Croke Park Agreement beyond 2014

Farmer Pudsey

Godge wrote: »

As well as their salary cuts, various public servants have seen their hours increased:

- civil servants lost their half-hour a week for bank time
- teachers work an extra hour under the Croke Park Agreement
- university lecturers work an extra hour
- technology institute lecturers are timetabled for an extra two hours


no increase in hours in Tesco, only pay increase.

Your point is?

Teachers work if fulltime around 22 hours a week let assume that they spend 2 hours/evening correcting student work this bring there total working week to 32 hours. Primary teachers work about a 37 week year post primary work about 33 week year. there is no comparrison with tesco workers so get off your high horse. This is a disgusting comparrison and as a union member as I am myself I am absolutly disgusted by your targeting of Tesco or any other low paid workers in the Grocery trade.

If Tesco, Dunnes et al had there way they would reduce worker pay if they could. Go and work in one of these employers for a while. Arrive at work at seven or eight in the morning and go to your checkout annd spend four hours there before you get a break for a bite to eat what ever about a toilet break. It is not like a cushy PS job behind a computer where you are allowed a 10 minute rest period for your eyes (often used as a smoking break)after an hour.

The only reason that Tesco and there ilk have not reduced wages is mainly because of the minimum wage legislation but again as a PS you (and your two faced unions) would prefer to see that broken rather than right the injustice of your pay levels.

hatrickpatrick

^ So why are we not focusing on trying to improve conditions for private sector workers instead of focusing on trying to bring public sector conditions, where better, down to the lower level?

Surely better conditions for private sector workers is a better outcome than seeing public sector conditions deteriorate just to give people some sort of bizarre satisfaction in seeing others suffer?

Just a thought. If conditions are worse in the private sector then that's what must be targeted.

Godge

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

.

Earlier in this thread I stated that 3.5-4 billion reductionwas needed in the public service paybill through wage cuts and job reductions in the public service. Some posters believe that this will achieve 50% of this in savings this is not true it would be more like 70% benifit to government spending.

Like I said earlier the PS unions are being very two faces by wringing there hands about cut in services and then refusing to contenance the reversal of the two benchmarking which disapportionally benifited the higher paid in the public service. Also I believe that pay cutsshould be targated at the higher paid in the PS. Also we have about 800 quangos with boards, CEO, deputy CEO's deputy to the deputy CEO's if these were cut in half how much would be saved.

.

Right, let me explain this slowly again for you.

You only want the salaries of top people in the public sector cut. When you cut someone's salary, they lose the bit of salary that they are paying the highest rate of tax and the highest deductions.

Let us say you took €10,000 a year off 1,000 of these so-called high earner. This should give you €10m saving.

O.K., first the government loses the 42% tax it deducted from this €10,000, then it loses the 7% Universal Social Charge, then it loses 10.5% pension levy deduction, as well as the pension contribution of 6.5%. Let us not forget PRSI of 4%. To be fair, the two pension deductions are allowed against tax so the net effect of the two of them is 9.86% rather than 17%.

Adding it all up, 42% tax, 7% USC, 9.86% pension and 4% PRSI means that the government was already getting 62.96% of that €10m already so the net saving is €3.74m, just over a third. Now, as that is the top of the money earned by those, it was hardly spent on basic foodstuffs. Let us assume that 50% of the €3.74m net that those public servants were taking home in cash had been spent on luxury goods and or drink and cigarettes attracting the higher VAT rate and excise duties (VAT is still up so as everyone else is penniless according to this thread so it must be the public servants buying luxury goods), well the VAT and excise on half of €3.74m is about €0.5m, give or take a little.

So to sum up, you take €10,000 off the top 1,000 public servants and while a simple calculation means that will save €10m, in the real world it only saves €3.24m, less than a third so more like 32% benefit to public expenditure than the 70% you quote.

Now, does anyone have any questions or can we now accept that cutting public service pay is not a short cut to solving the budgetary problems?

Tipp Man

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

^ So why are we not focusing on trying to improve conditions for private sector workers instead of focusing on trying to bring public sector conditions, where better, down to the lower level?

Surely better conditions for private sector workers is a better outcome than seeing public sector conditions deteriorate just to give people some sort of bizarre satisfaction in seeing others suffer?

Just a thought. If conditions are worse in the private sector then that's what must be targeted.

Ha ha this is pharcical

If the private sector had the same conditions, productivity and outlook on work as the public sector then the whole country would literally be doing nothing 5 days a week - production, output and tax revenue would fall dramatically and then we'd have to cut the public sector pay by even more

It's amazing that after all the country has been through the PS are still delusional

Tipp Man

Godge wrote: »

Right, let me explain this slowly again for you.

You only want the salaries of top people in the public sector cut. When you cut someone's salary, they lose the bit of salary that they are paying the highest rate of tax and the highest deductions.

Let us say you took €10,000 a year off 1,000 of these so-called high earner. This should give you €10m saving.

O.K., first the government loses the 42% tax it deducted from this €10,000, then it loses the 7% Universal Social Charge, then it loses 10.5% pension levy deduction, as well as the pension contribution of 6.5%. Let us not forget PRSI of 4%. To be fair, the two pension deductions are allowed against tax so the net effect of the two of them is 9.86% rather than 17%.

Adding it all up, 42% tax, 7% USC, 9.86% pension and 4% PRSI means that the government was already getting 62.96% of that €10m already so the net saving is €3.74m, just over a third. Now, as that is the top of the money earned by those, it was hardly spent on basic foodstuffs. Let us assume that 50% of the €3.74m net that those public servants were taking home in cash had been spent on luxury goods and or drink and cigarettes attracting the higher VAT rate and excise duties (VAT is still up so as everyone else is penniless according to this thread so it must be the public servants buying luxury goods), well the VAT and excise on half of €3.74m is about €0.5m, give or take a little.

So to sum up, you take €10,000 off the top 1,000 public servants and while a simple calculation means that will save €10m, in the real world it only saves €3.24m, less than a third so more like 32% benefit to public expenditure than the 70% you quote.

Now, does anyone have any questions or can we now accept that cutting public service pay is not a short cut to solving the budgetary problems?

Lets get 1 thing straight the public sector add nothing to the REAL tax take of the government

SO if the government pays a teacher 50k and taxs them 10k then it is the same as the government just paying 40k without tax. Either way net government EXPENDITURE is 40k

Now if a private sector worker is paid 50k and pays 10k tax, then the government has REVENUE of 10k. If the same worker is cut to 40k but pays no tax then the government has lost 10k in revenue

People really need to distinguish between the revenue generating areas of the economy and the non-revenue generating areas - Public Sector is most definately non revenue generating

alastair

Tipp Man wrote: »

People really need to distinguish between the revenue generating areas of the economy and the non-revenue generating areas - Public Sector is most definately non revenue generating

Because the economy would motor on regardless without educated citizens, health services, IDA activities, enforcement of the law etc? Nope - can't see any revenue-generating potential in any of that.

RobbieTheRobber

Tipp Man wrote: »

Lets get 1 thing straight the public sector add nothing to the REAL tax take of the government

SO if the government pays a teacher 50k and taxs them 10k then it is the same as the government just paying 40k without tax. Either way net government EXPENDITURE is 40k

Now if a private sector worker is paid 50k and pays 10k tax, then the government has REVENUE of 10k. If the same worker is cut to 40k but pays no tax then the government has lost 10k in revenue

People really need to distinguish between the revenue generating areas of the economy and the non-revenue generating areas - Public Sector is most definately non revenue generating

So we should stop caring about non revenue generating sectors of society?

The old, the young, the sick and what about certain disabilities, would these all not leave groups of people outside your non revenue generating groups and so of no benefit to Irish Society?

I cant actually put into words how I feel about your comments without getting a ban!

:rolleyes:

donalg1

Tipp Man wrote: »

Ha ha this is pharcical

If the private sector had the same conditions, productivity and outlook on work as the public sector then the whole country would literally be doing nothing 5 days a week - production, output and tax revenue would fall dramatically and then we'd have to cut the public sector pay by even more

It's amazing that after all the country has been through the PS are still delusional

Oh yes and the wonderful private sector workers are so hard working and productive all of the time, Gimme a break, and quit with the silly generalisations you are obviously here to troll only. The amount of issues I have with customer care or customer service generally involve private sector companies and businesses. The private sector is rife with useless unproductive lazy incompetent fools incapable of doing their jobs, but that doesnt mean the whole private sector is the same.

So generalisations as above have absolutely no place in any discussion and people that post nonsense like that in your post above have one goal only and that is to troll.

Godge

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

Teachers work if fulltime around 22 hours a week let assume that they spend 2 hours/evening correcting student work this bring there total working week to 32 hours. Primary teachers work about a 37 week year post primary work about 33 week year. there is no comparrison with tesco workers so get off your high horse. This is a disgusting comparrison and as a union member as I am myself I am absolutly disgusted by your targeting of Tesco or any other low paid workers in the Grocery trade.

If Tesco, Dunnes et al had there way they would reduce worker pay if they could. Go and work in one of these employers for a while. Arrive at work at seven or eight in the morning and go to your checkout annd spend four hours there before you get a break for a bite to eat what ever about a toilet break. It is not like a cushy PS job behind a computer where you are allowed a 10 minute rest period for your eyes (often used as a smoking break)after an hour.

The only reason that Tesco and there ilk have not reduced wages is mainly because of the minimum wage legislation but again as a PS you (and your two faced unions) would prefer to see that broken rather than right the injustice of your pay levels.

How many times do I have to say that I do not work in the public service (although I used to)?

Just because I defend certain aspects of the public service and because I resist the totally uniformed ignorant attacks on the public service doesn't mean I work there. You know, it is possible to work in the private sector and defend certain parts of the public sector.

I only gave Tesco as an example because that was the one I found but there have been pay rises everywhere in the private sector this year or promised for next year - Tesco, Dunnes, Marks & Spencer, other retail, Aviva, Intel, Guinness, any large company.

I have previously said, and I stand over it, because nobody has produced one shred of evidence to disprove it - apart from construction sector and SMEs, there have been little or no pay cuts in the private sector over the last few years.

As for retail salaries, we pay about 50% more than the rest of Europe to our retail workers, but don't worry, I am not calling for their salaries to be cut.

Tipp Man

alastair wrote: »

Because the economy would motor on regardless without educated citizens, health services, IDA activities, enforcement of the law etc? Nope - can't see any revenue-generating potential in any of that.

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

So we should stop caring about non revenue generating sectors of society?

The old, the young, the sick and what about certain disabilities, would these all not leave groups of people outside your non revenue generating groups and so of no benefit to Irish Society?

I cant actually put into words how I feel about your comments without getting a ban!

:rolleyes:

Where exactly did i say the entire economy,population and society should be revenue generating for the government????

What people seem to forget is that the people on the government expenditure side have a far better lifestyle (be it through pay, conditions, terms, allowances, benefits etc) than the people who are on the governments revenue side. That shows there is a fundamental problem in this economy.

Anybody who can't see that the public sector is bleeding this country dry is either working in the public sector or is living in cloud cuckoo land

Tipp Man

Godge wrote: »

How many times do I have to say that I do not work in the public service (although I used to)?

Just because I defend certain aspects of the public service and because I resist the totally uniformed ignorant attacks on the public service doesn't mean I work there. You know, it is possible to work in the private sector and defend certain parts of the public sector.

I only gave Tesco as an example because that was the one I found but there have been pay rises everywhere in the private sector this year or promised for next year - Tesco, Dunnes, Marks & Spencer, other retail, Aviva, Intel, Guinness, any large company.

I have previously said, and I stand over it, because nobody has produced one shred of evidence to disprove it - apart from construction sector and SMEs, there have been little or no pay cuts in the private sector over the last few years.

As for retail salaries, we pay about 50% more than the rest of Europe to our retail workers, but don't worry, I am not calling for their salaries to be cut.

Whether Tesco's, Dunnes or whoever are raising wages, cutting wages or doing whatever should be of no relevance to the public sector (of which you apparently aren't 1 (duck, walk quacking??))

The issue here is that the Irish government cannot afford to pay ridiculously high wages with ridiculously generous allowances, entitilements and work conditions. That is the issue

Private wages are irrelevant to this discussion (and more fool you for not wanting retail salaries to be cut if they are that overpaid. Main difference is you can go to a supermarket that is cheaper if you so wish)

donalg1

Tipp Man wrote: »

Where exactly did i say the entire economy,population and society should be revenue generating for the government????

What people seem to forget is that the people on the government expenditure side have a far better lifestyle (be it through pay, conditions, terms, allowances, benefits etc) than the people who are on the governments revenue side. That shows there is a fundamental problem in this economy.

Anybody who can't see that the public sector is bleeding this country dry is either working in the public sector or is living in cloud cuckoo land

Anyone that cant see that it was the Private Sector that fcuked this country up is living in cloud cuckoo land.

Tipp Man

donalg1 wrote: »

Oh yes and the wonderful private sector workers are so hard working and productive all of the time, Gimme a break, and quit with the silly generalisations you are obviously here to troll only. The amount of issues I have with customer care or customer service generally involve private sector companies and businesses. The private sector is rife with useless unproductive lazy incompetent fools incapable of doing their jobs, but that doesnt mean the whole private sector is the same.

So generalisations as above have absolutely no place in any discussion and people that post nonsense like that in your post above have one goal only and that is to troll.

here's an idea for you

If you are not happy with customer service at a particular company CHANGE COMPANY

ardmacha

Anybody who can't see that the public sector is bleeding this country dry

More drama! The net cost of the PS is about 11% of GNP, for which more than a million people are educated, hundreds of thousands are healed, justice is provided to say nothing of the roads and sewers beloved of the Romans. And this 11% is "bleeding this country dry". :rolleyes:

This is supposed to be a serious forum.

Tipp Man

donalg1 wrote: »

Anyone that cant see that it was the Private Sector that fcuked this country up is living in cloud cuckoo land.

And where exactly did i say anything to the contrary???

You might want to bear in mind that the huge pay increases given to public sector workers, the huge increase in social welfare of all kinds, and the huge wastage of govenment money is every bit as much to blame as builders and bankers

The budget defecit is predominantly down to those expnediture items rather than builders/bankers

donalg1

Tipp Man wrote: »

here's an idea for you

If you are not happy with customer service at a particular company CHANGE COMPANY

Oh believe me I have done that numerous times, but its not just companies its shops and other business right throughout the wonderful private sector, I could walk into any shop in the town and see the employees standing around having a chat and a laugh and doing nothing. But apparently this is the wonderful hard working and productive private sector that would never do anything of the sort. Can you see how silly and stupid generalisations are?

Tipp Man

ardmacha wrote: »

More drama! The net cost of the PS is about 11% of GNP, for which more than a million people are educated, hundreds of thousands are healed, justice is provided to say nothing of the roads and sewers beloved of the Romans. And this 11% is "bleeding this country dry". :rolleyes:

This is supposed to be a serious forum.

Just think what we could be getting for our 11% is the Public sector was paid what is should be paid (i.e considerably less) and if the public sector actually gave a damn about how it was spending government money

alastair

Tipp Man wrote: »

Anybody who can't see that the public sector is bleeding this country dry is either working in the public sector or is living in cloud cuckoo land

Anyone who can't admit that public services contribute centrally to national revenue generation is sticking their head in the sand.

Theboinkmaster

Godge wrote: »

there have been pay rises everywhere in the private sector this year or promised for next year - Tesco, Dunnes, Marks & Spencer, other retail, Aviva, Intel, Guinness, any large company.

That is simply not true - show me evidence that Dunnes gave pay rises? No you won't be able to.

Same with most of those businesses you listed and "any large companies".

padser12345

Godge wrote: »

Right, let me explain this slowly again for you.

You only want the salaries of top people in the public sector cut. When you cut someone's salary, they lose the bit of salary that they are paying the highest rate of tax and the highest deductions.

Let us say you took €10,000 a year off 1,000 of these so-called high earner. This should give you €10m saving.

O.K., first the government loses the 42% tax it deducted from this €10,000, then it loses the 7% Universal Social Charge, then it loses 10.5% pension levy deduction, as well as the pension contribution of 6.5%. Let us not forget PRSI of 4%. To be fair, the two pension deductions are allowed against tax so the net effect of the two of them is 9.86% rather than 17%.

Adding it all up, 42% tax, 7% USC, 9.86% pension and 4% PRSI means that the government was already getting 62.96% of that €10m already so the net saving is €3.74m, just over a third. Now, as that is the top of the money earned by those, it was hardly spent on basic foodstuffs. Let us assume that 50% of the €3.74m net that those public servants were taking home in cash had been spent on luxury goods and or drink and cigarettes attracting the higher VAT rate and excise duties (VAT is still up so as everyone else is penniless according to this thread so it must be the public servants buying luxury goods), well the VAT and excise on half of €3.74m is about €0.5m, give or take a little.

So to sum up, you take €10,000 off the top 1,000 public servants and while a simple calculation means that will save €10m, in the real world it only saves €3.24m, less than a third so more like 32% benefit to public expenditure than the 70% you quote.

Now, does anyone have any questions or can we now accept that cutting public service pay is not a short cut to solving the budgetary problems?

That's a good point.....but there is first the moral argument about how they got to that salary level.....secondly you can't cut social welfare and say it does not have a similar effect on the economy.....third point if it went up for a genuine reason related to the complexities of an expanding economy then it must come down for the same purpose. I'll also add although it's only speculation.....people who have very high salaries have an option to export their money via holiday homes, holidays etc.

donalg1

Tipp Man wrote: »

And where exactly did i say anything to the contrary???

You might want to bear in mind that the huge pay increases given to public sector workers, the huge increase in social welfare of all kinds, and the huge wastage of govenment money is every bit as much to blame as builders and bankers

The budget defecit is predominantly down to those expnediture items rather than builders/bankers

I wouldnt go as far as to say they are every bit as much to blame now in fairness. I would blame the builders, bankers and reckless borrowers 90% for the mess we are in. As for the increases in Social Welfare well I have said it was absolutely nonsensical for Fianna Fail to increase Social Welfare rates at a time when there was an abundance of jobs out there.

They should have been slashing Social Welfare then as they could at least say to people that if they arent happy with their dole being cut they could get a job anytime they like.

Theboinkmaster

Tipp Man wrote: »

Whether Tesco's, Dunnes or whoever are raising wages, cutting wages or doing whatever should be of no relevance to the public sector (of which you apparently aren't 1 (duck, walk quacking??))

The issue here is that the Irish government cannot afford to pay ridiculously high wages with ridiculously generous allowances, entitilements and work conditions. That is the issue

Private wages are irrelevant to this discussion (and more fool you for not wanting retail salaries to be cut if they are that overpaid. Main difference is you can go to a supermarket that is cheaper if you so wish)

This is exactly it - who cares about PS v private pay? it's irrelevant - the government cannot afford not to cut PS pay simple as that.

Tipp Man

alastair wrote: »

Anyone who can't admit that public services contribute centrally to national revenue generation is sticking their head in the sand.

Well here's an example to prove to the contrary

a teacher earning 50k and paying 20k in tax is exactly the same as a teacher earning 30k paying no tax. In either scenario the government has to find 30k from the private sector or other external areas to pay the teacher

Public sector taxes are only moving the furniture around a little and then having the chairs back exactly where they were

Tipp Man

donalg1 wrote: »

I wouldnt go as far as to say they are every bit as much to blame now in fairness. I would blame the builders, bankers and reckless borrowers 90% for the mess we are in. As for the increases in Social Welfare well I have said it was absolutely nonsensical for Fianna Fail to increase Social Welfare rates at a time when there was an abundance of jobs out there.

They should have been slashing Social Welfare then as they could at least say to people that if they arent happy with their dole being cut they could get a job anytime they like.

90% of our budget deficit is not due to builders or bankers
90% of our debt is not due to builders or bankers

Social Welfare and Public sector (as a result of outrageous government increases) are as big a problem and are much longer in duration

Godge

Tipp Man wrote: »

Lets get 1 thing straight the public sector add nothing to the REAL tax take of the government

SO if the government pays a teacher 50k and taxs them 10k then it is the same as the government just paying 40k without tax. Either way net government EXPENDITURE is 40k

Now if a private sector worker is paid 50k and pays 10k tax, then the government has REVENUE of 10k. If the same worker is cut to 40k but pays no tax then the government has lost 10k in revenue

People really need to distinguish between the revenue generating areas of the economy and the non-revenue generating areas - Public Sector is most definately non revenue generating

You are actually agreeing with me in the point in bold.

Someone said if you cut public service pay by 20% you save €3 billion. I am making the point that you don't because the government loses the deductions and the VAT on that money being spent which could mean that they lose at least €1.5bn of the saving as income tax receipts and VAT receipts go down.

So I was making no point about the productive or non-productive parts of the economy - that is another debate. This debate is about how you calculate net saving to the Exchequer in the event of a cut in public service pay and you have explained the same thing in a different way to me.

alastair

Tipp Man wrote: »

Well here's an example to prove to the contrary

a teacher earning 50k and paying 20k in tax is exactly the same as a teacher earning 30k paying no tax. In either scenario the government has to find 30k from the private sector or other external areas to pay the teacher

Said teacher sends whatever number of students out into the world each year with skills they need to succeed in both the domestic and international employment and commercial spheres. That 30K is a worthwhile investment in the future revenues those skills will generate.

Not quite sure how that's contrary to my point.

southsiderosie

Tipp Man wrote: »

Ha ha this is pharcical

If the private sector had the same conditions, productivity and outlook on work as the public sector then the whole country would literally be doing nothing 5 days a week - production, output and tax revenue would fall dramatically and then we'd have to cut the public sector pay by even more

It's amazing that after all the country has been through the PS are still delusional

Tipp Man wrote: »

Where exactly did i say the entire economy,population and society should be revenue generating for the government????

What people seem to forget is that the people on the government expenditure side have a far better lifestyle (be it through pay, conditions, terms, allowances, benefits etc) than the people who are on the governments revenue side. That shows there is a fundamental problem in this economy.

Anybody who can't see that the public sector is bleeding this country dry is either working in the public sector or is living in cloud cuckoo land

donalg1 wrote: »

Anyone that cant see that it was the Private Sector that fcuked this country up is living in cloud cuckoo land.

Tipp Man wrote: »

here's an idea for you

If you are not happy with customer service at a particular company CHANGE COMPANY

MOD NOTE:

These kinds of posts add nothing to the discussion. If you want to make claims about wages and the budget fine - there is information readily available to back that up. But making wild claims about lifestyles and productivity are just inflammatory.

This thread is on its last legs because we're getting sick of coming back to the same old nonsense. If you can't post in a reasonable and rational manner on this thread, prepare to get banned because you are wasting everyone's time and energy.

ardmacha

Same with most of those businesses you listed and "any large companies".

You can nitpick on one company name or the other. The main point is that in 2012 that are quite a few pay rises and few pay cuts.

Tipp Man

alastair wrote: »

Said teacher sends whatever number of students out into the world each year with skills they need to succeed in both the domestic and international employment and commercial spheres. That 30K is a worthwhile investment in the future revenues those skills will generate.

Its not a worthwhile investment if the French or UK or whereever can get an equal or better return for a 20k or less investment

alastair

Tipp Man wrote: »

Its not a worthwhile investment if the French or UK or whereever can get an equal or better return for a 20k or less investment

Strangely, France doesn't actually offer education provision for Irish students as a rule, and the French taxpayers pay rather more for their public services than we do here. Same story with the UK.

Idbatterim

As well as their salary cuts, various public servants have seen their hours increased:

- civil servants lost their half-hour a week for bank time
- teachers work an extra hour under the Croke Park Agreement
- university lecturers work an extra hour
- technology institute lecturers are timetabled for an extra two hours

ok so here is the answer to the question I posed, 1 extra hour a week LOL

ncdadam

donalg1 wrote: »

Oh yes and the wonderful private sector workers are so hard working and productive all of the time, Gimme a break, and quit with the silly generalisations you are obviously here to troll only. The amount of issues I have with customer care or customer service generally involve private sector companies and businesses. The private sector is rife with useless unproductive lazy incompetent fools incapable of doing their jobs, but that doesnt mean the whole private sector is the same.

So generalisations as above have absolutely no place in any discussion and people that post nonsense like that in your post above have one goal only and that is to troll.

If the private sector is 'rife with useless unproductive lazy incompetent fools' as you call them that is the private company's lookout and they will probably be losing money because of it.

The PS is paid for by every taxpayer in this country and borrowings from Europe so it's our money that's being wasted.

alastair

ncdadam wrote: »

The PS is paid for by every taxpayer in this country and borrowings from Europe so it's our money that's being wasted.

... by whatever minority of wasters employed within the public sector. Which may be more/less/the same as wasters employed within the private sector. And you as a customer/citizen are paying for either encounter - it's pretty much the same deal - let's not pretend that you can move your business elsewhere with certainty that you'll find better service as a consequence (Mobile phone companies, I'm looking at you).

Godge

Theboinkmaster wrote: »

That is simply not true - show me evidence that Dunnes gave pay rises? No you won't be able to.

Same with most of those businesses you listed and "any large companies".

Marks and Spencer

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/youre-worth-it-mands-staff-to-get-pay-rise-of-700-a-year-3070157.html


Dunnes - you are right, they haven't got it yet but it is on the way, I knew I had read it somewhere and Boots and Pennys as well.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/wage-rises-spark-wave-of-claims-by-shop-staff-3167393.html


Keelings Distributions, another company with more than 250 employees

http://www.hortitrends.com/fresh-produce-news/11754-ireland-fruit-firm-staff-offered-2-rise-


Financial Services Companies - fund accountants

http://news.efinancialcareers.com/108286/bonuses-and-pay-rises-on-the-cards-for-irelands-fund-accountants-in-a-bid-to-stop-them-leaving-the-country/

Fat Cats five-fold pay rise in the private sector

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2012/0611/1224317685871.html

Even IBEC says its members are giving pay rises (only 1/3 of them, but if they are the biggest companies, it would cover half of the workers)

http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/employers-hint-at-pay-rises-as-jobs-market-set-for-boost-3110831.html

Across the private sector, there are no more pay cuts

http://www.accountancyireland.ie/AI_RSS_Update/Prospects-for-Pay-Increases-in-2012/

2 to 2.3% across the board pay rises for the private sector predicted by Mercers for 2012

http://www.mercer.com/press-releases/European-2012-salary-increase-forecast

Yup, definitely pay cuts have disappeared from the private sector, only 2% considering pay cuts, while 24% consider pay rises, with the rest freezing but looking at 2013.

http://www.cpl.ie/content/SalaryGuide/


I won't keep going but all of the evidence above confirms that at worst, pay is staying still in the private sector, but is rising for somewhere between 20-50% of the workforce.

Godge

padser12345 wrote: »

That's a good point.....but there is first the moral argument about how they got to that salary level.....secondly you can't cut social welfare and say it does not have a similar effect on the economy.....third point if it went up for a genuine reason related to the complexities of an expanding economy then it must come down for the same purpose. I'll also add although it's only speculation.....people who have very high salaries have an option to export their money via holiday homes, holidays etc.

First point - we are arguing economics not morality.
Second point - social welfare payments are not taxed so there is not a similar effect, if you cut social welfare by €1 bn, you would probably have a net saving of around €800m, if you cut public service pay by €1 bn, you would probably have a net saving or around €300m, a significant difference.
Third point - it has been cut twice already, three times for newcomers and senior people, frozen for the rest while inflation has continued and pay rises have resumed in the private sector so how do you know that there hasn't been enough correction already.

Tipp Man

Godge wrote: »

Marks and Spencer

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/youre-worth-it-mands-staff-to-get-pay-rise-of-700-a-year-3070157.html


Dunnes - you are right, they haven't got it yet but it is on the way, I knew I had read it somewhere and Boots and Pennys as well.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/wage-rises-spark-wave-of-claims-by-shop-staff-3167393.html


Keelings Distributions, another company with more than 250 employees

http://www.hortitrends.com/fresh-produce-news/11754-ireland-fruit-firm-staff-offered-2-rise-


Financial Services Companies - fund accountants

http://news.efinancialcareers.com/108286/bonuses-and-pay-rises-on-the-cards-for-irelands-fund-accountants-in-a-bid-to-stop-them-leaving-the-country/

Fat Cats five-fold pay rise in the private sector

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2012/0611/1224317685871.html

Even IBEC says its members are giving pay rises (only 1/3 of them, but if they are the biggest companies, it would cover half of the workers)

http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/employers-hint-at-pay-rises-as-jobs-market-set-for-boost-3110831.html

Across the private sector, there are no more pay cuts

http://www.accountancyireland.ie/AI_RSS_Update/Prospects-for-Pay-Increases-in-2012/

2 to 2.3% across the board pay rises for the private sector predicted by Mercers for 2012

http://www.mercer.com/press-releases/European-2012-salary-increase-forecast

Yup, definitely pay cuts have disappeared from the private sector, only 2% considering pay cuts, while 24% consider pay rises, with the rest freezing but looking at 2013.

http://www.cpl.ie/content/SalaryGuide/


I won't keep going but all of the evidence above confirms that at worst, pay is staying still in the private sector, but is rising for somewhere between 20-50% of the workforce.

Some good researching there but it is pretty pointless really as i said earlier

Tipp Man wrote: »

The issue here is that the Irish government cannot afford to pay ridiculously high wages with ridiculously generous allowances, entitilements and work conditions. That is the issue

Tipp Man

Godge wrote: »

Third point - it has been cut twice already, three times for newcomers and senior people, frozen for the rest while inflation has continued and pay rises have resumed in the private sector so how do you know that there hasn't been enough correction already.

Sorry but how can you have a pay cut on a job that you don't even have yet (which the newcomers didn't have when the pay was reduced)??

Why are you focusing on private sector pay?? it is irrelevant. It's about what the Irish government can afford to pay

ardmacha

Why are you focusing on private sector pay?? it is irrelevant. It's about what the Irish government can afford to pay

As a general proposition, private sector pay determines the ability of the government to pay public sector pay. It is reasonable that people whose own pay is not being cut not arbitrarily ask for other people's pay to be cut.

murphaph

Godge wrote: »

I only gave Tesco as an example because that was the one I found but there have been pay rises everywhere in the private sector this year or promised for next year - Tesco, Dunnes, Marks & Spencer, other retail, Aviva, Intel, Guinness, any large company.

My bold. Both these firms have let staff go since the crisis began. my mother was let go from M&S and the Aviva redundancies were well publicised. I used to work in the sector and know that Intel certainly have uses managed redundancy in Ireland as a tool to control costs during downturns. Intel also would not promise a payrise to any employee. I know that they have employee appraisals and if you are not performing you'll get nothing and even if you are and the company is not, you'll still likely get nothing. Any US multi I ever worked in was like that anyway.

Don't know about the other firms in your list but to talk about "firm x has had no pay reductions" when in fact firm x has made several hundred people redundant is a fallacy.

ardmacha

Don't know about the other firms in your list but to talk about "firm x has had no pay reductions" when in fact firm x has made several hundred people redundant is a fallacy.

On the contrary, job losses are a different issue and entirely irrelevant. Redundancy relates to a decrease in the volume of work, and there has been a lot of that about, while the pay rises relate to the rate paid for work.

murphaph

ardmacha wrote: »

On the contrary, job losses are a different issue and entirely irrelevant. Redundancy relates to a decrease in the volume of work, and there has been a lot of that about, while the pay rises relate to the rate paid for work.

If a company handles its workload more efficiently, more effectively (say by meŕging to HR departments) it can handle MORE workload with FEWER staff.

We are told by your various unions that the CPA can deliver savings through greater efficiency. Where are the targetted redundancies to prove it?

Tipp Man

ardmacha wrote: »

As a general proposition, private sector pay determines the ability of the government to pay public sector pay. It is reasonable that people whose own pay is not being cut not arbitrarily ask for other people's pay to be cut.

The number of private sector workers has fallen dramatically so even if no private sector worker took any pay cut (in reality a huge number have)then the money still isnt' there to continue to pay the same level of wages to the public sector as the tax take isn't there

It is reasonable for people to demand better value for how their tax is being spent and how the government is spending its money regardless of whether their personal pay is rising, falling or static

So it is completely irrational to say private sector workers have not (or have) taken pay cuts - it doesn't (or shouldn't) matter to public sector pay

ardmacha

We are told by your various unions that the CPA can deliver savings through greater efficiency. Where are the targetted redundancies to prove it?

The PS is a large organisation, which has chosen to redeploy rather than make redundant. Now you can always come up with some examples where this is a bad plan, but for the bulk of the PS it is a reasonable strategy. As services have continued with less staff there is clearly greater efficiency.

beeno67

ardmacha wrote: »

More drama! The net cost of the PS is about 11% of GNP, for which more than a million people are educated, hundreds of thousands are healed, justice is provided to say nothing of the roads and sewers beloved of the Romans. And this 11% is "bleeding this country dry". :rolleyes:

This is supposed to be a serious forum.

The 11% of GDP does not pay for all this. You are ignoring the cost of schools, hospitals, drugs, radiology machines, courts, jails, cars, ambulances, books, computers! Roads etc. this is supposed to be a serious forum

Why are we paying 11% when we could get the staff for less. Before anyone says we can't, well the unions believe we can and so starting salaries are 10% less.

Godge

murphaph wrote: »

If a company handles its workload more efficiently, more effectively (say by meŕging to HR departments) it can handle MORE workload with FEWER staff.

We are told by your various unions that the CPA can deliver savings through greater efficiency. Where are the targetted redundancies to prove it?

MORE workload with FEWER staff, think the public sector can do that too.

http://implementationbody.gov.ie/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Second-Progress-Report.pdf

Page 11 of that report. "14.9% increase in student numbers in the higher education sector since the end of the 08/09 academic year. Staff numbers reduced by 7.3% in the same period".

I have not said that all parts of the public sector are doing their bit - there are clearly still huge issues in the health sector - but that is one example of what you claim the private sector is good at.

RobbieTheRobber

murphaph wrote: »

If a company handles its workload more efficiently, more effectively (say by meŕging to HR departments) it can handle MORE workload with FEWER staff.

We are told by your various unions that the CPA can deliver savings through greater efficiency. Where are the targetted redundancies to prove it?

Staff were lost through the early retirement scheme and natural wastage from 2008 to end of 2011 the number employed by the state were reduced from 320,000 to 296,900 and the government intend to continue to reduce this number.
The target for 2015 is 282,500.
http://per.gov.ie/2012/03/08/statements-in-dail-on-public-sector-numbers-thursday-8-march-minister-brendan-howlin-td/

Godge

Tipp Man wrote: »

The number of private sector workers has fallen dramatically so even if no private sector worker took any pay cut (in reality a huge number have)then the money still isnt' there to continue to pay the same level of wages to the public sector as the tax take isn't there

It is reasonable for people to demand better value for how their tax is being spent and how the government is spending its money regardless of whether their personal pay is rising, falling or static

So it is completely irrational to say private sector workers have not (or have) taken pay cuts - it doesn't (or shouldn't) matter to public sector pay

You are moving the goalposts. It was strongly argued earlier in this thread (and I am summarising) that there had been no pay cuts in the public sector while the private sector had seen widespread cuts and therefore the public sector should have more pay cuts.

As it has been shown (with links), that there have been significant pay cuts in the public sector and (also with links) that private sector pay (albeit in large companies outside the construction sector) is on the rise again, the argument made for pay cuts in the public sector has now been disproved. It wasn't me that made private sector pay relevant, it was those who were saying that because the private sector pay is being cut, the public sector should be cut too.

Your argument is just that we can't afford it. Well I happen to disagree. The public service pay bill will fall below €15 bn next year down from nearly €20 bn at the height of the boom. (Ironically, some of the people here who have been arguing for a 25% cut in the pay bill have also been using the out-of-date €20 bn figure and they don't realise they have already got what they are asking for!). No other element of public expenditure has been cut as much. The non-pay element of the health budget (medical cards, drugs etc) has continued to spiral out of control, social welfare spending is still on the rise. To make another saving of €5 bn in the public service pay bill, we would have to pay some people below social welfare rates but that doesn't seem to have occurred to some of the posters here.

No, we don't need more pay cuts for public servants, they won't save us the money and we would run into Greek-like trouble and protests. We do need more productivity and more from Croke Park and we also need to cut numbers further. But it is property taxation, income tax reliefs, cuts in social welfare entitlements (probably through tightening eligibility) and area such as medical cards and the travel pass that we need to make savings.

padser12345

Godge wrote: »

First point - we are arguing economics not morality.
Second point - social welfare payments are not taxed so there is not a similar effect, if you cut social welfare by €1 bn, you would probably have a net saving of around €800m, if you cut public service pay by €1 bn, you would probably have a net saving or around €300m, a significant difference.
Third point - it has been cut twice already, three times for newcomers and senior people, frozen for the rest while inflation has continued and pay rises have resumed in the private sector so how do you know that there hasn't been enough correction already.

However I contend justification for does not mean I wouldn't also argue justification against. If we cannot identify what is 'just' or 'unjust' how do we begin to argue? If you can justify why they got that salary to me then - I'll start to argue with you why they shouldn't have it no matter what adverse it may have on the economy as you contend.

Godge

padser12345 wrote: »

However I contend justification for does not mean I wouldn't also argue justification against. If we cannot identify what is 'just' or 'unjust' how do we begin to argue? If you can justify why they got that salary to me then - I'll start to argue with you why they shouldn't have it no matter what adverse it may have on the economy as you contend.

"justification for" is that Public Service Benchmarking Body gave them the salary which has since been reduced by a number of pay cuts. Unless we have a new Benchmarking Body, or you can do the work yourself, how can you argue why they shouldn't have it.

Given that most private sector employers are planning to increase pay this year or next, is it possible we have missed the opportunity already to do a proper correction in public service pay?

beeno67

Godge wrote: »

I won't keep going but all of the evidence above confirms that at worst, pay is staying still in the private sector, but is rising for somewhere between 20-50% of the workforce.

At worst pay is staying still for public sector workers WHO ARE NOT GETTING INCREMENTS. Very big difference.