CSO report on public-private pay gap

Farmer Pudsey

woodoo wrote: »

From the report:

They can take that out for a start, the semi states are not public service, they are untouchable. No paycut in 2010 or pension levy. The government has no way of getting at their wages.

Look what happens when the semi states are included with the private sector (whick they basically are anyway)

There is no comparrison betwen the semi states and private companies most are over paid and over staffed. Not that I am a huge fan of privatisation of utilities although in the case of refuse collection it made little difference.

You could compare the wages in Board Gais/ESB with private utilities Eircom/Vodaphone/Meteor/O2 and use staffing level in eircom/Vodaphone/Eircell pre/post privitation as comparissons

fliball123

ardmacha wrote: »

I look forward to you and your fellow travellers not talking about it then.

Well if the comparison is inaccurate as a measure of the differentiation between public and private why bother look at it..It needs to factor in everything in order to get a proper comparison

creedp

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

There is no comparrison betwen the semi states and private companies most are over paid and over staffed. Not that I am a huge fan of privatisation of utilities although in the case of refuse collection it made little difference.

You could compare the wages in Board Gais/ESB with private utilities Eircom/Vodaphone/Meteor/O2 and use staffing level in eircom/Vodaphone/Eircell pre/post privitation as comparissons

Very valid comparisons of course and Im sure they would throw up interesting differences. However, the point being made is that average semi-state salaries are high compared to average ps salaries and are therefore inflating the overall ps average wage. However, when cuts were introduced for public sector wages the semi-states wages were excluded from these cuts and will also be excluded from any future cuts. It would therefore be more directly comparable to remove semi-state salaries from the overall ps average salary before deciding what gap exists between public and private pay rates.

Its a bit much to be screaming that public pay rates are 50% higher when they contain salaries which cannot be impacted on by ps pay cuts. In addition, maybe hospitality pay should be removed from the average private salary calculation as this sector significantly reduces the overall average private sector salary. In fact people were concerned about low pay in the private sector, they should be supporting a campaign to improve salary leves for this sector. For those who can crunch the numbers it would be interesting to see what the pay 'average' gap would be if those adjustments were made.

Farmer Pudsey

creedp wrote: »

In addition, maybe hospitality pay should be removed from the average private salary calculation as this sector significantly reduces the overall average private sector salary. In fact people were concerned about low pay in the private sector, they should be supporting a campaign to improve salary leves for this sector. For those who can crunch the numbers it would be interesting to see what the pay 'average' gap would be if those adjustments were made.

Maybe we should also provide matrix'es for private sector where workers have often to be on different worksites (not just in construction) which impact on there travel and work cost not all reimbursed by the employer. Yes in an Ideal world we would like to see pay improve in low paid sections of the private sector but would this impact on employment rates. It is not as simplistic as starting a campaign to improve pay in low pay area's in the private sector.The hospitality sector is part of the tourism sector which has been decimated by high cost and has lost compeditive prices to other holiday destinations.

ballyharpat

If you take the weekly pay comparisons, I can find people in the same company as me doing the same job that get 50% less than me, I work 45 hours, someone else works 30 hours, let's say I get e10 per hour, that's 450 per week, they get 300, the figures are skewed if someone says I get paid 50% more than them, I work 50% more than them and get the same per hour, someone doing my job in the Public sector gets 50% more than me and more allowances/benefits/sick pay/pension.

How do I know this? Because my mother does the same work as me and gets paid 50% more.......

woodoo wrote: »

Thats the 2009 figures, in 2010 its less and it doesn't take the pension levy into account or weigh for education when you compare by hours. I'll stick to the weekly pay comparisons. They are what really matters.

Gumbo

fliball123 wrote: »

Well if the comparison is inaccurate as a measure of the differentiation between public and private why bother look at it..It needs to factor in everything in order to get a proper comparison

CSO reports were good enough when the figures suited your argument, now that they dont suit your agenda, the CSO reports are rubbish Talk about double standards, and they say TD's have one rule for them and one rule for others

ballyharpat wrote: »

If you take the weekly pay comparisons, I can find people in the same company as me doing the same job that get 50% less than me, I work 45 hours, someone else works 30 hours, let's say I get e10 per hour, that's 450 per week, they get 300, the figures are skewed if someone says I get paid 50% more than them, I work 50% more than them and get the same per hour, someone doing my job in the Public sector gets 50% more than me and more allowances/benefits/sick pay/pension.

How do I know this? Because my mother does the same work as me and gets paid 50% more.......

Im sorry, but i call BS without some sort of job title outlined at the least to compare.
This is where some narrow minded people fail, they assume all PS people get allowances and benefits.

someone doing my job in the Private sector gets 50% more than me and more allowances/benefits/sick pay/pension.

How do I know this? Because my mate does the same work as me and gets paid 50% more

fliball123

kceire wrote: »

CSO reports were good enough when the figures suited your argument, now that they dont suit your agenda, the CSO reports are rubbish Talk about double standards, and they say TD's have one rule for them and one rule for others

This report still even when not taking the increments, pensions, allowences still shows overpayment by the median and average as being somewhere between 20 and 40% in differing areas...what argument are you talking about is it the one were we are borrowing 2.5 million an hour to pay for this madness....The same body also stated that in countries where the public sector is paid vastly more than its private sector counter parts are as follows Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece and Spain...Now what else do these countries have in common???

Gumbo

fliball123 wrote: »

Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece and Spain...Now what else do these countries have in common???

we all have a chance at qualification for Brazil 2014?

fliball123

kceire wrote: »

we all have a chance at qualification for Brazil 2014?

Yeah they also are up to their t1ts in debt due to over borrowing for the day to day running of their countries and are all in the middle or will soon to be in a bailout program..its time to start joining the dots...The Public sector should be getting paid less than the private sector as they get a bullet proof and very attractive pension and security in their job, something that if you put a price on would seriously skew this report. Look at Germany, France and other countries that are not in the mire..

Gumbo

fliball123 wrote: »

they get a bullet proof and very attractive pension and security in their job

Why not cancel PS pensions and give the contributions back to the staff to look after themselves? It would mean a bigger take home pay for PS staff though, and that would kill the boards.ie faithful PS staff will still get the state pension then they can use their contributions and levy to fund their lifestyle or to bump up the state pension.

Are you forgetting that the state pension is built into the PS pension? Are you forgetting that PS staff pay contributions to their pension on top of the PRSI for the state pension?

ballyharpat

You can call anything you like, I am a HCA, I get paid e12 per hour, e2 extra on a sunday. My Mother gets e18 per hour, don't know that rate for Sunday, but it's a lot more than me.
And I am one of the better paid carers in the private sector, a lot of them only get minimum wage to e10 per hour.

Are you happy now????? ANd to add to that, I get 20 min on average per resident, my mother gets 30-40, and in that time I have to shower them twice a week, in the Public sector they don't......

Now please point out where that happens in a reverse as you are so smart in pointing out in your post??
Im sorry, but i call BS without some sort of job title outlined at the least to compare.
This is where some narrow minded people fail, they assume all PS people get allowances and benefits.

someone doing my job in the Private sector gets 50% more than me and more allowances/benefits/sick pay/pension.

How do I know this? Because my mate does the same work as me and gets paid 50% more[/QUOTE]

fliball123

kceire wrote: »

Why not cancel PS pensions and give the contributions back to the staff to look after themselves? It would mean a bigger take home pay for PS staff though, and that would kill the boards.ie faithful PS staff will still get the state pension then they can use their contributions and levy to fund their lifestyle or to bump up the state pension.

Are you forgetting that the state pension is built into the PS pension? Are you forgetting that PS staff pay contributions to their pension on top of the PRSI for the state pension?

What you mean the pensions levy?...yeah I would be all for that ... but do you think that what the ps currently pay will cover the current ps employees pensions...answer not in a million years..it will have to be subsidised by the tax payer..Thats a known fact and there is a clusterfcuk of a pensions problem coming down the road in about 10/15 years...They have already dipped into the private pension pot...I dont think there will be many of the ps who would want what your suggesting..I do know there are some in the ps that would be better off doing this but not a large %

ardmacha

They have already dipped into the private pension pot..

Not as much as they have dipped into the national pension reserve fund.

Gumbo

fliball123 wrote: »

What you mean the pensions levy?...

Pension Levy and Pension Contributions.
You do realise PS pay both of these dont you?

fliball123 wrote: »

but do you think that what the ps currently pay will cover the current ps employees pensions...answer not in a million years..it will have to be subsidised by the tax payer..Thats a known fact and there is a clusterfcuk of a pensions problem coming down the road in about 10/15 years...They have already dipped into the private pension pot...I dont think there will be many of the ps who would want what your suggesting..I do know there are some in the ps that would be better off doing this but not a large %

The high earners, no it wouldnt, i agree with you there. But anybody in and around the middle income/average may be better off with their own funds.
Lets be honest here, when i retire at 65, the lump sum if im still there and still applicable will not be as important as a regular income, so i'd gladly reduce payments in now to reduce the lump sum.

My weekly payment includes the state pension, so its only the balance that i have to fund, which i could easily manage with my own saving tbh.

Gumbo

ballyharpat wrote: »

And to add to that, I get 20 min on average per resident, my mother gets 30-40, and in that time I have to shower them twice a week, in the Public sector they don't......

Would you rather 30 mins with each patient?
Is the PS system in this instance better than the private system?

Does your boss/owner rush you through patients in order maximise people care and profits?

I personally would rather be looked after by a PS HCA as they get to spend that little bit more time with the patient rathert than in out thank you mam.

fliball123

kceire wrote: »

Pension Levy and Pension Contributions.
You do realise PS pay both of these dont you?



The high earners, no it wouldnt, i agree with you there. But anybody in and around the middle income/average may be better off with their own funds.
Lets be honest here, when i retire at 65, the lump sum if im still there and still applicable will not be as important as a regular income, so i'd gladly reduce payments in now to reduce the lump sum.

My weekly payment includes the state pension, so its only the balance that i have to fund, which i could easily manage with my own saving tbh.

So can the private sector take back their prsi as well then...Once again with what the ps are payin in both do you think that for the majority of current PS workers will it cover what they will get in their pensions..and the answer is no. who makes up the short fall ....the tax payer. But I am in agreement that pensions should from here on be taken away from PS let them pay PRSI like the private sector and be entitled to the OAP and if they want to top it up let them do so it would save billions in the future

Gumbo

fliball123 wrote: »

So can the private sector take back their prsi as well then...Once again with what the ps are payin in both do you think that for the majority of current PS workers will it cover what they will get in their pensions..and the answer is no. who makes up the short fall ....the tax payer. But I am in agreement that pensions should from here on be taken away from PS let them pay PRSI like the private sector and be entitled to the OAP and if they want to top it up let them do so it would save billions in the future

Hang on a minute here, then you would have to give the PS back their PRSI as you are aware that they pay that too??? Are you seriously unaware that PS staff pay PRSI, pension contributions and pension levy???????

I purposely left out the state pension as both private and public receive this for paying PRSI.
And ps staff are entitled to the COAP, it's built into their ps pension. Seriously do you even know why your ranting?

My ps pension contributions would cover my pension and I and many many others would give up the ps pension tomorrow if we had the chance.

fliball123

kceire wrote: »

Hang on a minute here, then you would have to give the PS back their PRSI as you are aware that they pay that too??? Are you seriously unaware that PS staff pay PRSI, pension contributions and pension levy???????

I purposely left out the state pension as both private and public receive this for paying PRSI.
And ps staff are entitled to the COAP, it's built into their ps pension. Seriously do you even know why your ranting?

My ps pension contributions would cover my pension and I and many many others would give up the ps pension tomorrow if we had the chance.

Where did I say that you didnt pay prsi or pension contributions. The private sector pay PRSI in orde to pay for the OAP. Where have I ranted? I only said that this report does not take into account the last number of years annual increments , allowances or the number of hours worked or pensions. I just stated that if any comparison was to be done it would have to be on the whole of what the ps get in comparison to the private sector. I never ranted or at least I didnt intentionally try to come across like that. Also as for you covering your pension grand I just wish that 100% of ps who will garnish a pension would be like you but unfortunately thats not the case.

Riskymove

fliball123 wrote: »

I just wish that 100% of ps who will garnish a pension would be like you but unfortunately thats not the case.

with the reforms in place since 1995, more and more will fall into this category

I only said that this report does not take into account the last number of years annual increments , allowances or the number of hours worked or pensions.

The report is about what surveyed people were paid in 2009 and 2010 and nothing more

it is not about our current deficit or cost of PS pay bill and it doesn't claim to be either!

fliball123

Riskymove wrote: »

with the reforms in place since 1995, more and more will fall into this category



The report is about what surveyed people were paid in 2009 and 2010 and nothing more

it is not about our current deficit or cost of PS pay bill and it doesn't claim to be either!

I never disputed this...I just said that if we want an accurate analysis of the differential between both sectors ... All perks, allowances, increments and pensions in both sectors should be taken into account as each have a monetary value.

ballyharpat

"Would you rather 30 mins with each patient?
Is the PS system in this instance better than the private system?

Does your boss/owner rush you through patients in order maximise people care and profits?

I personally would rather be looked after by a PS HCA as they get to spend that little bit more time with the patient rathert than in out thank you mam."

I would rather 30 min with each patient, it doesn't mean I need 30 min with each patient, I am there to work, from speaking to people that have come from hospitals/public sector, to our establishment, the level of care is much better in ours, they ring a bell and it is responded to much faster than in the public sector, there is more conversing with clients and asking them how they feel etc.
Of course it is a business, unlike the Public service, so therefore the business has to turn a profit and still be competitive, if we had 30 min with each resident, then the rate that the client pays would go up and then we would not be as competitive from a business standpoint, so the business would lose clients and then there would be layoffs.

cosbloodymick

fliball123 wrote: »

Yeah they also are up to their t1ts in debt due to over borrowing for the day to day running of their countries and are all in the middle or will soon to be in a bailout program..its time to start joining the dots...The Public sector should be getting paid less than the private sector as they get a bullet proof and very attractive pension and security in their job, something that if you put a price on would seriously skew this report. Look at Germany, France and other countries that are not in the mire..

Yeah, If only the Irish people did copy the French model. Where workers, both public sector and private sector stand up for themselves and don't get involved in trying to destroy the terms and conditions of employment of each other!

not yet

cosbloodymick wrote: »

Yeah, If only the Irish people did copy the French model. Where workers, both public sector and private sector stand up for themselves and don't get involved in trying to destroy the terms and conditions of employment of each other!

So true, It's sickening to listen to some of the crap the past few years, Ain't it funny when all these people where making serious money during the boom we heard none of this. Move on few years and some people would sack the whole PS and replace them with minimum wage employees.

woodoo

kceire wrote: »

Hang on a minute here, then you would have to give the PS back their PRSI as you are aware that they pay that too??? Are you seriously unaware that PS staff pay PRSI, pension contributions and pension levy???????.

I think he was yeah when he posted that bit but getting people to admit they are wrong here is mighty hard

woodoo

cosbloodymick wrote: »

Yeah, If only the Irish people did copy the French model. Where workers, both public sector and private sector stand up for themselves and don't get involved in trying to destroy the terms and conditions of employment of each other!

Yeah the french got together and can retire at 60, we argue amongst ourselves and the government sneak in a 68 retirement age.

woodoo

not yet wrote: »

So true, It's sickening to listen to some of the crap the past few years, Ain't it funny when all these people where making serious money during the boom we heard none of this. Move on few years and some people would sack the whole PS and replace them with minimum wage employees.

Very true, if the economy was back on track and booming tomorrow they would all turn their attention to consumerism again. The Indo would be directing them on that too. Just like they did with property. The masses are easily controlled.

sarumite

not yet wrote: »

Ain't it funny when all these people where making serious money during the boom we heard none of this. Move on few years and some people would sack the whole PS and replace them with minimum wage employees.

Tis about as funny as when the PS were all about benchmarking. Now its the ugly word that dare not rear its head.

cosbloodymick

sarumite wrote: »

Tis about as funny as when the PS were all about benchmarking. Now its the ugly word that dare not rear its head.

12 years of the Celtic Tiger = 4% Benchmark pay increase
1st year of Economic Crisis = 15% pay cut.
Given back in spades buddy (thats only so far)

Farmer Pudsey

cosbloodymick wrote: »

12 years of the Celtic Tiger = 4% Benchmark pay increase
1st year of Economic Crisis = 15% pay cut.
Given back in spades buddy (thats only so far)

Not quite the truth
http://www.finfacts.com/celtictigereconomyireland.htm#Pay_-_Irish_Public_Service_2001-2006

Takes alittle time to load however it put a lot of things in perpective and if you want the complete article
http://www.finfacts.com/celtictigereconomyireland.htm

Now I know it was written in 2006 but it put alot in perpective and debunks the theory that private sector workers were the winners in the Celtic tiger

cosbloodymick

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

Not quite the truth
http://www.finfacts.com/celtictigereconomyireland.htm#Pay_-_Irish_Public_Service_2001-2006

Takes alittle time to load however it put a lot of things in perpective and if you want the complete article
http://www.finfacts.com/celtictigereconomyireland.htm

Now I know it was written in 2006 but it put alot in perpective and debunks the theory that private sector workers were the winners in the Celtic tiger

I take exception to your not quite the truth comment.
I know what benchmark payment I got and I know what paycuts I got.

not yet

sarumite wrote: »

Tis about as funny as when the PS were all about benchmarking. Now its the ugly word that dare not rear its head.

You really don't know what benchmarking was do you........

It was to bring PS workers in line with private sector, It was 10% over 4 years which is 2.5 % a year. That has been totally reversed with pay cuts and pension levy.

sarumite

not yet wrote: »

You really don't know what benchmarking was do you........

It was to bring PS workers in line with private sector, It was 10% over 4 years which is 2.5 % a year. That has been totally reversed with pay cuts and pension levy.

I understand it. I actually supported benchmarking and still do (Which is why I am wholly opposed to the CPA). However the argument that the private sector were raking it in during the tiger period doesn't actually fit the data. If you look at charts on Ronan lyons blog for example (as he used numbers from the CSO) it shows that the average PS wage increased by €19,500 while the average private sector wage increased by €15,600. Certainly that increase has been affected by the pay cut and the levy, though between redundancies and pay cuts its arguable that the private sector has been hit equally hard (if not harder?) as a result of the recession however it does not have a taxpayer backed guarantee of no more pay or job cuts. Maybe it is time to "bring PS workers in line with private sector"?

Japer

cosbloodymick wrote: »

12 years of the Celtic Tiger = 4% Benchmark pay increase 10 years of Celtic Tiger = doubling of public sector pay
1st year of Economic Crisis = 15% pay cut. 5 years of economic crisis =8% net pay cut

fixed that for you

Gumbo

Japer wrote: »

fixed that for you

Your talking crap, the overall pay bill may have doubled but individual salaries did not and you know that. Another idiotic post.

fliball123

cosbloodymick wrote: »

Yeah, If only the Irish people did copy the French model. Where workers, both public sector and private sector stand up for themselves and don't get involved in trying to destroy the terms and conditions of employment of each other!

Mick the private sector is being decimated, there are some sectors flourishing and making a profit the ps see some pay incresases and think that they should be entitled to the same..They neglect to see the companies in trouble cutting an slashing and inevitably going to the wall..The gov is borrowing 2.5million an hour...now do you think the ps should follow the model of the flourishing sectors or ones that are in trouble...I mean increments and allowances are a complete jock given the state the country finds itself in.. I think the majority of people here are looking for common sense...cuts from the top..major cuts at the top and maybe tiny ones from those under say 30k...People are looking for the ps to adhere to the real world...like no more allowances for holding a key or making a fcuking box or for traveling to work or paying unvouched expenses. They are looking for the gov to stop paying increments temporarily until we are out of the sh1tstorm which in any private sector company which is in the same financial mess the gov are in would of happened back in 2008... The private sector has woken up to the fact that every cent that cannot be brought back in from the ludicrous social partnership agreement will have to come from increased taxes.... The private sector do not want to destoy the ps terms and conditions all we want is value for the taxes we pay..We have seen our taxes increased by a very large % when both direct and indirect taxes are taken into account and yet the service being offered has been diminished year in year out for the last 5 years....

Sorry but to give you an analogy with in the private sector...if you were shopping in Dunnes and you had 100 euros a week to do your shopping and Dunnes upped their prices and cut service such as no more trollies, no more cleaning etc and then you found that your 100 had been cut to 60...would you still shop in dunnes? No you wouldnt you would be off to Aldi or Lidle but unfortunately we have no competition for the public sector in this country so the private sector are told to shut up and get on with it..So sorry if you think we are having a go at your terms and conditions as we look at the sick and dying in this country not having a bed to die on due to cuts to services instead of core pay

fliball123

not yet wrote: »

So true, It's sickening to listen to some of the crap the past few years, Ain't it funny when all these people where making serious money during the boom we heard none of this. Move on few years and some people would sack the whole PS and replace them with minimum wage employees.

And yet the PS made such a racket that they got 2 bouts of benchmarking...Dont hear you guys asking to be benchmarked again when things have hit the ****s

fliball123

cosbloodymick wrote: »

12 years of the Celtic Tiger = 4% Benchmark pay increase
1st year of Economic Crisis = 15% pay cut.
Given back in spades buddy (thats only so far)

Sorry on average 7% how anyone can defend the pension levy when what the ps pay with levy will not cover the costs of the existing members is a joke..Hows about you take you pension levy back and look after your own pensions

frankosw

fliball123 wrote: »

And yet the PS made such a racket that they got 2 bouts of benchmarking...Dont here you guys asking to be benchmarked again when things have hit the ****s

I'd be happy to be benchmarked against a java programmer or a senior bank official.

"Average" pay is skewed by the huge number of minimum wage employees in the private sector and nothing more.

people like you talk as if everybody in the private sector has taken a huge paycut and are living a hand to mouth existence..complete BS..many,many companies are flourishing and paying increases to thier employees and prices are being ramped up for goods and services right accross the board...example the Porterhouse pub has increased the price of a pint by 30 c in the last year...what does that indicate to you,mr backseat economist?

K-9

fliball123 wrote: »

Sorry on average 7% how anyone can defend the pension levy when what the ps pay with levy will not cover the costs of the existing members is a joke..Hows about you take you pension levy back and look after your own pensions

They also pay the pre-existing pension deduction of about 5%.

fliball123

frankosw wrote: »

I'd be happy to be benchmarked against a java programmer or a senior bank official.

"Average" pay is skewed by the huge number of minimum wage employees in the private sector and nothing more.

people like you talk as if everybody in the private sector has taken a huge paycut and are living a hand to mouth existence..complete BS..many,many companies are flourishing and paying increases to thier employees and prices are being ramped up for goods and services right accross the board...example the Porterhouse pub has increased the price of a pint by 30 c in the last year...what does that indicate to you,mr backseat economist?

Is that what you do in the PS..I dont doubt that some in the PS would be brought up in line but the majority would take big pay cuts ... I never said all in the private sector have taken pay cuts..I pointed out that 4 companies a week since the beginning of 2010 have gone to the wall and that they go though processes such as pay cuts, hours cut, redundancies before going to the wall. I also pointed out that 350k joined the dole queue since 2008 ...a very low % less than 1% of those were from the public sector. Anyone in the private sector not getting a pay cut means that their company is not in difficulty..now the public sector is borrowing 2.5million an hour..show me a private sector company in that much trouble and paying pay rises?

fliball123

K-9 wrote: »

They also pay the pre-existing pension deduction of about 5%.

Which is a contribution to a defined benefit..,listen I would be all on for you keeping your pension deductions and levy..and take away pensions for all existing PS workers...It would save a small fortune for the tax payer

K-9

fliball123 wrote: »

Which is a contribution to a defined benefit..,listen I would be all on for you keeping your pension deductions and levy..and take away pensions for all existing PS workers...It would save a small fortune for the tax payer

They pay on average 7% plus another 5% plus PRSI towards the state pension part, that's a pretty significant contribution.

fliball123

K-9 wrote: »

They pay on average 7% plus another 5% plus PRSI towards the state pension part, that's a pretty significant contribution.

And yet with all the PS paying it we will still not be able to afford existing and future pensions for the next century. As I say keep your contributions and levy but look after you own pension simple we would save a fortune going forward

frankosw

fliball123 wrote: »

show me a private sector company in that much trouble and paying pay rises?

Aib.

Bailed out by the taxpayers and still paying bonuses top senior staff.

Gumbo

fliball123 wrote: »

Hows about you take you pension levy back and look after your own pensions

And pension contributions. Your again ignoring the fact that ps pay pension contributions and pension levy. If your gona rant about something at least be truthful and don't post pure ill informed opinions and try maintain them as fact.

frankosw

fliball123 wrote: »

And yet with all the PS paying it we will still not be able to afford existing and future pensions for the next century. As I say keep your contributions and levy but look after you own pension simple we would save a fortune going forward

The usual pension contribution for a PS worker is in the region of 15%.

Anybody hired after 1996 must pay this and has no choice in the matter.


This is in addition to prsi that they also pay.

Head The Wall

cosbloodymick wrote: »

12 years of the Celtic Tiger = 4% Benchmark pay increase
1st year of Economic Crisis = 15% pay cut.
Given back in spades buddy (thats only so far)

So you had a 15% pay cut in the first year . Yeah right, are you the taoiseachs right hand man or what?

K-9

fliball123 wrote: »

And yet with all the PS paying it we will still not be able to afford existing and future pensions for the next century. As I say keep your contributions and levy but look after you own pension simple we would save a fortune going forward

I'll look after my own pension seeing as I'm private sector but as others and me have pointed out, they do pay a significant portion towards pensions, not the 7% you tried to make out. That's one error you've been corrected on so I'll expect not to see it repeated again.

The pension issue is a major issue, not just with the public sector, the pension levy goes in some way to help with for the future. I'd say they'll be asked to pay more and private sector workers will be asked for a compulsory deduction, but that's a Government policy decision.

Tipp Man

K-9 wrote: »

I'll look after my own pension seeing as I'm private sector but as others and me have pointed out, they do pay a significant portion towards pensions, not the 7% you tried to make out. That's one error you've been corrected on so I'll expect not to see it repeated again.

The pension issue is a major issue, not just with the public sector, the pension levy goes in some way to help with for the future. I'd say they'll be asked to pay more and private sector workers will be asked for a compulsory deduction, but that's a Government policy decision.

why don't they just axe the public sector defined benefit pension (obviously they would keep what they currently have), axe the pension levy and let the workers look after their own pension

not yet

fliball123 wrote: »

And yet the PS made such a racket that they got 2 bouts of benchmarking...Dont hear you guys asking to be benchmarked again when things have hit the ****s

The 7% pay cut was in effect reverse benchmarking....then again thats noyt good enough for some people, the same people who would have PS workers pay cut by 40% as I've read on these forums.