What would the public sector accept?

average_runner

At the moment tax returns are down a massive amount mainly because people lsot their jobs around 500,000 i think was the figure and then alot of pay cuts which effects the tax return and property mark in bits So cuts have to be made all over.

So which of the following proposals would public and private sector like to see:

1. Pay cut in public sector, maybe 3% for under 30,000, 5% under 50000, 7% under 60000 and 10% for everyone above it?

2. A reduction in the amount the goverment contributes to your pension or the goverment make all the pensions like the private sector, ie you give as much as you want, goverment gives 5% towards it

3. No cuts in anything, but public sector is opened up like the private sector and let the markets adjust everything, ie no more job security, so redundos could happen in years to come.

4 Increase tax rates for all, and lets face it if we do this the goverment wont hit the super rich, its the joe soap that will suffer. Just the way ireland works.



Can only choose one.

ardmacha

So the choices are

1. arbitrary pay cut
2. the government doesn't fund your pension
3. privatisation

3. wouldn't bother me, I might end with more.

But surely there can be a choice where the government imposes pay cuts based on some principle and after normal negotiation.. They can say that inflation is -6% so that you can be cut by this amount, or that comparable private sector wages have gone down (with some actual facts to back this up) and run a benchmarking process.

During the boom pay may well have exceed a reasonable level, but this happened because of particular pay rises or particular deals. These can be revisited, but the government is completely unwilling to address detail in any way.

Sizzler

This is what the unions are proposing, obviously not great at Maths if they think this will save the neccessary €1.3 Billion.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2009/1125/1224259396248.html

wrote:

Paying overtime at flat rates rather than time-and-a-half;
Introducing an 8am-8pm core day during which no overtime payments would apply;
Introduction of unpaid leave, perhaps as much as 12 days per year;
The possibility of staff working a small number of additional hours per week;
The elimination of privilege days at Christmas and Easter.

I would estimate the above would be lucky to save €150m :rolleyes:

mikemac

I like the unpaid leave option.
I wish my company had that, handy for exams or if you're a parent they might opt for it too.

If a department has enough staff cover it should be easy enough to introduce.
Ok, not massive savings but it's not a bad idea at all

aidan_mc

A job and be greatful for it

ei.sdraob

Sizzler wrote: »

This is what the unions are proposing, obviously not great at Maths if they think this will save the neccessary €1.3 Billion.

the unions dont care about saving money

they want to borrow more and more for a longer period

to keep the gravy train going

that is their stated plan

someone should explain that money borrowed needs to be paid back + increasing interest, when were spending billions in interest payments alone thats when things get really fun

MaceFace

Seems to unfairly target front line staff leaving the bean counters unaffected.

ei.sdraob

MaceFace wrote: »

Seems to unfairly target front line staff leaving the bean counters unaffected.

havent you learned anything?

its that hardworking that get shafted

this whole "crisis" just exposed how perverse the culture has become

RMDrive

MaceFace wrote: »

Seems to unfairly target front line staff leaving the bean counters unaffected.

True. Hard to believe that the Unions are proposing (or at least considering) this.

OMD

Sizzler wrote: »

This is what the unions are proposing, obviously not great at Maths if they think this will save the neccessary €1.3 Billion.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2009/1125/1224259396248.html



I would estimate the above would be lucky to save €150m :rolleyes:

should save enough money. The problem here is it shifts the paycuts onto workers only whereas a straight paycut will come from pay and pensions. If you follow the union way then the average worker will have less pay than if they follow the government plan of a straight pay cut. This is what makes the unions so stupid. They agree to 1.3 billion in cuts yet want to strike to decide exactly how workers pay will be cut.

Sizzler

Dan O'Brien, economist was on Newstalk this morning and said if public expenditure is not addressed NOW then in 12 months Ireland may well be faced with credit clampdown, i.e. nobody will lend to us and public sector workers will get paid in IOU's untill credit was made available again, now theres a prospect :eek:

Dannyboy83

ei.sdraob wrote: »

havent you learned anything?

its that hardworking that get shafted

this whole "crisis" just exposed how perverse the culture has become

I grew up in the 80s, but don't remember them.
I wonder, was it like this back then?

SkepticOne

OMD wrote: »

should save enough money. The problem here is it shifts the paycuts onto workers only whereas a straight paycut will come from pay and pensions. If you follow the union way then the average worker will have less pay than if they follow the government plan of a straight pay cut. This is what makes the unions so stupid. They agree to 1.3 billion in cuts yet want to strike to decide exactly how workers pay will be cut.

However there's a certain logic to holding on to core pay at whatever cost. This seems to have been a principle objective for over a year. Core pay is still the bulk of remuneration and I don't think this has ever been revised downwards and so the unions don't want to create a precedent here. Once it has been breeched then further reductions are much easier.

Rob67

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

I grew up in the 80s, but don't remember them.
I wonder, was it like this back then?

Yes, but not as angry, I guess people didn't have as much information readily available to them.

OMD

SkepticOne wrote: »

However there's a certain logic to holding on to core pay at whatever cost. This seems to have been a principle objective for over a year. Core pay is still the bulk of remuneration and I don't think this has ever been revised downwards and so the unions don't want to create a precedent here. Once it has been breeched then further reductions are much easier.

Do workers know that is why they are striking? Do they realise their pay is going to be cut just the same on average. Those workers saying they cannot afford a paycut, do they realise the unions are quite happy to see their pay cut as long as it is not termed "a pay cut". Do they realise they will take an even larger pay cut to protect retired public servants?

P. Breathnach

Rob67 wrote: »

Yes, but not as angry, I guess people didn't have as much information readily available to them.

Or as much misinformation.

And people had not learned to take for granted things that should not be taken for granted.

It was quite a different world then.

SkepticOne

OMD wrote: »

Do workers know that is why they are striking?

Each of them have their own idea of why they are striking. There have been some PS workers on this forum, for example, who support the strike but who are on temporary contracts and have little job security. I don't think they realise that the unions representing them are much more likely to agree to those people being made redundant than the core pay of their fully permanent members being cut.

irish_bob

Sizzler wrote: »

Dan O'Brien, economist was on Newstalk this morning and said if public expenditure is not addressed NOW then in 12 months Ireland may well be faced with credit clampdown, i.e. nobody will lend to us and public sector workers will get paid in IOU's untill credit was made available again, now theres a prospect :eek:

its amazing how many seem to believe thier is no threat whatsoever of the IMF coming in , its as if they think the rules are different because we are irish , most countries in the world are poor and thier are countries like argentina who were once very rich but are now poor , if the figures dont stack up, we will not be given special treatment

the dunnes stores add , WERE DIFFERENT CAUSE WERE IRISH wont wash

Ally Dick

SkepticOne wrote: »

Core pay is still the bulk of remuneration and I don't think this has ever been revised downwards and so the unions don't want to create a precedent here.

Benchmarking of 20% was unprecedented. This is what the government should be clawing back now

meglome

I've been listening to the union leaders for some time now and I have no idea what they'll accept, other than it appears they think no one should have their pay cut. I'm no economist but my maths is perfectly good and I cannot for the life of me figure out how they think we're going to balance the books.

Amhran Nua

irish_bob wrote: »

its amazing how many seem to believe thier is no threat whatsoever of the IMF coming in

It doesn't matter if the IMF come in or not at this stage, whatever measures they would recommend will likely be needed one way or the other before the money runs out. Or after, whichever.

Riskymove

Ally Dick wrote: »

Benchmarking of 20% was unprecedented. This is what the government should be clawing back now

who got 20% in benchmarking?

Paulzx

Eh. Not me.

8% in first round.
0% in second


You can have back all the second round if you want. I've already given back the first round

ssaye

I believe the IMF will come in and cut my respectable PS wage by 27.5 percent over 2 years and Social Welfare by 20% over 3 years looking at people on long term (>10 year). I will then earn under 350 per week for a 35 hour week adding to my 20 hour a week commute. I will have to try to persuade the bank to extend my 35 year mortgage so I don't pay 80% of my salary on repayments. I love to work, I am thankful for my job, I wont starve and if its in the common good I will have no choice but to accept this. My alternatives are to leave the country, I don't think so, I don't run from problems I just accept them and think of the things I have that are more important to me like my health. I hope im wrong, but I doubt it.

ulysses32

How about we privatise the entire public sector and see how much basic services such as education, hospitals, roads, security etc will cost the person?

I would imagine it would be a tad more than current tax contributions. Wouldn't have to worry about my PS pay cut then as I could live and die by the market. Luckily, with the baby boom there will be loads of kids requiring good teaching so there's a guaranteed customer base! Happy days, long live the market!

Amhran Nua

ulysses32 wrote: »

How about we privatise the entire public sector and see how much basic services such as education, hospitals, roads, security etc will cost the person?

I would imagine it would be a tad more than current tax contributions.

You would imagine wrong.

We're spending approximately €14 billion a year on the Dept. of Health and Children at the moment, with a population of 4 million, and another billion for the market in health insurance. This gives a spend to population ratio of 3.75, zeroes excluded.

The Dutch, with their second best value for money and best health service in Europe or thereabouts, by comparison are spending approximately €46 billion a year on health with a population of 16 million.

This gives a spend to population ratio of 2.875, thus they spend about 75% as much on health as we do, and have far better healthcare. They have insurance premiums of around €30 a week to pay at a minimum (actually €22, but they have a few other charges on top of that).

To maintain current levels of healthcare and all the wastage that entails, we'd need to subsidise the insurance premiums (assuming everyone paid bare minimum) by about €8 billion, and with streamlining and efficiency measures to bring health to Dutch standards (0.75 cost) we're looking at a total cost to the exchequer of around €4 billion per annum. If its unsubidised, people might have to pay in the region of €50 to €60 a week in insurance.

Roads, there was a Japanese outfit that wanted to do the port tunnel I think it was for free, if they could keep the tolls for 15 years. Security, again not exactly a big earner outside the guards.

Mad_Max

There were a load of teachers being interviewed on Vincent Browne last night and one, a principle earning 70k, said that what he wanted was a fair and equitable tax system to fix the budget.

"Hear, Hear!".

Browne then pointed out that taxation alone cannot fill the gap, to which the principal replied, but why not start with fixing the tax and from the top down to boot.

"Hear, Hear!".

However, as he had conceded, taxation won't fill the hole. So even if the government did start taxing fairly and equitably (:rolleyes:) they would still need to shave off a few billion. The only way they could do it would be social welfare or public service cuts.

The teachers had already said before that they didn't want the welfare touched, SO... basically they acknowledged that cuts needed to come in their sector.

So why protest?! Whether the government cuts pay now and taxes later or taxes now and cuts later its all the same. They, or any incoming government, is going to have to do it no matter how nice/incompetent they are.

I'm just not sure what they (trying not to use them-vs-us divide) want to happen or what they will accept.

Irish and Proud

ardmacha wrote: »

So the choices are

1. arbitrary pay cut
2. the government doesn't fund your pension
3. privatisation

3. wouldn't bother me, I might end with more.

But surely there can be a choice where the government imposes pay cuts based on some principle and after normal negotiation.. They can say that inflation is -6% so that you can be cut by this amount, or that comparable private sector wages have gone down (with some actual facts to back this up) and run a benchmarking process.

During the boom pay may well have exceed a reasonable level, but this happened because of particular pay rises or particular deals. These can be revisited, but the government is completely unwilling to address detail in any way.

4. Scrap all expenses against income tax, thereby forcing the rich to pay - it's about time those spongers were made to pay their fair share into this country - loads of money then for projects like Metro North and the Interconnector - the Interconnector alone would employ 7000 year on year from 2011 till 2016 - one can only imagine what Metro North would add to that figure, then there's Luas BX, Luas D etc.

Regards!

Amhran Nua

Mad_Max wrote: »

However, as he had conceded, taxation won't fill the hole. So even if the government did start taxing fairly and equitably (:rolleyes:) they would still need to shave off a few billion.

Its a hell of a lot more than a few billion. As far as taxation goes, we pay more income tax than the EU average.

As Finance Minister Brian Lenihan complains about the high numbers not liable for income tax, the figures show taxes on personal income raising 28.4pc of revenue in 2007 -- higher than the EU-15 average.

As the economy slumped in 2008, tax revenues fell to the lowest in more than 30 years, relative to the size of the economy. The report shows the Irish tax "burden" falling below 30pc of output (GDP) for the first time since the 1970s.

When the figures are adjusted for the multinational earnings which leave the country, the tax burden rises to around 34pc of national income (GNP). This compares with an average of around 39pc in the the EU-15 and a tax take of just under 36pc in the UK.

In terms of overall tax take, we're just 2% below the UK. If we had their levels of corporate tax we'd be well within the EU average.

OMD

Irish and Proud wrote: »

4. Scrap all expenses against income tax, thereby forcing the rich to pay - it's about time those spongers were made to pay their fair share into this country - loads of money then for projects like Metro North and the Interconnector - the Interconnector alone would employ 7000 year on year from 2011 till 2016 - one can only imagine what Metro North would add to that figure, then there's Luas BX, Luas D etc.

Regards!

The rich do pay tax. This idea that there are rich people out there who could be taxed more and by doing so get us out of this mess is rubbish. The money is not there.

OMD

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Its a hell of a lot more than a few billion. As far as taxation goes, we pay more income tax than the EU average.

In terms of overall tax take, we're just 2% below the UK. If we had their levels of corporate tax we'd be well within the EU average.

That was 2 years ago when things were very, very, very different. Tax take has plummetted since then