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

speedboatchase

Liam79 wrote: »

The last time one section of society was singled out and hung out to dry like this, Adolf Hitler was in power in Germany ........

AHHHHAHAHAHHHAHAHHHHHAAA

gandalf

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

The first thing they should do is increase their lower than european average income tax rate. That is the first thing

To pay an inefficient overstaffed workforce I think not. The first thing to do is lower the cost of the workforce and ensure that they are delivering value for money and ensuring those who are not doing their jobs properly are removed to allow the people who want to work hard and progress in the Public Service can do so based on merit.

Dublin_Gunner

Robbie - edit button is your friend

In fairness, you're sort of looking at it the wrong way. If the Public Sector are not to blame (I agree, its not the individuals fault) but cuts there HAVE to be made by the government, which will obviously effect the Public Service employee's, so therefore they are not really in a position to complain (as we've pretty much all had to make sacrifices at this stage).

I think thats what the other posters are getting at. This has been happening in the Private Sector for the past couple of years.

Increasing income tax at this stage, would only help to reduce the amount of income tax received in the long run - people will spend less, more redundancies made, more on dole, less income tax paid etc

That would be cutting of your hand to spite your arm.

The Public Sector costs a monstrous amount every year to run / maintain, and it NEEDS reform. it needs to be streamlined, and redundancies MUST be made. Making sweeping pay cuts is not going to work in the long run.

And another thing, no a Government is not technically a company - however it should most definitely be run like one.

And your analogy of Ireland Inc is a little awry. You should look at the Government as being the Directors of Ireland Inc, with the public sector as employee's / shareholders - and both resposible for poor decision making, not the 'consumer' / 'customer' / 'investor' of Ireland Inc - the Private Sector.

If my fictional company is DublinGunner Inc - and I need to cut costs, I'll look at expenditure, most likely my staffing levels (Civil Service), and adjust accordingly. I may increase my prices (taxes), or even reduce my investor/shareholder benefits (welfare).

However, I would most certainly not be employing people to perform redundant job roles. I would keep the staff I need, pay them accordingly, and increase my revenue to boot.

Like most company's, I would be doing what I can to ensure I'm giving a good return to my shareholders / investors.

helimachoptor

I'm sure there are, I know people who've gotten pay rises in the last year!

Me on the other hand have gotten a hefty cut and my job feels like its hanging by a slowly unwinding thread!

dvpower

Liam79 wrote: »

The last time one section of society was singled out and hung out to dry like this, Adolf Hitler was in power in Germany ........

This doesn't do much for the perception that Public Sector workers are living in their own comfortable little bubble unaware of whats going on in the wider economy.

gent9662

muboop1 wrote: »

It's best you ignore dclane. If you go through his post he repeatedly shows he has a chip on his shoulder and has no objective view, with vast majority of point he makes unfounded or little evidence.

They are interesting to read though!

I guess it's easier to put people against me rather than you arguing your case. As far as chip on my shoulder goes, this is a forum and everyone is entitled to have their say. I guess you can't flash the badge on the the forum can you?

peasant

So, after the "savage" budget, the "crippling cuts" and the general unfairness of it all I think it is time for a show of hands:

How many employees of the public sector are going to stick it to the governement, hand in their resignation tomorrow, tell their manger to stuff the cuts and get one of those (supposedly) well paid private sector jobs?

Hmm?



Anyone?




Thought not

Jumpy

How on earth does private sector wage come into this?

Do you want the private sector to take cuts as well?

Less private tax (corporate + income) = less money to the country finances = Less money for the Public Sector.

I dont know why this is so unclear to the rage blinded members of the Public Service.

RobbieTheRobber

gandalf wrote: »

To pay an inefficient overstaffed workforce I think not. The first thing to do is lower the cost of the workforce and ensure that they are delivering value for money and ensuring those who are not doing their jobs properly are removed to allow the people who want to work hard and progress in the Public Service can do so based on merit.

No to pay off our 20 billion a year loss as a nation:rolleyes:

Removing staff from the civil service this year or next year will not help our bottom line it is cheaper to retain staff than to pay redundancy and then the dole.


But wait wasn't everyone saying the twelve days unpaid leave wouldnt work becasue the public sector wouldn't have the staff to complete the work but if we have too many staff in the public sector how is that possible. im very

RobbieTheRobber

peasant wrote: »

So, after the "savage" budget, the "crippling cuts" and the general unfairness of it all I think it is time for a show of hands:

How many employees of the public sector are going to stick it to the governement, hand in their resignation tomorrow, tell their manger to stuff the cuts and get one of those (supposedly) well paid private sector jobs?

Hmm?

Anyone?

Thought not

Do you no think those who have talents skills and qualifications who work in the public service wont go when they can get better jobs?

Thats :D:D


You think its inefficent now, what happens when the talent leaves for these better paid jobs?

RobbieTheRobber

Jumpy wrote: »

How on earth does private sector wage come into this?

Do you want the private sector to take cuts as well?

Less private tax (corporate + income) = less money to the country finances = Less money for the Public Sector.

I dont know why this is so unclear to the rage blinded members of the Public Service.

I think they wanted the government to tax all its people rather than just focus on cuts to the public service.

they were not calling for your employer to cut your wages!

PeakOutput

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?

there probably are some but probably not many

its fairly irrelevant either way

RobbieTheRobber

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

And your analogy of Ireland Inc is a little awry. You should look at the Government as being the Directors of Ireland Inc, with the public sector as employee's / shareholders - and both resposible for poor decision making, not the 'consumer' / 'customer' / 'investor' of Ireland Inc - the Private Sector.

.

No the people of this nation own this nation they are not customers of this nation but owners. Just as the national debt is the debt of the nation not of a government.

Warfi

peasant wrote: »

So, after the "savage" budget, the "crippling cuts" and the general unfairness of it all I think it is time for a show of hands:

How many employees of the public sector are going to stick it to the governement, hand in their resignation tomorrow, tell their manger to stuff the cuts and get one of those (supposedly) well paid private sector jobs?

Hmm?



Anyone?




Thought not

Wow, that's the same as the number of people who complained about high paid, cushy public sector jobs quitting their private sector jobs to work in the public sector! Who'd a thunk it?:)

Coincidence?....probably

danman

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

But wait wasn't everyone saying the twelve days unpaid leave wouldnt work becasue the public sector wouldn't have the staff to complete the work but if we have too many staff in the public sector how is that possible. im very

As far as I remember, most people thought the "12 days of Christmas" idea was ridiculous for one reason.
It was only a temp measure. It was only for the year 2010, then return to normal for 2011.

A temp measure wasn't enough, we would be left with a bigger mess next year.

It was the Unions that told everyone that we could cut 5% of PS working time/wages for a year without effecting services.
Remember that, it was the Unions.

The unions also wanted a 5% (12 days) cut for everyone, including the workers under 30,000euro. EVERYONE.

If the unions thought a 5% cut was ok last week, what's their problem now?

Dublin_Gunner

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

No the people of this nation own this nation they are not customers of this nation but owners. Just as the national debt is the debt of the nation not of a government.

I never said that - its an analogy for how the whole system works though.

jake59

Jumpy wrote: »

How on earth does private sector wage come into this?

Do you want the private sector to take cuts as well?

Less private tax (corporate + income) = less money to the country finances = Less money for the Public Sector.

I dont know why this is so unclear to the rage blinded members of the Public Service.

You might want to include taxes we in the public sector pay in your calculation there Jumpy or are you under the illusion that we don't pay taxes (obviously more cos we're on such high wages)????
There are too many working in the public service.. reform and streamlining is in order.

Dublin_Gunner

jake59 wrote: »

You might want to include taxes we in the public sector pay in your calculation there Jumpy or are you under the illusion that we don't pay taxes (obviously more cos we're on such high wages)????
There are too many working in the public service.. reform and streamlining is in order.

Jake - your taxes pay for your salary, so for the sake of argument, your tax payments shouldn't be counted. After all, the Gov give it to you, and then take it straight back, so it cancels out.

Its not being unfair, its a fact. You may as well just say you earn your net after tax, and don't pay tax.

Warfi

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

Jake - your taxes pay for your salary, so for the sake of argument, your tax payments shouldn't be counted. After all, the Gov give it to you, and then take it straight back, so it cancels out.

Its not being unfair, its a fact. You may as well just say you earn your net after tax, and don't pay tax.

I've seen this argument before, and I don't get it. Following this line of thought, this means that public sector workers don't contribute anything. Correct?

gandalf

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

No to pay off our 20 billion a year loss as a nation:rolleyes:

Thats what has happened the Government is reducing its costs. No point taxing if people are being paid over the odds for their jobs now is there. I suspect next year (or next April) the tax thresholds will be lowered to pull in more of the low paid into the tax net as more lose their jobs. The indications are for a raft of Semi-State redundancies in the new year and a lot more private sector jobs gone as well.

Removing staff from the civil service this year or next year will not help our bottom line it is cheaper to retain staff than to pay redundancy and then the dole.

I disagree, remove the dead wood and change the work ethic so those who do want to make a career out of the PS can do so and get rewarded for having a good work ethic.

But wait wasn't everyone saying the twelve days unpaid leave wouldnt work becasue the public sector wouldn't have the staff to complete the work but if we have too many staff in the public sector how is that possible. im very

But the unions were trying to convince everyone that service levels would not be effected. Now what that is actually saying to the taxpayer is that there is an overcapacity in the civil service of 12 days per year. If we then look at the average sick leave figures which are double the average in the private sector we can see that there are more days that can be saved.

What your union leaders said last Friday by putting that proposal on the table is that the PS can work harder with less people. Give Jack and the lads a good pat on the back for that gaff

Dublin_Gunner

Warfi wrote: »

I've seen this argument before, and I don't get it. Following this line of thought, this means that public sector workers don't contribute anything. Correct?

Technically, yes. They are an expense (mostly necessary one I might add), not a source of revenue.

Here's the scenario.

I am your employer, but I also am the tax collector.

I pay you 200 gross, but keep 20 as tax. I may as well just pay you 180. Get it?

They may as well NOT be taxed, and just paid their net incomes - but for welfare / prsi etc it has to be done that way to balance the books and ensure their records are up to date.

P. Breathnach

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

Jake - your taxes pay for your salary, so for the sake of argument, your tax payments shouldn't be counted. After all, the Gov give it to you, and then take it straight back, so it cancels out.

Its not being unfair, its a fact. You may as well just say you earn your net after tax, and don't pay tax.

It's a silly position to take, given that the individual's tax varies with his or her circumstances and, to a moderate extent, the amount paid can be controlled by the individual.

It would be best if, for just about all discussions here about pay levels, gross pay was the basis for comparison.

Warfi

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

Technically, yes. They are an expense, not a source of revenue.

Yeah I can see where you're coming from re govt giving money, then taking tax back.

It's just that I don't see any reason for it to be included in arguments against the public sector unless the person agrees there shouldn't bea public sector! Do you think it's possible to run a country without public servants?

gandalf

P. Breathnach wrote: »

It's a silly position to take, given that the individual's tax varies with his or her circumstances and, to a moderate extent, the amount paid can be controlled by the individual.

It would be best if, for just about all discussions here about pay levels, gross pay was the basis for comparison.

I agree with you on this. The PS pay tax out of their salary like everyone else so I wouldn't accept that what they pay in tax is anyway different from what I pay in tax. When the Government put their wages on the balance book they include the amount with tax afaik.

This is sidetracking everything else.

Dublin_Gunner

P. Breathnach wrote: »

It's a silly position to take, given that the individual's tax varies with his or her circumstances and, to a moderate extent, the amount paid can be controlled by the individual.

It would be best if, for just about all discussions here about pay levels, gross pay was the basis for comparison.

Its not silly, its entirely true.

The only reason the income tax for Public Sector workers is recorded is for the gov to keep records of tax & prsi payments for the individuals records.

danman

Warfi wrote: »

Yeah I can see where you're coming from re govt giving money, then taking tax back.

It's just that I don't see any reason for it to be included in arguments against the public sector unless the person agrees there shouldn't bea public sector! Do you think it's possible to run a country without public servants?

Basically, I think that the argument is this. If there is no one paying any tax from the private sector, no jobs, companies etc. There would be no revenue to pay public service wages. All public service wages are generated from the private sector. Non from the public sector.

If the private sector revenue is down, public sector wage bill has to be cut. There is no other way around it.

Warfi

danman wrote: »

Basically, I think that the argument is this. If there is no one paying any tax from the private sector, no jobs, companies etc. There would be no revenue to pay public service wages. All public service wages are generated from the private sector. Non from the public sector.

If the private sector revenue is down, public sector wage bill has to be cut. There is no other way around it.

i agree there's no other way around it alright.

Anytime I saw the public sector workers don't pay taxes argument, I assumed it was a dig. The amount of flak you get when you work in the public sector is unreal, both in the media and in real life (even if you don't have a job!!).

My hackles are gone down now

jake59

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

Jake - your taxes pay for your salary, so for the sake of argument, your tax payments shouldn't be counted. After all, the Gov give it to you, and then take it straight back, so it cancels out.

Its not being unfair, its a fact. You may as well just say you earn your net after tax, and don't pay tax.

No i definitely pay tax. So for arguments sake in my job i generate income for the government. So on a weekly basis i more than pay my way within the 'company' then i shouldn't have to pay taxes at all because i have already made money for the government through my normal weeks work.. It doesn't work like that Gunner. My taxes go right into the same big pot as yours. Public sector pay is not all the government spend money on .

muboop1

dclane wrote: »

I guess it's easier to put people against me rather than you arguing your case. As far as chip on my shoulder goes, this is a forum and everyone is entitled to have their say. I guess you can't flash the badge on the the forum can you?

I guess you cannot do any research either. I have no affiliation to the gardai.

I'm a student in University studying for a degree to get into the private sector. My parents are in in no way affiliated with the garda. I have no uncles, mates, cousins in the garda.

Ah mate, I've come to realise it's not worth arguing with you. You do not actually pay any attention when your points are proven wrong in any particular topic it would seem to me. You simply ignore and continue posting your "views" on the subject. I could argue your points here and prove you wrong. But pattern dictates you will just ignore and next time the topic comes up post the same stuff again and again... Whats the point?

gerry28

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?

Yes and there is a possibility that some are on social welfare and doing a bit of work in the black economy also.

Those type of people had no business calling for cuts in PS pay in the first place.