Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Im off to do my shopping up North- P***ed off public servant

Options
2456789

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    PeakOutput
    Registered Users Posts: 7,639 ✭✭✭PeakOutput


    ulysses32 wrote: »
    Yes.

    wll then there is no point arguing with you as you are clearly delusional an completely ignorant of reality


  • Options
    #33
    Rb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,277 ✭✭✭✭Rb


    ulysses32 wrote: »
    Yes.
    417.gif


  • Options
    #34
    ulysses32
    Registered Users Posts: 147 ✭✭ulysses32


    stooge wrote: »

    Inequality? If you want equality with the private sector then chances are you will now be on jobseekers(reduced at that). If not then you would most likely suffer a 15-20% cut in wages.


    Not convinced of the private sector pay cut banter at all. of my wide circle of friends acquaintances and family( a relatively small survey base i agree) none have taken a paycut or heard of one in their respective companies! They are in all forms of industry including services sector, pharmaceuticals, food production, retail, etc. One has lost his job ( construction) but luckily he had saved enough from his exorbitant salary to set himself up in the UK.


  • Options
    #35
    ulysses32
    Registered Users Posts: 147 ✭✭ulysses32


    LookingFor wrote: »
    Indeed, and I just do not get it.



    Would you prefer they raised taxes for everyone so they could spare their own employees pay cuts?

    No. I would prefer they raised taxes and cut everybody's pay equally, public and private. those unemployed or outside the tax net would remain uneffected.


  • Options
    #36
    PeakOutput
    Registered Users Posts: 7,639 ✭✭✭PeakOutput


    ulysses32 wrote: »
    Not convinced of the private sector pay cut banter at all. of my wide circle of friends acquaintances and family( a relatively small survey base i agree) none have taken a paycut or heard of one in their respective companies! They are in all forms of industry including services sector, pharmaceuticals, food production, retail, etc. One has lost his job ( construction) but luckily he had saved enough from his exorbitant salary to set himself up in the UK.

    ask them how many of them have been given raises in the last two years?

    my fathers company (a very large insurer) has enforced pay freezes for the last 2 years and suspended all bonuses regardless of performance. this coupled wit the various levies and tax changes over the same period has resulted in my fathers take home pay being down 25% a year


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    PeakOutput
    Registered Users Posts: 7,639 ✭✭✭PeakOutput


    ulysses32 wrote: »
    No. I would prefer they raised taxes and cut everybody's pay equally, public and private. those unemployed or outside the tax net would remain uneffected.

    A) you cant tax your way out of recession

    B) we are already a high tax economy increasing taxes more results in even less world wide competitiveness


  • Options
    #38
    ei.sdraob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭ei.sdraob


    Why dont you go and get a job in the North as well?

    i hear they pay much better :D


  • Options
    #39
    LookingFor
    Registered Users Posts: 2,682 ✭✭✭LookingFor


    ulysses32 wrote: »
    No. I would prefer they raised taxes and cut everybody's pay equally, public and private. those unemployed or outside the tax net would remain uneffected.

    You are clearly ignorant of the way the world operates.

    The government does not employ everyone.

    They cannot cut people's pay outside of the PS (or arguably banks which have been nama-ised or whatever).

    Every company offers pay based on its own financial situation. If you are working for the government, your pay will be subject to the government's financial situation. Saying other people's pay should also be cut is like saying that Microsoft should cut the pay of Intel's employees because Microsoft's accounts are down the toilet. That just doesn't make any logical sense.

    Unless you think we should all go communist and the government should run everything. Hmm.

    The ONLY wany the government could have made the savings they wanted to make without cutting PS pay would have been to raise taxes elsewhere or cut SW more or whatever. I don't think it would be right of them to protect their own employees from the reality of their finances by hiking everyone's tax.


  • Options
    #40
    nkay1985
    Registered Users Posts: 6,975 ✭✭✭nkay1985


    ulysses32 wrote: »
    Yes.

    Then there is very little point in anyone trying to make you see sense.


    I'll give it a go nonetheless!
    ulysses32 wrote: »
    Not convinced of the private sector pay cut banter at all. of my wide circle of friends acquaintances and family( a relatively small survey base i agree) none have taken a paycut or heard of one in their respective companies! They are in all forms of industry including services sector, pharmaceuticals, food production, retail, etc. One has lost his job ( construction) but luckily he had saved enough from his exorbitant salary to set himself up in the UK.

    Yes, it is a small sample size. Far too small for it to be of any relevance. But, of course, it's far better for you to use this little survey you've done yourself than the ones carried out by the likes of ISME which show that the "private sector pay cut banter" is a reality, not just hearsay as PS workers and unions would like to believe.

    The company where I work has made around 400 people redundant in a year. I'm lucky that I've still got the job I have but my job now is actually a combination of what was two jobs 12 months ago. Every single person in the organisation is now expected to do a lot more work for the same amount of money. This is the reality of what working in the private sector is; you've either been made redundant, taken a pay cut or are doing more work for the same money.


  • Options
    #41
    Welease
    Registered Users Posts: 3,834 ✭✭✭Welease


    ulysses32 wrote: »
    No. I would prefer they raised taxes and cut everybody's pay equally, public and private. those unemployed or outside the tax net would remain uneffected.

    sure... if you agree to manage and fund the PS pension fund in the same manner as private companies do... equality works both ways


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    ulysses32
    Registered Users Posts: 147 ✭✭ulysses32


    A tax hike for everyone is a cut in take home pay for everyone. Thanks for the lesson in semantics


  • Options
    #43
    ulysses32
    Registered Users Posts: 147 ✭✭ulysses32


    Yes, sounds great as long as i had a choice over the management of my pension, which I don't!


  • Options
    #44
    Qs
    Registered Users Posts: 579 ✭✭✭Qs


    ulysses32 wrote: »
    Not convinced of the private sector pay cut banter at all. of my wide circle of friends acquaintances and family( a relatively small survey base i agree) none have taken a paycut or heard of one in their respective companies! They are in all forms of industry including services sector, pharmaceuticals, food production, retail, etc. One has lost his job ( construction) but luckily he had saved enough from his exorbitant salary to set himself up in the UK.

    So rather than believe facts you're choosing to use anecdotal evidence of your mates.

    Obviously you and your mates live in a very different spectrum of society than mine.


  • Options
    #45
    zootroid
    Registered Users Posts: 784 ✭✭✭zootroid


    ulysses32 wrote: »
    A tax hike for everyone is a cut in take home pay for everyone. Thanks for the lesson in semantics

    You would still be left with a situation where the public sector earn on average 26% more than the private sector then.


  • Options
    #46
    Welease
    Registered Users Posts: 3,834 ✭✭✭Welease


    ulysses32 wrote: »
    Yes, sounds great as long as i had a choice over the management of my pension, which I don't!

    So you would give up a defined benefit pension funded primarily by the government for a defined contribution pension primarily funded by yourself (which is worth a fraction of what you paid in due to the market crash)?


  • Options
    #47
    LookingFor
    Registered Users Posts: 2,682 ✭✭✭LookingFor


    ulysses32 wrote: »
    A tax hike for everyone is a cut in take home pay for everyone. Thanks for the lesson in semantics


    So basically you think everyone else should pay more so your 'company' doesn't have to cut pay?

    How is that fair again?

    I don't expect anyone outside of my company to shoulder my company's financial burdens.

    The government is in a situation where they COULD do that (i.e. via tax), but whether they should is an entirely different matter. Again, I think it would be wrong. Pay cuts and - gasp - lost jobs have been the norm across other companies with suffering financials, and they've no mechanism to shove that burden on to others. The government shouldn't abuse its power to do that.

    I mean I think it's really really crappy how the government is spreading this within the PS - I do not think people under 30k should have taken a cut. I sympathise with you. But only to the same extent I sympathise with any of my friends who've had cut hours or cut pay. It sucks, yes. But blame your employers handling of it. Don't go looking for everyone else to pay up more to wrap you in cotton wool.


  • Options
    #48
    Qs
    Registered Users Posts: 579 ✭✭✭Qs


    ulysses32 wrote: »
    A tax hike for everyone is a cut in take home pay for everyone. Thanks for the lesson in semantics

    And what about people who've already taken a pay cut or a reduced week because of the recession?

    What about all the people who did great work and their companies are doing well, why should they take a pay cut?

    The governments lost money, its staff need to take the cut.


  • Options
    #49
    bdoo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 574 ✭✭✭bdoo


    nkay1985 wrote: »
    I have a feeling this is going to be trotted out time and time again ove rhte next days and months.

    Can you honestly say that you feel, after all the facts and figures that have been released, that you weren't earning more than you should have been for the work you were doing while also having rock solid job security and an unbelievably good pension?

    This budget is finally introducing some equality, not inequality as you see it.

    To say that public servants were earning more than they 'should have been' is a bit rich. Dont forget that 40% of public servants earn less than €40,000 pa. Certainly the higher Public servants do earn significant amounts.

    Bear in mind also the fact that there is a far higher proportion of graduates in the Public Sector and in general in the private sector there is a difference between the pay of graduates and non gradutes.

    The cut of 5% on someone on 30,000 is 15,000 a year or €125 a month. Surely you cant argue that 30,000 is an incredible wage?

    Your claim that this budget delivers equality is clearly rubbish. How is equality demonstrated by taking 5% of a low earning public servant, 4.1% off someone not working etc while letting the high rollers in the private sector away with no effect? Surely company executives, bankers, solicitors etc can afford to make some contribution too?

    Public servants realise that there needs to be cuts but despite what you maintain, there is very little fairness in this budget. And as for leading by example Lenihan and co. have a long way to go. If i earned as much as Cowen has been 'cut' I'd be a happy poster.


  • Options
    #50
    seclachi
    Closed Accounts Posts: 510 ✭✭✭seclachi


    Charisma wrote: »
    Thats it for me. Ive been loyal and shopped in Ireland and tried to buy Irish products since this recession hit but now I give up. I am a low paid public servant who was hit by the income levy, then the pension levy and now a 5 % pay cut. I cant afford to shop here anymore. I can save the 5% the government are taking from me by shopping elsewhere and keep my family afloat (just) and thats exactly what Im going to do. I got nothing in the boom so now Im f***ed if Im paying anymore to bail the government and the bankers out.

    Firstly, I feel sorry for anybody getting a pay cut, it always sucks

    Secondly, if your driving up north for food I hope you live close to the border (which I doubt you do as you say later you`ll go up once a month). I severely doubt theres much to be saved once you have paid the 50 odd quid on fuel to get up there (and 5-6 hours of your own time, which is not worthless). How much can you actually buy once a month anyway, you still need to get your fresh food every couple of days.

    I reckon most of the Newry gang are just after hdtv`s and booze (which is ironic considering how hard up some of them think they are).


  • Options
    #51
    Qs
    Registered Users Posts: 579 ✭✭✭Qs


    bdoo wrote: »
    Surely company executives, bankers, solicitors etc can afford to make some contribution too?

    For all those in the public sector keep banging this drum tomorrow instead of attacking anyone else. This is where you will get sympathy. The high earners in the private sector should absolutely have been hit.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    LookingFor
    Registered Users Posts: 2,682 ✭✭✭LookingFor


    bdoo wrote: »
    Your claim that this budget delivers equality is clearly rubbish. How is equality demonstrated by taking 5% of a low earning public servant, 4.1% off someone not working etc while letting the high rollers in the private sector away with no effect? Surely company executives, bankers, solicitors etc can afford to make some contribution too?

    Le sigh.

    Those 'high rollers' have nothing to do with this. They do not depend on the government for a job. They are not on the government's pay roll.

    You need to stop thinking of the government as some big nanny looking over all of us and start thinking of them like a company, albeit a company with special powers to affect everyone's financial situation.

    Asking for private sector 'high rollers' and solicitors etc. to 'make the same contribution' is like asking an employee of Guinness to make the same 'contribution' when an employee of Spar has to take a pay cut or cut in hours.

    It simply makes no sense!

    Again, if you don't want to take these cuts, then go work for another company and become one of those 'private sector high rollers'.

    Stop complaining, start taking personal responsibility. It's never too late to change. If you think now that the decision to work for the government was a wrong one, then hand in your resignation and move on to greener pastures...if you can find them!


  • Options
    #53
    nkay1985
    Registered Users Posts: 6,975 ✭✭✭nkay1985


    bdoo wrote: »
    To say that public servants were earning more than they 'should have been' is a bit rich. Dont forget that 40% of public servants earn less than €40,000 pa. Certainly the higher Public servants do earn significant amounts.

    Bear in mind also the fact that there is a far higher proportion of graduates in the Public Sector and in general in the private sector there is a difference between the pay of graduates and non gradutes.

    The cut of 5% on someone on 30,000 is 15,000 a year or €125 a month. Surely you cant argue that 30,000 is an incredible wage?

    Your claim that this budget delivers equality is clearly rubbish. How is equality demonstrated by taking 5% of a low earning public servant, 4.1% off someone not working etc while letting the high rollers in the private sector away with no effect? Surely company executives, bankers, solicitors etc can afford to make some contribution too?

    Public servants realise that there needs to be cuts but despite what you maintain, there is very little fairness in this budget. And as for leading by example Lenihan and co. have a long way to go. If i earned as much as Cowen has been 'cut' I'd be a happy poster.


    I never said that 30,000 is an incredible wage or anything like that. My point is that reports comparing like-with-like positions in the Public and Private sectors showed that the Public sector wage is generally higher. On top of that, you then have the rock solid job security and a pension that a private sector worker could only dream of.


    But let's just say that before today's budget, publlic and private sector wages were identical. If I were offered the job security and pension that a public sector worker gets in exchange for the pay cuts that have been announced, I'd take the hand and all off the person offerring it. I'd much rather a lower wage now that's guaranteed for life than a higher wage now that could disappear in the morning. And even if my higher wage now managed to last until I retire, the difference would be made up in the pension anyway!


  • Options
    #54
    BlaasForRafa
    Registered Users Posts: 7,020 ✭✭✭BlaasForRafa


    ulysses32 wrote: »
    Yes, sounds great as long as i had a choice over the management of my pension, which I don't!

    You do have a choice.

    If you don't like whats happened to the public sector you can always resign and take your chances in the private sector.


  • Options
    #55
    glaston
    Closed Accounts Posts: 331 ✭✭glaston


    Charisma wrote: »
    Thats it for me. Ive been loyal and shopped in Ireland and tried to buy Irish products since this recession hit but now I give up. I am a low paid public servant who was hit by the income levy, then the pension levy and now a 5 % pay cut. I cant afford to shop here anymore. I can save the 5% the government are taking from me by shopping elsewhere and keep my family afloat (just) and thats exactly what Im going to do. I got nothing in the boom so now Im f***ed if Im paying anymore to bail the government and the bankers out.

    Why dont you get a public service job up there while you are at it, as you will be bulking up the Queens coffers she may be able to afford you the renumeration you feel you deserve.


  • Options
    #56
    PeakOutput
    Registered Users Posts: 7,639 ✭✭✭PeakOutput


    Qs wrote: »
    For all those in the public sector keep banging this drum tomorrow instead of attacking anyone else. This is where you will get sympathy. The high earners in the private sector should absolutely have been hit.

    respond to the point that these people are the exact ones that pay more than 2/3rds of the countries tax already. please respond to it just once if your responce makes any logical sense i will never mention this statistic again


  • Options
    #57
    PopeBuckfastXVI
    Registered Users Posts: 5,155 ✭✭✭PopeBuckfastXVI


    ulysses32 wrote: »
    A tax hike for everyone is a cut in take home pay for everyone. Thanks for the lesson in semantics

    How much extra public service will I get for this increase in my contribution, after all if I am paying more surely I should get a better service?

    For instance will you work longer hours, i.e. a reduced hourly rate if I agree to pay you more of my income?


  • Options
    #58
    Ashanti
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17 ✭Ashanti


    stainluss wrote: »
    Cost of living has gone down by more than 5%...
    There is no negative effect on your real income compred to last year.

    As for going up north, go ahead, it not illegal:D

    Charisma I'm with you. I'll be heading up north too. losing several thousand on my middle income pay and having very little benefit from the tiger which benefitted the big business, bankers and construction people.

    If my income has not been affected compared to last year, then neither has anyone else's. The bottom line is that those who earned the most have got away with barely a scratch. Kick the old PS again. sure we're a sitting target. We can't say we won't pay our taxes, unlike the business sector who threatened that last week. Well the business sector will feel the brunt of the PS cut when we spend less in the local economy.


  • Options
    #59
    PopeBuckfastXVI
    Registered Users Posts: 5,155 ✭✭✭PopeBuckfastXVI


    Ashanti wrote: »
    Well the business sector will feel the brunt of the PS cut when we spend less in the local economy.

    Yes I'm sure they'd much rather pay a huge increase in tax in the hope of getting a fraction of it back in the form of your spendings...


  • Options
    #60
    nkay1985
    Registered Users Posts: 6,975 ✭✭✭nkay1985


    Ashanti wrote: »
    Charisma I'm with you. I'll be heading up north too. losing several thousand on my middle income pay and having very little benefit from the tiger.

    I'm sorry but I just can't let comments like that go.

    Read this thread and then try to say that sentence again.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    Ashanti
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17 ✭Ashanti


    BlaasForRafa wrote: »
    You do have a choice.

    If you don't like whats happened to the public sector you can always resign and take your chances in the private sector.

    That is such a disingenuous remark. there are no jobs anywhere. I work in the PS on a contract basis. As do many in the PS so a lot of us will be joining the dole queue once the contracts finish because there's a recruitment ban and contracts are not being renewed. More on the dole. Now there's a great solution to the recession.


Advertisement