Politicians salaries.

Maura74

Gurgle wrote: »

Because salary for a particular level of job isn't related to the population of the country, more to do with cost of living.

I agree, its only right and proper that the Taoiseach takes a bigger percentage paycut than lower level staff and also gets hit with the increased taxes.

Apparently Enda agrees with us too. :cool:

If it got to do with the cost of living Spain has the same costs as Ireland as it is in the euro, when they joined just like Ireland everything rounded upwards, therefore why such desparity in salaries, it is just greed with the TD's.

The Taoiseach and his predecessors cannot say that they have done such a wonderful job that they deserve their overinflated salaries.

itzme

Maura74 wrote: »

Look at the size of Ireland population 5 million and maybe less now due to emigration compared this to UK or USA, UK is around 70 million and USA around 500 million.

No wonder countries like India and China is doing so well just look at the leaders salaries which is equivalent to the minimum wage in Irealnd therefore why is the Taoiseachs getting so much when there are much larger countries like China and India are getting equivalent to minimum wage, also the Taoiseachs salary is double to what the leader is salary in Spain. Grrrrrrr

This is just a short list of incoherent points listing why you don't like the Taoiseachs current salary.
You've mentioned both population and minimum wage, if population is important then where is your indignation for the terrible salaries paid to the Chinese or the Indians? It seems to me that you don't have a principle here you have a bone to grind that he is paid in your eyes so much.

If we're honestly going to deal with the salary of the Taoiseach/TDs we should be able to agree on some very simple points first which doesn't seem to be the case.
There are different levels of seniority in every company,sector/department. Each level of seniority comes with more responsibility / importance / workload / difficulty and so on. We generally try and reward this by giving a reasonable increase in pay over the more junior (easier/less stress) position. Each of these positions should have a top and bottom pay scale. Then the next more senior position should be greater than the top pay scale of the more junior position. So if you take a company with 8 levels of seniority starting at 25k allowing for a max of four 3% increases in that position between base salary of a position and top salary at that position and then a 5% increase to be promoted that salary at the 8th level would be 107k.

The Taoiseach is meant to be the most senior civil servant in the country, that means above or equal to every other position in terms of responsibility/importance/workload/difficulty. It also means that if you follow the chain down, it is a promotion over ministers, in turn over junior ministers, in turn over TDs, in turn over/equal to department heads, section managers, managers of a section, general managers, researchers...... all the way down to something like junior clerical staff. To encourage anyone to take the extra stress/workload of a more senior position we have to pay more, considering it is easy to list 10+(and that's being really brief) levels of equivalent senior that report up the chain to the Taoiseach each of these has is a promotion and thus paid more. That's why politicians get paid more than the average industrial wage, should do and always will.

It does seem a bit crazy that I've had to type this obvious fact out but without accepting this how could we have an intelligent discussion on them being overpaid. Is 200k too much to pay him, honestly I would have to do some more research and look into PPPs, cost of living, expenses before I could give a definitive answer.

Gurgle

Maura74 wrote: »

Spain has the same costs as Ireland as it is in the euro

Nope.

RandolphEsq

The main problem is to be found in the pensions. How a public servant is allowed draw a pension before hitting retirement age annoys me to no end.

"The deficit will have to be closed over night if we vote no".

Fair enough.

SerialComplaint

Maura74 wrote: »

If it got to do with the cost of living Spain has the same costs as Ireland as it is in the euro,

This is nonsense. Check out the cost of property in Spain, and the cost of cars in Spain, and the cost of medication in Spain.

Lantus

I have always believed that the fairest way to pay TD's is to give them the average wage of the country as a whole based on the previous year.

Currently that stands at around €35,000 per annum.

Ministers and the top man should get a small % addition to this say 20% extra to reflect the additional duties and respobsibility.

By being paid an average wage a TD will literally 'feel' the effects first hand of any decisions they make. Currently they are paid so much they are comfortably insulated.

Expenses are a nasty subject. Firstly I think that TD's whose business is in leinster house should live near leinster house. If they want to jolly back and forth back to cork every day they can pay for it themselves.

If I were to get a 5 year contract with a private company they would not pay for me to travel all over the place.

itzme

Lantus wrote: »

I have always believed that the fairest way to pay TD's is to give them the average wage of the country as a whole based on the previous year.

Currently that stands at around €35,000 per annum.

Ministers and the top man should get a small % addition to this say 20% extra to reflect the additional duties and respobsibility.

By being paid an average wage a TD will literally 'feel' the effects first hand of any decisions they make. Currently they are paid so much they are comfortably insulated.

Expenses are a nasty subject. Firstly I think that TD's whose business is in leinster house should live near leinster house. If they want to jolly back and forth back to cork every day they can pay for it themselves.

If I were to get a 5 year contract with a private company they would not pay for me to travel all over the place.

Again another list of disjointed points with little or no link. How is paying a TD the average wage fair? Why should a TD 'feel' the effects of every decision made, that is what their constituents and elections are for. By that logic (and using your comparison to a private company) should a CEO be paid the companies average wage so they 'feel' the effect of their decisions.

There are plenty of people who work directly for or who are responsible to a TD, many of these would (rightly) be on more than the average industrial wage. How can you justify forcing a TD to be paid less than the people who work for them? What is the incentive for anyone to become a TD other than to do public good then?

Also, if part of your job with a company was to spend a large portion of your time in two locations you can be damn sure they would pay for it. Where are you drawing this idea that a private company doesn't pay for travel expenses from company business from? Currently part of TDs job is to be available to their constituency which involves being in the constituency office, so unless you are proposing getting rid of this critical part of democracy travel to and from Dail Eireann is quite normal. Its hilarious that you say that TDs are insulated from feeling the effect of their decisions but at the same time you call for all TDs to be located to Dublin away from their constituency. This really reads like a brain dump and something not thought through.

In general to all posts, I don't know the answer to this, but would be very interested to know of any country who does not pay travel expenses for members of parliament to/from their electoral district? (excluding something like Liechenstein of Vatican City for obvious reasons)

Gurgle

Lantus wrote: »

I have always believed that the fairest way to pay TD's is to give them the average wage of the country as a whole based on the previous year.

That makes sense if we want the Dàil full of average people, with average intelligence, education and experience. i.e. mediocre leaving cert followed by a couple of decades answering phones / running machine in a factory / milking cows / driving a taxi.

In other words, its a very silly idea.

Lantus wrote: »

If I were to get a 5 year contract with a private company they would not pay for me to travel all over the place.

Where did you get this idea?
Any job that requires travel pays for the travel.

kippy

Gurgle wrote: »

That makes sense if we want the Dàil full of average people, with average intelligence, education and experience. i.e. mediocre leaving cert followed by a couple of decades answering phones / running machine in a factory / milking cows / driving a taxi.

In other words, its a very silly idea.


Where did you get this idea?
Any job that requires travel pays for the travel.

I don't condone some of the talk here about reducing salaries to indusctrial wage etc hoever I want to say this.
The dail is, predominately, full of average people with average education etc etc.
How many times have you seen politicians needing to hire "advisers" or "consultants" often at great cost to the state. Some of the decisions made are more political than logical or needed tbf, intelligent people don't do this.
In fact, I would say if you did an IQ test or similiar of TD's the results wouldnt be as high as one would expect.

Politics is about getting enough votes to be elected - you don't need to be a rocket scientist to do that.......

golden lane

the government is paid too much...............by far......

that does not need any explanations........it is a fact....

Welease

kippy wrote: »

I don't condone some of the talk here about reducing salaries to indusctrial wage etc hoever I want to say this.
The dail is, predominately, full of average people with average education etc etc.
How many times have you seen politicians needing to hire "advisers" or "consultants" often at great cost to the state. Some of the decisions made are more political than logical or needed tbf, intelligent people don't do this.
In fact, I would say if you did an IQ test or similiar of TD's the results wouldnt be as high as one would expect.

Politics is about getting enough votes to be elected - you don't need to be a rocket scientist to do that.......

True but you shouldnt restrict the type of people who would go for the position by dropping wages to industrial average.
It's our choice who we fill those positions with, and the country seems largely happy with sons/brothers/cousins of other politicans, known corrupt entities, average IQ party members and the odd smattering of sensible politicians..

I'd rather keep the salary attractive, and hope (not holding my breath) that the electorate start voting for people with a tad more to give the country..

itzme

golden lane wrote: »

the government is paid too much...............by far......

that does not need any explanations........it is a fact....

Oh, I didn't realise that you just have to assert something and say its a fact.

Time to introduce a paradox into this "discussion"

golden lane...... you're wrong.... it doesn't need explaining... it is a fact....

fianna saor

itzme wrote: »

Oh, I didn't realise that you just have to assert something and say its a fact.

Time to introduce a paradox into this "discussion"

golden lane...... you're wrong.... it doesn't need explaining... it is a fact....

so you dont think our politicians are paid too much?

itzme

I was joking about the lack of information / progress of the discussion from the post.

I think I have gone to quite a length to discuss my position on politicians pay and how to try and determine a fairer way of evaluating what to pay them relative to jobs and pay conditions in Ireland, rather than the knee-jerk "Pay them the average wage" or "Hey look at that country, they pay them less" posts so far.
Have you read my posts?

itzme wrote: »

the fact that it has come down nearly 30% in less than 3 years is positive progress. Lets accept that and try and push for a further reduction

golfwallah

Before we set about judging how many TDs we need and how much they are paid, the people of Ireland should seriously sort out what we expect from our politicians – for example, do they have a job spec., what are their objectives and how do we assess their performance on the job?

We have 166 TDs, of whom 112 (75 Fine Gael, 37 Labour) are in Government. There are 15 Ministers in the Cabinet and a further 15 Junior Ministers. From their Ministerial Titles, the average voter has some idea of what the ministers do (or are supposed to do). But as for the rest, very few people are aware of what they do (or are supposed to do).

According to oireachtas.ie: “The main parliamentary function of Deputies is to enact legislation. The Constitution also provides that the Government shall be accountable to Dáil Éireann and various mechanisms are used to discharge this function. The principal mechanisms are parliamentary questions and motions. Members also spend a great deal of their time acting and making representations on behalf of members of the public and interest groups”.

With such a vague job spec., it’s hardly surprising TDs try to be all things to all people and spend so much time and money whizzing about the country.

Let’s look at a few benchmarks from overseas for comparisons.

Duties of US House of Representative Committees seem to be a bit more specific. They include hearings on oversight of government programs, investigative hearings on wrongdoing by public officials, private citizens, or on major disasters. Oversight and investigative hearings may lead to the introduction of legislative proposals.

Population of USA is 312 million and they have 435 Congressmen in the House of Representatives, which is about 1 for every 716,000 citizens.

Population of Yorkshire and Humber is about 5.1 million and they have 54 MPs in Parliament, which is about 1 for every 95,000 citizens.

Population of Ireland is 4.5 million and they have 166 TDs in the Dáil, which is about 1 for every 27,000 citizens.

The number of committees in the US House of Representatives is 20 (average of 22 members per committee) and in the Dáil it is 16 (average of 16 members per committee).

Going on the above benchmarks, we seem to be grossly over-represented in terms of TDs. Going on UK comparatives, we could go as low as 45 TDs, whereas, US comparatives would bring us down to only 6 TDS.

Basic pay for a TD of €98,424 compares to €82,420 for a UK MP and €136,631 for a US Congressman.

What I’d like to see is TD numbers, pay, job descriptions and accountability brought more into line with norms in UK, USA and selected EU States.

itzme

golfwallah wrote: »

Before we set about judging how many TDs we need and how much they are paid, the people of Ireland should seriously sort out what we expect from our politicians – for example, do they have a job spec., what are their objectives and how do we assess their performance on the job?

We have 166 TDs, of whom 112 (75 Fine Gael, 37 Labour) are in Government. There are 15 Ministers in the Cabinet and a further 15 Junior Ministers. From their Ministerial Titles, the average voter has some idea of what the ministers do (or are supposed to do). But as for the rest, very few people are aware of what they do (or are supposed to do).

According to oireachtas.ie: “The main parliamentary function of Deputies is to enact legislation. The Constitution also provides that the Government shall be accountable to Dáil Éireann and various mechanisms are used to discharge this function. The principal mechanisms are parliamentary questions and motions. Members also spend a great deal of their time acting and making representations on behalf of members of the public and interest groups”.

With such a vague job spec., it’s hardly surprising TDs try to be all things to all people and spend so much time and money whizzing about the country.

Let’s look at a few benchmarks from overseas for comparisons.

Duties of US House of Representative Committees seem to be a bit more specific. They include hearings on oversight of government programs, investigative hearings on wrongdoing by public officials, private citizens, or on major disasters. Oversight and investigative hearings may lead to the introduction of legislative proposals.

Population of USA is 312 million and they have 435 Congressmen in the House of Representatives, which is about 1 for every 716,000 citizens.

Population of Yorkshire and Humber is about 5.1 million and they have 54 MPs in Parliament, which is about 1 for every 95,000 citizens.

Population of Ireland is 4.5 million and they have 166 TDs in the Dáil, which is about 1 for every 27,000 citizens.

The number of committees in the US House of Representatives is 20 (average of 22 members per committee) and in the Dáil it is 16 (average of 16 members per committee).

Going on the above benchmarks, we seem to be grossly over-represented in terms of TDs. Going on UK comparatives, we could go as low as 45 TDs, whereas, US comparatives would bring us down to only 6 TDS.

Basic pay for a TD of €98,424 compares to €82,420 for a UK MP and €136,631 for a US Congressman.

What I’d like to see is TD numbers, pay, job descriptions and accountability brought more into line with norms in UK, USA and selected EU States.

The job spec point is absolutely spot on, I wouldn't have a lot to add to what you've said.


On the TD numbers, its something that has to be discussed in more detail alright but there's more to it. America is a federal state so each state has essentially its own government for running most of its local affairs. So while they have a very small national footprint the number of elected officials is huge (this link says over 500,000 in 1992 but could include sheriffs and so on?) here. So if we were to discuss our numbers in relation to other countries we'd first have to look at how local government is run to see if local / national models each country employs and the power they have are comparable.


On pay, it can be useful to look at international neighbours for ideas but I would be strongly against using this as some sort of benchmark. For instance both the pay of the president of france (240k -> 253k) and germany (228k ->242k) has gone up in the last two years while ours has gone down (285k -> 200k) and so has the uk (199k->172k). I would prefer we set our own standards of fair pay that as a country we can accept and if they are lower than other countries so be it, if they are higher so be it. I couldn't give a crap if our Taoiseach was being paid 30K more or less than the PM of England if it was representative of the pay conditions and job in Ireland.

Maura74

itzme wrote: »

If we're honestly going to deal with the salary of the Taoiseach/TDs we should be able to agree on some very simple points first which doesn't seem to be the case.
There are different levels of seniority in every company,sector/department. Each level of seniority comes with more responsibility / importance / workload / difficulty and so on. We generally try and reward this by giving a reasonable increase in pay over the more junior (easier/less stress) position. Each of these positions should have a top and bottom pay scale. Then the next more senior position should be greater than the top pay scale of the more junior position. So if you take a company with 8 levels of seniority starting at 25k allowing for a max of four 3% increases in that position between base salary of a position and top salary at that position and then a 5% increase to be promoted that salary at the 8th level would be 107k.

Yes, I agree that there are different levels of responsibility in companies, if a small company with only a small amount of employees then the boss of that company that started out on the shop floor so to speak that worked his/her way up to the top rung of the ladder with a salary reflecting the size of the company. In a bigger company with 40 times more employees surely his/her salary would be far more than a small company. It is just the same with small and bigger countries, the larger country the leader would get a must bigger salary due to the amount of responsibility that goes with a larger population of 47 million and a smaller country with a small population of 5 million should not get double the salary of much larger country.


CEO of Plc companies now get there bonuses in shares of the company that they are responsible for, therefore it is in CEO's interest to make the company profitable for all concern. If losses occurs then there are no bonuses for managers, CEO’s or the employees. In public section it is the tax payers money that is being used with a never ending pit of money there for the taking regardless whether the Leader did a good or a bad job for their country and its people......

golfwallah

itzme wrote: »

The job spec point is absolutely spot on, I wouldn't have a lot to add to what you've said.


On the TD numbers, its something that has to be discussed in more detail alright but there's more to it. America is a federal state so each state has essentially its own government for running most of its local affairs. So while they have a very small national footprint the number of elected officials is huge (this link says over 500,000 in 1992 but could include sheriffs and so on?) here. So if we were to discuss our numbers in relation to other countries we'd first have to look at how local government is run to see if local / national models each country employs and the power they have are comparable.


On pay, it can be useful to look at international neighbours for ideas but I would be strongly against using this as some sort of benchmark. For instance both the pay of the president of france (240k -> 253k) and germany (228k ->242k) has gone up in the last two years while ours has gone down (285k -> 200k) and so has the uk (199k->172k). I would prefer we set our own standards of fair pay that as a country we can accept and if they are lower than other countries so be it, if they are higher so be it. I couldn't give a crap if our Taoiseach was being paid 30K more or less than the PM of England if it was representative of the pay conditions and job in Ireland.

Good debating points and I agree with your point about pay being representative of pay and conditions here.

As regards local politics, however, my view is that county councillors have very little power or effectiveness, other than acting as lobbyists on local issues. As County Managers have almost exclusive executive power, the only real powers councillors seem to have are setting an annual rate (and, if they fail to do this, the Government Department can force a rate upon them within a specified number of days) and the granting of planning permission (and we all know the mess they made of that).

Seems to me like there is real need for reform of both local and central government from division of responsibilities between local and central government to agreeing clearer job specs through to setting the optimum number of representatives and their rates of pay.

In all fairness, the programme for government makes provision for some reform but, I feel it should go a lot further.

SerialComplaint

Maura74 wrote: »

CEO of Plc companies now get there bonuses in shares of the company that they are responsible for, therefore it is in CEO's interest to make the company profitable for all concern. If losses occurs then there are no bonuses for managers, CEO’s or the employees.

I'm sure that Fingers €27m Fingleton will be delighted to hear your news about how losses affect CEO income.

femur61

Ireland 166 Tds with a popoulation the same size of Greater Manchester who have 28 MPs. Jobs for the boys/girls who can't secure a teaching post.

kippy

femur61 wrote: »

Ireland 166 Tds with a popoulation the same size of Greater Manchester who have 28 MPs. Jobs for the boys/girls who can't secure a teaching post.

I don't particularily like your teaching post comment, but yes, this I believe is the crux of the matter. We are over represented at every level. Despite promises that this would change, nothing has happened.

itzme

Maura74 wrote: »

Yes, I agree that there are different levels of responsibility in companies, if a small company with only a small amount of employees then the boss of that company that started out on the shop floor so to speak that worked his/her way up to the top rung of the ladder with a salary reflecting the size of the company. In a bigger company with 40 times more employees surely his/her salary would be far more than a small company. It is just the same with small and bigger countries, the larger country the leader would get a must bigger salary due to the amount of responsibility that goes with a larger population of 47 million and a smaller country with a small population of 5 million should not get double the salary of much larger country.


CEO of Plc companies now get there bonuses in shares of the company that they are responsible for, therefore it is in CEO's interest to make the company profitable for all concern. If losses occurs then there are no bonuses for managers, CEO’s or the employees. In public section it is the tax payers money that is being used with a never ending pit of money there for the taking regardless whether the Leader did a good or a bad job for their country and its people......

I'm not gonna waste much time on this as you clearly haven't thought this through.
In short, if size was the predominant determining factor for pay how is Germanys PM pay so close to the USA's? Or if size was so important how is the head of AIB (around 15,000 employees) paid 500,000 and the Taoiseach (over 400,000 employees) only 200,000?

itzme

golfwallah wrote: »

Good debating points and I agree with your point about pay being representative of pay and conditions here.

As regards local politics, however, my view is that county councillors have very little power or effectiveness, other than acting as lobbyists on local issues. As County Managers have almost exclusive executive power, the only real powers councillors seem to have are setting an annual rate (and, if they fail to do this, the Government Department can force a rate upon them within a specified number of days) and the granting of planning permission (and we all know the mess they made of that).

Seems to me like there is real need for reform of both local and central government from division of responsibilities between local and central government to agreeing clearer job specs through to setting the optimum number of representatives and their rates of pay.

In all fairness, the programme for government makes provision for some reform but, I feel it should go a lot further.

Yeah, I would think that the lack of local power for councillors is one of the reasons for our high ratio of national representatives. Definitely a need for reform, bring local power to the local authorities and that should reduce our national representation (but possible increase our local)

itzme

SerialComplaint wrote: »

I'm sure that Fingers €27m Fingleton will be delighted to hear your news about how losses affect CEO income.

And sure those banks that we are (as in the country) bailing out wouldn't try and offer bonuses during this time would theynot a hope, god no

golden lane

itzme wrote: »

Oh, I didn't realise that you just have to assert something and say its a fact.

Time to introduce a paradox into this "discussion"

golden lane...... you're wrong.... it doesn't need explaining... it is a fact....

you know how much they are paid.......an undisputable fact.....

golden lane

if the government had a salary decrease tomorrow.......how many would resign...

none.....they would still be paid too much..

femur61

kippy wrote: »

I don't particularily like your teaching post comment, but yes, this I believe is the crux of the matter. We are over represented at every level. Despite promises that this would change, nothing has happened.

I apologise, Mr Noonan was so embarrassing on Bloomberg yesterday with his comment on the Greek crisis "the only way the Greek crisis will effect us is our consumption of Feta cheese".

BarackPyjama

andrew wrote: »

Maybe what they're getting is a bit much, but at the same time, there's a logic behind not paying them a pittance.

Agreed. We need to incentivise our politicians/servants with obscenely high salaries to ensure that we have the right people in the job and that that the country doesn't slide towards compete and utter economic ruin, so that jobs can be created and so that we can maintain state assets. Oh... wait...

Markcheese

I think TD's should be self employed or classed as it , (like contract staff) so when they get booted out, thats it no ongoing bills for exorbitant pensions, no secretarial bills to archive their documents ect. Fund their own pensions.. Reasonable vouched expenses(not including a turn up at work expense) , and a limit on staff..(we already have citizens information why pay twice to have a TD's office do it too. And scrap the senate all together...don't see the point.
It may be "only" 115 million but we're only broke... And you've got to start at the top...

SerialComplaint

golden lane wrote: »

if the government had a salary decrease tomorrow.......how many would resign...

If your employer had a salary decrease tomorrow, how many would resign?

SMASH THE UNIONS

@kippy: completely agree with your post. Most of our politicians are publicans, primary school teachers, and a couple of terrorists. This doesn't happen in other countries - only in the banana republic. I'd be in favour of requiring TDs to hold at least a university degree as proof of a certain level of education and intelligence. At the moment, the village idiot that can tell the best lies gets elected. I want to see intelligent politicians that are qualified for their position - ministers of finance with degrees in accountancy, ministers of justice with degrees in law, ministers of health with degrees in medicine etc. We've far too many clueless gombeens happy to ride the gravy train for four years while squeezing the state for every penny they can get. Hiring costly consultants and advisors to do their job.

Maura74

SerialComplaint wrote: »

I'm sure that Fingers €27m Fingleton will be delighted to hear your news about how losses affect CEO income.

That does not make anything right CEO's salary is about 40 or 50 more than the average working person earnings which is obscene. The shareholders have started to protest however they are rich and do not solely relying on their dividends from their investments therefore it does not matter that much to them compared to the average person working on the minimum wage.


http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-05-07/aviva-ceo-pressed-to-step-down-after-meeting-revolt

itzme wrote: »

I'm not gonna waste much time on this as you clearly haven't thought this through.
In short, if size was the predominant determining factor for pay how is Germanys PM pay so close to the USA's? Or if size was so important how is the head of AIB (around 15,000 employees) paid 500,000 and the Taoiseach (over 400,000 employees) only 200,000?

I like the way you say ‘just’ 200,000 euros and I do not know what you are saying here. Germany population is 81,858,000 and USA is 313,558,000. The Germany President Angela Merkel is doing 50 times more than Ireland in keeping the euro zone counties that took the money and now do not want to play by the rules ie not wanting to pay it back… Look how strong Germany is compared to other euro countries. She deserves every penny she gets.


As we all know, Germany do have an elected President, but in practice the President doesn't have that much power. Everyday running of the government is done by the Chancellor, which is equivalent to a Prime Minister.

‘Holding the third-highest state office available within the Federal Republic of Germany, the Chancellor of Germany receives €220,000 per annum and a €22,000 bonus,’
Can you show me a link where it says differently please.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population

Jaysoose

femur61 wrote: »

I apologise, Mr Noonan was so embarrassing on Bloomberg yesterday with his comment on the Greek crisis "the only way the Greek crisis will effect us is our consumption of Feta cheese".

Its getting very scary at this stage, noonan and kenny are harping on about "the markets" ad naseum when its clear they dont have a breeze what they are on about.

Gurgle

kippy wrote:

The dail is, predominately, full of average people with average education etc etc.

SMASH THE UNIONS wrote:

Most of our politicians are publicans, primary school teachers, and a couple of terrorists.

Can either of you post a link to source please?
I can't find this info, which makes me a little skeptical of your assertions.

kippy

Gurgle wrote: »

Can either of you post a link to source please?
I can't find this info, which makes me a little skeptical of your assertions.

What statistics do you need?
How often do you read of politicians needing advisers or consultants?

I'm not stating that there aren't intelligent politicians out there (You dont need to be educated to degree level to be intelligent)
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/new-teachertds-holding-on-to-their-school-jobs-2971181.html

itzme

Maura74 wrote: »

That does not make anything right CEO's salary is about 40 or 50 more than the average working person earnings which is obscene.

No one was saying it was right, it was in response to you saying this

Maura74 wrote: »

CEO of Plc companies now get there bonuses in shares of the company that they are responsible for, therefore it is in CEO's interest to make the company profitable for all concern. If losses occurs then there are no bonuses for managers, CEO’s or the employees.

You can’t have it both ways, you are actually managing to disagree with yourself. Seems like you're chasing your own tail

Maura74 wrote: »

I like the way you say ‘just’ 200,000 euros and I do not know what you are saying here. Germany population is 81,858,000 and USA is 313,558,000. The Germany President Angela Merkel is doing 50 times more than Ireland in keeping the euro zone counties that took the money and now do not want to play by the rules ie not wanting to pay it back… Look how strong Germany is compared to other euro countries. She deserves every penny she gets.

I like the way I didn’t say ‘just’, I know it’s pedantic but you have the quote directly above and you still can’t quote me right. I was making a simple point
Basing the salary primarily of a countries leader on population(/employees) is silly, overly simplistic and clearly not thought through. I have in my posts already laid out, in a decent amount of detail, how I think it should be worked out and why it should be worked out that way. Take a look and come back with what’s wrong with it.

Maura74 wrote: »

‘Holding the third-highest state office available within the Federal Republic of Germany, the Chancellor of Germany receives €220,000 per annum and a €22,000 bonus,’
Can you show me a link where it says differently please.

Are you serious, do people even read posts anymore? Where did I say it wasn’t 242,000? Did you even read any other posts... like the one I’m quoting below where I already said her salary is now 242,000!

itzme wrote: »

For instance both the pay of the president of france (240k -> 253k) and germany (228k ->242k) has gone up in the last two years

RobbieTheRobber

SMASH THE UNIONS wrote: »

@kippy: completely agree with your post. Most of our politicians are publicans, primary school teachers, and a couple of terrorists. This doesn't happen in other countries - only in the banana republic. I'd be in favour of requiring TDs to hold at least a university degree as proof of a certain level of education and intelligence. At the moment, the village idiot that can tell the best lies gets elected. I want to see intelligent politicians that are qualified for their position - ministers of finance with degrees in accountancy, ministers of justice with degrees in law, ministers of health with degrees in medicine etc. We've far too many clueless gombeens happy to ride the gravy train for four years while squeezing the state for every penny they can get. Hiring costly consultants and advisors to do their job.

Why should a person have to obtain a degree before being elegible for politics, and if we implement such a law is it really representative of our nation(them being elected representatives)?

From your post its clear you dont like our current government (cant say im their biggest fan) but they were elected by the majority as is the way a democratic election should work, so if we as a nation choose to elect these people then that is the right choice no matter what your personal feelings are!


As for the qualified people Michael mcDowell was qualified in his role and I dont think he covered himself in glory during his time in office.
Likewise charlie McCreevy qualified in commerce and who Gareth fitzgerald blames for our crisis! http://www.independent.ie/national-news/fitzgerald-says-crisis-started-with-mccreevy-1606203.html

golden lane

SerialComplaint wrote: »

If your employer had a salary decrease tomorrow, how many would resign?

my ex employer (i am retired now) never needed to decrease wages......

they earned, not borrowed them......

femur61

Gurgle wrote: »

Can either of you post a link to source please?
I can't find this info, which makes me a little skeptical of your assertions.

Everybody knows Enda is a primary school teacher, Noonan = primary school teacher. Howlin = school teacher. Adams = ???????

itzme

Couldn't agree more with you robbie, George Carlin said it in a much more entertaining way here but if our politicians are gombeens, lazy, village idiots, liars..... that tells us a hell a lot more about the electorate who elects them and allows them to stay in power then it does about the politicians

kippy

itzme wrote: »

Couldn't agree more with you robbie, George Carlin said it in a much more entertaining way here but if our politicians are gombeens, lazy, village idiots, liars..... that tells us a hell a lot more about the electorate who elects them and allows them to stay in power then it does about the politicians

Indeed. One of the major issues with "democracy".

itzme

femur61 wrote: »

Everybody knows Enda is a primary school teacher, Noonan = primary school teacher. Howlin = school teacher. Adams = ???????

The article says 29 out of 166, can you list the other 55 that make up the publicans and terrorists that make your assertion of "most" correct, otherwise you have to admit you were wrong.

Kenny was a primary school teacher until 1975, so that was what three years as a teacher? Politician since then 36-37 years, he's a professional politician not a teacher. I worked as a McDonalds worker for three years, so since I did that first does that make me a McDonalds worker no matter what I do now and for how long?
I'm not a massive fan of FF or FG but I'd have discuss what they're doing wrong and how it could be done better than try and take cheap lazy digs at them or by proxy teachers.

creedp

itzme wrote: »

And sure those banks that we are (as in the country) bailing out wouldn't try and offer bonuses during this time would theynot a hope, god no

Its not just banks either .. I remember reading about the CEO's pay in the big three auto companies in the US before they were bailed out (Ford escaped!) by the Govt. These companies (GM and Chrysler) were absolutely bust and were run into the ground by bad management yet the CEOs were being paid in excess of $20m a year .. there's some empathy with your company's success. God only knows what they would have earned if they had been making profits!! Its the usual line public bad and private bad that is incessantly trotted out. Not saying either is incorrect some of the time but certainly not all the time .. problem with sweeping generalisations.

In relation to the OP, I think that pay for Taoiseach/Govt Ministers could come down further but I think the suggestion of the av. industrial wage is not a runner. I do think though that we should be looking at the overall terms and conditions, i.e. including all the allowances and expenses, and not just salary. I think its ludricuous that a TD gets a substantial allowance for sitting on a Dail committee - surely that should be part of his normal work and not attrach a premium payment. Recently, Gilmore was defending the extra payment for a Junior Minister to sit at the Cabinet. For feck sake, she is paid as a Junior Minister and get an extra €20k to sit at the Table!! Similarly the idea that someone based in Dublin gets €12k a year to travel the Dail is not sustainable.

SerialComplaint

Maura74 wrote: »

That does not make anything right CEO's salary is about 40 or 50 more than the average working person earnings which is obscene. The shareholders have started to protest however they are rich and do not solely relying on their dividends from their investments therefore it does not matter that much to them compared to the average person working on the minimum wage.

I was just pointing out that the use of stock and stock options to link CEO income to future success doesn't really work. It encourage short-term approachs, where the CEO can pump up the apparent value and then cash out his stock.

golden lane wrote: »

my ex employer (i am retired now) never needed to decrease wages......

they earned, not borrowed them......

Nice evasion. There isn't a business in the country that never needed to borrow in bad times. Are you suggesting that every business that borrows money has to cut staff wages at the same time.

SMASH THE UNIONS wrote: »

@kippy: completely agree with your post. Most of our politicians are publicans, primary school teachers, and a couple of terrorists. This doesn't happen in other countries - only in the banana republic. I'd be in favour of requiring TDs to hold at least a university degree as proof of a certain level of education and intelligence. At the moment, the village idiot that can tell the best lies gets elected. I want to see intelligent politicians that are qualified for their position - ministers of finance with degrees in accountancy, ministers of justice with degrees in law, ministers of health with degrees in medicine etc. We've far too many clueless gombeens happy to ride the gravy train for four years while squeezing the state for every penny they can get. Hiring costly consultants and advisors to do their job.

There is so much wrong with this post that it's hard to know where to start. I guess the username gives a fair indication of the level of balanced consideration and thought that went into it.

First of all, we've had the Minister of Finance with the accountancy degree - Charlie McCreevy - the main architect of our bubble economy. The genius who came up with 'If I have money, I'll spend it'. The man who pi$$ed away €2 billion on his ludicrous decentralisation plan. By contrast, Ruairi Quinn is generally recognised as being an excellent Minister for Finance - he's an architect by profession. We've had the Minster of Justice with the law degree - Michael McDowell - the man who had to argue with everybody and win every argument - the man who failed completely at reforming the Gardai and the Prison Service.

By requiring degrees, you are by and large limiting access to those whose parents had the resources to put them through college. You are furthering the inequality that arises from our education system.

Requiring functional expertise (i.e. doctors as Minister for Health and lawyers as Minister for Justice) makes no sense. Why would you require a doctor as a Minster for Health - why not a nurse, or a pharmacist, or a speech therapist, or a manager of residential services for people with disabilities, or a health economist, or a health informatics specialist, or a health quality specialist, or a child protection social worker? The doctor is expert at being a doctor, not at running health services.

Similarly, in the Dept of Justice, why would you want a lawyer and not a Garda, or a Prison Officer - where the big money is spent by that Dept.

The functional experts already work in the relevant Depts and agencies. The Minister does not need to be a functional expert. They need to be able to lead a team of senior people. They need to be able to implement change. They need to be able to understand policy. Functional experts (e.g. doctors) are often the very worst people to run health services - remember Brendan Drumm?

And finally, the Dept Finance has very little to do with accountancy. It is about running an economy, not a business. If any specialist skill was required, it would an economist, not an accountant.

It would really help if people had a basic knowledge of how Govt works before they go pontificating about their ill-considered solutions.

Gurgle

kippy wrote:

What statistics do you need?

Something to support your assertion that:

kippy wrote:

The dail is, predominately, full of average people with average education etc etc.

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/predominantly

femur61 wrote:

Everybody knows Enda is a primary school teacher, Noonan = primary school teacher. Howlin = school teacher. Adams = ???????

This is not the same as:

femur61 wrote:

Most of our politicians are publicans, primary school teachers, and a couple of terrorists.

most
I'm not going to go through all 166, but starting from here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Members_of_the_31st_D%C3%A1il
If you check the individuals' pages, it seems that a significant majority have 3rd level education.(Alma Mater listed under Bio)

So I'll return to my assertion: We (I) don't want a Dàil full of people with the level of intelligence, education and experience that would earn them average industrial wage in the private sector.

golden lane

serial complaint.....

i am not suggesting anything about private companies.......

i am suggesting that the politicians in times of great hardship should reduce their salaries etc........

simply because the country cannot afford such salaries.....

that does not need pages of writing and arguements......just for them to pay themselves less........

they should set examples......

when the country can afford to pay them more again, i see no problem then.....

so why don't they just get on with it.........

SerialComplaint

golden lane wrote: »

serial complaint.....

i am not suggesting anything about private companies.......

i am suggesting that the politicians in times of great hardship should reduce their salaries etc........

They've already done it - three times if I recall correctly.

Maura74

SerialComplaint wrote: »

They've already done it - three times if I recall correctly.

Yes, but nearly enough, they should make a cut of 50% and that would be no hardship for them.:mad::mad:

itzme wrote: »

Kenny was a primary school teacher until 1975, so that was what three years as a teacher? Politician since then 36-37 years, he's a professional politician not a teacher. I worked as a McDonalds worker for three years, so since I did that first does that make me a McDonalds worker no matter what I do now and for how long?
I'm not a massive fan of FF or FG but I'd have discuss what they're doing wrong and how it could be done better than try and take cheap lazy digs at them or by proxy teachers.

Therefore if he has been a politics for 37 he is a career politician with not much of an idea how hard it is for small companies to make a go of it in these hard times or how difficult it is for people losing their jobs and homes as a result.

Gurgle

Maura74 wrote: »

Yes, but nearly enough, they should make a cut of 50% and that would be no hardship for them.:mad::mad:

Reducing salary from 100k to 50k would be no hardship.

I take it you're raising a family and paying a mortgage?
Or at the very least you're a grown-up?

Maura74

Gurgle wrote: »

Reducing salary from 100k to 50k would be no hardship.

I take it you're raising a family and paying a mortgage?
Or at the very least you're a grown-up?

you are misinterpreting my post, I was referring to the Taoiseach/Govt Ministers, the Taoiseach salary at present is just over 200k therefore he could easily come down to 100k with his guarantee pensions and I expect no housing commitments/expenses, I assume his family has all grown up and left home by now or are they making their career in government as well?


At least he does not spend any money on makeup like the amount that Bertie spent.



http://www.thejournal.ie/bertie-spent-e441-a-week-on-make-up-enda-has-spent-e0-415405-Apr2012/