Croke Park Agreement beyond 2014

donalg1

ncdadam wrote: »

Local Authorities do not pay deposits to landlords for RAS properties.

No the landlord doesnt receive a deposit but the LA holds money as a deposit so if when the tenant leaves there is damage to the property the LA give over the deposit then.

ncdadam

donalg1 wrote: »

No the landlord doesnt receive a deposit but the LA holds money as a deposit so if when the tenant leaves there is damage to the property the LA give over the deposit then.

I had a tenant leave the 1 property I bought in 2005 as a 'pension fund' for when I retire.
She's left circa €5,500 worth of damage to the property (on RAS scheme)
The council aren't giving me, nor won't give me 1 months rent back.
Even if they did that'd be €750, leaving me €4,750 out of pocket.

ncdadam

Anyway, that's a bit off topic.
Anyone seen James Reilly today, is he still AWOL?

martingriff

Head The Wall wrote: »

That's what they have to accept with collective bargaining. The CPSU may have voted against it but they are the ones benefiting from it, if they feel that strongly about it then they should try and do something about it.

I agree with you completly and try they do but as you say collective bargaining has to be ahered by all so unless the majority SIPTU,IMPACT, nurses unions decide to change there stance there is not much they can do except talk.

donalg1

ncdadam wrote: »

I had a tenant leave the 1 property I bought in 2005 as a 'pension fund' for when I retire.
She's left circa €5,500 worth of damage to the property (on RAS scheme)
The council aren't giving me, nor won't give me 1 months rent back.
Even if they did that'd be €750, leaving me €4,750 out of pocket.

Well I dont think any of them would be giving back that much, its about 1 month iirc. Still though the point was the HSE wont even take money back when someone tries to give it to them and then they wonder why they are over budget all the time.

n97 mini

ardmacha wrote: »

All cuts have not been in areas other than salaries, as you very well know that salaries have been cut and numbers have been cut.

Apologies, I forgot the Budget 2010 paycut, and it's true that some agency staff have been removed from the payroll

ardmacha

Apologies, I forgot the Budget 2010 paycut, and it's true that some agency staff have been removed from the payroll

And the pension levy, to say nothing of the reduction in staff numbers from the voluntary redundancies and the non replacement of staff leaving.

Staff costs have probably been reduced by 20%. Have energy costs, drug costs, or other supply costs been reduced by this amount?

sarumite

ardmacha wrote: »

And the pension levy, to say nothing of the reduction in staff numbers from the voluntary redundancies and the non replacement of staff leaving.

Staff costs have probably been reduced by 20%. Have energy costs, drug costs, or other supply costs been reduced by this amount?

If these figures are correct

BOHSBOHS wrote: »

well the minister isnt telling the truth

lets look at the figures for hse spending in 2009 (highest)
and compare to last year 2011

2009 pay 8,091m........ nonpay 6,577.......... capital 434
2011 pay 7,026m........ nonpay 6,541.......... capital 337

looks most of the saving has been on the pay side to me ??? :pac:

then staff costs have been reduced by 15%
nonpay costs by less than 1%
Capital by 23%

(I would say of the costs you mentioned, energy and supplies (such as drugs) costs are somewhat beyond the control of the HSE)

n97 mini

ardmacha wrote: »

And the pension levy, to say nothing of the reduction in staff numbers from the voluntary redundancies and the non replacement of staff leaving.

Pension levy is a deduction, not a reduction. Retired staff are still receiving a pension from the HSE.

ardmacha

Pension levy is a deduction, not a reduction

Terminology is neither here nor there. The employee doesn't receive it and the government doesn't have to to pay it out. It is a saving to public expenditure whatever you call it.

(I would say of the costs you mentioned, energy and supplies (such as drugs) costs are somewhat beyond the control of the HSE)

Energy fair enough. But the HSE pays a lot more for drugs than in the UK and there is no fundamental reason for this, although there are excuses.

Vizzy

Head The Wall wrote: »

The unions voted in the CPA so yes every union member currently has their nose in the trough.

It really irks me when people,who no longer live in the country and hence make no financial contribution to our national finances,seem to think that they have all the answers.

n97 mini

ardmacha wrote: »

Terminology is neither here nor there. The employee doesn't receive it and the government doesn't have to to pay it out. It is a saving to public expenditure whatever you call it.

The employee gets it back when they retire.

RobbieTheRobber

n97 mini wrote: »

The employee gets it back when they retire.

This post is disingenuous at best. :rolleyes:

ardmacha

The employee gets it back when they retire.

The employee gets nothing they weren't previously getting, so it is still a reduction in cash paid out by the government.

But even if you use your contention, then it is a reduction in pension spending, so is still a reduction.

Either way, the government has reduced its spending.

Villa05

Vizzy wrote: »

It really irks me when people,who no longer live in the country and hence make no financial contribution to our national finances,seem to think that they have all the answers.

It really irks me, when we are borrowing from citizens of other countries, (who pay more tax and get paid less than us) to maintain unsustainable pay levels.

This borrowed money has to be paid back by our children who have to put up with job-bridge, which is slave labour and a job blocker - and croke park agreement which if they are fortunate enough to get a job, it is on reduced pay and conditions compared to their protected co workers. The lucky ones are emigrating.

If the unions feel that these terms and conditions are suitable for new entrants then they are suitable for existing staff.

This country is all about me, me, me and the above example shows that certain sections of our society are prepared to let their children suffer to protect themselves.

Count Dooku

n97 mini wrote: »

ardmacha wrote: »

Terminology is neither here nor there. The employee doesn't receive it and the government doesn't have to to pay it out. It is a saving to public expenditure whatever you call it.

The employee gets it back when they retire.

Main purpose was to protect pension s for those who already retired or was just about to retire on expense of those who will stay

sarumite

ardmacha wrote: »

Terminology is neither here nor there. The employee doesn't receive it and the government doesn't have to to pay it out. It is a saving to public expenditure whatever you call it.




Energy fair enough. But the HSE pays a lot more for drugs than in the UK and there is no fundamental reason for this, although there are excuses.

Economies of scale. Negotating a price for a drug manufacturer on behalf of 62 million people is easier than on behalf of 4.5million people with regards to getting the best deal. That said, I would be surprised if it was as much as 20% of a difference.

Idbatterim

In opposition, the then FG health spokesman, Dr Reilly, said at the time: "I am saying very clearly that the days of people who think they can take €180,000 out of the State and another €300,000 from the VHI will be over under Fine Gael, because it's just not sustainable."

from the indo the other day!

n97 mini

ardmacha wrote: »

The employee gets nothing they weren't previously getting,

Which was a problem.

murphaph

Vizzy wrote: »

It really irks me when people,who no longer live in the country and hence make no financial contribution to our national finances,seem to think that they have all the answers.

Many of us expats still pay tax in Ireland. I do anyway. In any case, many of the people forced to leave Ireland due to political mismanagement have a fair idea of what can be done to tackle the problems.

woodoo

n97 mini wrote: »

Pension levy is a deduction, not a reduction. Retired staff are still receiving a pension from the HSE.

The IMF call the pension levy a paycut. As did the creator of it Brian Lenihan. Its only a few internet experts... cough.. cough.. that insist on this contribution/deduction word play. I know who i'd listen to.

woodoo

Villa05 wrote: »

This borrowed money has to be paid back by our children who have to put up with job-bridge, which is slave labour and a job blocker - and croke park agreement which if they are fortunate enough to get a job, it is on reduced pay and conditions compared to their protected co workers. The lucky ones are emigrating.

There is people calling for increments to be abolished. This would have the same effect. Leaving some workers on permanently less pay than their co workers.

ncdadam

woodoo wrote: »

There is people calling for increments to be abolished. This would have the same effect. Leaving some workers on permanently less pay than their co workers.

Stop calling them increments, they're Pay Rises in a time of deep cuts and recession.
No two ways about it.

woodoo

ncdadam wrote: »

Stop calling them increments, they're Pay Rises in a time of deep cuts and recession.
No two ways about it.

I don't make up the names i just call them as they appear in my contract.

ncdadam

woodoo wrote: »

I don't make up the names i just call them as they appear in my contract.

Proper PS speak eh?

Count Dooku

woodoo wrote: »

There is people calling for increments to be abolished. This would have the same effect. Leaving some workers on permanently less pay than their co workers.

Like new entrants to public services....

n97 mini

woodoo wrote: »

The IMF call the pension levy a paycut. As did the creator of it Brian Lenihan.

Brian Lenihan was a politician -- he was good at telling various groupings what they wanted to hear.

woodoo wrote: »

Its only a few internet experts... cough.. cough.. that insist on this contribution/deduction word play. I know who i'd listen to.

And why wouldn't you listen to whoever agrees with you.

woodoo

Count Dooku wrote: »

Like new entrants to public services....

Well not really. The people coming into the PS new have the choice to take the job or not. They decide if they are happy with the contract on offer and if they are they sign it. To do away with increments on existing staff on existing contracts is unfair and could be considered reneging on a deal.

ncdadam

Count Dooku wrote: »

Like new entrants to public services....

Hold what we have lads and lassies, never mind the new recruits, we're ok!

n97 mini

woodoo wrote: »

To do away with increments on existing staff on existing contracts is unfair and could be considered reneging on a deal.

Doesn't really matter if it's fair or not. We don't have the money to pay.

woodoo

n97 mini wrote: »

Brian Lenihan was a politician -- he was good at telling various groupings what they wanted to hear.

And why wouldn't you listen to whoever agrees with you.

I pay the pension levy i know all about it. Its changing a deal mid stream and it is a win for the government and a loss to us. Word play doesn't really matter. Staff see it for what it really is.

n97 mini

woodoo wrote: »

Staff see it for what it really is.

I have several friends working in the public sector who see it as a over-due contribution to their excellent pension. They also realise the country is buggered and that it's not all about them. They are not on the internet all day long whinging either, because they're too busy working!

Vizzy

n97 mini wrote: »

I have several friends working in the public sector who see it as a over-due contribution to their excellent pension. They also realise the country is buggered and that it's not all about them. They are not on the internet all day long whinging either, because they're too busy working!

Whoa,whoa.
You mean that there are actually public servants who can keep themselves busy ?
Or is that just between doing the crossword,reading the paper and drinking tae?

ncdadam

n97 mini wrote: »

Doesn't really matter if it's fair or not. We don't have the money to pay.

There is a 'inability to pay' clause in the CPA, maybe we need labour to walk and force an election to bring it into play.

woodoo

n97 mini wrote: »

I have several friends working in the public sector who see it as a over-due contribution to their excellent pension. They also realise the country is buggered and that it's not all about them. They are not on the internet all day long whinging either, because they're too busy working!

You are making it up as you go along. I have no access to boards at work so stop talking out your arse.

ncdadam

Mind you, on their next visit the troika will instruct the government to sort the unions out.
After all it is the troika who are running the country, not Labour and not their mouthy unions.

woodoo

ncdadam wrote: »

Mind you, on their next visit the troika will instruct the government to sort the unions out.

How do you figure that?

Lumbo

ncdadam wrote: »

Mind you, on their next visit the troika will instruct the government to sort the unions out.
After all it is the troika who are running the country, not Labour and not their mouthy unions.

I read the same claim on this board 3 years ago :rolleyes:

Can I have a loan of your crystal ball?

The CPA is delivering saving in certain areas. It looks like parts of the PS can't deliver the saving and never will. IMO there will be redundancies before there is pay cuts, employees won't be prepared to take further cuts in take home pay. From talking to people on the ground, there's a lot of people who would take it.

ncdadam

woodoo wrote: »

How do you figure that?

Do you think they will allow this government preside over the level of waste, perks and allowances that your unions think are 'entitlements' while the country is running a €15 billion deficit?

Tomorrow will be fun when Howlin tries to tackle a few of the most ridiculous allowances there is.

sarumite

Lumbo wrote: »

I read the same claim on this board 3 years ago :rolleyes:

Can I have a loan of your crystal ball?

The CPA is delivering saving in certain areas. It looks like parts of the PS can't deliver the saving and never will. IMO there will be redundancies before there is pay cuts, employees won't be prepared to take further cuts in take home pay. From talking to people on the ground, there's a lot of people who would take it.

Hopefully if that is the case it will be targeted redundancies this time around and not the shambles that became the early retirement fiasco.

woodoo

ncdadam wrote: »

Tomorrow will be fun when Howlin tries to tackle a few of the most ridiculous allowances there is.

I wish Howlin good luck in tackling the allowances some of them are crazy.

K-9

Cut out the personal jibes please and don't bring whether somebody is posting in work time into it, it's specifically against the charter because it's irrelevant and proves nothing.

Lumbo

sarumite wrote: »

Hopefully if that is the case it will be targeted redundancies this time around and not the shambles that became the early retirement fiasco.

I don't understand your comment. Early retirements weren't targeted because you either qualified or you didn't.

On redundancies, the impression I get is that Unions would want to last in, first out approach. Management would have a different view (although this may only be in the sector I work in).

ncdadam

Lumbo wrote: »

I read the same claim on this board 3 years ago :rolleyes:

Can I have a loan of your crystal ball?

Funny that, the troika agreement is only in place since November 2010.

Lumbo

ncdadam wrote: »

Funny that, the troika agreement is only in place since November 2010.

Posters on here were predicting that the IMF would be coming into the country to break the Unions before any troika agreement.

sarumite

Lumbo wrote: »

I don't understand your comment. Early retirements weren't targeted because you either qualified or you didn't.

On redundancies, the impression I get is that Unions would want to last in, first out approach. Management would have a different view (although this may only be in the sector I work in).

Early retirement were the appraoch the government took to reducing the number of staff in the PS. The fact that it wasn't/couldn't be targeted meant that the PS lost some essential staff prematurely. If the government offer blanket redundancies (akin to blanket early retirements) the same problems will arise again.

donegal_man

Here's a suggestion for the next version of benchmarking. Why not compare C/S rates and employment conditions to those of the companies that provide similar services on behalf of the state such as the DTT or NTC?

Head The Wall

Vizzy wrote: »

It really irks me when people,who no longer live in the country and hence make no financial contribution to our national finances,seem to think that they have all the answers.

Boo hoo, cry me a river. You may not realise it but emigrants hold the right to vote for 18 months after leaving the country so I am entitled to think whatever I want. If you have an issue with your life and situation in Ireland do something about it instead of directing your resentment toward people that were able to make changes to theirs.

By your logic all the people who make no financial contribution (people on the dole) shouldn't have an opinion either.

Laminations

Head The Wall wrote: »

By your logic all the people who make no financial contribution (people on the dole) shouldn't have an opinion either.

They purchase things in Ireland thus paying VAT and that's just one tax they'd pay.

fliball123

woodoo wrote: »

Its as clear as day that is what the government are at. Varadkar was sent out to throw a spanner in the works about 2 months ago now he is out defending Croke Park?? O'Reilly is up s**t creek, all attention should be on him but he comes out and throws the peasants a scrap of meat to squabble over and surprise surprise off they go. Everyone will be talking about croke park again.

Croke Park is not going to be broken with just over a year to go. Neither the Troika or the Government are interested in breaking it. Its only the Sunday Independent and a few other media outlets that are going hell for leather to get it scrapped but they are just using the furore to sell papers.

Being honest I think O'reilly has a thankless task..trying to make cuts when 80/90% of the money is off the table via the CPA.. There is going to be a major decision to be made in 2014 when the cpa runs out...O'Reilly is forced to make the cuts he made as he has 10% of what we pay on Health to play with. as for Varadkar he has said we should leave the CPA run its course..if they can get the other associated costs other than pay such as allowences down between here and 2014 it will be a job well done..Then 2014 all bets are off. The PS will have to take another a pay cut...I reckon the dole will be cut this year as taxes will increase...