Are some Private Sector workers using their colleagues misfortune....

Tilt Gone

Tbh I'm one of the lucky private sector workers who hasn't been hit. i'm on 40+ grand a year, Get a double weeks pay at Christmas, a bonus in Feb depending on performance and a 3% increase at least every year, with no pay cuts in sight. I feel sorry for all the PS workers and the private equally but I wont apologise for my situation. It just happens that the area I'm in makes ridiculous amounts of money so we haven't been hit yet ,thank God. My other half on the other hand has got screwed in her job having all ready taken a 5% pay cut along with losing all over time, bonuses and wage increases. Oh plus her shift has been cut from 4 cycle to 3 cycle.

Count Dooku

Liam79 wrote: »

You realise of course that PS workers pay the exact same Tax/PRSI as the bullet proof bastions of society that is the Private Sector, dont you?

They don’t pay any tax, gross PS salaries are artificially increased to make payroll procedures compatible with private sector, but net income of public sector fully paid by private sector
Another reason to give few grand extra and take it back immediately without passing into hands of PS workers is to have bigger tax revenue
Foreign investors always look on tax revenue, this is why government has to cheat as they do with GDP, inflated by MNC’s

danman

I can only give my own example to the OP.
I took a 25% paycut, but added 20 extra hours to my working week. Giving me a total paycut of 43% per hour.

I don't Know anyone in the private sector that hasn't been effected. Maybe it's just my friends mostly work in the construction and IT sectors. But to say that the majotity of Private workers haven't been hit is untrue in my experience.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

sofia11

I think this private v public is wicked. Can't people see that if people have less money esp lower paid public sector workers it will affect private business, people will have less to spend in the run up to christmas. Won't it have a knock on effect, more unemployment next year, it won't improve life/job security for private sector employees, IMO. I'm unemployed so i've nothing to splash out on for christmas.

danman

amacachi wrote: »

Sorry what?

Have a look at your counterpart in NI. They do the same job, do they get the same pay?

Smcgie

amacachi wrote: »

I was answering the question in the thread title.

Sorry what?

For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.

LEONKING

The public sector employer is not in a healthy state, so cuts, while unpalitable for some, are essential to restore the balance in income and expenditure. The private sector is self policing, so it shouldnt enter the argument.[/quote]

totally agree with this. Why the hell on primetime last night were they trying to do a comparison between a public sector worker and a private worker to show the difference to each that the budget has made?? The government cannot cut the wages of the private sector, they can only effect the Priv Sector by making tax changes which they chose not to do.

When will the public sector workers start to see the government as an employer(company) when it comes to paying wages. Private companies that are as in as bad a financial state as our government are have cut jobs, reduced wages, put in pay freezes etc etc. So the government is no different - if they don't have the money then they can't pay you.

manafana

my 50p

I took a 5% pay cut on a 24K salary more than fair, now i have been promoted, but whereas before i would seen a 3-5K bump up im still on same wage thats where my cut is, and we are still making money, so i hate been told by public sector workers that these cuts our unfair. Other option is keep your big pay jobs, and in few months you wont be paid at all, making 25K+ is better than sitting on ones bum at home.
The welfare situation is for another day, that wasnt done across the board, reducing rates are badly needed so recently unemployed get a fair payment.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Count Dooku

sofia11 wrote: »

I think this private v public is wicked. Can't people see that if people have less money esp lower paid public sector workers it will affect private business, people will have less to spend in the run up to christmas. Won't it have a knock on effect, more unemployment next year, it won't improve life/job security for private sector employees, IMO. I'm unemployed so i've nothing to splash out on for christmas.

If government will increase taxes on private sector to keep incomes of public sector, it will not bring any extra money into economy. Some parts of private sector will have to die.
Incomes of private sector already down by 12 Bn,
Unemployment is high, but mostly due construction industry.
Extra 6 Bn from public servants will increase unemployment by 30,000, but will balance finances.

LEONKING

Edited to say that at the end of the day a company can only pay out as much as it brings in (unless it borrows). If my boss couldn't afford to pay me then a P45 would be on my desk in the morning. Simple as that - if the money isn't there, the job isn't there.[/quote]

RUBYRED - thats the nail on the head - totally to the point

Private sector : No Money = No Jobs

Publin Sector : No Money = borrow to keep the public workers from striking and holding the country to ransom = unsustainble

amacachi

danman wrote: »

Have a look at your counterpart in NI. They do the same job, do they get the same pay?

I'm not in the civil service. My point was that while there's no doubt some in the private sector are exaggerating their misfortune plenty in the civil service are as well. I know one person claiming they were down 10%. Once his increment was taken into account his take home pay was down between 1 and 2%. The 5% pay cut he's getting will be almost completely covered when he receives his annual increment in April. So over two years he'll be down about 2%, not 15% as his union official claims and is trying to persuade him.

Smcgie

Does anyone else think that before an industrial ballet of a large scale in the public sector is confirmed that the general public should have a say so... If they were the public sector would realise that no one has any sympathy for them and if they go on strike we still won't have any sympathy for the.

LEONKING

Smcgie wrote: »

Does anyone else think that before an industrial ballet of a large scale in the public sector is confirmed that the general public should have a say so... If they were the public sector would realise that no one has any sympathy for them and if they go on strike we still won't have any sympathy for the.

totally agree - don't have and won't have sympathy for them in this situation.

David Begg you muppet !!

Dublin_Gunner

While I think the way the cuts have been implemented is unfair, I most certainly think its necessary.

I do believe that the <30K earners in the Public Sector should have been left well alone, and the high earners should have been hit a little harder, even by 0.5-1% to make up for the shortfall.

However, merely cutting wages in the public sector will NOT alleviate the problem in the first place.

There are MANY public sector jobs that really are totally unnecessary. I have cited the details of this on another thread, so not getting into it now.

The Public Sector needs a significant overhaul, jobs need to be made redundant, and the Civil Service streamlined. Why have 4 people doing a job when 1 will suffice?

I really don't understand how the Government has gotten away for so long paying employees for doing little or no work. And before someone jumps down my throat, I do know that this is happening, and this is in no way a critical comment on ALL Public Sector workers - many of which to a great job.

Its time for a complete overhaul, and reform of the public sector 'machine'. If the Government actually ran its 'company' as a viable 'business' in the bloody first place, we would not be in this mess.

How about instead of giving out about the Private Sector, they actually start to treat their own as Private Sector workers. Na make redundant jobs, bloody well redundant. The saving would be significant.

To the OP - for many many years (and it still holds fairly true), the only people who were/are 'bullet proof' are Public Sector workers.

amacachi

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

While I think the way the cuts have been implemented is unfair, I most certainly think its necessary.

I do believe that the <30K earners in the Public Sector should have been left well alone, and the high earners should have been hit a little harder, even by 0.5-1% to make up for the shortfall.

Haven't the figures to hand but there are a lot in the civil sector on less than 30k, leaving them alone would've left a big hole in the plan.

dearg lady

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

In fairness, as far as I remember(correct me if I'm wrong) benchmarking carried out previously compared individual positions with a similiar position in the private sector. What's been advocated often on here is blanket cuts, which is quite unfair. There are sections within public sector I would consider underpaid, and others overpaid.

Boskowski

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

While I think the way the cuts have been implemented is unfair, I most certainly think its necessary.

I do believe that the <30K earners in the Public Sector should have been left well alone, and the high earners should have been hit a little harder, even by 0.5-1% to make up for the shortfall.

I agree and I blame the public sector unions.

They continued to live in cloud-cuckoo-land and were genuinely expecting to pull some sort of stunt and avoid cuts altogether. When that didn't materialize they decided to throw a tantrum when instead they should have ensured that the inevitable cuts were just and fair.

They're useless and if I were a public sector worker in the lower wage bands I'd be rightly pissed off with them.

Count Dooku

Liam79 wrote: »

Are there some/many employed members of the private sector using the current situation to their advantage.

Are there some/many private sector workers on boards who have not taken any cut in their hours/pay but are playing the poor mouth just cos they are in the private sector so they know they are practically bullet proof from criticism right now?

Are their some/many well paid private sector workers in here preaching to lower paid PS workers about cuts, when they have not taken any themselves, certainly not to the extent of the PS, safe in the knowledge that if the PS worker defends themselves...the Private sector worker can reply with blood curdling cries of "job cuts....dole queues..40% drop in wages" when in fact, in many of these cases, none of it is relevant to them?

Is there?

30% of private sector was not affected – true
Tell to government/unions that 30% of public sector should not affected as well
For example propose 30% cuts above 40K, it will leave 30% of low income PS workers untouched

Dublin_Gunner

amacachi wrote: »

Haven't the figures to hand but there are a lot in the civil sector on less than 30k, leaving them alone would've left a big hole in the plan.

Precisely why I indicated in my post that it has been implemented poorly. They could have hit the higher earners a little harder to make up for the shortfall - and in a more long term way, cut the jobs that are redundant.

Merely taking one line out of my post without reading the rest gives a false sense of the point I was making, and taking it out of context.

amacachi

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

Precisely why I indicated in my post that it has been implemented poorly. They could have hit the higher earners a little harder to make up for the shortfall - and in a more long term way, cut the jobs that are redundant.

Merely taking one line out of my post without reading the rest gives a false sense of the point I was making, and taking it out of context.

Christ someone's defensive. I bloody well agree but it would've been more than a percent more of a cut for the rest to cover the lower-paid. Plus there has to be some financial incentive for well-qualified, experienced people to work in the civil service. It's near enough fair but it would've been nearly impossible to leave everyone under 30k alone.

Maguined

I'm a private sector employee and have not had any paycut, my employer is not earning as much as it used to so it has chosen to not touch anyones salary but instead make over 33% of its staff redundant. I have already been lucky enough to survive two waves of redundancies with the next wave coming in the new year and at least one more after that.

So wile some in the public sector might look at my uncut salary with anger my job is not secure for at least two more years which i would gladly trade for a 5% cut and job security.

murphaph

sofia11 wrote: »

I think this private v public is wicked. Can't people see that if people have less money esp lower paid public sector workers it will affect private business, people will have less to spend in the run up to christmas. Won't it have a knock on effect, more unemployment next year, it won't improve life/job security for private sector employees, IMO. I'm unemployed so i've nothing to splash out on for christmas.

It will also have the effect of further driving down the overall costs of doing business in Ireland. There is simply no other solution: NAMA may be the biggest crock of sh!t ever, as may be the recapitalisation of all the banks, but the fact is that the government take in 20bn a year less than they spend. This is just the first 4bn of that 20bn being clawed back.

The overall costs in the Republic should be broadly similar to Northern Ireland at least, we're not even there yet. Borrowing money from the ECB to pay (overpaid by European standards) public sector workers to go and spend it (hopefully not in NI!) in the shops is ludicrous. Why not just cut out the middleman, borrow the money from the ECB and hand it over to shopkeepers? Because it's a nonsense argument, that's why.

We can't tax or borrow our way out of the 20bn budget defecit. We overpay our public sector relative to all our European neighbours. The solution was obvious and it'll need more cuts next year I reckon. So long as we pay ourselves more than our competitors, we are in trouble!

P. Breathnach

Count Dooku wrote: »

They don’t pay any tax, gross PS salaries are artificially increased to make payroll procedures compatible with private sector, but net income of public sector fully paid by private sector
Another reason to give few grand extra and take it back immediately without passing into hands of PS workers is to have bigger tax revenue
Foreign investors always look on tax revenue, this is why government has to cheat as they do with GDP, inflated by MNC’s

Jaysus! So now the public service is running a big tax fraud conspiracy.

murphaph

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

However, merely cutting wages in the public sector will NOT alleviate the problem in the first place.

There are MANY public sector jobs that really are totally unnecessary. I have cited the details of this on another thread, so not getting into it now.

The Public Sector needs a significant overhaul, jobs need to be made redundant, and the Civil Service streamlined. Why have 4 people doing a job when 1 will suffice?

I really don't understand how the Government has gotten away for so long paying employees for doing little or no work. And before someone jumps down my throat, I do know that this is happening, and this is in no way a critical comment on ALL Public Sector workers - many of which to a great job.

Its time for a complete overhaul, and reform of the public sector 'machine'. If the Government actually ran its 'company' as a viable 'business' in the bloody first place, we would not be in this mess.

How about instead of giving out about the Private Sector, they actually start to treat their own as Private Sector workers. Na make redundant jobs, bloody well redundant. The saving would be significant.

To the OP - for many many years (and it still holds fairly true), the only people who were/are 'bullet proof' are Public Sector workers.

Spot on. The slash and burn approach was necessary from Lenihan (I think it could have been a bit harsher tbh) as we have no time to show our international creditors that we are serious about reform. They (the ECB/Germans) wanted to see these cuts and they will like what they see. Look at Greece to see the alternative.

We now need to begin a root and branch reform of the public sector. Benchmarking never delivered this, despite union lies. The public sector just grew under Ahern & Co. and needs to see the dead wood eliminated, the top performers rewarded and a general streamlining of resources. Eliminate 3 HR depts when one will do. Eliminate 4 IT departments when one centralised one will do. The list of opportunities for reform is probably endless. Don't bring consultants in (more waste) to tell us how to do it, just use common bloody sense and we'll be amazed at the outcome.

Dublin_Gunner

amacachi wrote: »

Christ someone's defensive. I bloody well agree but it would've been more than a percent more of a cut for the rest to cover the lower-paid. Plus there has to be some financial incentive for well-qualified, experienced people to work in the civil service. It's near enough fair but it would've been nearly impossible to leave everyone under 30k alone.

I wasn't being defensive, I just wanted to clarify in case someone else saw your comment and assumed that was all I was saying!

But back to my post, I was also implying that a lot of the jobs should be made redundant - which would inevitably be a lot of sub 30k earners (numerous clerical staff doing similar jobs when the work isn't there to justify them).

The fact is, and the point of my whole post is, making sweeping cuts is a very poor way of streamlining the Public Sector, and the pay role. It needs to go a LOT further than that.

Count Dooku

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Jaysus! So now the public service is running a big tax fraud conspiracy.

Of coarse the do
We need urgently to report that 113,000 public sector workers are paying only 0.9% of PRSI
113,000 public servants will escape PRSI hike

What will happen if private sector worker will not pay PRSI in full?
He will go to jail
It means that those public servants must arrest themselves and go to prision, where the will guard themselves

murphaph

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Jaysus! So now the public service is running a big tax fraud conspiracy.

You know well what he means. Income tax on public sector pay is no more than an exercise in accounting. It's the same money: money comes out of exchequer and goes straight back in.

Private sector taxes are the only taxes which count a jot. If you raised all your 'taxes' from the public sector, you'd be living in a totally bankrupt state!

Liam79

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

I wasn't being defensive, I just wanted to clarify in case someone else saw your comment and assumed that was all I was saying!

But back to my post, I was also implying that a lot of the jobs should be made redundant - which would inevitably be a lot of sub 30k earners (numerous clerical staff doing similar jobs when the work isn't there to justify them).

The fact is, and the point of my whole post is, making sweeping cuts is a very poor way of streamlining the Public Sector, and the pay role. It needs to go a LOT further than that.

Mother of God :rolleyes: your solution to fixing the economy is to take people making barely 30k and sack them....thus increasing the Social Welfare lines by prob around 90,000 extra people, and subsequently pay them all the welfare and benefits they will then qualify for...

So you want to basically sack loads of low earners in the PS

Let them eat cake...........