Have the Public Servants won the dispute?

gurramok

Taxipete29 wrote: »

You would have a better chance of getting FF backbenchers in vulnerable seats to reject the budget than you would the Greens. They had their chance and blew it.

Yeh right. Pandering to a minority of the population at the expense of the vast majority. Won't work.

deise48

damo wrote: »

No, they havent won anthing. They are coming crashing back down to the real world, kicking and screaming, and it will continue for years to come.

Scenario one: Their pay and pensions will be clawed back to a realistic level with continuous cuts over the next 3-4 years at the direction of the ECB.

Scenario two: Their pay and pensions, and staff numbers, will be viciously hammered down to a realistic level overnight by the IMF.

These latest cuts are just the beginning.

realistic level? what are you on about

Barname

dvpower wrote: »

This proposal has been floating around for a few days now and looks to be gaining traction.



This is reckoned to be worth about €850m in savings - well on the way to the €1.3bn.

This would seem to represent a victory of sorts for the public servants; they get to hold onto basic pay rates albeit on reduced hours.

But, how would this proposal work? Close down schools and public offices for 10 - 14 days? Reduce services across the board? Surely if it is possible to retain the current level of services with less days worked, a programme of redundancies would be a better alternative?

Thoughts?

Who is in charge? It appears the Unions run this bankrupt kip for their own gain.

Union leaders sat on the Boards of the Central Bank, FAS etc they turned a blind eye to the recklessness of the bertie bubble as they were simultaneously fleecing the tax coffers

If the 'days off' deal is struck 'services' will be decimated, but once again the Unions DONT CARE

if cowen had a pair he would simply state that he as Taoiseach of this bankrupt kip is actually in charge and that he will slash PS/CS pay as required

but this is cowardly cowen we are talking about. this place is fugged.

MaceFace

Barname wrote: »

if cowen had a pair he would simply state that he as Taoiseach of this bankrupt kip is actually in charge and that he will slash PS/CS pay as required
.

How great would it be to hear him use those exact words!

Dickerty

NiteOwl2 wrote: »

Seriously, we are supposed to believe that the government can't afford to pay the Christmas bonus, or overtime for public servants, or vaccination for cervical cancer...but they can afford €54 billion to banks, €750 million for the Port Tunnel (tendered for €450 million, and the government paid an extra €300 million without batting an eyelid), €250 million (and still rising) cost of the P-PARS system for the Health boards, €52 million on electronic voting machines and €800,000 per annum to store the machines, €14 million to Murray consultants to front the "Yes to Lisbon" campaign, etc.

Most of those were things done when we had money, there is really no point in dwelling on the past now.

And I am a bit sick of the banks bailout discussion - whether through NAMA or nationalisation, we were always going to fork out to the banks. It is not part of our National Debt, so it is not a factor in this.

TGPS

I don't have a problem with this proposal.

If it is a victory it's very much a pyrrhic one, but it allows all concerned to save face - unions can claim there's been no dimunition of salary and government can claim they've reduced the public pay bill. The most important thing is the EU and international markets don't see it as a fudge and it actually generates the promised savings.

MaceFace

TGPS wrote: »

I don't have a problem with this proposal.

If it is a victory it's very much a pyrrhic one, but it allows all concerned to save face - unions can claim there's been no dimunition of salary and government can claim they've reduced the public pay bill. The most important thing is the EU and international markets don't see it as a fudge and it actually generates the promised savings.

It is much too serious for saving face. What this proposal will do is impact everyone the same amount regardless of how well or bad they are paid.
Also, those in receipt of pensions don't take a hit.

Surely those who can afford to pay the most should?

TGPS

MaceFace wrote: »

It is much too serious for saving face. What this proposal will do is impact everyone the same amount regardless of how well or bad they are paid.
Also, those in receipt of pensions don't take a hit.

Surely those who can afford to pay the most should?

Why?

Seriously - why?

This Marxist idea of "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" is generally spouted, but the rest of the ideology is not.

I earn a decent salary, yes - but I work hard for it and I worked even harder to get the qualifications (self-funded) that got me into a position to get the job in the first place. So I'd like to hear a rational explanation as to why more of my salary should be taken away.

MaceFace

TGPS wrote: »

Why?

Seriously - why?

This Marxist idea of "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" is generally spouted, but the rest of the ideology is not.

I earn a decent salary, yes - but I work hard for it and I worked even harder to get the qualifications (self-funded) that got me into a position to get the job in the first place. So I'd like to hear a rational explanation as to why more of my salary should be taken away.

I am capitialist to the core but here is my reasoning:
We are told that 1.3b must come off the public sector pay bill. What is happening with this unpaid leave is everyone is being hit exactly the same amount (basically docked 2-3 weeks pay per year and not having to work).
There is already tremendous strain on many lower paid workers in the country and my belief is that if these folks are hit too much, they will end up losing everything and the country will be in a worse mess than it is now.

Can someone explain why those in receipt of the pensions will continue to avoid any pain?

Besides this, there is talk that the leave may only save 400m which leaves a 900m gap.

dvpower

NiteOwl2 wrote: »

Seriously, we are supposed to believe that the government can't afford to pay the Christmas bonus, or overtime for public servants, or vaccination for cervical cancer...but they can afford €54 billion to banks, €750 million for the Port Tunnel (tendered for €450 million, and the government paid an extra €300 million without batting an eyelid), €250 million (and still rising) cost of the P-PARS system for the Health boards, €52 million on electronic voting machines and €800,000 per annum to store the machines, €14 million to Murray consultants to front the "Yes to Lisbon" campaign, etc.

The money for the banks is mainly borrowed money. All of the other issues you raised were when we (thought) we had money.

do you really believe that the government has a pot of hidden gold?

scary

P. Breathnach wrote: »

I read it again. You said

No matter what way I look at it, it seems to say that teachers should get less pay without doing less work. How did I misunderstand it?

the idea is that you dont get paid for 14 days that you should, he's saying as far as i can see, is that the only practical way it would work in the education system is to take it from the 3 months that they dont work but get paid for it, they still work less than others and the kids dont suffer. I dont think he's singling out teachers to bear the brunt of it, just pointing out a practical way that it would work in that area.

Dickerty

TGPS wrote: »

I earn a decent salary, yes - but I work hard for it and I worked even harder to get the qualifications (self-funded) that got me into a position to get the job in the first place. So I'd like to hear a rational explanation as to why more of my salary should be taken away.

I'm with you - I have been working nearly 20 years, only now coming into a good wage through further learning, personal sacrifice and hard bloody work. I refuse to accept that I should pay more than people in my organisation (or any other) who barely do the minimum to keep their jobs.

This is not an inheritance tax, I have earned this.

TGPS

MaceFace wrote: »

I am capitialist to the core but here is my reasoning:
We are told that 1.3b must come off the public sector pay bill. What is happening with this unpaid leave is everyone is being hit exactly the same amount (basically docked 2-3 weeks pay per year and not having to work).
There is already tremendous strain on many lower paid workers in the country and my belief is that if these folks are hit too much, they will end up losing everything and the country will be in a worse mess than it is now.

Can someone explain why those in receipt of the pensions will continue to avoid any pain?

Besides this, there is talk that the leave may only save 400m which leaves a 900m gap.

I've no problem taking the hit in my salary - we as a country need to cut back on what we're spending. I don't like it, but that's the way it has to be.

My point is, why is all the emphasis on the earners - what about the net consumers of public services - why shouldn't there be at least a notional contribution extracted from them, especially in the area of social welfare.

Pensions and pensioners are a more complicated issue, but the first thing that should happen there in the public sector is that the link between pensions and salary should be broken. Secondly (again the in the public sector) the non-contributory nature of the pension system has to end and the financing of it put on a much sounder footing. Finally, the country should bring in legislation requiring people to opt out of a pension (rather than the current opt in situation).

The problem with this though is it saves money in 40 years when we need to be saving money now.

On a separate issue, I think it would be wrong to assume that just because people in the public sector are compelled to take unpaid leave they are "....not having to work." On the contrary working will become essential. I know I'll be using the time productively.

the_syco

dvpower wrote: »

But, how would this proposal work?

It doesn't. Look at the amount of consultants where there is only one in the entire country. Had to wait for 6 months for one myself. If he had to take 14 days unpaid leave, there is no-one to cover for him, so the backlog would increase. For small 3 person teams, such as the telephonists, if one person were to be off, the otheres would have to do overtime. This means that whilst someone is doing sweet f**k all at home, someone is covering their shift by doing overtime. How this would save money, I do not know.

Dickerty

scary wrote: »

the idea is that you dont get paid for 14 days that you should, he's saying as far as i can see, is that the only practical way it would work in the education system is to take it from the 3 months that they dont work but get paid for it, they still work less than others and the kids dont suffer. I dont think he's singling out teachers to bear the brunt of it, just pointing out a practical way that it would work in that area.

Teachers are in a very good position with regard to summer salary. They have reduced overheads from travel, lunch or work-related costs, and if they have kids, probably save on those fees when they are at home. So I wouldn't be surprised it they felt a little more pain here then in the Health sector...

rebel.ranter

TGPS wrote: »

I earn a decent salary, yes - but I work hard for it and I worked even harder to get the qualifications (self-funded) that got me into a position to get the job in the first place. So I'd like to hear a rational explanation as to why more of my salary should be taken away.

I can give you a rational explanation, the people who run your company (the government) do not have the money to pay that salary anymore. It is unfortunate & I do not take any delight whatsoever in condoning a cut in anyone's salary but that is the simple truth.
I recently saw a report from a company in the private sector, it showed the number of employees for 2007 & 2008 as being the same but the the salary bill was 25% less in 2008. Unfortunately I think the salaries will drop further in 2009, there will also be job losses. Simply because the income of the company will drop again in 2009, this is something I am fairly sure of too.
I know people in this company who have also funded their education & continue to do so right now but this does not protect them from the cuts.

I'm not trying to have a go but just thought it was worth mentioning.

On the whole unpaid leave idea, I do not think it will work. As others have said if the workload can be managed in less hours then there is over-staffing in that area. That should be dealt with by reducing staff in that area be it by redundancy or redeployment to other areas.
If it cannot be managed in reduced hours then overtime is required or additional resoures will have to be hired. These additional resources will then have to be taken on at the same rates & conditions as those already there so the problem will be compounded further.

Dickerty

the_syco wrote: »

For small 3 person teams, such as the telephonists, if one person were to be off, the otheres would have to do overtime. This means that whilst someone is doing sweet f**k all at home, someone is covering their shift by doing overtime. How this would save money, I do not know.

Are you seriously telling me that such teams are so overworked that they MUST do overtime whenever someone is out sick or on holidays?

Do these staff take their lunch and tea breaks? I bet they do. I don't, because I have a lot to work to do.

I would love to look at the processes that are being engaged in parts of the Private Sector. Management in the PS would not traditionally be overly concerned with automation or process improvement, they didn't need to be. Now they do, I wonder if they know how...

TGPS

rebel.ranter wrote: »

I can give you a rational explanation, the people who run your company (the government) do not have the money to pay that salary anymore. It is unfortunate & I do not take any delight whatsoever in condoning a cut in anyone's salary but that is the simple truth.
I recently saw a report from a company in the private sector, it showed the number of employees for 2007 & 2008 as being the same but the the salary bill was 25% less in 2008. Unfortunately I think the salaries will drop further in 2009, there will also be job losses. Simply because the income of the company will drop again in 2009, this is something I am fairly sure of too.
I know people in this company who have also funded their education & continue to do so right now but this does not protect them from the cuts.

I'm not trying to have a go but just thought it was worth mentioning.

On the whole unpaid leave idea, I do not think it will work. As others have said if the workload can be managed in less hours then there is over-staffing in that area. That should be dealt with by reducing staff in that area be it by redundancy or redeployment to other areas.
If it cannot be managed in reduced hours then overtime is required or additional resoures will have to be hired. These additional resources will then have to be taken on at the same rates & conditions as those already there so the problem will be compounded further.

As I've said many times - I've no problem with the salary cut - as unpalatable as it is, it must be done.

My issue is why is there a much more limited discussion on the consumers than the providers of public services? In economic terms the focus is on a supply side solution to what is partially a demand side problem.

In my own organisation, I reckon we'll manage through it, but it will mean curtailing services. We won't be paying overtime - we haven't done so for over a year now and I can't see that changing. Which means altering the way we work. I expect there will be reduced opening hours for our public offices, more emphasis on engagement with the public through phones and the internet.

My main issue is some of the "enhanced" services we've developed - such as home visiting for some of our more vulnerable and less mobile users - it's time consuming (and therefore disproportionately costly) but makes their lives less stressful (not sure we've a metric for that!!). I think when it comes to keeping the more visible "shop front" open that will take priority over meeting a genuine need.

Jaysoose

So basically they take an extra 10-14 days off a year and get the same amount of work done?

Are they basically admitting that they are inefficient to the point that 10-14 days makes no difference in output?

Well done beardies you have outdone yourselves in trying to protect your grossly overpaid union jobs.

TGPS

Jaysoose wrote: »

So basically they take an extra 10-14 days off a year and get the same amount of work done?

Are they basically admitting that they are inefficient to the point that 10-14 days makes no difference in output?

Well done beardies you have outdone yourselves in trying to protect your grossly overpaid union jobs.

No, I think services will be degraded - less opening hours, longer waiting lists and times and cuts to services.

The other point worth mentioning is that the saving will not be as great as anticipated because even though salaries / wages will be cut, people will be due rebates of tax for the two weeks they don't receive pay for.

If the government really wanted to introduce a cut then they'd insist that say 25% of a person's annual leave entitlement should be taken on an unpaid basis - but as usual the gombeens we (both public and private sector) have voted into office have gone for the.....

amacachi

Jaysoose wrote: »

So basically they take an extra 10-14 days off a year and get the same amount of work done?

Are they basically admitting that they are inefficient to the point that 10-14 days makes no difference in output?

Well done beardies you have outdone yourselves in trying to protect your grossly overpaid union jobs.

That's exactly what I thought and my dad (who half-supports the strikes) said the exact same.
Looks like some of the unions are in-fighting already, looks like the usual crap of high-up union members wanting to be the biggest cheese in town is rearing its head again, with the usual consequences of nothing getting done.

What's the betting some unions will accept this then just strike for another day to allow overtime payments for when they're making up for the work they fell behind on? :pac:

Jaysoose

TGPS wrote: »

No, I think services will be degraded - less opening hours, longer waiting lists and times and cuts to services.

The other point worth mentioning is that the saving will not be as great as anticipated because even though salaries / wages will be cut, people will be due rebates of tax for the two weeks they don't receive pay for.

If the government really wanted to introduce a cut then they'd insist that say 25% of a person's annual leave entitlement should be taken on an unpaid basis - but as usual the gombeens we (both public and private sector) have voted into office have gone for the.....

Will anybody notice a difference?

dvpower

Dickerty wrote: »

Teachers are in a very good position with regard to summer salary. They have reduced overheads from travel, lunch or work-related costs, and if they have kids, probably save on those fees when they are at home. So I wouldn't be surprised it they felt a little more pain here then in the Health sector...

But if teachers end up with less pay for the same amount of work and other public servants end up with less pay for less work, then the teachers will, quite rightly, feel that this is inequitable.

The teaching unions are hardly gong to wear that. So we end up with strikes.

Other groups are going to face a similar problem. I can't imagine it being possible to have cuts in hours in frontline services without cuts in services.

I can see another Irish farcical solution to an Irish problem emerging where public servants are asked to work overtime to cover the gap left by their unpaid leave, thus earning more than they did in the first place.

Please tell me I'm wrong.

bbam

The whole thing is a shambles..
Seriously it is...
When these public sector workers take their unpaid time off...
1. Services will be effected wait lists will grow, when we complain the unions will tell us its our own fault and we get what we deserve
2. Other staff will br brought in on OT to cover and the PS salary bill may increrase
3. The only area it will be practicle to implement with no effect it education so teachers are the only real workers who will take a pay cut.
4 Nudge, nudge wink, wink.... Do we really think that the PS can be trusted to implement this ??
5. After a year or two it will be forgotten and all will be well again..
6. What has been acheived, will they take 14 more days unpaid at the next budget... I doubt it

That's it... Cowen and crew have completed the final sell out of the irish people, to go and eat cake with O'Hara and other fat cats.

FF are due to be kicked out at the next election and I thought they would stick to their guns on this last thing... bigger fool me

Politics in Ireland is dead and the Unions are feeding on its rotten corpse....

Even when Cowen and his cronies are out of government there is no one with any backbone to defend Joe Average....

Theboinkmaster

Jaysoose wrote: »

So basically they take an extra 10-14 days off a year and get the same amount of work done?

Are they basically admitting that they are inefficient to the point that 10-14 days makes no difference in output?

Well done beardies you have outdone yourselves in trying to protect your grossly overpaid union jobs.

Yes and if the government allows this I'm gone abroad - we'll be the laughing stock of Europe and nobody will take us seriously.

Our country WILL go under - this will not work

Government will show the financial markets and other countries that they have no spine and cannot control their workforce - that the unions are the ones really in control

I'm completely exasperated at the thought of this genuinely being considered by the government :mad:

dvpower

Will the Gardai get a new allowance to make up for the fact that they are losing pay and allowances by being on unpaid leave?:rolleyes:

TGPS

Jaysoose wrote: »

Will anybody notice a difference?

Not if you're healthy, productive and mobile - if you're not then you're screwed, but that's always been the way in this country.

Nobody is interested in health services, the Gardai or any of the social services until they go wrong then they're all for them.

Plenty of people think nurses are overpaid until they wake up in A&E with one leaning over them. Likewise teachers, until they spend some time in a class room or Guards until you spend some time around a city centre Garda Station on Saturday night....

....as with most public services, they're not really missed until they're gone.

westtip

When will the government realise they simply don't have to talk to the bearded gentlemen just tell them we ain't go the the money to pay you therefore you will be paid less

And BTW they need to make massive cuts at the top end of civil service pay:

Paid leave should be no more than 5 weeks

Sick pay for a maximum of 5 days per annum - then social welfare

there should be a sliding scale of the cuts in public sector pay, the cut in pay will only be on that portion of the salary:

0 - 20,000 no cuts

next 20k - 50k cut 2% (ie someone on 40K will lose 2% of 20K)

50k - 100k cut 5% (ie someone on 70 k will lose 2% of 30K from the lower band cut and 5% of 20K and so on.)

100k - 150 k cut 10%

150k - 200k 25%

+200K all pay over 200k to be cut by 90%

When are the bearded gentlemen going to realise that their employers - ie the government simply don't have the money to pay them. The game is up the party is over.

Simple as. Wake up. I see FF are going to give in again ....

diverdriver

When are the bearded gentlemen going to realise that their employers - ie the government simply don't have the money to pay them. The game is up the party is over.

Unpaid leave is a pay cut, they bearded grey men know this and know they had no alternative. They are also stupid enough to believe their members who they led pied piper like into marches and strikes will buy into this lie.

I'd love to see how they sell this as a 'victory'.

It's an Irish lash up, once again.

FlutterinBantam

Unpaid leave!!

Absolute debacle and in my opinion unworkable.


Cowen, if he runs with this can of piss is fudging the problem.

Disasterville, more man hours will be accrued 'policing' the thing thn

will be saved.

Some tell me the Govt. are not that stupid.

Pay cuts in basic pay across the board,graduated reflective of earnings is the only answer.

Anything else is a cop out.