Croke Park Agreement beyond 2014

itzme

fliball123 wrote: »

Sorry lets make it clear I said Health that also includes the dept of Health, It also includes a fair few quangos and it also includes pensions..but it is all paid for out of the health budget along with the HSE..The 80/90% is specifically for health I am sure I outlined this

Fair enough, that's what I was thinking in the edit alright. Sorry for the misinterpretation.
Could you provide a source showing actual expenditure figures to back up 80-95% on pay/pensions please?

sarumite

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

Care to deal with the fact that on average the Public sector are better educated and have more experience at their jobs than the average private sector worker?

Does education and experience count for nothing?

I will just quote you on the question of them having more experience

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

Back up your.......claims

RobbieTheRobber

sarumite wrote: »

I will just quote you on the question of them having more experience

So we have to provide proof of what we post now do we. No one else is doing that in this thread why should I be the first to start?

sarumite

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

So we have to provide proof of what we post now do we. No one else is doing that in this thread why should I be the first to start?

"back up your stupid claims" were your words, were they not? Is it a case do as I say and not as I do?

donalg1

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

So we have to provide proof of what we post now do we. No one else is doing that in this thread why should I be the first to start?

I think that is generally how things work though, its in the charter is it not. Same as the one where we are not supposed to say "well my mate told me" as proof of something being fact. If we cant provide evidence for our claims sure we could all just make up whatever we wanted and present it as fact.

RobbieTheRobber

sarumite wrote: »

"back up your stupid claims" were your words, were they not? Is it a case do as I say and not as I do?

Oh no it is not, I just wanted to see if you want to take the same approach to those on your side of the fence.

As you have shown your true self I will indeed show my cards anyway.

Page one of this thread the poster "head the wall" links to an ESRI report Titled "The Public-Private Sector Pay Gap in Ireland: What Lies Beneath?"

Atrributed to author(s):
Kelly, Elish / McGuinness, Seamus / O'Connell, Philip J

http://www.esri.ie/publications/latest_publications/view/index.xml?id=2864
From page 2 of that report I quote

One of the key challenges in assessing pay differentials between groups is to ensure a “like-with-like” comparison. Thus, we know that public sector workers are more likely to have higher levels of education, to work in professional occupations and to have longer work experience. Kelly et al., (2009)

itzme

Idbatterim wrote: »

who cares whether they are the highest or second highest etc, they are outrageous at the higher levels! I agree with protecting the most vulnerable, and as a section of society, the PS and CS are by far the least vulnerable, cuts from the top down to circa 35 or 40k!

Are you saying cut those at the top by 35-40k or cup everyone down to a max PS salary of 35-40k? Assuming you mean the former

RobbieTheRobber

donalg1 wrote: »

I think that is generally how things work though, its in the charter is it not. Same as the one where we are not supposed to say "well my mate told me" as proof of something being fact. If we cant provide evidence for our claims sure we could all just make up whatever we wanted and present it as fact.

Very little in this thread has been backed up.
I think if we removed the unverifiable and the lies the thread would not top 2 pages.
:rolleyes:

fliball123

itzme wrote: »

Fair enough, that's what I was thinking in the edit alright. Sorry for the misinterpretation.
Could you provide a source showing actual expenditure figures to back up 80-95% on pay/pensions please?

Cant find one..if you do a quick googley boogle..you will see claims from O'reilly himself that it was at 70% but that was before the recent cuts to services and the annual incements being paid..so just listening to a few people on both newstalk and VB they reckon its anywhere between 80/90% at the moment ..some hospitals they reckon will be out of money at the end of the month..meaning they are near 100% of their specific budget...

donalg1

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

Very little in this thread has been backed up.
I think if we removed the unverifiable and the lies the thread would not top 2 pages.
:rolleyes:

Ok then sure because everyone else does it then you might aswell and sure I will too so. My mate told me the top salary in the PS is €1.50 and thats fact. :rolleyes:

HellFireClub

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

Back up your stupid claims, there is no point in me making any comment on the rest of your stupid post when you so clearly begin with a fallacy and later continue the lies.

Here, have a read of this and maybe come back here & rejoin the discussion when you know what you are talking about:

http://www.tui.ie/pay-and-conditions/salary-scales-.1578.html#Common

RobbieTheRobber

HellFireClub wrote: »

Here, have a read of this and maybe come back here & rejoin the discussion when you know what you are talking about:

http://www.tui.ie/pay-and-conditions/salary-scales-.1578.html#Common

What the hell has teachers salary scales got to do with anything.
Please identify how this link supports your claims!

RobbieTheRobber

donalg1 wrote: »

Ok then sure because everyone else does it then you might aswell and sure I will too so. My mate told me the top salary in the PS is €1.50 and thats fact. :rolleyes:

Eh I already have provided evidence to support my claims, but carry on with your silly rant anyway.:rolleyes:

See here for example http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=80619822&postcount=307

itzme

fliball123 wrote: »

Cant find one..if you do a quick googley boogle..you will see claims from O'reilly himself that it was at 70% but that was before the recent cuts to services and the annual incements being paid..so just listening to a few people on both newstalk and VB they reckon its anywhere between 80/90% at the moment ..some hospitals they reckon will be out of money at the end of the month..meaning they are near 100% of their specific budget...

So this would be O'Reilly's comments from four days ago that you are referencing here.
These would seem to be from up to date figures from his department. Could you please provide a source for your assertion that it is not including annual increments please.
Also what recent cuts are you talking about it not including?

There is a huge difference between 70% and the 80-95% you have been quoting. If you can't find any credible source for the 80-95%, is it not fair to either only state the 70% or when stating the 80-95% say it is completely unverified.

fliball123

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

Oh no it is not, I just wanted to see if you want to take the same approach to those on your side of the fence.

As you have shown your true self I will indeed show my cards anyway.

Page one of this thread the poster "head the wall" links to an ESRI report Titled "The Public-Private Sector Pay Gap in Ireland: What Lies Beneath?"

Atrributed to author(s):
Kelly, Elish / McGuinness, Seamus / O'Connell, Philip J

http://www.esri.ie/publications/latest_publications/view/index.xml?id=2864
From page 2 of that report I quote

The longer work experience part of this is because its very hard to be fired out of the PS and anyone in there stays there as its seen as a handy job for life...Now before I get the ..I am a paramedic blah blah..I know some work very hard and some do vital jobs...But people like this seem to get tarnished with the lads doing fcuk all...Anyone over 50k in the PS can well afford a pay cut..leave anyone under that alone, cut out all rediculous perks and allowances and then its a level playing field. I still dont understand why the gov do not benchmark again ... If some people get a raise so be it but the majority in the PS would have a fair cut in their pay...It will be interesting come 2014 when the CPA is finished what the approach will be....The PS have had cuts but so has everything else and we are still in the mire..We are fast becoming one of the most taxed (when taking both direct and indirect taxes into account) nations on the planet..and as someone pointed out if we up'd our tax to the highest on the planet we would still be running a deficit with the same pi$$ poor services and infrastructure..What the gov need to do is realise they need to increase tax, cut social welfare and PS pay and pensions until the gap has closed then turn and tell the EU and banks to fcuk off with their loans and promissory notes, but until they grow some balls ... and while deals like the CPA is keeping about 1/3 of our spend in tact , while Unions hold a gun to the head of Ministers like Reilly and force him into decisions like the cuts he was about to bring in ..Nothing will change

HellFireClub

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

What the hell has teachers salary scales got to do with anything.
Please identify how this link supports your claims!

It's got everything to do with the fact that teachers in this state are highly overpaid. If you think the the list of allowances and ridiculous salary scales there on that link, are appropriate for a country that is in an IMF bailout program, then that's fine. I DON'T!

fliball123

itzme wrote: »

So this would be O'Reilly's comments from four days ago that you are referencing here.
These would seem to be from up to date figures from his department. Could you please provide a source for your assertion that it is not including annual increments please.
Also what recent cuts are you talking about it not including?

There is a huge difference between 70% and the 80-95% you have been quoting. If you can't find any credible source for the 80-95%, is it not fair to either only state the 70% or when stating the 80-95% say it is completely unverified.

As I say I cant I was just listening to the VB and newstalk usual chatters..and they made the point that it keeps moving...like the annual increments will be paid that will push that % up, if they cut more on the service side it pushes it up aswell. But I think you will agree that it is at the very least 70% (as stated by O'Reilly himself) and I never went as far as 95% ... I think some were saying individual hospitals where up near that mark and that some hospitals will be out of funds by the end of the month

K-9

Cut out the hyperbole and the sniping and stop calling opinions stupid, attack the post, not the poster.

donalg1

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

Eh I already have provided evidence to support my claims, but carry on with your silly rant anyway.:rolleyes:

See here for example http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=80619822&postcount=307

My silly rant? You were the one asking if you have to back up anything you say with evidence or facts I just said that is the accepted practice here thats all. But carry on.

itzme

fliball123 wrote: »

The longer work experience part of this is because its very hard to be fired out of the PS and anyone in there stays there as its seen as a handy job for life...Now before I get the ..I am a paramedic blah blah..I know some work very hard and some do vital jobs...But people like this seem to get tarnished with the lads doing fcuk all...Anyone over 50k in the PS can well afford a pay cut..leave anyone under that alone, cut out all rediculous perks and allowances and then its a level playing field. I still dont understand why the gov do not benchmark again ... If some people get a raise so be it but the majority in the PS would have a fair cut in their pay...It will be interesting come 2014 when the CPA is finished what the approach will be....The PS have had cuts but so has everything else and we are still in the mire..We are fast becoming one of the most taxed (when taking both direct and indirect taxes into account) nations on the planet..and as someone pointed out if we up'd our tax to the highest on the planet we would still be running a deficit with the same pi$$ poor services and infrastructure..What the gov need to do is realise they need to increase tax, cut social welfare and PS pay and pensions until the gap has closed then turn and tell the EU and banks to fcuk off with their loans and promissory notes, but until they grow some balls ... and while deals like the CPA is keeping about 1/3 of our spend in tact , while Unions hold a gun to the head of Ministers like Reilly and force him into decisions like the cuts he was about to bring in ..Nothing will change

Did you have a read of the report linked at all? Or is this your personal gut feeling?
I was very surprised that Robbie found a source to claim that PS have more experience and am very interested in the report but if you take a look at page 10

As can be seen from Table
A2 in the Appendix, which presents descriptive information on the characteristics of both sectors, a higher proportion of public service workers have third-level qualifications (55 per cent compared to 32 per cent of private sector employees), are employed in Professional and Associate Professional occupations (51 per cent compared to 19 per cent of private sector workers) and have higher levels of experience. All these characteristics are associated with higher earnings. Private sector were found to work longer hour (almost 40 hours per week compared to 36 hours in the public sector), were more likely
to be male (67 per cent compared to 43 per cent in the public sector) and undertook more supervisory responsibilities.

Seems like a logical, tested, backed up reason for the experience claim. Do you disagree with their methodology or their figures? (including the negative ones for the PS about shorter working hours and undertaking less responsibility)

RobbieTheRobber

HellFireClub wrote: »

It's got everything to do with the fact that teachers in this state are highly overpaid. If you think the the list of allowances and ridiculous salary scales there on that link, are appropriate for a country that is in an IMF bailout program, then that's fine. I DON'T!

You claimed Irish public servants were the highest paid on the face of the planet your link does not prove this.

You refuse to back up your claims and instead launch into a rant, so I will no longer discuss this matter with you.

HellFireClub

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

You claimed Irish public servants were the highest paid on the face of the planet your link does not prove this.

You refuse to back up your claims and instead launch into a rant, so I will no longer discuss this matter with you.

Discuss what you want with who you want. Name me one other country that is borrowing 55 million Euro A DAY, which is in an IMF bailout program, where teachers are getting these insane salaries and where they allowances are the order of the day?

You see this is the problem, you look at those salaries and you think that's normal to be on that kind of money. I look at those salaries and see wanton greed, because I know how hard it is to actually have to earn that salary in a private sector role, as in generate that salary from sales, etc.

fliball123

itzme wrote: »

Did you have a read of the report linked at all? Or is this your personal gut feeling?
I was very surprised that Robbie found a source to claim that PS have more experience and am very interested in the report but if you take a look at page 10

Seems like a logical, tested, backed up reason for the experience claim. Do you disagree with their methodology or their figures? (including the negative ones for the PS about shorter working hours and undertaking less responsibility)

As I say show me stats on anyone who lost there job in the PS by force over the last decade and compare that to the private sector? I dont doubt there are ways of measuring everything but until you accept that people who go into the public sector go in with the mantra of "job for life" because they know they will not get a better deal in the private sector and they know that it is very hard to be fired. Sure the country is how much in debt and how much are we borrowing and how many people were forced to leave the public sector...to my knowledge very few full time staff were forced out of the public sector thus far...How many private sector cos go to the wall every week??? So its an unfair comparison as people in the private sector have obstacles and hurdles in order to stay in their job that the public sector dont have

itzme

fliball123 wrote: »

As I say I cant I was just listening to the VB and newstalk usual chatters..and they made the point that it keeps moving...like the annual increments will be paid that will push that % up, if they cut more on the service side it pushes it up aswell. But I think you will agree that it is at the very least 70% (as stated by O'Reilly himself)

I can completely accept what the minister claims that the figure is 70%, if I disagreed with it I would have to prove it.

Ok so can you agree that the 80-95% figure you have been quoting is at best unverified or just plain wrong as you can't source it at all in any tangible way.

RobbieTheRobber

donalg1 wrote: »

My silly rant? You were the one asking if you have to back up anything you say with evidence or facts I just said that is the accepted practice here thats all. But carry on.

Yes donal your silly rant, I first provided evidence for my claims and later pointed out that this same request for evidence is not used by those who argue from a similiar postion as yourself.
To which you replied

Ok then sure because everyone else does it then you might aswell and sure I will too so. My mate told me the top salary in the PS is €1.50 and thats fact.

So I make a claim, i back it up and then you make that comment. What would you call your response to me?

fliball123

HellFireClub wrote: »

Discuss what you want with who you want. Name me one other country that is borrowing 55 million Euro A DAY, which is in an IMF bailout program, where teachers are getting these insane salaries and where they allowances are the order of the day?

You see this is the problem, you look at those salaries and you think that's normal to be on that kind of money. I look at those salaries and see wanton greed, because I know how hard it is to actually have to earn that salary in a private sector role, as in generate that salary from sales, etc.

Robbie has a point as you do ... They are not the most over paid in the world..In some sections they are such as consultants etc..but not all..and this is what we all have to learn including the likes of Robbie...All PS workers are not creaming it...As all private sector workers are not bankers....But because of the unions and collective barganing the PS are all lumped in together...What sickens me is the lets protect the existing memebers of the union and fcuk over anyone new coming in...Anyone can see that someone new coming in thats where the rate should be at for everyone

itzme

HellFireClub wrote: »

Discuss what you want with who you want. Name me one other country that is borrowing 55 million Euro A DAY, which is in an IMF bailout program, where teachers are getting these insane salaries and where they allowances are the order of the day?

You see this is the problem, you look at those salaries and you think that's normal to be on that kind of money. I look at those salaries and see wanton greed, because I know how hard it is to actually have to earn that salary in a private sector role, as in generate that salary from sales, etc.

I see those figures and see out of date figures which have been significantly reduced since then.

donalg1

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

Yes donal your silly rant, I first provided evidence for my claims and later pointed out that this same request for evidence is not used by those who argue from a similiar postion as yourself.
To which you replied


So I make a claim, i back it up and then you make that comment. What would you call your response to me?

A sarcastic silly post in response to yours which highlights the silliness of your post.

sarumite

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

Oh no it is not, I just wanted to see if you want to take the same approach to those on your side of the fence.

You must have me confused with another poster. I haven't positioned myself on anyside of the fence. Although, I do think it is important for people to provide proof as well as living up to their own standards.

As you have shown your true self I will indeed show my cards anyway.[

Not really sure how quoting you reveals anything about myself, however cheers for the source (I hadn't actually read the report myself until now). Do you have an opinion on the report itself?

fliball123

itzme wrote: »

I can completely accept what the minister claims that the figure is 70%, if I disagreed with it I would have to prove it.

Ok so can you agree that the 80-95% figure you have been quoting is at best unverified or just plain wrong as you can't source it at all in any tangible way.

I have told you that 70% was acceptable but the 80% in particular has been used quite a bit by the different economists and other politicians..and I never said anywhere like 95% ...I said people who have more knowledge than me are stating that...and I think the 95% is on individual hospitals who are running out of money after burning through their own individual budgets...Having said that I see no stats for the 70% that Reilly claims either so he could be wrong aswell it could be lower or higher but as I pointed out increments and cuts to other services not pay would have pushed this % upwards

itzme

fliball123 wrote: »

Robbie has a point as you do ... They are not the most over paid in the world..In some sections they are such as consultants etc..but not all..and this is what we all have to learn including the likes of Robbie...All PS workers are not creaming it...As all private sector workers are not bankers....But because of the unions and collective barganing the PS are all lumped in together...What sickens me is the lets protect the existing memebers of the union and fcuk over anyone new coming in...Anyone can see that someone new coming in thats where the rate should be at for everyone

Emm......
I have been on these boards for not too long and since I have been, generally you have been on the other side of the debate to me. Can I just say that, this is the most balanced post I have read from you to date. I nearly agree with everything you've written here, fair play fliball.

RobbieTheRobber

sarumite wrote: »

You must have me confused with another poster. I haven't positioned myself on anyside of the fence. Although, I do think it is important for people to provide proof as well as living up to their own standards.


Not really sure how quoting you reveals anything about myself, however cheers for the source (I hadn't actually read the report myself until now). Do you have an opinion on the report itself?

So you have asked other posters to verify their claims in this thread have you?

HellFireClub

itzme wrote: »

I see those figures and see out of date figures which have been significantly reduced since then.

Yes but which only apply to a small number of teachers who were hired within the last 2 years! The majority of teachers are still on the old rates. Whatever about the figures, automatic increments are still there for everyone, so the productive and the unproductive get remunerated in the exact same manner, something that is ALIEN to me as a private sector worker!

itzme

fliball123 wrote: »

I cant blame the man..How can you make cuts to about 10% of your spend when the other 90%(give or take 5%) is protected under the CPA ..

Well as much as I gave you credit in my last post... back to the norm
Here is where you said 85-95%

HellFireClub

There has been this general consensus in our elite public sector, that unless you are on more than 100K a year, you are being made a mug out of. There is a casual disregard for any person who asks why it is that only those on 100K plus should be told to take a serious salary cut.

To me, anyone on 45K plus should have to account in a very serious way for their salary. That is now an excellent salary in the private sector.

fliball123

itzme wrote: »

Emm......
I have been on these boards for not too long and since I have been, generally you have been on the other side of the debate to me. Can I just say that, this is the most balanced post I have read from you to date. I nearly agree with everything you've written here, fair play fliball.

Well it took me leaving ireland and coming back ... As I say I did get caught up with being blinkered but having said that there are blinkers on both sides...I mean as I say if we up taxes to the highest in the world we are still not going to get out of the mess...If we cut social welfare too much there will be chaos same goes with ps workers...Everyone has to take some pain.....I thought the gov were naive to continue with the cpa but if it delevers some good new practises and cuts out silly allowances and perks ... grand leave the wage until 2014 and then cut it after the agreement has completed..but I hope that they cut from 50k upwards and in some way benchmark and maybe bring new hires up a small bit and existing down to that mark...

fliball123

itzme wrote: »

Well as much as I gave you credit in my last post... back to the norm
Here is where you said 85-95%

Sorry that 5% should of been the other way as in 85% sorry for the confusion

Head The Wall

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

Care to deal with the fact that on average the Public sector are better educated and have more experience at their jobs than the average private sector worker?

Does education and experience count for nothing?

Taking the so called qualifications and experience in the PS why in the UK do they pay their staff around 5% more than the average private sector worker but Ireland deems it necessary to pay public around 40% more here.

It would also be interesting to know what percentage of people in the PS actually need or use their qualifications for their jobs. Personally I know people with programming and software development qualifications who are now clerical officers. I expect that these type of qualifications would be included in the PS stats

itzme

fliball123 wrote: »

Well it took me leaving ireland and coming back ... As I say I did get caught up with being blinkered but having said that there are blinkers on both sides...I mean as I say if we up taxes to the highest in the world we are still not going to get out of the mess...If we cut social welfare too much there will be chaos same goes with ps workers...Everyone has to take some pain.....I thought the gov were naive to continue with the cpa but if it delevers some good new practises and cuts out silly allowances and perks ... grand leave the wage until 2014 and then cut it after the agreement has completed..but I hope that they cut from 50k upwards and in some way benchmark and maybe bring new hires up a small bit and existing down to that mark...

Again, that is in my view an extremely balanced and considered description of the path forward. I completely agree with all of it.
In my view, and if you take a look at a thread on politicians salaries recently I think a form of benchmarking is the only way forward for PS pay. I disagree with how most people have described their implementation of benchmarking though.

sarumite

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

So you have asked other posters to verify their claims in this thread have you?

This thread, not to my knowledge. Other threads yes. I don't always read every post in every thread so I may not always see if someone posts a statement as fact without providing accompanying proof and if a another poster has already asked for verification I feel it is somewhat redundant to ask.

RobbieTheRobber

Head The Wall wrote: »

Taking the so called qualifications and experience in the PS why in the UK do they pay their staff around 5% more than the average private sector worker but Ireland deems it necessary to pay public around 40% more here.

It would also be interesting to know what percentage of people in the PS actually need or use their qualifications for their jobs. Personally I know people with programming and software development qualifications who are now clerical officers. I expect that these type of qualifications would be included in the PS stats

I know private sector software firms who employ former solicitors. We all know of many people who work in banks who have arts degrees so im not sure what exactly is your point.

Edit: Can you also provide me with evidence of this 40% difference in pay?

itzme

fliball123 wrote: »

Sorry that 5% should of been the other way as in 85% sorry for the confusion

No problem, personally I think the 85% is too high I could just about believe the 80%. I agree with your original contention though that pay in health does need to be tackled and that with such a high ratio compared to total expenditure it makes it trickier for O'Reilly to reduce his bill. I was just worried when I saw 95% that you were going to call for a mass reduction in pay by some crazy amount which you're clearly not doing.

RobbieTheRobber

sarumite wrote: »

This thread, not to my knowledge. Other threads yes. I don't always read every post in every thread so I may not always see if someone posts a statement as fact without providing accompanying proof and if a another poster has already asked for verification I feel it is somewhat redundant to ask.

So on the page i made my calls for poster to support facts, mine was the only comment that needed to be verified?

So 20 pages of lies about public servants and you have posted on a number of those pages yet not once have you requested obvious lies to be verified. Yet you attack me over my claims, Hmmmmmmmm!

Head The Wall

HellFireClub wrote: »

There has been this general consensus in our elite public sector, that unless you are on more than 100K a year, you are being made a mug out of. There is a casual disregard for any person who asks why it is that only those on 100K plus should be told to take a serious salary cut.

To me, anyone on 45K plus should have to account in a very serious way for their salary. That is now an excellent salary in the private sector.

Do clerical officers earning nearly 35k for 32.5 hour week with 25 days holidays not seem excessive to you? The ESRI report stated that the biggest public private discrepancies were at the lower wage levels, we shouldn't pick arbitrary wage levels, we should reduce every wage level that is out of kilter with what the same role would pay in the private sector.

itzme

HellFireClub wrote: »

There has been this general consensus in our elite public sector, that unless you are on more than 100K a year, you are being made a mug out of. There is a casual disregard for any person who asks why it is that only those on 100K plus should be told to take a serious salary cut.

To me, anyone on 45K plus should have to account in a very serious way for their salary. That is now an excellent salary in the private sector.

I'm sorry to say HellFireClub but I don't really see a coherent point from you at the minute. You are jumping from one "fact" to another making it impossible to discuss things with you, it comes across to me that you are ranting.

Your original point was the PS here are the highest on earth.
You backed this up with (out of date) teacher salaries (without any link to other countries, to back up the "highest on earth" comment)
Then you said the teachers are highly overpaid.......
onto comments about the "general consensus" in the PS??

I would be happy to contribute to a discussion of a single point with you but this jumping around makes it impossible.

Theboinkmaster

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

So on the page i made my calls for poster to support facts, mine was the only comment that needed to be verified?

So 20 pages of lies about public servants and you have posted on a number of those pages yet not once have you requested obvious lies to be verified. Yet you attack me over my claims, Hmmmmmmmm!

Your position seems to be that Irish PS employees are paid on par with other countries - can you support this with reference to supporting documentation?

RobbieTheRobber

Head The Wall wrote: »

Do clerical officers earning nearly 35k for 32.5 hour week with 25 days holidays not seem excessive to you? The ESRI report stated that the biggest public private discrepancies were at the lower wage levels, we shouldn't pick arbitrary wage levels, we should reduce every wage level that is out of kilter with what the same role would pay in the private sector.

That would require a new benchmarking process and not your arbitrary judgement.

In a body of 300,000 can you be sure that no clerical workers are worth this wage?

Which is near the maximum for this type of worker and not the average!

RobbieTheRobber

Theboinkmaster wrote: »

Your position seems to be that Irish PS employees are paid on par with other countries - can you support this with reference to supporting documentation?

Please please point out to me where I made such a claim?

When you cant I Suggest you do not attribute positions to me that I have not attached myself too.

:rolleyes::rolleyes:

sarumite

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

So on the page i made my calls for poster to support facts, mine was the only comment that needed to be verified?

So 20 pages of lies about public servants and you have posted on a number of those pages yet what other comments have you requested verification?

I haven't read all 20 pages myself (though not all of the pages were lies imo). If another poster has already corrected a wrong fact or requested verification (as you have) then it is redundant of me to ask. My posting history is not limited to this thread. I have asked people other than yourself to verify facts in the past and will more than likely do so in the future.

RobbieTheRobber

sarumite wrote: »

I haven't read all 20 pages myself (though not all of the pages were lies imo). If another poster has already corrected a wrong fact or requested verification (as you have) then it is redundant of me to ask. My posting history is not limited to this thread. I have asked people other than yourself to verify facts in the past and will more than likely do so in the future.

So you accept my source and if no one else does I expect you will request verfication from obviously misleading posts in this thread, on pages that you do read of course.