Savings made by the Croke Park Agreement

The_Thing

Dancing Brave wrote:

It is almost impossible to have a proper discussion about this financial crisis with civil servants, as they appear to take the whole cuts strategy too personally. ie. my pay cut, my pension cut, blah. blah. blah. we have all suffererd similar, and arguably more severe cuts. those still lucky to have a job and luckier still to have a pension. until you accept you are part of a machine that is no longer affordable regardless of how hard you work we are never going to achieve stability. it is not personal, we jusy need more reductions, more job losses, smaller pensions, more savings. simple as.

Really?

fliball123 wrote:

.....you.and your protected ilk in the ps I will have a massive session when you get cut again...And its going to happen ..watch this space..

fliball123 wrote:

I am not rubing my hands with glee..just an eagerness to see equality in the pain that we are seeing is shared...As I have stated I would love to see the ps remain on their wage as it would meant the country would not be in the dire trouble it is..but reality is every section will need to be cut and taxes increased...but under the cpa certain areas cannot be cut therefore the pain is not shared evenly

Some posters try to disguise their personal begrudging hatred of the PS by attempting to portray a false concern for their fellow citizens and litter their posts as they do with overly dramatic prose in an attempt to cover up their real agenda.

RichardAnd

The_Thing wrote: »

Some posters try to disguise their personal begrudging hatred of the PS by attempting to portray a false concern for their fellow citizens and litter their posts as they do with overly dramatic prose in an attempt to cover up their real agenda.

I agree. There are people on this forum whom I could only describe as misanthropists. What kind of sick person would actually say they will have a party if/when public servants are made redundant. My take on this is that there are an awful lot teenagers here who have some serious growing up to do.

Godge

Nijmegen wrote: »

Hey kippy - first off, on the cost of a PS worker, you are quite right to correct my math - I didn't take into account the tax 'rebate' I spoke of.

You wish to heck that the likes of the croke park report could just spell out all the numbers in a clear fashion. "This is what we pay the public sector workers gross. This is what we get back in tax. This is the net figure."

Anyway, I also agree that a last in first out policy would be daft. Any cuts to the PS should be done in a structured manner - let's look at what we don't need (in the context of what we can't afford) and cut that. Let's do job reviews. Let's single out individuals (this is what the unions hate most) who, regardless of their job performance, are superfluous to requirements.

Let's fire those who are doing a bad job, and perhaps transfer those other superfluous individuals who can do their job.

In short, let's think logically as opposed to unionally. The government should not, in my opinion, be treated as a work program. It is there to deliver services, and should deliver those services efficiently and within the envelope of what we can afford.

Severance pay is a one off cost in any restructuring. As part of a financial lending package that looks at total costs over several years, it makes sense and can be worked in to have a blip to make long term structural savings. It's a cost of doing business - you are front loading a cost to make a saving.

Lets tone down your figure (and I feel uncomfortable making it up and would just like to see the SW bill for unemployed people and divide by number of people on it - just can't find the figures) we save €18,000 a head we cut PA.

IE, cutting the PS pay bill by 25% (shy of 76,000 jobs) gets us €4bn net, but a little over €1.365bn net PA. That's the range we're talking per quarter of the PS we shave off. (At current SW rates, of course.)

I'd like the SW figures honed in to get a better handle on that. But I think we're in the ballpark.

PS - Let's say we freeze increments, and round ourselves up to a €1.5bn a year saving. Phew, now my need for round numbers is sated ;-)

What you are saying there is that if we cut the public service pay bill of 16bn by 25%, we save €1.365 bn net. That is nowhere near enough to close the budget deficit.

Transfer payments including social welfare are €26bn. Cutting these by 25% would save us €5 bn gross and because social welfare doesn't attract tax, it would save us most of that €5bn net. Together they might close the budget deficit. However, politically impossible because of Croke Park and the Labour Party, so we will need new taxes.

Nijmegen

Godge wrote: »

What you are saying there is that if we cut the public service pay bill of 16bn by 25%, we save €1.365 bn net. That is nowhere near enough to close the budget deficit.

Transfer payments including social welfare are €26bn. Cutting these by 25% would save us €5 bn gross and because social welfare doesn't attract tax, it would save us most of that €5bn net. Together they might close the budget deficit. However, politically impossible because of Croke Park and the Labour Party, so we will need new taxes.

There is no one item we could cut from government expenditure that would bridge the deficit, barring drastic enforced action. A €1.5bn net saving off the public sector pay bill is not the largest item we could save on. Neither are the expenses of TDs. Yet, here we are In the context of this discussion of the PS pay bill in total, I think it's fair to put a figure on what you could realistically afford to save for every percentage point of PS employment you cut.

You are right that cutting social welfare gives you almost the full whack of the face value saving (though the deficit is far higher than €5-10bn, if I read your above post.) This is for another thread, but apart from cutting headline rates the government could save between €1 and €3bn a year if it had a serious go at social welfare fraud.

I believe that we should tug on each lever of cuts less assiduously than we have, with state spending expected to drop from €54.7bn to only €48bn over the four year plan (which will close the gap to 3% of GDP, not at all entirely. And of course, the four year plan will have to become a six or seven year plan as growth isn't turning up to the party to contribute to closing that gap.)

As it is, with growth slowing and a longer period of cuts expected the governments default position of raising more tax is not acceptable.

An interesting aside I just thought of: The croke park deal supposedly delivered €600m in savings, which we have established here are largely, for one reason or another, paper savings that do not reduce the deficit - at best in places like pay, it reduces the amount by which the public sector pay bill increases the deficit while savings are found elsewhere.

By the formula we've concocted here, to make €600,000,000 in real savings (IE, net reduction in the deficit in years following the year we pay out lump sum redundancy payments), they'd have to cut 33,300 jobs in the PS, versus the 5,349 they offloaded through natural wastage and voluntary redundancy.

Those would be individuals they'd cut off without pension - or else you can say, it doesn't account for the pensions of those we'd make redundant who are entitled to them. We paid out an extra €108m in pension contributions for the 5,349 we offloaded in 2010, or €20,190 a head. You can calculate how many of the 33,300 we would cut in that figure would be genuine retirements at pensionable age, and would then have to calculate the number of jobs we'd need to cut upwards to achieve the €600m saving.

Assume, for the sake of argument, the same number retire again, to account for this you'd need to cut an additional 6,000 non-pensionable individuals to make the €600m target, for a total of 39,300

That's between 11 and 13% of the public service that remains today.

Of course, a caveat that the further we go out on our assumptions - such as the net saving after tax and social welfare are accounted for - the further wrong we could be. But let's say these kinds of numbers are within the ballpark of what we'd see in real life.

Now imagine a year where we try and cut 40,000 PS jobs......

TheAnswer

kippy wrote: »

I've worked with plenty deadwood in every sector.



Why should she get paid, she isnt working?
I was being sarcastic when I said "maybe she ought to be bloody paid.
When you take a few weeks off work - does it mean that your job isnt requried? How do people manage?
You are talking c**p, huge difference between taking a couple of weeks off and taking 5 years off.

As I said, she has to apply for the leave, if it is in a busy area she wouldnt get it.
I hate repeating myself, if the position can go unmanned for 5 yrs, it's blatantly obvious that post can be covered by other staff

This is not a Public sector V Private sector issue, my taxes are not paying private sector wages, they are however paying public sector wages so I am perfectly entitled (as is any other citizen) to scrutinise/critisise what goes on in the Public Sector. This country is still spending €20billion more every year than its taking in, that's just farcical.

kippy

TheAnswer wrote: »

This is not a Public sector V Private sector issue, my taxes are not paying private sector wages, they are however paying public sector wages so I am perfectly entitled (as is any other citizen) to scrutinise/critisise what goes on in the Public Sector. This country is still spending €20billion more every year than its taking in, that's just farcical.

I am perfectly entitled to do the same, as my taxes pay for the same.
You're also perfectly entitled to comment on private sector wages as your taxes may support those also.

thebman

kippy wrote: »

I am perfectly entitled to do the same, as my taxes pay for the same.
You're also perfectly entitled to comment on private sector wages as your taxes may support those also.

Not really, the state awards the contracts in those cases or gives grants to the industry so the issue is the state as it is giving away tax payers money.

Probably fairly high up which seems to be where most of the waste is generated and which is the part least likely to be sorted going on the past record of the organisation. In that respect, it is much like any large organisation. The people high up are considered untouchable as they have been there for years and were promoted numerous times so the people higher up think it would reflect badly on the organisation if they got rid of the bad people at that level.

However, in the states case, they would be wrong as these people generate so bad PR, it would really benefit the state to reform like we elected the current government to do.

kippy

thebman wrote: »

Not really, the state awards the contracts in those cases or gives grants to the industry so the issue is the state as it is giving away tax payers money.

Probably fairly high up which seems to be where most of the waste is generated and which is the part least likely to be sorted going on the past record of the organisation. In that respect, it is much like any large organisation. The people high up are considered untouchable as they have been there for years and were promoted numerous times so the people higher up think it would reflect badly on the organisation if they got rid of the bad people at that level.

However, in the states case, they would be wrong as these people generate so bad PR, it would really benefit the state to reform like we elected the current government to do.

Not really what??

nursextreme

largepants wrote: »

Remarkable how there are less than 10 posts on this thread. I'm sure if there were no savings we would have 10 pages at this stage. And then the ones who do happen to post are still not happy. Its doesn't matter what the CP agreement achieves the jealousy and envy will never abate.

I's actually quite amusing to see the same stuff being rehashed by the same people.

Remarkable! Over 300 posts and some very good points made, interesting reading - more than just a rehash!

I would expect that most of the posters agree that the cost of running our Public Sector must be reduced. Elimination of waste an inefficiency needed to be tackled Economic Crisis or not. With regards to the wage bill the big issue - do we need a smaller Public Sector or a cheaper Public Sector or a combination of the two?

Dannyboy83

Nijmegen wrote: »

Anyway, I also agree that a last in first out policy would be daft. Any cuts to the PS should be done in a structured manner - let's look at what we don't need (in the context of what we can't afford) and cut that. Let's do job reviews. Let's single out individuals (this is what the unions hate most) who, regardless of their job performance, are superfluous to requirements.

I remember people saying the very same thing in this forum 3 years ago.
It's not going to happen unfortunately.

Let's fire those who are doing a bad job, and perhaps transfer those other superfluous individuals who can do their job.
The government should not, in my opinion, be treated as a work program. It is there to deliver services, and should deliver those services efficiently and within the envelope of what we can afford.

You are approaching this with too much logic.

In short, let's think logically as opposed to unionally.

Yes, that's where you're going wrong.
In order to defeat the enemy, you first need to think like them.

rodento

Wonder why we haven't heard people calling for cuts in grants and tax incentives for people/companies/multinationals in the private sector

kippy

rodento wrote: »

Wonder why we haven't heard people calling for cuts in grants and tax incentives for people/companies/multinationals in the private sector

Because, in the majority, these help create jobs.
There are a few tax incentives that could be cut back alright but stuff like corporation tax and the likes shouldnt be touched.

thebman

kippy wrote: »

Not really what??

Nothing, I must have misread the post reading it, I was still half asleep, sorry.

Nijmegen

rodento wrote: »

Wonder why we haven't heard people calling for cuts in grants and tax incentives for people/companies/multinationals in the private sector

You could feel free to start a discussion on the topic...

I think, on the face of it, that people don't think leveling taxes on jobs and job creators is a great idea when economic growth is slow as it is.

sollar

Godge wrote: »

What you are saying there is that if we cut the public service pay bill of 16bn by 25%, we save €1.365 bn net. That is nowhere near enough to close the budget deficit.

That is a good point. If the government cut the PS by 25% many would be surprised. It would be considered butchery. But look at all it would save. The answer to our problems does not lie in the PS. Why is gets so much coverage is beyond me.

rodento

Sollar what would you suggest for all those people who are close to retirement and have at least 30yrs pension contributions built up

Should they get offered early retirement and a pension to go

sollar

rodento wrote: »

Sollar what would you suggest for all those people who are close to retirement and have at least 30yrs pension contributions built up

Should they get offered early retirement and a pension to go

As in another vol redundancy/early retirement offer. I think its likely and would be a good enough idea. There is no short term solution i don't think.

Nijmegen

sollar wrote: »

As in another vol redundancy/early retirement offer. I think its likely and would be a good enough idea. There is no short term solution i don't think.

Good enough in the context that we would lose more individuals we need and not be at all targeted.

Why can't government make logical cuts and single people and groups out for a cull?

Instead we offer voluntary redundancy and then need to hire in contractors to oversee the shortfall...

galway2007

TheAnswer wrote: »

This is not a Public sector V Private sector issue, my taxes are not paying private sector wages, they are however paying public sector wages so I am perfectly entitled (as is any other citizen) to scrutinise/critisise what goes on in the Public Sector. This country is still spending €20billion more every year than its taking in, that's just farcical.

You are nothing short of an idiot
Where the **** do you think the 16 billion wages the public sector gets is spent????????????????????
The billions that are spent out supplies and other stuff I the public sector where does u think that go???????????
Well you go back to bed you idiot

spider guardian

galway2007 wrote: »

You are nothing short of an idiot
Where the **** do you think the 16 billion wages the public sector gets is spent????????????????????
The billions that are spent out supplies and other stuff I the public sector where does u think that go???????????
Well you go back to bed you idiot

Using that logic why not just double social welfare payments and PS wages? The injection of cash into the economy would be phenomenal!

galway2007

sarumite wrote: »

If I was to treat the public sector employer the same as the private sector employer I would say that the first two are not the problems of the employer, the third one is protected and can be withdrawn pro-rata on retirement and the fourth while being true, is essentially tax money being recycled and unsustainable as long as we have such a high deficit.

It is tax money being recycled but you are getting
Education
Health care
Security
And other services by recycling it
You are also creating hundreds off thousands off job in the private sector
So could even say hundreds of thousands of private sector employees wages are paid for by people paying tax

galway2007

spider guardian wrote: »

Using that logic why not just double social welfare payments and PS wages? The injection of cash into the economy would be phenomenal!

Well if they double mine it will be spent
I dont think we need to make it more attractive for people to be on the dole
Money goes around and it create job and pays for services

Count Dooku

galway2007 wrote: »

You are nothing short of an idiot
Where the **** do you think the 16 billion wages the public sector gets is spent????????????????????

about 21% goes back to state, about 8% goes as wages to private sector workers, small part goes to Irish manufacturers, the rest is paid as rent to landlords ( or banks) and remaining part is going directly to china

galway2007 wrote: »

he billions that are spent out supplies and other stuff I the public sector where does u think that go???????????

Do you mean all taxes collected belongs to public servants, not to the state?

spider guardian

galway2007 wrote: »

Well if they double mine it will be spent
I dont think we need to make it more attractive for people to be on the dole
Money goes around and it create job and pays for services

If only things were that easy man. Nijmegen has commented on such stimulus schemes in this thread, have a look.

tails_naf

kippy wrote: »

I've worked with plenty deadwood in every sector.



Why should she get paid, she isnt working?

When you take a few weeks off work - does it mean that your job isnt requried? How do people manage?
As I said, she has to apply for the leave, if it is in a busy area she wouldnt get it.

I work in the private sector, for a multi-national in electronics design, and very often we can't take time off exactly when we want it - as during 'crunch times' there is no hope of anyone able to cover my job - were very short staffed as it is.
I often work 50+ hours a week, but am only paid for 39 (yeay salaries...)

If I were able to take a break for 5 years and have the rest of my colleagues cover me for that time, then I would be dead wood and believe me, my employer would take notice - and action - on that.

That is the reality of employment in many private sector companies. 3 months leave of absence, only if feasible. 5 years is an absolute disgrace.

sollar

tails_naf wrote: »

I often work 50+ hours a week, but am only paid for 39 (yeay salaries...)

Whatever about a small strapped for cash business needing this in tough times, working an extra 11 hrs a week for a multi national for nothing is madness.

I expect to get paid for the hours i do.

tails_naf

sollar wrote: »

Whatever about a small strapped for cash business needing this in tough times, working an extra 11 hrs a week for a multi national for nothing is madness.

I expect to get paid for the hours i do.

It's not every week, but it happens more than I'd like. I can easily say though that it's been a long time since I 'just' did the 39 hours.

It's also not for nothing - it's to keep me off the dole, keep the roof over my head, etc. It's a pretty stressful job at times, but on the upside reasonably well paid.

Having no overtime, but doing the hours, is the reality for many many professional people. It's another reason the PS professional grades are out of touch somewhat - if you work 1/2 hour over, you get it back, or you get paid. If I do it - zilch. I have deadlines and goals to meet, if I don't meet them, I'm sure someone else will be found that can.

spider guardian

tails_naf wrote: »

It's not every week, but it happens more than I'd like. I can easily say though that it's been a long time since I 'just' did the 39 hours.

It's also not for nothing - it's to keep me off the dole, keep the roof over my head, etc. It's a pretty stressful job at times, but on the upside reasonably well paid.

Having no overtime, but doing the hours, is the reality for many many professional people. It's another reason the PS professional grades are out of touch somewhat - if you work 1/2 hour over, you get it back, or you get paid. If I do it - zilch. I have deadlines and goals to meet, if I don't meet them, I'm sure someone else will be found that can.

Sometimes a job well done is satisfaction in itself, even if it does involve more hours than what was paid for. It could always be worse man.

tails_naf

spider guardian wrote: »

Sometimes a job well done is satisfaction in itself, even if it does involve more hours than what was paid for. It could always be worse man.

I totally agree. There definitely is a strong sense of satisfaction when what we are working on produces results.
I definitely thank my lucky stars that I have not had to join the dole queues. I don't mind the extra hours so much, if it means things stay that way.

spider guardian

tails_naf wrote: »

I totally agree. There definitely is a strong sense of satisfaction when what we are working on produces results.
I definitely thank my lucky stars that I have not had to join the dole queues. I don't mind the extra hours so much, if it means things stay that way.

It's not an ideal situation. In some companys if you start at that kind of craic you'll be left at it. But for a lot of workers that's just how things pan out. In short bursts as long as it results in something tangible it can be worth it. Otherwise it isn't feasible

thebman

spider guardian wrote: »

It's not an ideal situation. In some companys if you start at that kind of craic you'll be left at it. But for a lot of workers that's just how things pan out. In short bursts as long as it results in something tangible it can be worth it. Otherwise it isn't feasible

Yes nobody can work flat out all the time.

Found that out the hard way myself.

tayto lover

sollar wrote: »

Whatever about a small strapped for cash business needing this in tough times, working an extra 11 hrs a week for a multi national for nothing is madness.

I expect to get paid for the hours i do.

I'd say he gets nice bonuses though.
Something the Public Sector workers never get.

Count Dooku

tayto lover wrote: »

I'd say he gets nice bonuses though.
Something the Public Sector workers never get.

Compensated by job security, DB pension, nice overtime rates and many other privileges which private sector workers can only dream about

tayto lover

Count Dooku wrote: »

Compensated by job security, DB pension, nice overtime rates and many other privileges which private sector workers can only dream about

I spent a few years teaching and never got any bonus or overtime. Only occasional abuse. It wasn't for me and when i left and went into the Private Sector it was like coming out of darkness into the light. The Public Sector might have security but its not really all its cracked up to be. Apart from security and pension it can be very mundane. The best years of my life was when i started my own little business and was my own boss.
I think many of you are being too hard on the Public Sector workers. they are getting what they signed up for and it was there for everyone to choose. I have a lot of sympathy for anyone who has lost their job but they should not get into a rut. Try something new and maybe start your own little business. The Credit Union has money to loan for small enterprises.

spider guardian

tayto lover wrote: »

I'd say he gets nice bonuses though.
Something the Public Sector workers never get.

There's nothing to stop public sectors workers seeking work elsewhere if they're unhappy with their remuneration.

femur61

tayto lover wrote: »

I spent a few years teaching and never got any bonus or overtime. Only occasional abuse. It wasn't for me and when i left and went into the Private Sector it was like coming out of darkness into the light. The Public Sector might have security but its not really all its cracked up to be. Apart from security and pension it can be very mundane. The best years of my life was when i started my own little business and was my own boss.
I think many of you are being too hard on the Public Sector workers. they are getting what they signed up for and it was there for everyone to choose. I have a lot of sympathy for anyone who has lost their job but they should not get into a rut. Try something new and maybe start your own little business. The Credit Union has money to loan for small enterprises.

Wasn't that the problem with the PS. They have jobs for life no matter how badly they preform. At least what has happened in the last year they have to meet targets in order to keep the CP agreement.

highgiant1985

spider guardian wrote: »

There's nothing to stop public sectors workers seeking work elsewhere if they're unhappy with their remuneration.

also just to add some public sector workers DO get bonuses. Its the same in private sector some DO get bonuses but not all.

thebman

Exactly where are all these private sector bonuses people go on about here.

I never really got any bonuses. Certainly nothing that compensated for the amount of free overtime I had to put in to get the job done.

Bonuses are mostly a sales man thing to ensure they have an invested interest in selling. Bonuses elsewhere are tiny in comparison unless maybe its a bank or something which are mostly state controlled now, partly because of this kind of attitude I imagine :P

noodler

I wish we wouldn't focus on savings made by redundancies in relation to the CP Deal.

matthew8

Actually we didn't save a penny. For every euro saved 50c was payed out in pensions (so 50% gone right away) and a lump sum of 50% (or 150% I'm getting contradictory sources but if it is 150% that means we pay 289m more for this deal than we save and will only have a net total saving in 3 years) of the salary of each departee (the other 50% gone) and we haven't saved a thing. Meanwhile hundreds of thousands lose jobs in private sector and get little to no compensation while pension schemes are often ruined. What an awful world for these poor teachers.

Head The Wall

femur61 wrote: »

At least what has happened in the last year they have to meet targets in order to keep the CP agreement.

They seem to be failing miserably at it as well. No surprise there

tayto lover

Head The Wall wrote: »

They seem to be failing miserably at it as well. No surprise there

No surprises ! Especially when you don't want to see any and prefer to complain and begrudge. Nothing like a good old whinge to make the country recover.

tayto lover

highgiant1985 wrote: »

also just to add some public sector workers DO get bonuses. Its the same in private sector some DO get bonuses but not all.

Please tell me more.

Flex

tayto lover wrote: »

No surprises ! Especially when you don't want to see any and prefer to complain and begrudge. Nothing like a good old whinge to make the country recover.

There was a simple bit of maths done earlier regards the savings in pay. They came to about €300m. Now, remove €150m for the increase in pensions asa result of that and remove another €250m for incremental pay rises and the bill actually increased by €100 or so.

Regards the other €300m in savings, as far as Ive seen so far most of those are improvements in cost efficiency, not actually reductions in the cost.

Thats whats so frustrating; we're hearing of €600m in savings, but when you actually delve into these 'savings' the amount the PS bill is reduced by is **** all.

tayto lover

Flex wrote: »

There was a simple bit of maths done earlier regards the savings in pay. They came to about €300m. Now, remove €150m for the increase in pensions asa result of that and remove another €250m for incremental pay rises and the bill actually increased by €100 or so.

Regards the other €300m in savings, as far as Ive seen so far most of those are improvements in cost efficiency, not actually reductions in the cost.

Thats whats so frustrating; we're hearing of €600m in savings, but when you actually delve into these 'savings' the amount the PS bill is reduced by is **** all.

That is only a short time thing because so many are leaving. Things will be better when it evens out. You have to expect that with so many leaving. It will take a few years to see the real savings, unless you want them to leave without their entitlements.

dissed doc

spider guardian wrote: »

There's nothing to stop public sectors workers seeking work elsewhere if they're unhappy with their remuneration.

One of many reasons why several hospitals will be closing from July, as 400 doctor jobs remain unfilled.

I can see the future of Ireland with your mindset: "well if you're unhappy with the cave and well nearby to get water, you can leave". It's as if there is some sort of concerted effort to actual move backwards towards neanderthal times, rather than improve society as a whole.

tayto lover

spider guardian wrote: »

There's nothing to stop public sectors workers seeking work elsewhere if they're unhappy with their remuneration.

Does that not go for all workers ?
I left teaching because i felt i hadn't the temperament for it and i didn't like filling my evenings correcting homework and planning lessons for the following day. I wanted a job where i could leave in the evening and not worry or have to do extra stuff in my own time. Simple as. While the day is basically 9 'till 4 i didn't like to have to take my break supervising in the yard and eating a sandwich as i moved about sorting out rows or refereeing games. Thats why i got out.

Sand

tayto lover wrote: »

It will take a few years to see the real savings, unless you want them to leave without their entitlements.

We dont have a few years.

spider guardian

tayto lover wrote: »

Does that not go for all workers ?
I left teaching because i felt i hadn't the temperament for it and i didn't like filling my evenings correcting homework and planning lessons for the following day. I wanted a job where i could leave in the evening and not worry or have to do extra stuff in my own time. Simple as. While the day is basically 9 'till 4 i didn't like to have to take my break supervising in the yard and eating a sandwich as i moved about sorting out rows or refereeing games. Thats why i got out.

It does go for all workers. I just detected a hint of begrudgery in the post where you mentioned that "he probably gets a nice bonus". So what if he does? Surely that's just between him and his employer.

Fair play to you for getting out when you did, life's too short to be unhappy in a job.

Vizzy

Flex wrote: »

There was a simple bit of maths done earlier regards the savings in pay. They came to about €300m. Now, remove €150m for the increase in pensions asa result of that and remove another €250m for incremental pay rises and the bill actually increased by €100 or so.

Regards the other €300m in savings, as far as Ive seen so far most of those are improvements in cost efficiency, not actually reductions in the cost.

Thats whats so frustrating; we're hearing of €600m in savings, but when you actually delve into these 'savings' the amount the PS bill is reduced by is **** all.

If a private sector company employ a new employee for €50,000 and he immediately introduces new policies/procedures that result in savings to the employer of €100,000, have the companies costs gone up or down ?