Have the Public Servants won the dispute?

BroomBurner

stevoman wrote: »

as far as im would thin it would be one day a month with 2 of those months you have to take two days unpaid or something to that effect but its all pie in the sky at the moment.

Thanks stevoman. I guess having to work a 4 day week wouldn't be too bad every now and then. I was envisioning having two/three weeks block time without any pay coming in.

GoldenTickets

Pringles^IRE wrote: »

Thats another place we can cut our spending "An affordable house" lmao, do you think your neighbours love paying a full mortgage! lmao

No abuse necessary for this post. It's totally "rediculous"!

stevoman

Pringles^IRE wrote: »

Thats another place we can cut our spending "An affordable house" lmao, do you think your neighbours love paying a full mortgage! lmao

i wouldnt think so, the entire estate is affordable. all 32 houses.

your just making yourself look more foolish tbh.

stevoman

BroomBurner wrote: »

Thanks stevoman. I guess having to work a 4 day week wouldn't be too bad every now and then. I was envisioning having two/three weeks block time without any pay coming in.

no its not so bad really. the money is being saved now thats the main thing so at least things can start looking on the up and the public service is doing its part on taking a hit. at the end of the day we are al nrmal people living normal lives so we are all feeling the squeeze. as long as the mortgage is paid, and the kid has clothes on her back and we are all happy dont think that theres much to complain about.

bobblepuzzle

GoldenTickets wrote: »

No abuse necessary for this post. It's totally "rediculous"!

You obviously can't spell mate if you think thats incorrect "rediculous" Want to make a bigger fool out of yourself, go ahead lmao

oscarBravo

People need to either get a lot more civil in a hurry, or refrain from posting.

omahaid

stevoman wrote: »

well tbh i make €460 a week after 10 years in the job. i have a mortgage, child an partner who isnt working and im not complaining. More pay cuts were coming and that was the reality. at least now its not a full on pay cut and when economic recovery does happen it will be easier to fight to get back to work on the days you had to take unpaid leave rather that fight for a pay rise so i think its a good situation in a bad time.

So seeing as you have no problem with a cut, why not suggest to your union and co-workers that you all work the unpaid leave for free? I think unpaid leave is the most unfair way of dealing with this problem, the public suffer, the higher paid PS workers barely notice. I assume you are a cleaner stevoman? After 6 years a cleaner in the PS earns €465 a week.

http://www.publicjobs.ie/publicjobs/downloads/Circular_18_2008_payscales_210808.pdf

Not trying to disparage the job, but I assumed the lowest paid PS workers were having a rough deal, but if you are one of them and you say that unpaid leave is a good deal then perhaps I shouldn't feel sorry for PS workers but indeed ask that more savings be found in the PS.

GoldenTickets

Pringles^IRE wrote: »

You obviously can't spell mate if you think thats incorrect "rediculous" Want to make a bigger fool out of yourself, go ahead lmao

Here, check it out for yourself at www.dictionary.com or in any good bookshop.

P.S. LOL

BroomBurner

Omahoid, why would anyone, private or public, work for free?

It's ok doing OT now and again, but full days? Not a chance.

oscarBravo

GoldenTickets wrote: »

Here, check it out for yourself at www.dictionary.com or in any good bookshop.

P.S. LOL

Banned for a week, and anyone else who thinks it's OK to drag the thread down to playground level will be also.

omahaid

BroomBurner wrote: »

Omahoid, why would anyone, private or public, work for free?

It's ok doing OT now and again, but full days? Not a chance.

It strikes me as selfish (and certainly not falling under the definition of public service) that a pay cut is completely out of the question but unpaid leave is fine. The effect on take home pay is the same, the difference is the level of service the public receive.

BroomBurner

omahaid wrote: »

It strikes me as selfish (and certainly not falling under the definition of public service) that a pay cut is completely out of the question but unpaid leave is fine. The effect on take home pay is the same, the difference is the level of service the public receive.

It may sound selfish, but it's a bargainging tool they're using. Basically, if you were in a position whereby you didn't want to give up your pay, you would fight for some sort of bargaining chip i.e. time off. That's the basis of it. Looked at in simple terms, the unions (if this goes ahead) will have managed to set a compromise with the government.

stevoman

omahaid wrote: »

So seeing as you have no problem with a cut, why not suggest to your union and co-workers that you all work the unpaid leave for free? I think unpaid leave is the most unfair way of dealing with this problem, the public suffer, the higher paid PS workers barely notice. I assume you are a cleaner stevoman? After 6 years a cleaner in the PS earns €465 a week.

http://www.publicjobs.ie/publicjobs/downloads/Circular_18_2008_payscales_210808.pdf

Not trying to disparage the job, but I assumed the lowest paid PS workers were having a rough deal, but if you are one of them and you say that unpaid leave is a good deal then perhaps I shouldn't feel sorry for PS workers but indeed ask that more savings be found in the PS.

well im a clerical officer and not a cleaner. i obviously must get a job as a cleaner if thats the pay rate. but tbh i wouldnt work for free.

omahaid

BroomBurner wrote: »

It may sound selfish, but it's a bargainging tool they're using. Basically, if you were in a position whereby you didn't want to give up your pay, you would fight for some sort of bargaining chip i.e. time off. That's the basis of it. Looked at in simple terms, the unions (if this goes ahead) will have managed to set a compromise with the government.

Yes, reduced services for the public and reduced pay for the PS but extra time off. Who really loses there?

The amount of posts where I read "teaching is a vocation" or other like that, this agreement says to me that instead of being in the PS for the public good, the PS workers are in it for themselves. Now, I've no problem with that, but lets be honest, is it a job or is it a vocation?

And I'm also amused by the posts that say "I joined the PS for job security" and the same posters saying "there hardly no job security in the PS anymore".

Truth be told, if the PS came out and told the truth - we're as greedy as the rest of you - I'd be more sympathetic.

omahaid

stevoman wrote: »

well im a clerical officer and not a cleaner. i obviously must get a job as a cleaner if thats the pay rate. but tbh i wouldnt work for free.

According to that pdf a clerical officer earns ~$750 a week after 6 years? They earn €460 at the lowest scale, but after 10 years...

stevoman

omahaid wrote: »

According to that pdf a clerical officer earns ~$750 a week after 6 years? They earn €460 at the lowest scale, but after 10 years...

trust me i know what comes into my bank account every week. wherever you are getting that figure from you can be sure that it is clearly wrong. i dont have access to my civil service pay scales at the moment but as soon as i get them i'l post them up for you.

omahaid

stevoman wrote: »

trust me i know what comes into my bank account every week. wherever you are getting that figure from you can be sure that it is clearly wrong. i dont have access to my civil service pay scales at the moment but as soon as i get them i'l post them up for you.

Ah wait a min, you earn €460 nett not gross, am I right?

stevoman

omahaid wrote: »

Ah wait a min, you earn €460 nett not gross, am I right?

yep thats my take home pay each week.

kippy

Theres no winners here.

However, What it may do, and I hope to **** it does if it comes in, is force the public service to be more efficient.
Benchmarking, in the majority hasnt done it. Perhaps less time and people to do possibly the same amount of work may lead to a review of what work is actually needed and needs to be done and smarter more efficient ways to do that work.

omahaid

stevoman wrote: »

yep thats my take home pay each week.

Ah, when I read

stevoman wrote: »

well tbh i make €460 a week after 10 years in the job.

I assumed "made"=="earned".

My original question was

omahaid wrote: »

Will the PS workers that earn tiny amounts of money agree? And what job do you do that pays less than its private sector equivalent? Any job I know pays more in the public service than the private service.

I don't consider you to be earning a tiny amount of money...

miju

ixoy wrote: »

It's interesting that increments hasn't come up much. Many PS/CS workers are still getting effective pay rises based on length of service and it hasn't been frozen so that it might take just two years to get back to your pre-levy wage (more so for the lower levels on the rung). Not quite the horrendous cuts some spun out.

increments are a VERY tricky one, you would have untold strikes / internal warfare going on and the whole public service would prob come crashing to a halt for a very considerable time. You would have the same grades doing the same work for different pay and while the people on the upper end of the scale would be fine about it someone on the bottom obviously wouldnt.

ixoy wrote: »

So it's potentially €1bn short? You might think this sounds fair but where is that 1bn going to come from? More borrowings? It seems the government have (once again) post poned the pain.

thats only going on some rough maths and also what i've been informed of today and just for clarification I never said it was fair it's far from it. Better to get whatever cuts that need to be done out of the way now as all this stalling just means bigger pain and deeper cuts for the PS in the very near future.

omahaid

kippy wrote: »

Theres no winners here.

However, What it may do, and I hope to **** it does if it comes in, is force the public service to be more efficient.
Benchmarking, in the majority hasnt done it. Perhaps less time and people to do possibly the same amount of work may lead to a review of what work is actually needed and needs to be done and smarter more efficient ways to do that work.

I agree, but I think some people lose more than others. I think the public lose more, the lowest paid PS workers lose. The people least able to take the hit take the same as people well able to take the hit. It's unfair.

**Big disclaimer** - I will retract all this if the agreement has different unpaid leave for differently paid workers. I think the lowest paid are probably the most valuable and we might not notice half the managers missing for a couple of weeks.

nurse23

not really sure how this unpaid leave thing is goin to work!! it may be feasible in more clerical areas etc. but just in my own area (work with children and young adults with physical and intellectual disabilities) that would be impossible to implement. although im only supposed to work 37.5hrs a week 75 hours a payperiod (get paid fornightly), it has often happened lin the last year i have worked 120hrs on average because absolutely no nurse cover!! with the embargo, maternity leave not been covered etc. Don't mind at all workin those hours as then im not out causin trouble:)even at that i have managers from other units ringin me to cover shifts all the time and as i dont see the embargo been lifted anytime soon i dont know who else is goin to be workin these shifts!! that said HR not too impressed with me so will have to go back to workin half normal hours soon before i get a major talkin too!! they think ill sue them for overworkin me, did ya ever hear such muck!! and yet they can't hire anyone new. your damned if ya do damned if ya dont!! but seriously in an area thats understaffed how are they goin to make people take leave without services been affected?? can't wait to see what they come up with, they must be miracle workers!!:)

miju

kippy wrote: »

Theres no winners here.

However, What it may do, and I hope to **** it does if it comes in, is force the public service to be more efficient.

I'll be perfectly honest with you here and say it out straight for all the lashing I'll get for it. I've ZERO intention of fitting in an extra days work to make up for the time I'm on unpaid leave and I'd dare say most of the other PS workers will be the same.

For example a teacher can't teach anymore than 9am-5pm , a Garda can't catch more criminals, a nurse / doc can't treat more people as much as they might like to. Civil Servants won't be able to process things any faster either, like it or not there are only so many hours in the working day and human nature being what it is means most PS workers will have ZERO incentive t do extra work.

Personally, I've enough to be doing during the day as it is. What more than likely will happen as I said earlier is that "backlogs" will begin to develop in processing all sorts of things in the various departments as public service levels begin to drop.

omahaid

miju wrote: »

I'll be perfectly honest with you here and say it out straight for all the lashing I'll get for it. I've ZERO intention of fitting in an extra days work to make up for the time I'm on unpaid leave and I'd dare say most of the other PS workers will be the same.

For example a teacher can't teach anymore than 9am-5pm , a Garda can't catch more criminals, a nurse / doc can't treat more people as much as they might like to. Civil Servants won't be able to process things any faster either, like it or not there are only so many hours in the working day and human nature being what it is means most PS workers will have ZERO incentive t do extra work.

Personally, I've enough to be doing during the day as it is. What more than likely will happen as I said earlier is that "backlogs" will begin to develop in processing all sorts of things in the various departments as public service levels begin to drop.

I agree with this and I would do the same. Which is why a pay cut would have been more in the public good.

Ronan|Raven

Another top class Fudge by the Government.

kippy

miju wrote: »

I'll be perfectly honest with you here and say it out straight for all the lashing I'll get for it. I've ZERO intention of fitting in an extra days work to make up for the time I'm on unpaid leave and I'd dare say most of the other PS workers will be the same.

For example a teacher can't teach anymore than 9am-5pm , a Garda can't catch more criminals, a nurse / doc can't treat more people as much as they might like to. Civil Servants won't be able to process things any faster either, like it or not there are only so many hours in the working day and human nature being what it is means most PS workers will have ZERO incentive t do extra work.

Personally, I've enough to be doing during the day as it is. What more than likely will happen as I said earlier is that "backlogs" will begin to develop in processing all sorts of things in the various departments as public service levels begin to drop.

Miju,
You've got completely the wrong attitude and outlook in my opinion and this is something that is endemic in the public service. I see it every day. Its the kind of attitude that give the public service a bad name.
1. Lots of those jobs you've mentioned have, as many in those jobs would tell you, become so paperwork centric that a lot of the job is paperwork. What this paperwork is and does, and why it is getting done via paper needs to be looked at. You'd probably find a lot of extra time in the day if you didnt have the same amount of paperwork to do or if you could do that paperwork via proper software system. The workers, sometimes through no fault of their own, end up being more beurocratic(sp) instead of serving the public.
2. "Processing", in the public sector is an extremely inefficient and time consuming task, sometimes intentionally so, so that it could create more jobs during the boom times.
3. There HAS to be some level of merging public services and review of building and overhead costs, again duplicity of work and roles across the public sector is all too common.
4. Public servants need to have an interest in their work, its efficiency and what exactly the goal of their job is. They need to make changes to it to make it more efficient.

To address those who say this time off isnt "fair" to those on low wages. Low wages is a relative term in the public sector. If you are on "low" wages there is generally a reason for it and you are doing relatively well compared to someone doing the same job in the private sector.

To ensure you arent on low wages for too long, I would suggest partaking in some part time training or experience in your unpaid time off. There will no doubt be opportunities in the sector when embargos are relaxed in a few years and those with the qualifications and the wherewithal to better themselves will do well.

Would people prefer a straight pay cut this time round (working the same hours for less money)? Id much rather the 2 weeks unpaid, I can do what I want in that time.


People also need to realise that this is only part 3 in a 5 or 6 part series of cuts/tax increases and I hope, at some stage, spending packages to stimulate private industry.

I may be a bit harsh here and I do realise the serious wrongs that have been done in this country by various people, but we can only do out own bit to try sort things out.

bobblepuzzle

kippy wrote: »

Miju,
You've got completely the wrong attitude and outlook in my opinion and this is something that is endemic in the public service. I see it every day. Its the kind of attitude that give the public service a bad name.
1. Lots of those jobs you've mentioned have, as many in those jobs would tell you, become so paperwork centric that a lot of the job is paperwork. What this paperwork is and does, and why it is getting done via paper needs to be looked at. You'd probably find a lot of extra time in the day if you didnt have the same amount of paperwork to do or if you could do that paperwork via proper software system. The workers, sometimes through no fault of their own, end up being more beurocratic(sp) instead of serving the public.
2. "Processing", in the public sector is an extremely inefficient and time consuming task, sometimes intentionally so, so that it could create more jobs during the boom times.
3. There HAS to be some level of merging public services and review of building and overhead costs, again duplicity of work and roles across the public sector is all too common.
4. Public servants need to have an interest in their work, its efficiency and what exactly the goal of their job is. They need to make changes to it to make it more efficient.

To address those who say this time off isnt "fair" to those on low wages. Low wages is a relative term in the public sector. If you are on "low" wages there is generally a reason for it and you are doing relatively well compared to someone doing the same job in the private sector.

To ensure you arent on low wages for too long, I would suggest partaking in some part time training or experience in your unpaid time off. There will no doubt be opportunities in the sector when embargos are relaxed in a few years and those with the qualifications and the wherewithal to better themselves will do well.

Would people prefer a straight pay cut this time round (working the same hours for less money)? Id much rather the 2 weeks unpaid, I can do what I want in that time.


People also need to realise that this is only part 3 in a 5 or 6 part series of cuts/tax increases and I hope, at some stage, spending packages to stimulate private industry.

I may be a bit harsh here and I do realise the serious wrongs that have been done in this country by various people, but we can only do out own bit to try sort things out.

Cut their pay! Efficiencies later, the pay bill is destroying the country economically, NO MORE TAXES... cut their pay, the economy gets back to normal

kippy

Pringles^IRE wrote: »

Cut their pay! Efficiencies later, the pay bill is destroying the country ecomically, NO MORE TAXES... cut their pay, the economy gets back to normal

I was responding to an earlier post.
BTW, there will be a pay cut, whether it is through unpaid leave or otherwise is the question for this year.

What would you define as normal by the way?
1995 levels?

bobblepuzzle

kippy wrote: »

I was responding to an earlier post.
BTW, there will be a pay cut, whether it is through unpaid leave or otherwise is the question for this year.

What would you define as normal by the way?
1995 levels?

I would like to see the government (as would pretty much all private sector workers) abolish gauranteed pensions, and make them get private pensions. The pay bill needs to be cut by 1.3 billion, if it takes 1995 levels, than so be it!