Boards.ie is obsessed with the Public Sector

P. Breathnach

Deleted User wrote: »

Nope.
You asked me about one.

I didn't ask you about any.

But in defending the indefensible,I guess it's easy to attempt to ignore that.

In many years in the public service, I never experienced the behaviour you describe. People are entitled to be defended from such serious but weakly supported allegations as you make.

Dannyboy83

nesf wrote: »

Personally. It's not about fairness, justice or who got us into this mess. I genuinely don't bear any ill-will towards public sector workers. I've far too many family and friends in it to do that (ranging from army and prison guards to academics, nurses, teachers and civil service employees). I'd happily work in some parts of it and have been working towards being eligible for several years now.


It's about a 27 billion Euro hole in the budget with 33 billion odd taxes coming in. Before we spend a penny on the banks we are borrowing 500 million euro a week to fund the running of the State. Over 2 billion a month. Think about that for a second. The cuts being looked for are under two months' worth of borrowing before we put a cent into the banks. Just two months, we're still left with 23 odd billion borrowed this year.

We have absolutely no choice but to drastically cut back on spending both on services and the public sector pay bill. We need to broaden the tax band to include more low wage earners as well as increase taxes on the better off.

We need to do all these things to even have a hope of getting out of this.

I don't argue for public sector pay cuts because I think public sector workers are lazy, worthless or because they do a bad job. I don't think any of these things. We need the cuts because we have no choice but to do them. It's not out of any sense of fairness or justice that I argue for them, I can't think of anything fair in arguing for job losses and pay cuts for any group. There's no nice way to put a person out of work or tighten a family's budget so the kids can afford less toys but we have to do it because we've been left no choice by the squandering of public money of the past Government and their social partners. The unions' plan will just make things worse and add years onto any hope of a recovery. We'll rack up 1980's debt levels in 2-3 years people. We're so close to the same mess that for the younger generation our parents had to slog through.

Public sector reform, both in terms of pay cuts, job losses and management pruning are necessary. There isn't a tax base extant in this country to pay for what we have. Despite the pain it'll cause we need to cut back on services and public pay as well as increase the tax burden on the ordinary worker as well as the wealthy. It's that or go bankrupt in a few short years and then we'll be in a far worse situation.

I wrote a similar thing 3 pages back here: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=63176603&postcount=67

It doesn't matter how matter how many times you say it tho, they are never going to accept reality. They are never going to say "Yes, we agree".
They will say there is an alternative, even tho they have no alternative to offer.

The government need to just grow a pair and do it already.
We will borrow another €4 billion before they even do it anyway.
This is complete madness.

P. Breathnach

P. Breathnach wrote: »

I didn't ask you about any.

You did by denying such practices exist.

In many years in the public service, I never experienced the behaviour you describe. People are entitled to be defended from such serious but weakly supported allegations as you make.

Well they do exist and need to be eliminated forthwith and will hopefully be.
Needless to say it's the current public finances crisis that focuses light on them.

Amhran Nua

imme wrote: »

So, it's fairly representative of society at large. Or is it?

No, if society at large was half as angry as half of boards, we wouldn't be in half the trouble we are in today. Or maybe we'd be in worse.

P. Breathnach

Deleted User wrote: »

You did by denying such practices exist...

This is a whole new type of logic!

The Volt

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

I wrote a similar thing 3 pages back here: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=63176603&postcount=67

It doesn't matter how matter how many times you say it tho, they are never going to accept reality. They are never going to say "Yes, we agree".
They will say there is an alternative, even tho they have no alternative to offer.

The government need to just grow a pair and do it already.
We will borrow another €4 billion before they even do it anyway.
This is complete madness.

Will that €4 Billion go into Anglo Irish as well?

houghton88

Darragh29 wrote: »

As a private sector employer, my issue with you is that you want it every which way. You want to be paid the same as me, but at the same time you won't take any of the risk that I have to take on...

I don't mind your total compensation package being equal to mine for comparable work, but I have a major major problem with this notion that you want equal or greater pay than me, and at the moment you are on greater pay than I am, but you're exposed to absolutely none of the risk and none of the responsibility...

I've no problem with you wanting to playing it safe with your career as you put it, but please have the grace and humilty to accept that with that decision should come an understanding that the job security that you value so much, should come with a price tag and you should be paid less in the knowledge that you have a job for life, relative to your private sector counterpart...

The problem here is that the kind of securities and protections that are taken for granted in the public sector, are actually very difficult to come by in the private sector. Say you have a grievance in your workplace and you work in the public sector, you can safely assume that if you take a dispute to the LRC or the Labour Court or your union does it for you, that your employer will (A) turn up at the relevant forum, and (B) respect any recommendation that might be made in your favour. These two assumptions are out the window in a lot of private sector workplaces, I worked for one large multinational in Ireland in the past and when I tried to take a dispute to the LRC, they told me to my face to "f*ck off", something that would be completely unheard of and unaccepted in any public sector employment.

I worked for another company in the private sector who refused to honour terms as agreed, I left the job and took a complaint to the Labour Court, the company turned up to argue the case, lost the argument, and then ignored the recommendation that made against them, without having to worry about any legal consequences whatsoever.

I know someone will come back and say, "ah you should have joined a union!".... I tried that and was told that there was a "gentlemans arrangement" in relation to unions approaching the large multinational employer above, so even though I could join the union, the union couldn't canvas for members within my workplace, or be seen to represent me against this employer for fear that there were "sensitivities" relating to this particular employer at a political level and this could cause "embarrassment".

I'd like to know why the ICTU have decided that many private sector workers are not worthy of membership or representation??? These unions could actually do with the kind of balanced reasoning that non-unionised private sector, largely ignored, unempowered workers could bring to the table...

Obviously I don't expect to have it every which way. I never expected to earn as much as private sector workers. That was my point, I went for security. Your risk is that in times of recession you can lose your job. My risk is that in times of prosperity I can get left behind, unable to get on the property ladder etc I respected the decision of people to join the private sector and you should also respect my decision. Its a disgrace that the private sector continue to channel all their anger on the public sector. Just drop it. I felt sorry for all of you and my friends and family who are suffering in the private sector but how dare you have a problem with us. This is the way economies work. They go up and down. Thats life. Life is great for you when the economy is booming. Life is that bit easier for us when the economy is weak. 5 yrs ago I couldn't dream of getting a house, now I can. A simple thanks would be great. We have bailed out everyone once. We cannot keep taking hits so excuse us for standing up for ouselves.

Amhran Nua

houghton88 wrote: »

Obviously I don't expect to have it every which way. I never expected to earn as much as private sector workers. That was my point, I went for security. Your risk is that in times of recession you can lose your job.

Your weak link is that the public sector are usually paid considerably more than their private sector counterparts, and there are a lot of reports and studies to back that up.

houghton88 wrote: »

My risk is that in times of prosperity I can get left behind, unable to get on the property ladder etc

Are you kidding, the banks were perfectly happy to hand over loans of whatever size was needed to the public sector during the boom, there hasn't been a report done on it but I'd love to see the numbers for the public sector workers who have mortgages outstanding on second and subsequent properties at the moment.

houghton88 wrote: »

Life is great for you when the economy is booming.

Again, what, 90% of the "private sector", of which the public sector is a subset, didn't gain anything of value out of the boom. Compare public salaries in 2001 and today and tell us the same applies to that sector.

houghton88 wrote: »

A simple thanks would be great. We have bailed out everyone once.

This makes no sense at all.

Voltwad

Voltwad wrote: »

Will that €4 Billion go into Anglo Irish as well?

no...
The 4billion each year is the figure for the cut needed to equate the cost of running the public service with the amount of taxes that come in.

The Billions to the bankers[aka the bail out] is earning circa 8% pa in interest income [thats double what the government is currently paying for the money on the open market so 100% profit] to the government and has to be paid back in full aswell.
The chances of the two main banks defaulting on that is next to nill.
Anglo's share of the principal might be a problem alright.

The amount of misinformation bandied about in an attempt to create more of a bogey man than there actually is, is pure stupidity in all honesty.
It's usually bandied about by people who think that similar amounts should be borrowed to keep a bloated civil and public service going and growing at the rate of knots it had been to date.
Newsflash-the civil and public service are exactly that,a public service,they should be paid out of the states coffers and not on the never never.
If they can't be afforded because the Economy isn't big enough to justify the level they are at,then they have to be shaved.
Otherwise the only thing stopping the country heading down Zimbabwe road is the fact that the IMF and or the EU will step in and impliment un negotiated cuts.

Anyone that thinks different is in fairy land.

Sand

I would be interested in checking with public sector workers: Do they think the country can indefinitly run a budget with a shortfall of 26 billion per year?

ParkRunner

Sand wrote: »

I would be interested in checking with public sector workers: Do they think the country can indefinitly run a budget with a shortfall of 26 billion per year?

No. Cuts will happen as they have been happening for the last few months. Recovery will happen and the gap will close by people getting back to work paying taxes again and with controlled reductions in expenditure. The stimulus is just as important as the cuts though yet the frenzy is all about reducing public sector pay and to a lesser extent about slashing social welfare.

nesf

EF wrote: »

No. Cuts will happen as they have been happening for the last few months. Recovery will happen and the gap will close by people getting back to work paying taxes again and with controlled reductions in expenditure. The stimulus is just as important as the cuts though yet the frenzy is all about reducing public sector pay and to a lesser extent about slashing social welfare.

You can't stimulate the economy without borrowing money and borrowing money at the rate we are already doing it deflates the economy further. Stimulus is not an option for us. Why do you think the EU are letting us get away with our stupid level of borrowing? They know we've no choice but to unwind it slowly, 4 billion of cuts at a time.

The gap won't close quickly. It's going to take 5 years at least with cuts to get the public finances back in order. Some would say I'm being optimistic at that.

ParkRunner

nesf wrote: »

You can't stimulate the economy without borrowing money and borrowing money at the rate we are already doing it deflates the economy further. Stimulus is not an option for us. Why do you think the EU are letting us get away with our stupid level of borrowing? They know we've no choice but to unwind it slowly, 4 billion of cuts at a time.

The gap won't close quickly. It's going to take 5 years at least with cuts to get the public finances back in order. Some would say I'm being optimistic at that.

True and borrowing off the banks is proving difficult enough as they have everyone wrapped around their little finger. We cant borrow and we cant cut too much without losing control of the public finances so a gentle cut in expenditure which mirrors at least the reduction in the cost of living and a targetted stimulus will go a long way. There is funding available though available from what I have seen for new promising enterprises, not so much from the banks but from the government and private individuals with money to invest..there arent millions of them but there are quite a number out there belive it or not.

nesf

EF wrote: »

True and borrowing off the banks is proving difficult enough as they have everyone wrapped around their little finger. We cant borrow and we cant cut too much without losing control of the public finances so a gentle cut in expenditure which mirrors at least the reduction in the cost of living and a targetted stimulus will go a long way. There is funding available though available from what I have seen for new promising enterprises, not so much from the banks but from the government and private individuals with money to invest..there arent millions of them but there are quite a number out there belive it or not.

No, a gentle cut in spending increases how much we will have to cut the year after and the year after that. We cannot escape the pain and it'll be better for the country to go through it now with the chance of a quicker recovery than the delay cuts and guarantee the recession lasting longer.

Sand

No. Cuts will happen as they have been happening for the last few months.

Good - then hopefully the complaints about unfairness, or "We didnt do it!" can be left to one side. We are careering over the cliff and we need to get back onto solid footing, and then hold an inquisition on who was to blame. Stabilise first, blame second.

Recovery will happen and the gap will close by people getting back to work paying taxes again and with controlled reductions in expenditure. The stimulus is just as important as the cuts though yet the frenzy is all about reducing public sector pay and to a lesser extent about slashing social welfare.

As Nesf has pointed out, a conventional stimulus package is impossible.Whatever scope there was, the government has wasted on the completely criminal NAMA theft.

Any stimulus package will have to be in the form of getting more done for less and stimulating economic activity through clearing red tape and hinderances to business like our cost base. Bankruptcy legislation also needs to be revised as was highlighted in the IT today - banks, with the economic expertise they claim to have, need to take more responsibility for what they lend and for what purpose. Entrepreneurs need to be able to take the risk of starting up a business without being terrified off being pursued to their graves should the business fail. A cheap stimulus package is all that is possible.

We do not have the Keynsian option of spending the surplus we built up in the good times to sustain us through the bad times because we didnt build up a surplus, and this is not a temporary blip - it is a massive shift in Irelands economic trajectory. We will recover growth, despite the unions, bankers and governments best efforts to suicide the economy but growth wont magically reappear to sustain a public sector that by every measure is overpriced.

Sooner the cuts go into place, the better - I have seen a poster on another site note that even if the 4 billion in cuts this year was put off for just one year and the cycle of cuts started in the 2011 budgets instead, the overall increase in debt by 2015 would be an additional 18 billion owed. And between NAMA and borrowing 26 billion per year we are going to owe an awful lot to begin with.

houghton88

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Your weak link is that the public sector are usually paid considerably more than their private sector counterparts, and there are a lot of reports and studies to back that up.


Are you kidding, the banks were perfectly happy to hand over loans of whatever size was needed to the public sector during the boom, there hasn't been a report done on it but I'd love to see the numbers for the public sector workers who have mortgages outstanding on second and subsequent properties at the moment.


Again, what, 90% of the "private sector", of which the public sector is a subset, didn't gain anything of value out of the boom. Compare public salaries in 2001 and today and tell us the same applies to that sector.


This makes no sense at all.

A) If you read my original posting you would know I am talking about the lower paid members of the public sector. So there goes your weak link theory. I earn 40k. Maybe you should have a little browse through my original posting.

As you said, there has not been a report done on it so come back to me when you can back this up..I was not offered much of a mortgage on my salary. Again, the people you are talking about with second and subsequent mortgages are the higher paid members of the public sector. Once again, I invite you to read my original posting. Cheers.

C) where did you pluck this 90% from?.....

D) what doesn't make sense? We have taken one paycut already to help our country. YOU ARE WELCOME. Now I am looking at another paycut. How many cuts do you want me to take? Once again, read my original posting.

houghton88

MaceFace wrote: »

OP: If you saw Primetime last night you would understand the frustration people have with members of the public sector and why they are not making it easy for themselves.

3 joe soaps, I think the first was a teacher on 48k, the second was a local authority civil servant on 34k, and the third a physiotherapist on 55k.

The girl on 55k was saying she was not on a great wage and she shouldn't have to take a cut. When asked where her employer will get the money to continue paying her wages she said she didn't know.

Until members of the public sector come out and start offering realistic alternatives I retain the right to express my current disastisfaction in how my hard earned money is spent.

(while I am on the subject, I would question why that guy was on 34k. I wonder if it would be possible to employ someone to do his job for a lot less, and if so, why don't

read my original post for some alternatives..

P. Breathnach

Sand wrote: »

... As Nesf has pointed out, a conventional stimulus package is impossible.Whatever scope there was, the government has wasted on the completely criminal NAMA theft...

Not so. There was no scope. NAMA is quite separate.

Sand

My point was NAMA is a "stimulus" package for the banks by its kindest interpretation. It is a transfer of roughly 30 billion in wealth from the PAYE workers to the banks. Its outright theft by any interpretation outside the corrupt circle of the Dept of Finance and the banks/developers themselves. I can only hope the FG/Labour government will have the stones to dishonour the NAMA bonds given to the banks.

But essentially, yeah, theres is no scope for a stimulus package because our government spent any buget surplus on buying votes in the public sector with wage and pension hikes and amongst other vested interests. There is no warchest, hence no stimulus. We get the government we deserve I suppose.


@Houghton88

D) what doesn't make sense? We have taken one paycut already to help our country. YOU ARE WELCOME. Now I am looking at another paycut. How many cuts do you want me to take? Once again, read my original posting.

Youre on 40K - which is a decent wage btw, outside the public sector anyhow - so I wouldnt expect you to take a vast amount more in wage cuts as I expect your fixed outgoing on mortgages and loans wont be cut in line with your wages and theres always a breaking point. However....we are overspending by 26 billion per year. We are cutting 4 billion this year. Its only the very first step in what will be a long, painful downsizing to use the hated term. Personally I believe those on the inexplicably stratospheric wages higher up in the public sector need to take far bigger wage cuts than those on the lower end of the scale. Theres about 300K in the public sector, and maybe only 15K gardai, plus similar numbers of nurses, teachers and other frontline sectors for a total of 60K heroes struggling by on the minimum wage thats paid for these roles in the public sector. So the other 240K is where the real savings can be made imo. Dont worry, the people who are really squirming are the guys on 60K plus...you little guys on the 40K .... you're just puppets they get to dance out to protect their own pay and conditions.

ParkRunner

nesf wrote: »

No, a gentle cut in spending increases how much we will have to cut the year after and the year after that. We cannot escape the pain and it'll be better for the country to go through it now with the chance of a quicker recovery than the delay cuts and guarantee the recession lasting longer.

I agree with you to some extent..what is clear is that people are building up savings as consumer confidence is rock bottom but I am not as pessimistic regarding our medium term outlook. All that was achieved in reality from the emergency budget in April was lets face it, a further deteriotation in the deficit. Granted it takes time for budgetary measures to take effect but I just cannot see how successive savage cuts alone will achieve a return to a situation where the books will balance.
By all means if anyone is willing to do out a medium projection of the figures prove me wrong.

P. Breathnach

Sand wrote: »

My point was NAMA is a "stimulus" package for the banks by its kindest interpretation. It is a transfer of roughly 30 billion in wealth from the PAYE workers to the banks. Its outright theft by any interpretation outside the corrupt circle of the Dept of Finance and the banks/developers themselves. I can only hope the FG/Labour government will have the stones to dishonour the NAMA bonds given to the banks.

You might not like NAMA, but that is no justification for describing it so inaccurately.

nesf

EF wrote: »

I agree with you to some extent..what is clear is that people are building up savings as consumer confidence is rock bottom but I am not as pessimistic regarding our medium term outlook. All that was achieved in reality from the emergency budget in April was lets face it, a further deteriotation in the deficit. Granted it takes time for budgetary measures to take effect but I just cannot see how successive savage cuts alone will achieve a return to a situation where the books will balance.
By all means if anyone is willing to do out a medium projection of the figures prove me wrong.

Consumer confidence won't improve fully until we start seeing the public finances improving substantially and people get to stop worrying about future tax hikes/pay cuts. Doing the cuts/hikes early rather than sooner is far preferable to allowing uncertainty to continue to build as it has this past year.

Sand

You might not like NAMA, but that is no justification for describing it so inaccurately.

Sure there is. Its true. Thats why NAMA is clouded in such secrecy and tricky accountancy. Its not to make things clear, its to hide the sheer scale of the theft until Brian is safely out of office and sitting on the board of AIB, enjoying his retirement. Who knows, maybe a few old hands in the Dept of Finance will be joining him and they can laugh about the good old days.

Look, heres the quality of developments were hoping to make money back on.

"I believe a full safety audit on all high rise buildings in elevated areas must be carried out immediately in order to avoid disaster in the future. We need to establish that all such buildings were finished to the relevant wind speed regulations which apply at these elevations.

"As well as inhabited apartment blocks there are dozens of empty and half-completed apartment block buildings in this elevated area," she said. "Some of these are in the hands of receivers or are about to pass into the control of Nama."

The boys in AIB must be thumping the table with laughter when they joke about the tough NAMA negotiations.

ParkRunner

nesf wrote: »

Consumer confidence won't improve fully until we start seeing the public finances improving substantially and people get to stop worrying about future tax hikes/pay cuts. Doing the cuts/hikes early rather than sooner is far preferable to allowing uncertainty to continue to build as it has this past year.

So a severe and sudden reduction of money flowing around the economy, even if it is borrowed, leading to further job losses and pay cuts will restore consumer confidence? By all means as I said before, if someone can do out the figures to show how taking a substantial hit now will restore consumer confidence and trigger a controlled and gradual recovery, put it out there for all to see. All the private sector is doing in effect is funding its own social welfare bill at the moment

Sand

People are hoarding money and cutting spending now in fear of tax hikes and wage cuts to come - theres an argument for simply getting it over with now, like ripping off a plaster as opposed to dragging it out. Everyone knows it has to be done, the sooner its done, the less uncertainty there is over the pain and the sooner people feel the future holds less pain, and perhaps more promise and begin thinking about spending again.

Even if you dont agree with that, theres simply a necessity to cut spending that effectively invalidates much debate. We cant spend money we dont have.

nesf

EF wrote: »

So a severe and sudden reduction of money flowing around the economy, even if it is borrowed, leading to further job losses and pay cuts will restore consumer confidence? By all means as I said before, if someone can do out the figures to show how taking a substantial hit now will restore consumer confidence and trigger a controlled and gradual recovery, put it out there for all to see. All the private sector is doing in effect is funding its own social welfare bill at the moment

Well there's what Sand said also:

We need to make a cut. We can do it this year or delay and add 10 billion extra onto our borrowings that we'll be shouldering for the next 20 years at least. That's 10 billion extra generating interest that will be a drain on this economy's ability to perform in the medium to long term. This will outweigh any softening this year when consumer confidence is already rock bottom!

There is absolutely no sound reason economically to argue for delaying the cuts we need to make this year i.e. at least 4 billion Euro.

Darragh29

houghton88 wrote: »

Obviously I don't expect to have it every which way. I never expected to earn as much as private sector workers. That was my point, I went for security. Your risk is that in times of recession you can lose your job. My risk is that in times of prosperity I can get left behind, unable to get on the property ladder etc I respected the decision of people to join the private sector and you should also respect my decision. Its a disgrace that the private sector continue to channel all their anger on the public sector. Just drop it. I felt sorry for all of you and my friends and family who are suffering in the private sector but how dare you have a problem with us. This is the way economies work. They go up and down. Thats life. Life is great for you when the economy is booming. Life is that bit easier for us when the economy is weak. 5 yrs ago I couldn't dream of getting a house, now I can. A simple thanks would be great. We have bailed out everyone once. We cannot keep taking hits so excuse us for standing up for ouselves.

You were clearly compensated on several occasions via the benchmarking process to be able to afford a house. As I've already said, you are substantially better paid than I am and you have no risk whatsoever to take on. You seem to believe that everyone who worked in the private sector during the boom years made a fortune, and that you are paid less, relative to that particular, and entirely false, reference salary.

The unions had the opportunity to unite the workers of this country and get us all back on the same page recently and they blew it. I'd rather be in a room with you talking this through than knocking your position on here. Notwithstanding the fact that we have differing views, I accept that what needs to happen is that I and the majority of workers like me who are unempowered, unrepresented and voiceless, need to be brought into the process of dialogue that needs to happen now and you and me and the rest of us need to get to a common place where we can get people working and spending again.

The problem here I think is that there is no leadership, there is no political leadership here, but why are others who are in a position of leadership,for example the ICTU, not stepping up to the plate now???

foxymm

Few things on the Private Sector... I certainly have many friends in the Private Sector, working in I.T., they tell me on certain days they could be sitting at their desks from 9.30-5PM with no projects to do, surfing the net, running for a cuppa tea, doing this 'n' that, other than actual work.

There are disciplinary procedures that people in the Public and certainly Pricare sector go through if required so the fact that you could be joining the dole queue after two days is a little ridiculous.

When I walk into a classroom, I'm there to teach between in some instances 25-30 kids (i.e I'm working). I left school today at 4PM, got dinner, marked a bunch of copies, and corrected a set of tests. I went to the gym, came back and did my planning for tommorrow (doing up handouts and worksheets).

This is certainly work I enjoy doing as it enriches the kids learning experience. I get paid for the direct teaching I do in the classroom, nothing else. The holidays certainly make up for the extra-curricular work I do outside the school day, putting on extra classes in the evening for exam years... as well as the many hours we do in evenings and weekends planning, marking etc. I certainly don't apologise for that.

When you clock off from your days work in the private sector, you leave your work behind, in not all but in alot of instances.

By the way, we contribute to our own pensions (including the pensions levy), like yourself we pay the 2% income levy, for our PRSI and private health insurance. I am a PAYE worker like all the other PS workers so enough about this "we may your wages".

My mate in the private sector gets his private health insurance paid for. Many PS workers paid into private pension funds which have been wiped out. Last year 70% pf private sector workers got pay increases so the myth that everyone in the private sector is suffering is quite indeed a "myth".

But if you think we've such a great time with our unwarranted holidays, come join us we'd be happy to have you on board in the teaching profession.

gollem_1975

no doubt there are some people in private sector jobs that have had days where they have surfed the net etc.. but these people won't have many days like this .. because its not sustainable.

if they are doing fsck all in their job it is understandable that the customer who is paying them should be annoyed.. in the case of the public sector we are the customer.

the underutilised private sector worker is faced with the following scenario :
if there is no work coming in -> then there is no money to pay for their services -> therefore they are very likely to lose their job.

this can happen literally overnight. in one Irish IT company I worked for back in 2001/2 I came into the office on a monday morning after being on a weeks holidays to be told I was let go along with 12 others and that was it.. I wasn't even allowed back into the building ( and that was back in 2002! )

does the same thing happen to people in permanent pensionable public sector jobs ?

I would say that there is surplus supply of people wanting to join you in the teaching profession ( I am seriously tempted myself )

while I was working in private sector IT jobs during the 00's there were a few people who left IT careers to do the post grad primary teaching qualification

I didn't encounter too many primary school teachers leaving to begin IT careers.

why would they , teaching is in many ways a more rewarding job, and now it seems that the pay is better too!

Darragh29

gollem_1975 wrote: »

this can happen literally overnight. in one Irish IT company I worked for back in 2001/2 I came into the office on a monday morning after being on a weeks holidays to be told I was let go along with 12 others and that was it.. I wasn't even allowed back into the building ( and that was back in 2002! )

I had a similar thing happen me back in 2006 when things were still relatively healthy enough, the IT business involved let a load of people go one day and people were escorted out of the building. However as I walked through the car park on the way, I passed a Porche driven by the MD and several Range Rovers driven by other directors, so the situation was obviously one where the money coming in during the boom was being used to buy expensive cars to bolster ego's and overcome insecurities...

As much as I have an issue with many aspects of the public sector, in the private sector, the needs of people doing the hard graft were often far down the list of priorities, such as expensive cars for directors, maintenance of extravagant lifestyles, etc...