No to the deal (betrayal)

Welease

Riskymove wrote: »

the point is about taking cost of living into account when comparing pay for comparable jobs in different countries

obviously if looking at revising current pay here and the possibilities for reductions or increases then solvency is an issue to be taken into account along with the cost of living here

It was just a throwaway comment

but on a more serious note.. the cost of living excuse will continue to cause issues moving forward, and people cannot continue to use it as a crutch... it just becomes a cyclic issue that grows..

Ireland is uncompetitive due in part to the high cost of doing business here, part of this reason is due to higher labour costs with little or no defined added value. One of the outcome of these higher wages, is increased cost of living due to extra purchaing power, and little attempt to drive any value through the supply chain.

The more we continue to pay the more items will cost and in return the more uncompetitive we will continue to be which will (and is) resulting in less jobs.

At some point the cycle needs to be addressed, and hopefully before we are all drawing 202 per week and borrowing internationally to finance it.

murphaph

Riskymove wrote: »

there can be other reasons for those scenarios,for example New Zealand is two small islands in the middle of nowhere with a dispersed small population so importing things is expensive and has a large agricultural industry

Small island, check.
Dispersed population, check.
Middle of nowhere? well there's nothing between us and Canada so it's pretty remote compared to say, Belgium. Ireland fits the bill for a high cost of living country according to your criteria tbh.

OMD

Riskymove wrote: »

the point is about taking cost of living into account when comparing pay for comparable jobs in different countries

obviously if looking at revising current pay here and the possibilities for reductions or increases then solvency is an issue to be taken into account along with the cost of living here

Much more relevant to take into account the tax structure in each country. In Ireland we pay less tax than most other countries and we don't (at present) have property tax or water charges.

Count Dooku

OMD wrote: »

Much more relevant to take into account the tax structure in each country. In Ireland we pay less tax than most other countries and we don't (at present) have property tax or water charges.

If you will take into account indirect taxes, picture can change
Plus we pay less taxes and have less services,
if taxes will increase, all extra money must go for capital spending (roads, schools, hospitals etc) instead of keeping living standards PS workers

OMD

Count Dooku wrote: »

If you will take into account indirect taxes, picture can change
Plus we pay less taxes and have less services,
if taxes will increase, all extra money must go for capital spending (roads, schools, hospitals etc) instead of keeping living standards PS workers

My point about taxes relates to the argument that people should be paid more here because Ireland is expensive. The reality is that take home pay is higher in Ireland than other countries. We then have no compulsory extras such as water charges and property taxes.

This leaves substantially more to spend (if we wish) on goods which are a higher price than in other countries partly due to VAT and other indirect taxes. Also thes goods and services have fallen about 6% recently

For people to simply say things are expensive in this country so we should be paid more is a very lazy argument.

FlutterinBantam

OMD wrote: »

My point about taxes relates to the argument that people should be paid more here because Ireland is expensive. The reality is that take home pay is higher in Ireland than other countries. We then have no compulsory extras such as water charges and property taxes.

This leaves substantially more to spend (if we wish) on goods which are a higher price than in other countries partly due to VAT and other indirect taxes. Also thes goods and services have fallen about 6% recently

For people to simply say things are expensive in this country so we should be paid more is a very lazy argument.

Look, get real.

What does Ireland make, like cars ,computers etc.... nothing

What raw materials o we have like coal /oil... nothing

Our economy is based on foreign investment and education

Go figure bud.

OMD

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Look, get real.

What does Ireland make, like cars ,computers etc.... nothing

What raw materials o we have like coal /oil... nothing

Our economy is based on foreign investment and education

Go figure bud.

What has that to do with anything I said?

FlutterinBantam

You were waffling about why Ireland is so high costed?


I gave you the reason.

OMD

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

You were waffling about why Ireland is so high costed?


I gave you the reason.

No I wasn't.

No you didn't

paraletic

i think, this argument is spent....

the anti-public sector people think that there is ONE solution to the economic crisis.

the rest of us, think that they wont change their mind.:rolleyes:

i hope it is sorted (for all of us) soon...

Welease

paraletic wrote: »

i think, this argument is spent....

the anti-public sector people think that there is ONE solution to the economic crisis.

the rest of us, think that they wont change their mind.:rolleyes:

i hope it is sorted (for all of us) soon...

lol not to prolong the discussion, but I dont think anyone in their right mind believes there is ONE solution to the problem..

In fact, it seems to be the primarily the unions (and supporters) who cry "it wasn't us who caused the problems, so why should we take the pain" who seem to believe in ONE solution, and as they didn't directly cause the issue they don't need to be part of the solution.

danman

paraletic wrote: »

i think, this argument is spent....

the anti-public sector people think that there is ONE solution to the economic crisis.

the rest of us, think that they wont change their mind.:rolleyes:

i hope it is sorted (for all of us) soon...

Reform the public sector and the wage bill.

Reform social welfare.

Widen the tax net.


There's 3 things I want. The solution to our problems isn't just one thing, it's reducing spending and bringing in more revenue.

You and the unions only want 2 of those implemented.

Welease

danman wrote: »

Reform the public sector and the wage bill.

Reform social welfare.

Widen the tax net.


There's 3 things I want. The solution to our problems isn't just one thing, it's reducing spending and bringing in more revenue.

You and the unions only want 2 of those implemented.

Private sector needs as much reform...

PeakOutput

Welease wrote: »

Private sector needs as much reform...

you dont own the private sector and the private sector reforms organically when profits cease, there is great incentive to reform then

we own the public sector and the public sectors profits (budget surplus) have ceased and there is no reform, there is no incentive for the public sector to reform organically so they dont. they need to be forced.

edit; also this tit for tat bull**** needs to stop

'oh well if we reform you have to reform to or im telling mommy' if everyone just worried about doing the best job they could no matter what it was instead of worrying about what everyone else is doing and making sure they are doing the same or less as everyone else they see and hear about it we would be in a far better position

Welease

PeakOutput wrote: »

you dont own the private sector and the private sector reforms organically when profits cease, there is great incentive to reform then

we own the public sector and the public sectors profits (budget surplus) have ceased and there is no reform, there is no incentive for the public sector to reform organically so they dont. they need to be forced.

edit; also this tit for tat bull**** needs to stop

'oh well if we reform you have to reform to or im telling mommy' if everyone just worried about doing the best job they could no matter what it was instead of worrying about what everyone else is doing and making sure they are doing the same or less as everyone else they see and hear about it we would be in a far better position

I think you are making assumptions and falling into the behaviour you complain about My comments are not tit for tat.

I am and have always been in the private sector (20+ years).. Private sector wages in this country are high, without in most cases providing any extra value. As a result, we are losing jobs abroad, and missing out on potential FDI. Anyone who believes we don't need a reform of the private sector is delusional.

PeakOutput

Welease wrote: »

I think you are making assumptions and falling into the behaviour you complain about My comments are not tit for tat.

I am and have always been in the private sector (20+ years).. Private sector wages in this country are high, without in most cases providing any extra value. As a result, we are losing jobs abroad, and missing out on potential FDI. Anyone who believes we don't need a reform of the private sector is delusional.

ok sorry i misunderstood what you were saying point stands though

Welease

PeakOutput wrote: »

ok sorry i misunderstood what you were saying point stands though

Absolutely it does...

Both sectors across this country need to understand we don't currently offer any more value than our competitors, so expecting to be paid more because we have a higher cost of living is suicidal..

If we want to earn higher wages, we need to deliver value which is equal or greater to the extra wages we want (race to the top).. or cut our wages (race to the bottom).. we have the choice, but (and my response was to a previous poster who's 3 point plan focussed on the PS) focussing on one sector alone is futile.

PeakOutput

Welease wrote: »

Absolutely it does...

Both sectors across this country need to understand we don't currently offer any more value than our competitors, so expecting to be paid more because we have a higher cost of living is suicidal..

If we want to earn higher wages, we need to deliver value which is equal or greater to the extra wages we want (race to the top).. or cut our wages (race to the bottom).. we have the choice, but (and my response was to a previous poster who's 3 point plan focussed on the PS) focussing on one sector alone is futile.

not focusing on the public sector right now = no private sector in a year or two

public sector first get the deficit under control so we have money to spend on reforming our private sector. right now there is no money for infrastructure / education anything all because of a bloated public sector and overly generous social welfare system

danman

I also gave 2 other points...

Widening the tax net and reforming social welfare.

PS reform was only 1 of 3 points.

Head The Wall

danman wrote: »

I also gave 2 other points...

Widening the tax net and reforming social welfare.

PS reform was only 1 of 3 points.

Most people are aware of the fact that those two will definitely be happening. You pointed out that the unions only wanted these two reforms. I think thats where the thread got sidetracked

Hair Ball

Welease wrote: »

Absolutely it does...

Both sectors across this country need to understand we don't currently offer any more value than our competitors, so expecting to be paid more because we have a higher cost of living is suicidal..

If we want to earn higher wages, we need to deliver value which is equal or greater to the extra wages we want (race to the top).. or cut our wages (race to the bottom).. we have the choice, but (and my response was to a previous poster who's 3 point plan focussed on the PS) focussing on one sector alone is futile.

I have followed this tread, but I think the country is Banjaxed so the real problem
here is who is going to pay the bill ,we all in the private & public sector could
go on strike and not return to work until we all win ,we can support each other. But we must obey the rule of the Mushroom and feed on **** and live in the Dark

Welease

PeakOutput wrote: »

not focusing on the public sector right now = no private sector in a year or two

public sector first get the deficit under control so we have money to spend on reforming our private sector. right now there is no money for infrastructure / education anything all because of a bloated public sector and overly generous social welfare system

I disagree... respectfully though both can (and need to be done now).. We have a new minister for PS reform and they can and should deal with that.. The Private sector through both ministerial, union and employee consent needs to decide how it will tackle it's issue.. There's no reason why one sector should wait until the other achieve's reform (in the terrible tit for tat that you mentioned before.. which seems to be the current pointless standoff).

Welease

danman wrote: »

I also gave 2 other points...

Widening the tax net and reforming social welfare.

PS reform was only 1 of 3 points.

My response (if thats why your were subsequently responding) was because those only deal with the expenditure of a shrinking tax revenue.. We need to continue to drive competitive private sector investment, so we actually generate income which we can tax

Welease

Hair Ball wrote: »

I have followed this tread, but I think the country is Banjaxed so the real problem
here is who is going to pay the bill ,we all in the private & public sector could
go on strike and not return to work until we all win ,we can support each other. But we must obey the rule of the Mushroom and feed on **** and live in the Dark

Sadly it appears that a large percentage of this country would go on strike and believe your plan was workable

FlutterinBantam

Don't worry, they won't.

They will bellyache and rattle sabres until the cows come home, but once personal money is involved they will do fcuk all.

Watch the spin for ' Don't hit education and the children'

We are prepared to take the hit, but don't hit the children:D

Laughable.

Trust me on that one

danman

Head The Wall wrote: »

Most people are aware of the fact that those two will definitely be happening. You pointed out that the unions only wanted these two reforms. I think thats where the thread got sidetracked

So are you saying that the unions want public sector and reform, and reforming the PS wage bill?

It doesn't seem that way from the loud mutterings from the various conferances this week.

They don't want any cost savings from the PS.
The less money spent in PS wages, the less subs they receive.

That was the point I was making.

We also need reform on social welfare and all spending.
We need to widen the tax net to include the 50% that don't pay PAYE tax.

I mAy come across as a PS bashed, but my wife is PS, and I accept the reality of our countries situation. Cuts will effect my family, but if it stops the slide we're now in, I'll accept it.

Welease

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Don't worry, they won't.

They will bellyache and rattle sabres until the cows come home, but once personal money is involved they will do fcuk all.

Watch the spin for ' Don't hit education and the children'

We are prepared to take the hit, but don't hit the children:D

Laughable.

Trust me on that one

Already covered that one in the other thread.. Any org that gets a 34% boost in revenue to 9.57 billion (in 4 years from 05 to 09), and spend's 77% on wages, doesn't give a flying **** about the children when my kids will be sitting in ****ty rotting prefrabs with no access to educational devices required to succeed in a competitive world, and no concept of removing poor teachers who fall below basic standards ...

(and the same applies to the private sector with equally bad value)

ardmacha

about the children when my kids will be sitting in ****ty rotting prefrabs with no access to educational devices required to succeed in a competitive world,

Your kids will be sitting in ****ty rotting prefabs because you as citizens are unwilling to spend the money on those schools that citizens in countries with similar GNP are willing to spend.

Welease

ardmacha wrote: »

Your kids will be sitting in ****ty rotting prefabs because you as citizens are unwilling to spend the money on those schools that citizens in countries with similar GNP are willing to spend.

Do we spend considerably less on education (per populace) than other countries?

ardmacha

Do we spend considerably less on education (per populace) than other countries?

Well total spending per student in 2006 (a boom year when money was supposedly thrown around) was below the OECD average and 82% of the UK figure. That additional 18% would have helped out with the equipment etc, probably some progress was made on buildings in that year. I'd say that Ireland has been cut more than the UK since then.

If the government is broke, it is not because of overspending on education.

Welease

ardmacha wrote: »

Well total spending per student in 2006 (a boom year when money was supposedly thrown around) was below the OECD average and 82% of the UK figure. That additional 18% would have helped out with the equipment etc, probably some progress was made on buildings in that year. I'd say that Ireland has been cut more than the UK since then.

If the government is broke, it is not because of overspending on education.

Was the spending on infrastructure and capability or wages?

thebaldsoprano

dean21 wrote: »

We now seem to have 2 Employers the Government and ICTU

Wow, a lot of people are glad to have an employer, and you're complaining about it. If you don't like it that much, maybe you could consider swapping places with one of the 430,000 people without an employer. This kind of contemptuous attitude towards someone giving you a job in the current environment is a bit bizarre, to put it mildly.

jimmycrackcorm

Welease wrote: »

Private sector needs as much reform...

Define "reform" for the private sector! As I see it, the job losses, cuts in wages and lower starting salaries are symtomatic of a reform process.

For those industries that are shedding jobs, as a result of a lack of competitiveness, if any new companies do start up again, you can be sure they will be realigned.

There are private sector companies that do not need to make cuts as we've seen as they are competitive and so insisting they should unnecessarily cut is counter-productive as it would take money out of the economy for no apparent reason other than profit motives. Companies that do need to make cuts actually do so rather effectively unlike the loose public sector definition of just getting rid of temporary employees.

I don't count organizations such as the ESB as part of the private sector as they, for example, are effectively a state monopoly despite the blatant necessity of cutting electricity costs.

OMD

ardmacha wrote: »

Well total spending per student in 2006 (a boom year when money was supposedly thrown around) was below the OECD average and 82% of the UK figure. That additional 18% would have helped out with the equipment etc, probably some progress was made on buildings in that year. I'd say that Ireland has been cut more than the UK since then.

If the government is broke, it is not because of overspending on education.

Are you comparing actual spend here or spend as a proportion of GDP?

Count Dooku

OMD wrote: »

Are you comparing actual spend here or spend as a proportion of GDP?

75% of GDP belongs to MNC's, so lets compare as proportion of GNP, because it will reduce all comparisons by 30%

BTW – deal rejected, we don’t have to worry anymore
Public service union rejects deal

OMD

Count Dooku wrote: »

75% of GDP belongs to MNC's, so lets compare as proportion of GNP, because it will reduce all comparisons by 30%

BTW – deal rejected, we don’t have to worry anymore
Public service union rejects deal

Also GNP has dropped since 2006 much more than education spending. Perhaps Ardmacha could update us on education spending

Head The Wall

OMD wrote: »

Also GNP has dropped since 2006 much more than education spending. Perhaps Ardmacha could update us on education spending

I want data on the breakdown of the education spend across the EU zone i.e % on wages, infrastructure, facilities etc.

Is this data available or would it be too damaging to the unions

Ben_Dover

thebaldsoprano wrote: »

Wow, a lot of people are glad to have an employer, and you're complaining about it. If you don't like it that much, maybe you could consider swapping places with one of the 430,000 people without an employer. This kind of contemptuous attitude towards someone giving you a job in the current environment is a bit bizarre, to put it mildly.

The kind of meek attitude you obviously show towards your employer is the attitude that has wrecked this economy. The attitude of "no one in the private sector is to blame for any of this...." You have wrecked the country.You are not able to create any jobs -only taking in the multinationals, grant aided to the hilt, low corporation tax etc etc

ixoy

The attitude of "no one in the private sector is to blame for any of this...."

Nobody has ever said that - it's the public service who's claiming utter innocence. We all know banks are private sector and deeply involved, as were some other elements as the primary contributors. Then there's second and tertiary layers which involve a large part of the population - public and private.

You have wrecked the country.You are not able to create any jobs -only taking in the multinationals, grant aided to the hilt, low corporation tax etc etc

So it's our fault for not bringing in enough investment to pay for PS/CS wages? And the private sector is now one entity as well?

dearg lady

I haven't been keeping up with this thread, but I just received a list of reasons why SIPTU is opposing the deal and I feel slightly sick. the deal seems to me like a mixed bag, elements of compromise on both parts, but overall a damn good deal for the publc sector, and yet SIPTU are giving out about every single point, nothing is good enough, I really don't know what they want. Methinks I will be leaving SIPTU.

The main thing that worries me is their proposal to reduce numbers naturally, presumably this will ahppen in two ways, retiremenst and not renewing contracts. I think it's important to keep some of the lower paid, shall we say, more eager staff members in. There's definitely a lot of stagnation going on thats needs to be sorted out.

ParkRunner

dearg lady wrote: »

I haven't been keeping up with this thread, but I just received a list of reasons why SIPTU is opposing the deal and I feel slightly sick.

Is this an official SIPTU document?

dearg lady

EF wrote: »

Is this an official SIPTU document?

yup, they mailed it to me

also, should specify, it's particular to the education branch, not SIPTU overall!

ixoy

dearg lady wrote: »

I haven't been keeping up with this thread, but I just received a list of reasons why SIPTU is opposing the deal and I feel slightly sick. the deal seems to me like a mixed bag, elements of compromise on both parts, but overall a damn good deal for the publc sector, and yet SIPTU are giving out about every single point, nothing is good enough, I really don't know what they want. Methinks I will be leaving SIPTU.

Interesting to hear from someone who thinks the deal is probably as good as it's going to get. A friend of mine, also subject to the deal, opined much the same. I honestly don't know what they think can realistically be obtained from a financial black hole.

The main thing that worries me is their proposal to reduce numbers naturally, presumably this will ahppen in two ways, retiremenst and not renewing contracts. I think it's important to keep some of the lower paid, shall we say, more eager staff members in. There's definitely a lot of stagnation going on thats needs to be sorted out.

I'd agree with this. In an ideal world, you'd keep the talented ones on. We know this won't happen - it'd be a "last in, first out" policy (less redundancy payments for a start) and you could very well lose those with idealism who want to reform it, particularly the younger who haven't become locked in a mindset.

dearg lady

ixoy wrote: »

Interesting to hear from someone who thinks the deal is probably as good as it's going to get. A friend of mine, also subject to the deal, opined much the same. I honestly don't know what they think can realistically be obtained from a financial black hole.

yeah, I mean for me, while I can understand everyone wants their working conditions to be the best possible, but if it's, for example, at the expense of someone else having a job, do I want the best possible conditions, well not so much. It's hard to get the balance on a personal level even.

PeakOutput

dearg lady wrote: »

yeah, I mean for me, while I can understand everyone wants their working conditions to be the best possible, but if it's, for example, at the expense of someone else having a job, do I want the best possible conditions, well not so much. It's hard to get the balance on a personal level even.

any chance you will put up what the letter says? i imagine there is no reason not to, blank out any personal details obviously

thebaldsoprano

Ben_Dover wrote: »

The kind of meek attitude you obviously show towards your employer is the attitude that has wrecked this economy

I write software for a living. Can you explain how knuckling down and doing this, not going on strike and being grateful for a job has wrecked the economy?

It's funny, before all this 'current economic climate' I used to be fairly left leaning. Statements such as this one, along with the unions being exposed for the gangster outfits that they are is driving me more and more to the right as time goes by. At this rate I'll be a libertarian before the year is out...

danman

thebaldsoprano wrote: »

I write software for a living. Can you explain how knuckling down and doing this, not going on strike and being grateful for a job has wrecked the economy?

It's funny, before all this 'current economic climate' I used to be fairly left leaning. Statements such as this one, along with the unions being exposed for the gangster outfits that they are is driving me more and more to the right as time goes by. At this rate I'll be a libertarian before the year is out...

It's funny, I was thinking the same thing the other day.
In my student days, I was very left leaning. I would have considered myself more SWP even than Labour.

Recently, over the past 2/3 years, I've started to lean in the other direction.

I think it's just general dismayal at the attitude of the unions.
Coupled with the way social welfare has gone way out of control, I might consider joining up with Donegalfellas party should he decide to start it.

I've a 50% chance of being in his constituency.

Hair Ball

thebaldsoprano wrote: »

I write software for a living. Can you explain how knuckling down and doing this, not going on strike and being grateful for a job has wrecked the economy?

It's funny, before all this 'current economic climate' I used to be fairly left leaning. Statements such as this one, along with the unions being exposed for the gangster outfits that they are is driving me more and more to the right as time goes by. At this rate I'll be a libertarian before the year is out...

The big problem is that unless you work for your self ,hard work alone
will not guarantee that some lazy middle manager wont steal your good
ideas and take all the Glory.
more important don't lower your standers ,if you are a lefty go for it

Amhran Nua

thebaldsoprano wrote: »

At this rate I'll be a libertarian before the year is out...

The proper term is anarcho-corporatist, it has nothing to do with liberty, and to be honest that's cutting off your head to spite your nose.

mgegan

Kensington wrote: »

Hmm, maybe what brought them here was the low wage, low tax, low cost base?
And what pushed them away again was because we became a high wage, high cost base?
Perhaps FÁS had nothing whatsoever to do with it?


What?!?! Well, I'll be damned!!! :rolleyes:

Yes the low wage, low tax, low cost base + English Speaking workforce + Educated Work Force + Free IDA building + Loads of Grant Aid

FAS is the biggest waste of time in this country. The waste of money by FAS over the years is nothing short of criminal.

The tickets, foreign trips, 1st class flights are only the tip on the iceberg.

FAS has been used to manipulate the live register figures for years now.