What would the public sector accept?

ardmacha

Properly organised, the unpaid leave thing would be a good idea. When the detail is examined then it would be found that more leave would not be a problem in some sectors while in others it would. The first category are then a candidate for a reduction in numbers with people being moved to sectors in the second category. For instance it might well be found perfectly possible to give bureaucrats in the HSE leave without loss of service but not as easy with radiographers.

The only observation I have is that it would very unjust if people whose services were in demand ended up with a straight paycut, while those who had nothing to do got an extra fortnight off.

Paulzx

EF wrote: »

. I imagine there are very few public sector workers who work a full week and do only 32 hours.

Correct.
I love makey uppy figures though!!

bridgitt

EF wrote: »

I imagine there are very few public sector workers who work a full week and do only 32 hours.

Judging by how many post here during the day ( some posters admit it, and even said they are entitled to surf the net during working hours ) , and how quiet it was last Tuesday when they were up north shopping / on strike, you are probably correct in assuming 32 hours a week are not "worked" on average. Some official figures are much less eg teachers + lecturers.

Flex

EF wrote: »

It looks like compulsory unpaid leave in the region of around 12-14 days could form the basis of an agreement to prevent the strike next week. It seems like a good idea to me anyway and a fairer way to reduce expenditure.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2009/1128/breaking4.htm

I'll be extremely worried if thats the case. The simple reason is that this doesnt address the problem at hand; the huge level of public spending. What happens next year? Another 12 days upaid leave? And the year after that?

Public spending must be cut drastically because it cant be afforded. Taxes are practically at the point of diminishing returns this year and the Minister for Finance has stated numerous times theres extremely little scope for generating more tax revenue. When they increased taxes months ago their revenue plummeted. For God sake why do people refuse to realise that????? We'll be squeezing the final drops out of taxation this year to make up €4B, what happens next year??

Hopefully this will just be a stop gap, if only to try convince the French, Germans and British that we are actually taking the tough steps needed to address the issue while simply using the €500m a week their lending us for breathing room in the interim, rather than thinking itll last forever.

€500M a week is being borrowed. Thats enough to build 3 new Red & Green LUAS lines every month, 3 new port tunnels every month, new motorways... But no, instead we're using it to finance short-term debts with no prospect for future returns (except massive interest repayments that will be on our backs for years and years to come).

Cut Public Spending Now.

ParkRunner

bridgitt wrote: »

Judging by how many post here during the day ( some posters admit it, and even said they are entitled to surf the net during working hours ) , and how quiet it was last Tuesday when they were up north shopping / on strike, you are probably correct in assuming 32 hours a week are not "worked" on average. Some official figures are much less eg teachers + lecturers.

So then why are you calling for a 40 hour week if public sector workers dont do anything but surf the net in your opinion?

bridgitt

Flex wrote: »

€500M a week is being borrowed. Thats enough to build 3 new Red & Green LUAS lines every month, 3 new port tunnels every month, new motorways... But no, instead we're using it to finance short-term debts with no prospect for future returns (except massive interest repayments that will be on our backs for years and years to come).

"we're using it to finance short-term debts"....ehhhh, true, we saw last Tuesday where a lot of it is going - to buy trolleyfuls of drink in Newry, Derry, Enniskillen etc. The party is not over for some people yet.

bridgitt

EF wrote: »

So then why are you calling for a 40 hour week if public sector workers dont do anything but surf the net in your opinion?

I never said "public sector workers dont do anything but surf the net". Get your facts right. It was not me calling for a 40 hour week for public servants - its what one of the top business people in the country suggested, as part of the measures in order to save 20 billion a year / solve our economic crises.
Sack some people from the public service, and get the rest to work 40 hours a week like everyone else ( and if they do not like it they can leave ).

old boy

me thinks they only thing the p.s. workers will settle for is another cash cow, or the same one under a different discuise

HollyB

EF wrote: »

It looks like compulsory unpaid leave in the region of around 12-14 days could form the basis of an agreement to prevent the strike next week. It seems like a good idea to me anyway and a fairer way to reduce expenditure.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2009/1128/breaking4.htm

I agree, as long as they decide in advance the number of unpaid days and adjust salaries accordingly at the start of the year. If it turns out that they over-estimated the number of unpaid days, they can refund the money for those days or else convert them to annual leave and carry them over to the next year.

irish_bob

bridgitt wrote: »

I never said "public sector workers dont do anything but surf the net". Get your facts right. It was not me calling for a 40 hour week for public servants - its what one of the top business people in the country suggested, as part of the measures in order to save 20 billion a year / solve our economic crises.
Sack some people from the public service, and get the rest to work 40 hours a week like everyone else ( and if they do not like it they can leave ).

increasing working hours is code for culling numbers which in turn means a cut in the wage bill , increasing working hours in itself wont solve our problems

erictheviking

bridgitt wrote: »

Judging by how many post here during the day ( some posters admit it, and even said they are entitled to surf the net during working hours ) , and how quiet it was last Tuesday when they were up north shopping / on strike, you are probably correct in assuming 32 hours a week are not "worked" on average. Some official figures are much less eg teachers + lecturers.

:pac::pac: Rubbish! It seems to me most posters on here in Daytime are Private Sector,Unemployed, Self employed and the students. I know a few lads who are public sector and they have no access to boards and other forums as there is software that blocks their PC's (Although I would imagine higher ranks may not have the same problem.)
How do you know those shoppers were all PS? Could it not have been Mums whose kids had the day off so they decided to go on a shopping trip? I heard there was a tailback Friday into Newry. Was this caused by 600 central bank workers?:rolleyes: I doubt it!

erictheviking

bridgitt wrote: »

I never said "public sector workers dont do anything but surf the net". Get your facts right. It was not me calling for a 40 hour week for public servants - its what one of the top business people in the country suggested, as part of the measures in order to save 20 billion a year / solve our economic crises.
Sack some people from the public service, and get the rest to work 40 hours a week like everyone else ( and if they do not like it they can leave ).

How many people work a 40 hour week? Every job I've worked in has been a 39 hour or 37.5 hour week. After this its overtime.

seangal

P. Breathnach wrote: »

I know public servants who do not take all their annual leave because of the requirements of their work and their commitment to meeting those needs. How will such situations be dealt with?

.
It would be done by taking 12 day pay off them during the summer
It would be put in place for 2010 and then reviewed in 2011 and 2012
In 2012 it would be hoped that the public sector wage bill will have came down by people leaving it and not being replaced
The recruitment embargo has all ready saved 600 million in 2009
12 to 14 days would save about 1.3 billion
the question is will the media still keep bashing the public sector even after the 1.3 billion has being saved as we still will be on the same hour rate of pay.

seangal

erictheviking wrote: »

:pac::pac: Rubbish! It seems to me most posters on here in Daytime are Private Sector,Unemployed, Self employed and the students. I know a few lads who are public sector and they have no access to boards and other forums as there is software that blocks their PC's (Although I would imagine higher ranks may not have the same problem.)
How do you know those shoppers were all PS? Could it not have been Mums whose kids had the day off so they decided to go on a shopping trip? I heard there was a tailback Friday into Newry. Was this caused by 600 central bank workers?:rolleyes: I doubt it!

we can solve this by people saying are they private or public sector and the hours they work
i have siad i am public sector
so time for the rest to declare and we can go back and see who is posting when

ei.sdraob

seangal wrote: »

.
It would be done by taking 12 day pay off them during the summer
It would be put in place for 2010 and then reviewed in 2011 and 2012
In 2012 it would be hoped that the public sector wage bill will have came down by people leaving it and not being replaced
The recruitment embargo has all ready saved 600 million in 2009
12 to 14 days would save about 1.3 billion
the question is will the media still keep bashing the public sector even after the 1.3 billion has being saved as we still will be on the same hour rate of pay.

so the teachers who already have one of the shortest working years

get to work even less

bleh :pac:

erictheviking

seangal wrote: »

P. Breathnach wrote: »

I know public servants who do not take all their annual leave because of the requirements of their work and their commitment to meeting those needs. How will such situations be dealt with?

.
It would be done by taking 12 day pay off them during the summer
It would be put in place for 2010 and then reviewed in 2011 and 2012
In 2012 it would be hoped that the public sector wage bill will have came down by people leaving it and not being replaced
The recruitment embargo has all ready saved 600 million in 2009
12 to 14 days would save about 1.3 billion
the question is will the media still keep bashing the public sector even after the 1.3 billion has being saved as we still will be on the same hour rate of pay.

Of course they will keep up the PS bashing as they need a scapegoat.

seangal

Flex wrote: »

I'll be extremely worried if thats the case. The simple reason is that this doesnt address the problem at hand; the huge level of public spending. What happens next year? Another 12 days upaid leave? And the year after that?

Public spending must be cut drastically because it cant be afforded. Taxes are practically at the point of diminishing returns this year and the Minister for Finance has stated numerous times theres extremely little scope for generating more tax revenue. When they increased taxes months ago their revenue plummeted. For God sake why do people refuse to realise that????? We'll be squeezing the final drops out of taxation this year to make up €4B, what happens next year??

Hopefully this will just be a stop gap, if only to try convince the French, Germans and British that we are actually taking the tough steps needed to address the issue while simply using the €500m a week their lending us for breathing room in the interim, rather than thinking itll last forever.

€500M a week is being borrowed. Thats enough to build 3 new Red & Green LUAS lines every month, 3 new port tunnels every month, new motorways... But no, instead we're using it to finance short-term debts with no prospect for future returns (except massive interest repayments that will be on our backs for years and years to come).

Cut Public Spending Now.

it makes load of sence to do it this way as give unpaid leave
it will reduce the cost of the wage bill by about 1.3 billion a year
Each year we have people who retire from public sector and we are not replacing them so in 3 year we will have a lot lower wage bill and we will have held on to a younger workforce in the public sector
The other option is to let the younger people go and end up with and old workforce
If we cut pay now it will lead to wage demands in about 3 year time when we return to growth and i dont thing we want to go back to the days when there was allways some part of the public sector going on strike to get pay

seangal

ei.sdraob wrote: »

so the teachers who already have one of the shortest working years

get to work even less

bleh :pac:

sure they dont work during the summer and 12 days wage would be taken off them during the summer

P. Breathnach

seangal wrote: »

It would be done by taking 12 day pay off them during the summer
It would be put in place for 2010 and then reviewed in 2011 and 2012
In 2012 it would be hoped that the public sector wage bill will have came down by people leaving it and not being replaced
The recruitment embargo has all ready saved 600 million in 2009
12 to 14 days would save about 1.3 billion
the question is will the media still keep bashing the public sector even after the 1.3 billion has being saved as we still will be on the same hour rate of pay.

So you go back to the idea of simply cutting their pay. So much for unpaid leave being a way of avoiding pay-cuts.

erictheviking

OMD wrote: »

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?

As far as I know forcing unpaid leave on PS workers will mean that pensioners won't have to take a cut and we all know the Govt. are very AFRAID of our senior citizens. The exchequer saves money on the pay bill, the pensioners won't be complaining...everyones a winner! well almost...it still won't be enough for the buy to let chancers, whingers and begrudgers etc. who want to see every working class family in the state in the poorhouse!

seangal

P. Breathnach wrote: »

So you go back to the idea of simply cutting their pay. So much for unpaid leave being a way of avoiding pay-cuts.

i think what we are looking for now is money money money
they dont care how they get it as long as they get it and if they can get it by agreement that is better for everybody
your sound like you just want to get one over on the public sector
we need 1.3 billion there are offering 1.3 billion so get over it

ParkRunner

I think its worth noting that even if the government get their 4bn cuts, including a reduction of 1.3bn in the public sector pay bill this will only lead to a stabilisation of the deficit rather than a significant reduction in the exchequer deficit.
Current expenditure reductions cannot keep on chasing a slumping tax take so more innovative constructive solutions will have to be found

P. Breathnach

seangal wrote: »

i think what we are looking for now is money money money
they dont care how they get it as long as they get it and if they can get it by agreement that is better for everybody
your sound like you just want to get one over on the public sector
we need 1.3 billion there are offering 1.3 billion so get over it

I don't understand what you mean.

The idea of achieving savings by giving public servants a number of days of unpaid leave has been floated. I pointed to problems with the proposal, using a couple of examples (of many I could give). How does that sound like I want to get one over on the public sector?

seangal

P. Breathnach wrote: »

I don't understand what you mean.

The idea of achieving savings by giving public servants a number of days of unpaid leave has been floated. I pointed to problems with the proposal, using a couple of examples (of many I could give). How does that sound like I want to get one over on the public sector?

what problems do u see with the proposal?

P. Breathnach

seangal wrote: »

what problems do u see with the proposal?

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=63235436&postcount=56

Arathorn

If they are able to give everyone in he public sector an extra 2-3 weeks leave does this not suggest that they are overstaffed and underworked ?

murphaph

seangal wrote: »

it makes load of sence to do it this way as give unpaid leave
it will reduce the cost of the wage bill by about 1.3 billion a year
Each year we have people who retire from public sector and we are not replacing them so in 3 year we will have a lot lower wage bill and we will have held on to a younger workforce in the public sector
The other option is to let the younger people go and end up with and old workforce
If we cut pay now it will lead to wage demands in about 3 year time when we return to growth and i dont thing we want to go back to the days when there was allways some part of the public sector going on strike to get pay

Just make it illegal for the public sector to strike, like in Germany.

We need to tackle core pay because it got out of hand during the Celtic Pyramid. End of. The alternative is massive job losses in the Public Sector-something I don't want anyway.

P. Breathnach

Arathorn wrote: »

If they are able to give everyone in he public sector an extra 2-3 weeks leave does this not suggest that they are overstaffed and underworked ?

Indeed.

You'll find that the proposal will prove impracticable because because large areas of the public service are not overstaffed and underworked.

BroomBurner

Are we just looking at pay only?

The whole system of budgets in each department and county council is run the wrong way to my mind. They are each given their budget and if they don't spend the whole lot in the year, the following year, it's taken back. This prompts each department to spend, spend, spend on anything in order to ensure that they can say that the money was needed and will be needed the next year. This budget includes pay, etc.

What we should do is restructure the budget system. Perhaps having those in a position of responsibility for the budget of their section on some sort of bonus structure. Either for themselves, for their department/section, or both. For example, if they manage to underspend by 10%, they receive a bonus of X% of salary. This would prompt the "older generation" of PS members to stop thinking in terms of the old way of spending what they have.

Obviously, what I wouldn't want to see is those at the top creaming bonuses while the rest go without (i.e. no necessary supplies, etc.), so there would have to be a bit more thought put in to regulating it. Maybe a bit of a financial bonus for the department overall, instead of those in charge, might work.

Bruce2008

average_runner wrote: »

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.

Why not have a thread on a paycut to impose on Average Runner

May aswell cause its makes as much sense as this Sh*te!!!