A call to all Lower Paid PS Workers

frman

Long Onion wrote: »

What we are trying to resolve here - as a nation - is how much would such a benefit cost.

I think that the issue is rather how much can the Government afford ?

ardmacha

My own opinion is that if the option of job security was open for those in the non secure section to purchase out of their pay, they would do so in large numbers

Well they might, but when times were good you don't need this and when times turn bad you couldn't buy it. Many people borrowed to the hilt and in general behaved in a risk taking way, suggesting that security wasn't valuable to them.

nice1franko

Liam79 wrote: »

They could care less about ...

couldn't care less.

gazzer

douglashyde wrote: »

I can't see what the Public Sector are moaning about this time.

Now the Public service don't have to work for yet another 12 days, in addition to all the other days they don't work.

What are 'the other days they dont work'? Or are you referring to annual leave which is a legal entitlement?

ei.sdraob

haha yee got screwed by the union leaders who earn 6 figures

Liam79

ei.sdraob wrote: »

haha yee got screwed by the union leaders who earn 6 figures

Disgraceful Stuff :mad:

Reported

tunney

Liam79 wrote: »

Disgraceful Stuff :mad:

Reported

God you're whingy
I mean god thats a whingy post.

ryaner77

To all public service workers out there. Fair play to you for standing up against further cuts to your income.

I do think you are being treated really unfairly by your employer.

Stand together and stand strong. Do not back down to this bully of a Government.

If there have to be cuts (which there does) it should be across the board, private and public sector.

Why should it just be you who foots the bill for this governments failures ?

You have my sympathies and my full support.

tunney

ryaner77 wrote: »

To all public service workers out there. Fair play to you for standing up against further cuts to your income.

I do think you are being treated really unfairly by your employer.

Stand together and stand strong. Do not back down to this bully of a Government.

If there have to be cuts (which there does) it should be across the board, private and public sector.

Why should it just be you who foots the bill for this governments failures ?

You have my sympathies and my full support.

So you are proposing another round of benchmarking?
Good call.

frman

This is the best result for the Country as a whole.

Count Dooku

Right wing FG proposal was more useful for low paid PS workers, then proposed by “left” union leaders, who carres only about fat cats in public sector

Income % Reduction % Reduction
(After Tax) (Before Tax)

€30,000 0% 0%
€40,000 0.7% 1.3%
€50,000 1.6% 3.0%
€60,000 2.2% 4.2%
€70,000 2.6% 5.0%
€80,000 2.8% 5.6%
€90,000 3.0% 6.1%
€100,000 3.2% 6.5%
€150,000 5.4% 11.0%
€220,000 6.5% 13.9%

http://www.finegael.org/news/a/1776/article/

ryaner77

tunney wrote: »

So you are proposing another round of benchmarking?
Good call.

What your solution then ?

marco_polo

ryaner77 wrote: »

To all public service workers out there. Fair play to you for standing up against further cuts to your income.

I do think you are being treated really unfairly by your employer.

Stand together and stand strong. Do not back down to this bully of a Government.

If there have to be cuts (which there does) it should be across the board, private and public sector.

Why should it just be you who foots the bill for this governments failures ?

You have my sympathies and my full support.

<--- Cuba (3000 km).
Vietnam (9,000 km)---->

ei.sdraob

Liam79 wrote: »

Disgraceful Stuff :mad:

Reported

reported for what? speaking the truth??

yee got what yee deserve for being so naive
the lower paid PS workers got screwed by the unions and your higher paid peers

congrats :cool: you only have yourself to blame, a straight cut is the worst possible outcome

marco_polo wrote: »

<--- Cuba (3000 km).
Vietnam (9,000 km)---->

more like North Korea the way things are going, i think Vietnam like China have fully embraced capitalism as an economic policy

gerry28

I don't understand what this is all about really.... if its true that the country is borrowing 500million a week then 1.3billion savings represents less than 3 weeks worth.

Is all this public vs private for 3 weeks worth of savings.

Now, as a member of Impact i am raging at Cowan, Lenihan and the drunk driving loving back benchers - what was this talks charade all for!!

I hope we do not go on strike next, rigid work to rule is the only option.

I hope this government falls now. Bring on a FG and Labour government. I would accept their efforts to fix the country. Not support these shower of B's in their pathetic attempt to fix what they have destroyed.

ei.sdraob

gerry28 wrote: »

I don't understand what this is all about really.... if its true that the country is borrowing 500million a week then 1.3billion savings represents less than 3 weeks worth.

Is all this public vs private for 3 weeks worth of savings.

Now, as a member of Impact i am raging at Cowan, Lenihan and the drunk driving loving back benchers - what was this talks charade all for!!

I hope we do not go on strike next, rigid work to rule is the only option.

I hope this government falls now. Bring on a FG and Labour government. I would accept their efforts to fix the country. Not support these shower of B's in their pathetic attempt to fix what they have destroyed.

you dont realize that we are gonna be paying more than 1.3billion in interest on existing debt alone


the more you borrow the more you have to give back + interest, and ireland is not exactly a low risk country hence a higher interest

gazzer

tunney wrote: »

So you are proposing another round of benchmarking?
Good call.

Maybe there should be another round of benchmarking. I was looking at some circulars in the Dept Of Finance website and for the majority of Civil Servents (EO and below) the TOTAL increase in Benchmarking was 10% and that was paid out over 3 years. Not quite the ATM that a lot of people mentioned. Already 7.5% has been taken in the levy and it looks like another 7% is going to go in next weeks budget.Thats a 14.5% reduction in less than a year against a 10% increase over 3 years. At that stage the decrease in pay is more than the increase given in benchmarking phase 1.

Just for the record, I am quiet willing to pay my share in helping the economy and I think that the union leaders for the most part have shown themselves for the charlatans they are this week but I would like to plead with some of the posters here who seem to think that Civil and Public servents are the children of satan that we are all human and we all have to live in this country. We are paying our share. Ok we get a 50% pension when we retire but that is when we retire. Not now, Its something that will happen years down the line for the majority of people here. Who is to say that there will be a pension for us when we get to retire. The government will probably squander the money and there will be nothing for us.

Similarly people with a private pension whose value has shot down. Who is to say that it wont go back up in value by the time you retire? We just dont know so I think all this arguing between ourselves is really shooting ourselves in the foot.

implausible

Long Onion wrote: »

This PS abbreviation is unhelpful private and public are both PS. May I recommend Secure sector and Non secure sector. This way we can see that, at the very least there is a distinction between sectors of employment. Is security of tenure a benefit that should be paid for? I think that this is one of the main issues that the division has arisen and is being largely skirted.

Seriously, how many times does it have to be posted before people believe it- all public sector workers ARE NOT in secure or permanent employment. This myth that all teachers, nurses, library assistants etc walk straight into permanent employment is so prevalent that people believe it is true:rolleyes:

ntlbell

deemark wrote: »

Seriously, how many times does it have to be posted before people believe it- all public sector workers ARE NOT in secure or permanent employment. This myth that all teachers, nurses, library assistants etc walk straight into permanent employment is so prevalent that people believe it is true:rolleyes:

can you give us the figures % of ps workers that are in full time permanent to those on contracts then?

ei.sdraob

ntlbell wrote: »

can you give us the figures % of ps workers that are in full time permanent to those on contracts then?

there was post on this before ~18% are not on permanent contracts

the rest are....


out of all the people who became unemployed in last year, how many came from PS?

baaaa

gerry28 wrote: »

What do you mean refusung to help - i'm on 28K and already had the pension levy taken out of my wages along with the income levy.

What have you given???

I like many others have nothing left to give.Lost my job last jan,the bank has started threatening repossession of my house as I can't pay the mortgage.
Did any secure sector(public sector)worker hear what they said on the news?-"the unions suggestions would not save the required amount of money"-does any public sector worker understand this simple concept?
Or are ye just going to ignore it and trot out the usual crap-"but we suffered a cut already(whiney voice)"

rainbowtrout

ntlbell wrote: »

can you give us the figures % of ps workers that are in full time permanent to those on contracts then?

well to give one small example of what deemark is on about, i work in a school with a staff of 35, 11 are part-time (on yearly contracts), 24 are permanent. Of the permanent staff about 11 of them are 55+ (close to retirement/eligible to retire). When they go, they will be replaced by part time staff.

gerry28

baaaa wrote: »

I like many others have nothing left to give.Lost my job last jan,the bank has started threatening repossession of my house as I can't pay the mortgage.
Did any secure sector(public sector)worker hear what they said on the news?-"the unions suggestions would not save the required amount of money"-does any public sector worker understand this simple concept?
Or are ye just going to ignore it and trot out the usual crap-"but we suffered a cut already(whiney voice)"

No, but the maths aren't adding up. What does the 1.3 billion represent in the grand scheme of things.... 3 weeks worth of borrowings.

They had the chance of real reform and for the sake of only about 1 weeks worth of borrowings threw it all away.

baaaa

gerry28 wrote: »

No, but the maths aren't adding up. What does the 1.3 billion represent in the grand scheme of things.... 3 weeks worth of borrowings.

They had the chance of real reform and for the sake of only about 1 weeks worth of borrowings threw it all away.

Make sense please

Drumpot

gerry28 wrote: »

No, but the maths aren't adding up. What does the 1.3 billion represent in the grand scheme of things.... 3 weeks worth of borrowings.

They had the chance of real reform and for the sake of only about 1 weeks worth of borrowings threw it all away.

I noticed you sidestepped the posters mentioning of not having a job ! !

Do you think that poster should understand why public servants shouldnt have to take a paycut or should understand why Public service unions complain that they want "shared pain" ?

With over 450,000 people like that poster (or the hundreds of thousands worried about losing their jobs, on shortime or reduced wages), do you think the public service unions ever think that its their attitude to what constitutes "sharing pain", as opposed to the government trying to start a public v private, that is the reason people resent certain public service assumptions and feelings of entitlement ?

For a country in our state, you cant make savings of €500mil a week in one budget. If you believe that what you said is a credible issue in this particular debate, I'm afraid you are way off the pace in understanding what it takes to run a country . .

On a sidenote, the last vested interest group to say "in the grand scheme of things it doesn't really make much of a difference" when defending their salary , were . . . . . Our politicians . . . .

The department of finance have done their budget for the year. Its based on what taxes we have, what our expenses are and what loans we can get from abroad. Contrary to what information your unions have "educated" you on, the public service are'nt the only area where savings have to be made . . :eek:

In simple terms, lowering our public service bill (among the many other ways government is having to cut costs) has a knock on positive effect on our credit rating and how much that €4-500mil a week is costing.

This doesn't factor in the goodwill and positive message we are getting across internationally. . "Ireland is prepared to roll its socks up and work hard for less". .

And as far as reform goes, the public service union admitted that the public service can afford to take 12 more days off a year . . . It means we have too many public servants with not enough to do. There is no other way of interpreting it . . Why cant we reform aswell ? Or is it asking to much to have a public service thats paid for working hard ? (Im only referring to your unions, DONT ATTACK ME THE UNIONS SAID PUBLIC SERVANTS CAN TAKE 12 DAYS OFF WITHOUT AFFECTING SERVICES).

The unions have been shown up for the "football agents" that they are . . trying to get more for less . . . Luckily , whether by accident or not, they have sabotaged their own members claims that they are already "stretched" to capacity.

Oh and yes . . Im a public service basher simply because I say things how I see them . . I obviously hate the nurses because I am posting such a ridiculously objective comment . . I beat baby seals . . Baah Humbug . . Yadda yadda yadda . .:pac:

gerry28

Drumpot wrote: »

And as far as reform goes, the public service union admitted that the public service can afford to take 12 more days off a year . . . It means we have too many public servants with not enough to do. There is no other way of interpreting it . . Why cant we reform aswell ? Or is it asking to much to have a public service thats paid for working hard ? (Im only referring to your unions, DONT ATTACK ME THE UNIONS SAID PUBLIC SERVANTS CAN TAKE 12 DAYS OFF WITHOUT AFFECTING SERVICES).

The 12 days were to be taken over 6 years.

I support FG proposal to cut earnings over 30,000 by 5% - its fairer.

Baaa as for not making sense... read my post back a page, i explained what i meant there.


I don't buy this share the pain rubbish. What pain are the €150K + private sector earners taking.
If the government cut 7% of me in this budget on top of the income levy and pension levy... thats close to 15% of someone on 28K.

Drumpot

gerry28 wrote: »

The 12 days were to be taken over 6 years.

I support FG proposal to cut earnings over 30,000 by 5% - its fairer.

Baaa as for not making sense... read my post back a page, i explained what i meant there.


I don't buy this share the pain rubbish. What pain are the 150K + private sector earners taking.
If the government cut 7% of me in this budget on top of the income levy and pension levy... thats close to 15% of someone on 28K.

Ok . . . Since you keep sidestepping everything that shatters your misplaced feeling of injustice, you can put me straight on the following . .

1. What percentage of private workers does the 150k + brigade represent ?

2. Do you think unemployed people aren't sharing the pain ?

3. Do you think people worried about losing their jobs or who are on short time or wage cuts, haven't shared the pain ?

4. Did you factor in the tax relief the workers got on that 7% paycut ?

5. Do you believe having job security is worth a premium?

Lets avoid discussions on sick leave, overtime, perks and generous pension etc . .

irish_bob

gerry28 wrote: »

The 12 days were to be taken over 6 years.

I support FG proposal to cut earnings over 30,000 by 5% - its fairer.

Baaa as for not making sense... read my post back a page, i explained what i meant there.


I don't buy this share the pain rubbish. What pain are the 150K + private sector earners taking.
If the government cut 7% of me in this budget on top of the income levy and pension levy... thats close to 15% of someone on 28K.

what if those 150 thousand private sector workers earn less than you on average , as many have stated before , a sizeable number who work in the private sector are on minimum wage and for legal reasons , cannot have a paycut enforced on them , the fact that every public sector worker has taken a cut is relative , 1st of all , they earn on average 25% more , secondly , the public sector all work for the one employer , thier are thousands if employers in the private sector , its an altogether fallacious arguement to speak of how everyone in the public sector has taken a pay cut and everyone in the private sector hasnt , apples and organges

ps , the average 7% pension levy leaves workers out of pocket 4.5% after tax , deflation alone wipes out any losses

gerry28

Drumpot wrote: »

Ok . . . Since you keep sidestepping everything that shatters your misplaced feeling of injustice, you can put me straight on the following . .

1. What percentage of private workers does the 150k + brigade represent ?

2. Do you think unemployed people aren't sharing the pain ?

3. Do you think people worried about losing their jobs or who are on short time or wage cuts, haven't shared the pain ?

4. Did you factor in the tax relief the workers got on that 7% paycut ?

5. Do you believe having job security is worth a premium?


Lets avoid discussions on sick leave, overtime, perks and generous pension etc . .

1. I don't think you seriously expect me to have a ready answer for that.

2. I don't buy the share the pain argument... because some are getting it bad and some are laughing all the way to their sunny tax exile land.

3. As above.

4. That is why i said close to

5. No

Irishbob Just to clarify i was refering to people earning €150K

baaaa

gerry28 wrote: »

1. I don't think you seriously expect me to have a ready answer for that.

2. I don't buy the share the pain argument... because some are getting it bad and some are laughing all the way to their sunny tax exile land.

3. As above.

4. That is why i said close to

5. No

Irishbob Just to clarify i was refering to people earning €150K

Ahh the beauty of the public sector workers brain,I think this deserves a new thread but I'm not gonna bother.
I put it to everybody-We all see the arguments they trot out for not receiving cuts,they range from selfish to stupid.Is this because they don't know what's goin on,are they that f**king insulated from reality in their secure jobs that they simply don't know what's happening.I think so.
Like look at the first answer in this particular post,la la land-yes,if you tell us to make the savings off the 150k+ brigade instead of the public sector then it would be preferable if you could move beyond rhetoric when asked and actually clarify whether or not there are enough of them to do so....but you can't,you trot out the lamety "surely you don't expect me to have an answer for that"-yes we do my intelligent public sector poster friend,yes we do.