest work. Time for people who never made the right choices to stop complaining about others just because they made careers for themselves.

And All those people thinking their pensions have tanked - get an up to date statement. You'll get a pleasant surprise.

irish_bob

mike rolite wrote: »

Thats the most hilarious email I have read in a long time . You seriously think your brother who is really important because he's 'in charge of very large building sites' is worth more than a man who might one day risk his life running into a burning building to save you? Get real!
Ok so yes there are people who should take pay cuts, but firemen and nurses aren't top of my list.
FYI, I am a civil servant who has just taken a 6% pay cut on a wage of 45k that hadn't increased in eight years. I work about 50 to 55 hours per week and get no overtime. But honest to God, I do not begrudge a fireman his 50k. He may be supporting a family on that. Yes your brother is suffering, we all are, but why don't you attack the greedy bankers, builders and politicians who got us into the mess instead of a fireman?!
Use your vote wisely next time.

so firemen are special and should be given special treatment over engineers when it comes to the effects of the rescession , tell me , where do we draw the line with this danger money for firemen , nurses and guards ( 60 k , 80 k , 100k ??? )and btw , none of those proffesions see near as many casualties as farming

BornToKill

Sneakee wrote: »

I spent 4 years in uni and I have met some Irish firefighters and most say they are in a dangerous job but the money is way too much. They surely can't be on more money than highly educated people. I spend 4 years in Uni and now in management now but I'm not even close to 50k after 2 years
There is something not right there!

Yep. It's called envy. Your 2 years in 'management' among the 'highly educated people' means you deserve to earn more than an experienced fireman and paramedic?

P. Breathnach

gurramok wrote: »

... We have PS workers who always quote 'my take home pay is down 7%+ due to the pension levy" which is misleading as its gross pay and their take home pay itself is affected by the tax relief on that pension levy which brings that % lower so can we agree on this?

Can you point us to posts and/or posters that say that?

gurramok

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Can you point us to posts and/or posters that say that?

Is that all you can say? I'm not going to trawl through thousands of posts PB of those uttering those words.
You know they have said that, its even on the prime time news bulletins by union spokespeople!

starbelgrade

S.L.F wrote: »

True but how many firemen are there in comparison to the fishing, construction and commercial driving industries.

According to the CSO, in 2008, there were 116,000 employed in Argriculture, Forestry & Fishing with 21 reported fatalities in Agriculture & Forestry and 1 in Fishing.

233,100 were employed in Construction with 15 deaths and 121,700 in Transport with 1 reported fatality.

In Public Defence, Compulsory Social Security & Administration, there were 105,600 employed with 2 fatalities.

My point is that when I hear representatives from the Gardai, Fire Brigade or the 24/7 Alliance defending their high pay rates, they often use the line that they "put their lives on the line" on a daily basis, when in reality, they don't.

Their jobs may well have the possibility of being dangerous, but there are far more dangerous industries that you can work in in Ireland, namely farming & construction... yet you don't hear them using the line of "putting their lives on the line" when they are talking about the problems within their sectors.

Everyone has the right to protest & to fight their corner, but I'd prefer if it were done without pure b*llsh*tting.

K-9

gurramok wrote: »

Is that all you can say? I'm not going to trawl through thousands of posts PB of those uttering those words.
You know they have said that, its even on the prime time news bulletins by union spokespeople!

What tends to be said is my wage is down 7.5%, as a good example. After tax relief it is unlikely anybody in the PS loses 7.5%, even people on 200k.



People on 200k will pay the 6% Income levy though which isn't tax deductible. Most pay 2%.

P. Breathnach

gurramok wrote: »

Is that all you can say? I'm not going to trawl through thousands of posts PB of those uttering those words.
You know they have said that, its even on the prime time news bulletins by union spokespeople!

In other words, you cannot substantiate what you say.

TCP/IP_King

starbelgrade wrote: »

.... 233,100 were employed in Construction with 15 deaths.....

And one word comes to mind - Zoe !

I worked in the building industry in the early 90's - health and safety were two words unknown then. I suspect standards are much higher in anything to do with a government project, and in fairness they have the time and the money to do that. They're also a bigger target for a payout if anything goes wrong.

TCP/IP_King

Sneakee wrote: »

...I spend 4 years in Uni and now in management now but I'm not even close to 50k after 2 years
There is something not right there!

Well I've been through "Uni" twice in 23 years, second time while holding down a job, and it's only in the last 5 years or so that I've even begun to earn anything near 50 g's.

It seems like a lot of people here are lacking some perspective.

starbelgrade

TCP/IP_King wrote: »

I suspect standards are much higher in anything to do with a government project, and in fairness they have the time and the money to do that. They're also a bigger target for a payout if anything goes wrong.

Government projects are tendered out to private companies & the timescales for completion & costs are per the individual contract, to which penalties apply for over-running. The health & safety standards would be the exact same as any other job & the "payouts" for injuries or fatalities are paid by the contractor's insurance company & not the government.

Count Dooku

dresden8 wrote: »

Hard to tell from the tables as these also include current public servants going for promotion, but looking at a recruitment grade of "Clerical Grades"

From 2002:

7,253 applications were made for 2,551 appointments. This for a grade that is earning more than 26% above what the private sector is paying allegedly.

2.84 to 1, a far cry from 80 to 1.

http://www.publicjobs.ie/publicjobs/downloads/CivilService_AR2002.pdf

Page 52.


Edit: Only 4,304 bothered to sit the exams. That changes the ratio to 1.69 to 1. Even further from 80 to 1.

Feel free to ignore any facts and figures that don't suit you.

In 2006 80,000 applied for 3900 positions in public sector.

https://www.tribune.ie/archive/article/2007/apr/01/open-access-to-public-service-jobs/

In 2006 the Public Appointments Service, through Publicjobs. ie, attracted some 80,000 applicants to apply for jobs throughout the public service. These positions ranged from clerical officers, junior diplomats and legal professionals in the civil service to engineers and senior managers in local authorities to hospital consultants and administrators in the health sector.

BTW, in 2002 private sector was also suffering from absence of workforce. This is why 67,000 work permits have been issued to fill gaps in private sector.

In 2004 cheap new-EU labour filled gaps in private sector and native Irish started to move into safe place

gurramok

P. Breathnach wrote: »

In other words, you cannot substantiate what you say.

In other words, for you pushing the subject matter, i have searched to put this one to bed. Have a gander. The statement of the pension levy as a paycut is everywhere on boards so i dug deeper to find those who give a % deduction.

Here's a gem from today! http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=63064452&postcount=29

I'd be paying a 9% pension levy

Conveniently forgets tax relief as his take home pay is not 9% down.

And here's a gem from yesterday which was corrected in a post after it. Another that forgets about the tax relief.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=63047569&postcount=3

The PS worker, on the other hand, gets no tax benefit for his "pension contribution" aka the pension levy,

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=62676744&postcount=57
This poster is stating a 7.5% extra in tax is paid(that 7.5% tax is pension levy). He forgets the tax relief.

So, the overtime is taxed/levied.pRSI'd at 50% plus pension levy of 7.5%, that's 57.5%?

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=62209539&postcount=51
Another here says the PS sector took a 7% paycut already via the pension levy. He too forgets tax relief.

Yep, they cut it by about 7%

Note the 9% paycut. Forgets tax relief as well.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=59757125&postcount=25

then a 4% pension levy.

now the income levy has doubled to 2% and i have an increase of 3% on PRSI.

On a salary of 30,000 a year thats a 9% paycut since december.

Riskymove

gurramok wrote: »

Here's a gem from today

Conveniently forgets tax relief as his take home pay is not 9% down.

Your gem never mentions "take home pay"

I read it as talking about gross pay

Most people take about gross pay when talking about their situations

if they talk about take-home its normally to say something like "I'm down €100 a cheque" not a %

granted a lot of people might not think of pension relief when thinking about the cost of the levy but likewise many dont think about tax bands or credits when they talk about a tax increase or a ceiling on PRSI payments etc

not everyone knows everything about our tax system


If someone (private or public) is told you have a 10% pay cut then they normally descirbe it as "a 10% pay cut"

they dont usually sit down and work out what the net effect is after less tax, less PRSI etc and then say "oh its a 6% pay cut in take home or whatever"

Count Dooku

Riskymove wrote: »

Your gem never mentions "take home pay"

I read it as talking about gross pay

Most people take about gross pay when talking about their situations

if they talk about take-home its normally to say something like "I'm down €100 a cheque" not a %

granted a lot of people might not think of pension relief when thinking about the cost of the levy but likewise many dont think about tax bands or credits when they talk about a tax increase or a ceiling on PRSI payments etc

not everyone knows everything about our tax system


If someone (private or public) is told you have a 10% pay cut then they normally descirbe it as "a 10% pay cut"

they dont usually sit down and work out what the net effect is after less tax, less PRSI etc and then say "oh its a 6% pay cut in take home or whatever"

Because main reason for levy instead of cuts was to keep pensions of retired public sector on the same level
Union could demand to replace levy with real cut, but union leaders have too many old friends, which will be affected by this decision

gurramok

Riskymove wrote: »

Your gem never mentions "take home pay"

I read it as talking about gross pay

Most people take about gross pay when talking about their situations

if they talk about take-home its normally to say something like "I'm down €100 a cheque" not a %

granted a lot of people might not think of pension relief when thinking about the cost of the levy but likewise many dont think about tax bands or credits when they talk about a tax increase or a ceiling on PRSI payments etc

not everyone knows everything about our tax system


If someone (private or public) is told you have a 10% pay cut then they normally descirbe it as "a 10% pay cut"

they dont usually sit down and work out what the net effect is after less tax, less PRSI etc and then say "oh its a 6% pay cut in take home or whatever"

Just be truthful(posters who state it) and state tax relief on the pension levy when they mention they took paycuts, thats all.

A paycut in the real world usually means you have less take home pay after all deductions. If you take home 2500 per month and find yourself take home 2400 per mth instead, thats a real paycut of 100quid or its 4% equivalent.

Its dishonest saying one took a 9% paycut when it really is 4% in the hand.

Riskymove

gurramok wrote: »

Just be truthful(posters who state it) and state tax relief on the pension levy when they mention they took paycuts, thats all.

A paycut in the real world usually means you have less take home pay after all deductions. If you take home 2500 per month and find yourself take home 2400 per mth instead, thats a real paycut of 100quid or its 4% equivalent.

Its dishonest saying one took a 9% paycut when it really is 4% in the hand.

But as I say surely its the same for everyone

If a private sector worker says he took a 10% pay cut...I assume he means a gross pay cut....I dont jump on him telling him he's dishonest as he doesn't account for the tax changes etc meaning his take home reduction is less than 10%

Riskymove

Count Dooku wrote: »

Because main reason for levy instead of cuts was to keep pensions of retired public sector on the same level
Union could demand to replace levy with real cut, but union leaders have too many old friends, which will be affected by this decision

1. you mean a union might try and protect the pension provisions of members...shock!!

2. what has that got to do with my post...why quote me?

Sneakee

TCP/IP_King wrote: »

Well I've been through "Uni" twice in 23 years, second time while holding down a job, and it's only in the last 5 years or so that I've even begun to earn anything near 50 g's.

It seems like a lot of people here are lacking some perspective.

In response to that, I was comparing myself to a person who never went or did any 3rd level education (the majority of firemen) and wonder after 3 years in a blue collar job. How can they be earning far more money than highly educated people such as yourself for basically public service jobs.

Well there is an expectation of people who did the whole uni thing to be coming out with 50k afterwards. I'm not one of them, I count myself lucky to be in this job and I'm an active member of the company. I'm on 31k, I'll be lucky to staying with that come the next contract renewal in Jan, but if I have to take a 10% cut, I'd do it for the sake of keeping my job. I'm not walking out and going on strike, I don't have that luxury!

I had this conversation with a number of people and there was a growing anger at people who went for the quick easy cash during the boom time and made far more what they should. People who went for construction related jobs.
I'm saying in short....Stupid people earning way more money than people who studied hard in uni and then be earning less than these people.
I met a few, one in particular got 150 marks in his leaving cert, he's on €70,000 doing building work. He's a nice guy but come on!! Lucky for him he's still working in London in one of the only building companies surviving in England. There has to be the equalisation peroid when jobs like these should be less paid depending on the work and intelliegence needed. Same goes for public jobs. There has to be a realization that most low end public jobs do not need over inflated wages.
It's getting to a stage that the country can't sustain these jobs..so what are they doing.
One example, the Cork County Council are disbanding Council rubbish collections and looking at one private company to take over the business. This will in effect create a monopoly for this company to charge whatever they want to customers. That saves the Council money and takes that responsibilty off them. Why the council wants this, the wages paid by the private collectors are far less than the council pay for the same job! If the wages and cost of the Council collectors was lower they may not be in this situation.

dresden8

gurramok wrote: »

Just be truthful(posters who state it) and state tax relief on the pension levy when they mention they took paycuts, thats all.

A paycut in the real world usually means you have less take home pay after all deductions. If you take home 2500 per month and find yourself take home 2400 per mth instead, thats a real paycut of 100quid or its 4% equivalent.

Its dishonest saying one took a 9% paycut when it really is 4% in the hand.

I trust you will be taking all these dishonest private sector workers to task about them exaggerating their paycuts and reminding them to use the percentage nett of tax et al.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055742602

seclachi

I met a few, one in particular got 150 marks in his leaving cert, he's on €70,000 doing building work. He's a nice guy but come on!! Lucky for him he's still working in London in one of the only building companies surviving in England. There has to be the equalisation peroid when jobs like these should be less paid depending on the work and intelliegence needed. Same goes for public jobs. There has to be a realization that most low end public jobs do not need over inflated wages.

Oh come on, he got a 150 marks in his leaving cert ? This sort of comment makes me rage.. I got 250 points in my leaving which many would consider crap too. Well let me tell you something, my main interest in life was always IT, and doing the leaving half a decade ago there wasnt a single IT subject, closest thing I had was engineering (I cant imagine it is much better now). I didnt have a massive interest in the other subjects, which were uninteresting to me. I also got dicked over by a poor maths teach who left me with a massive gap in maths. I went on to do electronics in college which I found pretty tough thanks to my poor maths, but I stuck at it, college is full of academic bull anyway, it ended up being a case of learning off how to do exampapers, I felt pretty self confident as I had so much trouble with the maths.

Then I went on to do a work placement in an IT area, I was fantasticly lucky as a I got to work with some guys who were interested in helping a student out, and they treated me pretty much as an equal. I found that my lifetime of working with computers as a hobby had paid off and I was able actually help out seasoned engineers with VB scripts etc. I was even asked if I was top of my class, which I was pretty far from. I managed to come back another year for a college project and the combined experiance helped me get a fantastic job.

People with there stupid judgements based off one or two facts need to f**k off, I`m so sick of it, like the OP, he takes one look at his mates check, looks at his job as a fireman and thinks hes undeserving, do you know him everyday ? are you his boss ? The guy who got 150 points, maybe he was just s**t at school subjects, if your a civil engineer you have like 3 subjects, TD, Woodworking and engineering, you could be crap at the rest, how much does french relate to it ? Maybe he went to college afterwords and was a H1 student ? Maybe he wasnt but when it came to actually doing the job instead of acidemic BS he turned out to be fantastic !?

The fact you mentioned the leaving cert tipped me over the edge, it such a f**king joke really, if everybody in the college wanted to go on to do a humanitys degree it would be fine, but what use is it to other specializations, especially IT or engineers ?

EDIT: Maybe he was 18 at the time too and more interesting in dicking around ? Its probably the time in most peoples lives where they dont take anything seriously

K-9

Riskymove wrote: »

But as I say surely its the same for everyone

If a private sector worker says he took a 10% pay cut...I assume he means a gross pay cut....I dont jump on him telling him he's dishonest as he doesn't account for the tax changes etc meaning his take home reduction is less than 10%

That's a fair point but the levy only kicks in after €15,000 I think. So when people say 7.5%, they usually don't take account of that either.

It can be hard to explain. The actual table issued by the Dept. of Finance is here:
http://www.agsi.ie/home.asp#table

You'd need to be on 69k to have a 7.5% Gross deduction.

ck3960

I spent 4 years in uni and I have met some Irish firefighters and most say they are in a dangerous job but the money is way too much. They surely can't be on more money than highly educated people. I spend 4 years in Uni and now in management now but I'm not even close to 50k after 2 years
There is something not right there![/quote]


so you did 4 yrs uni, have 2 years experience and arent close to 50k,

compare that to me
i have a 4 year honours science degree, followed by an 18 month higher diploma (both specifically required for my job) i have 3 and a half years experience. the most i will ever earn will be 42,000 (after 20 years continous service) yes i do shift work (13hr shifts) and get premiums, namely:
time and 1/6th from 6pm until midnight
for doing a week of night shifts (7 twelve hour shifts) i get extra 240e
double pay sundays
and 14 euro extra for each saturday.
monthly tax, prsi, levies etc- amount to 1200 euro each month..
i come out with around 2500 a month,
its a good thing i like my job, its the only thing holding me in it at the moment. i'm a midwife

bluefinger

Just for clarity, does anyone know the basic wage for a firefighter after three years. I earned approx 30k when in college in a customer service position because i basically worked every unsociable hour i could. 50k is a bit of a red herring tbh.