Croke Park II preliminary Talks started today

daveyeh

fliball123 wrote: »

Sorry they were 2 seperate incidents, I rang the gaurds as I had a back window of my car smashed in with a stone. Sorry for the confusion. And the VHI was purchased after my time in St James Hospital for the torn retina,

"Sorry love, can't make it up to that rape/murder thats going on up your way, we've got a smashed window emergency to get to asap."

COYW

fliball123 wrote: »

Sorry they were 2 seperate incidents, I rang the gaurds as I had a back window of my car smashed in with a stone. Sorry for the confusion. And the VHI was purchased after my time in St James Hospital for the torn retina,

James' for a detached retina? Strange, my mother had the same and was brought to the Royal Victoria on Adelaide road and was seen in a few hours. She has no health insurance due to an existing condition. Horrible thing to have, hope all is good now.

fliball123

daveyeh wrote: »

Quote:
Originally Posted by sean200
but the state is paying 21% of it or do you not avail of the tax deduction??
No I pay for it. I decided once I became a father 2.5 years ago that if my son ever had any difficulty or problem I would be fecked if I was going to see him lying in a hospital trolley in pain.

Wrong. The state pays 20% of the actual cost.

Also sean I pay taxes so I should be entitled to the same medicare as any one else I pay a premium so I dont have to use the crap services that are there at the moment..Dont get me wrong I am not having a go at the nurses and gaurds in general I think they do a decent job and when I was in James the nurses were ran off their feet. But the fact still bears that we are paying a lot of money in taxes for a poor service.

fliball123

COYW wrote: »

James' for a detached retina? Strange, my mother had the same and was brought to Royal Victoria on Adelaide road and was seen in a few hours. She has no health insurance, due to an existing condition. Horrible thing to have, hope all is good now.

Well to be fair I was knocked unconsious aswell so I was brought to the nearest hospital..yeah the eye is all good.

woodoo

I would like to see the following:

• Abolish the pension levy and introduce a pay-cut to take its place
• Reduction of Travel and Subsistence payments by 20%
• Abolish about 75% of all allowances paid.
• Changes to overtime arrangements, increase core hours time from 8am to 8pm where any work done at these times is paid single time.

• No increase to working week
• No freezing of increments

frankosw

fliball123 wrote: »

Recently yeah the guards, they showed up 3 hours later and I was taken into hospital with a torn retina whilst obtained playing GAA, I was on a trolley for 2 full days with only x-rays being done. I took the x-rays to the eye an ear place (private) got looked after in 2 hours.. I pay motor tax which is supposedly for the upkeep of the roads and I live in an apartment so I pay a fee for the upkeep of the roads and paths around me..Whats your point?

Why did you call the guards for a torn retina?

fliball123

woodoo wrote: »

I would like to see the following:

• Abolish the pension levy and introduce a pay-cut to take its place
• Reduction of Travel and Subsistence payments by 20%
• Abolish about 75% of all allowances paid.
• Changes to overtime arrangements, increase core hours time from 8am to 8pm where any work done at these times is paid single time.

• No increase to working week
• No freezing of increments

point one saves nothing
Agree with the next 3
2nd last one saves nothing
The last one costs us money (we are trying to save money)

Godge

fliball123 wrote: »

The 116 Billion was discussed this morning on Pat Kenny's Radio program with Liam Doran I would hazard a guess if it was wrong Doran would have brought him to task

www.rte.ie/radio/ go to pat kenny it is the first segment on todays program. Sorry if I was not clear thats the full cost of retiring PS over the next 30 years so its not a yearly cost. But guess what we are borrowing to pay this so add in the interest as well.

.

Here is the report published in 2009.

http://audgen.gov.ie/documents/vfmreports/68_Central_Gov_Pensions.pdf

Net present value of liabilities as of December 2008 is €101 billion not €116 billion.

First interesting quote:

"Overall, the examination found that, based on the cost of one year’s additional service, the pension provision for an average public servant will cost around 9% of pay after account is taken of contributions made including the new pension related deduction introduced in 2009."

So in this case, the cost to the employer is 9% of pay. I have been in private sector jobs where the cost to the employer of contributions to my private pension scheme has been higher.

In relation to the early retirement schemes in planning in 2009, it states:

"The impact of the scheme will be to increase pension outflows in the short term and to reduce them in the longer term due to the lower number of years’ service achieved by those taking early retirement."

A clear signal that the early retirement schemes would reduce the long-term liability.

"2.21 Annual gross cash outflows are projected to increase by over 500% from €2.4 billion in 2009 to €14.7 billion in 2058 in constant 2008 price terms. Contribution income, including PRD, is also projected to increase by over 300% from €1.7 billion to €7.4 billion. The introduction of the PRD would significantly offset the cost of meeting pension obligations if it is maintained at 2009 rates rising from €1.0 billion in 2009 to €4.6 billion in 2058."

This paragraph 2.21 is very interesting. It shows that in 2009 gross outflow is €2.4 billion and contributions and PRD total €2.7 billion. Wow, current public servants paid for their predecessors pensions in 2009. by 2058 the gross outflow will be €14.7 billion but the total contributions will be €12 bn leaving a net annual cash flow of €2.7 billion. Hardly the oncoming train that will bankrupt the country. And this is before we look at the assumptions.

"Between 2038 and 2058 gross benefit expenditure is projected to increase from 2.5% to 3.6% of GNP. This increase also results from the projected growth in the number of pensioners and the related pensions outflow over this period exceeding the growth in GNP. The projected growth in the number of pensioners results from an increase in size of the public service which is forecast to increase by 23% between 2008 and 2018."

Another interesting quote. Does anyone really believe that the public service will increase by 23% between 2008 and 2018 when it is already down 10% on 2008. That (23% plus 10%) suggests you could shave one-third off the projected cost even before you look at Howlin's latest cuts in numbers.

A.18 The value of the accrued pension liability is calculated assuming that future pension increases are awarded at the same rate as general salary inflation i.e. 1.75% p.a. above price inflation (pay parity).

Here is another flaw that overestimates the cost. General salary increases of 1.75% plus inflation. That has not happened since 2008, salaries have gone down. As anyone who understands net present value would tell you, changes in the near future have a big effect because of the compound effect. Therefore if a 2008 calculation envisages 1.75% plus inflation as a pay increase every year and pay is lower four years later than 2008, the effect is that the figure of €116 billion is grossly overestimated. In the sensitivity analysis they only looked at the situation where the salary increases were greater (rather than lesser which is how it turned out) and they concluded that

"C.10 The impact is an increase in the net cost by between 1.4% and 7.2%. This demonstrates that the cost is very sensitive to this assumption."


I haven't time to point out other multiple flaws in the report as it relates to events that actually happened since 2008 but enough in the above to state with certainty that the cost is nowhere near as dear as they make out.

fliball123

Godge wrote: »

Here is the report published in 2009.

http://audgen.gov.ie/documents/vfmreports/68_Central_Gov_Pensions.pdf

Net present value of liabilities as of December 2008 is €101 billion not €116 billion.

First interesting quote:

"Overall, the examination found that, based on the cost of one year’s additional service, the pension provision for an average public servant will cost around 9% of pay after account is taken of contributions made including the new pension related deduction introduced in 2009."

So in this case, the cost to the employer is 9% of pay. I have been in private sector jobs where the cost to the employer of contributions to my private pension scheme has been higher.

In relation to the early retirement schemes in planning in 2009, it states:

"The impact of the scheme will be to increase pension outflows in the short term and to reduce them in the longer term due to the lower number of years’ service achieved by those taking early retirement."

A clear signal that the early retirement schemes would reduce the long-term liability.

"2.21

Annual gross cash outflows are projected to increase by over 500% from €2.4 billion in 2009 to €14.7 billion in 2058 in constant 2008 price terms. Contribution income, including PRD, is also projected to increase by over 300% from €1.7 billion to €7.4 billion. The introduction of the PRD would significantly offset the cost of meeting pension obligations if it is maintained at 2009 rates rising from €1.0 billion in 2009 to €4.6 billion in 2058."

This paragraph 2.21 is very interesting. It shows that in 2009 gross outflow is €2.4 billion and contributions and PRD total €2.7 billion. Wow, current public servants paid for their predecessors pensions in 2009. by 2058 the gross outflow will be €14.7 billion but the total contributions will be €12 bn leaving a net annual cash flow of €2.7 billion. Hardly the oncoming train that will bankrupt the country. And this is before we look at the assumptions.

"Between 2038 and 2058 gross benefit expenditure is projected to increase from 2.5% to 3.6% of GNP. This increase also results from the projected growth in the number of pensioners and the related pensions outflow over this period exceeding the growth in GNP. The projected growth in the number of pensioners results from an increase in size of the public service which is forecast to increase by 23% between 2008 and 2018."

Another interesting quote. Does anyone really believe that the public service will increase by 23% between 2008 and 2018 when it is already down 10% on 2008. That (23% plus 10%) suggests you could shave one-third off the projected cost even before you look at Howlin's latest cuts in numbers.

A.18

The value of the accrued pension liability is calculated assuming that future pension increases are awarded at the same rate as general salary inflation i.e. 1.75% p.a. above price inflation (pay parity).

Here is another flaw that overestimates the cost. General salary increases of 1.75% plus inflation. That has not happened since 2008, salaries have gone down. As anyone who understands net present value would tell you, changes in the near future have a big effect because of the compound effect. Therefore if a 2008 calculation envisages 1.75% plus inflation as a pay increase every year and pay is lower four years later than 2008, the effect is that the figure of €116 billion is grossly overestimated. In the sensitivity analysis they only looked at the situation where the salary increases were greater (rather than lesser which is how it turned out) and they concluded that

"C.10 The impact is an increase in the net cost by between 1.4% and 7.2%. This demonstrates that the cost is very sensitive to this assumption."


I haven't time to point out other multiple flaws in the report as it relates to events that actually happened since 2008 but enough in the above to state with certainty that the cost is nowhere near as dear as they make out.

Well that is the figure being used and no one has argued it.

sean200

COYW wrote: »

From my experiences in universities here, lecturers spend an awful lot of time outside lecturing hours working on research projects and directing postgraduate students with their research work.



Yes but a heavy majority of the public sector staff earns less than €50K, so those cuts are going to contribute very little. I would tier the cuts right down to €25K myself. I would also extend the working week, as suggest above.

But what do you get from cutting pay ?
Say you cut the pay bill by 1 billion
So between tax, USC and PRSI 52% goes straight back so you save 480 million
Most of that 480 million would be spent and hence 23% would go straight back to the state so now you have saved 369 million
So do you take that 369 million and give it to bond holder, cause job losses and pay it out as dole or do you leave it in the economy and maintain jobs??

frankosw

fliball123 wrote: »

Well that is the figure being used and no one has argued it.

Everybody is arguing it..

Godge

fliball123 wrote: »

Why is it I have had a terrible time anytime I tried to avail of them

Maybe in your day-to-day dealings with the public service you reflect that attitude that you take up on these threads.

It is a natural reaction for people to be less than fully helpful to those who are rude and insulting to them. Before you jump at me, I am not justifying their behaviour to you, only offering a possible explanation:).

Chips Lovell

fliball123 wrote: »

Well that is the figure being used and no one has argued it.

You've got several people arguing with it right here on this thread.

sean200

fliball123 wrote: »

No I pay for it. I decided once I became a father 2.5 years ago that if my son ever had any difficulty or problem I would be fecked if I was going to see him lying in a hospital trolley in pain.

so you get no Tax relief on your VHI ?????????????
do you claim Tax relief on you medical costs???????

Godge

fliball123 wrote: »

Well that is the figure being used and no one has argued it.

Is that the best you can come up with? I have comprehensively demolished the €116 billion figure and all you can say is that because all the monkeys in the zoo are parroting the same line, that it must be true.

The figure is wrong because it is out-of-date and based on assumptions that no longer hold. I didn't even factor in the new pension scheme which wasn't even on the far distant horizon in 2008 that will further reduce costs.

So many people are like sheep and do not question what so-called experts who don't have a clue are saying.

Godge

fliball123 wrote: »

No I pay for it. I decided once I became a father 2.5 years ago that if my son ever had any difficulty or problem I would be fecked if I was going to see him lying in a hospital trolley in pain.

You do realise that having VHI makes no difference if you turn up at A&E in Temple Street or Crumlin, don't you? You still get the same service.

I don't think that Blackrock A&E accept kids, just pass them on to the children's hospital once stabilised.

p1akuw47h5r3it

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

It will be intresting to see how it develops. The government have a problem in that the present micky mouse deal did not present real savings and productivity. The day of the 35 hour week is going to be under pressure.

I see the lazy journalist refered to a 40 hour when they should have said 39 hour week. Excessive hoildays in Co Councils should be targated. 28 days should be the max for any staff including privilage or racing days.

Real productivity should also be a target and should not take the form of outsourcing work that should be able to be efficiently done in house. Savings should not be at the cost of service. There is no reason that teachers could not spend 10-15% more hours teaching for 5-10% less pay. After all primary teachers have over 14 weeks off per year and 2nd level have about 18 weeks/year off. Maybe 2-4 of these should be used for training ang curriclum review updating. The same with third level lecturers. Very few students have lectures friday PM. Colleges are usually closed for a month at christmass and 16 weeks during the summer as well as mid-terms.

Where services are provided to the public Passport Offices, Car tax, Land registery, DVO offices these should be open from 9.30am-5.00pm and should stay open during lunch time.

Expensive equipment in hospitals should be uses for at least 12 hour a day 6 days a week and appointments scheduled from 8.30am-8.30pm. 9-5 saturday would be acceptable.

The list is not exhaustive but these are some idea's

I'd agree with making the Secondary School year longer, to bring it more in line with Primary school i.e an extra month of teaching.

With regards to college, there are very few Friday PM lectures due to turnout being poor/non-existence. You could argue this not a reason to not have them, but it is a waste of resources as the lecturer could be doing more productive work.

With regards to Uni's being closed for a month over Christmas, again lecturers would (should!) be carrying out research etc. It is just the lectures that are not on (and this period doubles as a study break). This is the same with SUmmer and not all colleges get a mid term.

Celticfire

fliball123 wrote: »

Well to be fair I was knocked unconsious aswell so I was brought to the nearest hospital..yeah the eye is all good.

How did you get to the hospital when you were unconscious?

Scofflaw

While I appreciate people are trying to make a real point about people's use of public services in emergencies, they're also verging on the personal. Keep it polite, please.

moderately,
Scofflaw

spikethedog

sean200 wrote: »

but the state is paying 21% of it or do you not avail of the tax deduction??

The state, i.e the taxpayer, pays 100% of the public sector bill.
With that in mind I would suggest we start with public sector workers doing a 40 hour week.
After that wage cuts of 10% for anyone under €50k, a 20% wage cut for anyone on €50k-€100k and a 30% cut on anyone over €100k.
These are the cuts that are necessary and hopefully after the troika's report last week something along those lines will be achieved.
The country cannot afford the wage rates being paid to a protected state sector anymore, we are broke and are paying these people on one massive credit card binge.
The chickens will come home to roost at some stage.

frankosw

Celticfire wrote: »

How did you get to the hospital when you were unconscious?

The guards brought him apparantly...then he spent two days on a trolley after being knocked unconsious.

frankosw

spikethedog wrote: »

The state, i.e the taxpayer, pays 100% of the public sector bill.
With that in mind I would suggest we start with public sector workers doing a 40 hour week.
After that wage cuts of 10% for anyone under €50k, a 20% wage cut for anyone on €50k-€100k and a 30% cut on anyone over €100k.
These are the cuts that are necessary and hopefully after the troika's report last week something along those lines will be achieved.
The country cannot afford the wage rates being paid to a protected state sector anymore, we are broke and are paying these people on one massive credit card binge.
The chickens will come home to roost at some stage.

Ah but the country can afford to pay the PS wages...what it cannot afford is to pay hundreds of thousands of people to sit at home and do nothing.

10% paycut will save almost nothing,it is the dole that needs to be cut,and cut sharply!

mariaalice

Pay cut etc its all nonsense ( although it would look good )

What really needs to be done would not grab any headline and is very boring.

All relativism need to be stoped, no displacement money or disruption money or anything of that nature it should be all stoped.

All allowances EXCEPT increments and overtime allowances stoped or severely restricted.

Complete flexibility no looking for compensation for work changes.

Standardised working week and leave entitlements.

spikethedog

frankosw wrote: »

Ah but the country can afford to pay the PS wages...what it cannot afford is to pay hundreds of thousands of people to sit at home and do nothing.

10% paycut will save almost nothing,it is the dole that needs to be cut,and cut sharply!

10% cut on all welfare payments in my opinion as well. That would save over €2 billion annually.

Pepsirebel

sean200 wrote: »

Do you not have private health insurance??
why should the state have to fund you torn retina, let the GAA pay for it

The GAA have their own insurance scheme but as the state run the hospitals, you kind of have to go there to be medically treated for serious incidents!!

You pay for yourself in the a&e and claim back from the GAA insurance which by the way, you can be waiting for up to a year to be reimbursed

p1akuw47h5r3it

Things I would do:
1. I would remove the pension contribution that Public staff pay. Half of what was contributed would be given back in basic pay and the other half kept by the Government. This would stop situation were certain politicians and other public sector staff get huge pensions at the tax payers expense and allow people to contribute however much they want to their pension. I understand there would be difficulties in implementing this and more detail would be required to make it work.

2. Cut the Taoiseach's pay to 140,000 a year and all other ministers to 130.000. I'm fully aware that the savings would be minimal however it would be decent PR and there would be some savings all the same.

3. Open up Dublin Bus routes to Private companies. Again huge saving wouldn't be made but every little helps.

4. Lower all wages above 150,000 by 10%. Above 100,000 by 7%. Above 50,000 by 5% and 50,000 and lower by 2%.

5. Remove all expenses/allowances paid to teachers (I'm not sure if these were done away with or not) and lower expenses paid to ministers by 15% across the board. Stop increments and up the working week to 40 hours with no closing for lunch.

6. I'd love to see a dole system whereby you earn 100% of your wages having lost your job. This then reduces to 80% after 6 months, then 60% after a year and finally comes down to a basic rate after a year and a half. However there is no money for this so I would cut all social welfare payments by 5%. Remove child benefit altogether (this would ideally come into affect in 2 years so as to allow people to adjust).

7. I know it doesn't come under the remit of the Croke Park agreement but I'd introduce tuition fees.

8. Lower the amount in grants given to the GAA, FAI and the IRFU by 10%. I'm a sport loving person however these 3 organisations should be able to survive with a cut to the grants given to them.

I await being torn apart:pac:

Gumbo

fliball123 wrote: »

Recently yeah the guards, they showed up 3 hours later and I was taken into hospital with a torn retina whilst obtained playing GAA, I was on a trolley for 2 full days with only x-rays being done. I took the x-rays to the eye an ear place (private) got looked after in 2 hours.. I pay motor tax which is supposedly for the upkeep of the roads and I live in an apartment so I pay a fee for the upkeep of the roads and paths around me..Whats your point?

You have been using this paragraph for 2 years now

Also, I thought you emigrated?

Stheno

According to the times a lot of what has been mentioned here was brought up this morning

Godge

DanDan6592 wrote: »

Things I would do:
1. I would remove the pension contribution that Public staff pay. Half of what was contributed would be given back in basic pay and the other half kept by the Government. This would stop situation were certain politicians and other public sector staff get huge pensions at the tax payers expense and allow people to contribute however much they want to their pension. I understand there would be difficulties in implementing this and more detail would be required to make it work.

Do you understand how pensions work? What would you do with the new pension scheme introduced by legislation from the start of this year?

Are you aware that decent large private sector employers contribute to the pension schemes of their employees?

What would you do with the pre-1995 employees who have no entitlement to the contributory social welfare pension and don't have many years left to save towards a pension now that you have taken away all their entitlements? Or do you intend to let people keep what they have already accumulated?

I am not "tearing you apart" but it is amazing how many people come on here and casually make statements about pensions when they have little or no knowledge of how pensions work (even worse are those with a little knowledge of private sector pension arrangements). Is it too much to ask for a little bit of research and understanding?

DanDan6592 wrote: »

2. Cut the Taoiseach's pay to 140,000 a year and all other ministers to 130.000. I'm fully aware that the savings would be minimal however it would be decent PR and there would be some savings all the same.

No problems with this but FF was the party of PR and no substance to what they did. Are we in the business of saving the country or are we just looking to find people to witch-hunt?

DanDan6592 wrote: »

3. Open up Dublin Bus routes to Private companies. Again huge saving wouldn't be made but every little helps.

Think this is due anyway under EU law by 2015

DanDan6592 wrote: »

4. Lower all wages above 150,000 by 10%. Above 100,000 by 7%. Above 50,000 by 5% and 50,000 and lower by 2%.

Pay has been cut already in the public sector by a far greater amount than occurred in the private sector. Is this fair and reasonable?

DanDan6592 wrote: »

5. Remove all expenses/allowances paid to teachers (I'm not sure if these were done away with or not) and lower expenses paid to ministers by 15% across the board. Stop increments and up the working week to 40 hours with no closing for lunch.

Stopping the increments hurts those recently recruited who are generally lower paid and on lower pay scales. Expenses and allowances should definitely be looked at but for one example, travel and subsistence expenses were cut by 25-30% in 2008/09 and haven't increased since but the cost of travel and hotels etc. has gone up since, not a lot of flesh here to be honest.

Increasing the working week is where the CPA is really going.

DanDan6592 wrote: »

6. I'd love to see a dole system whereby you earn 100% of your wages having lost your job. This then reduces to 80% after 6 months, then 60% after a year and finally comes down to a basic rate after a year and a half. However there is no money for this so I would cut all social welfare payments by 5%. Remove child benefit altogether (this would ideally come into affect in 2 years so as to allow people to adjust).

100% of your wages for six months? Could I take a job for six months followed by six months sitting on the dole at 100% of the wages. Sounds like a great deal.

In favour of eliminating child benefit but I would replace it with free school books, uniforms and lunches as well as subsidised child-care where both parents are working.

DanDan6592 wrote: »

7. I know it doesn't come under the remit of the Croke Park agreement but I'd introduce tuition fees.

How much? They are already going up to €3,000.

DanDan6592 wrote: »

8. Lower the amount in grants given to the GAA, FAI and the IRFU by 10%. I'm a sport loving person however these 3 organisations should be able to survive with a cut to the grants given to them.

I await being torn apart:pac:

Agreed, why support large private sector organisations with their own income-generating capacities. We would be much better off putting the money into sports in schools rather than helping pay John Delaney's salary.

You have some interesting ideas but some have happened already or in the pipeline, others are impractical and those that are left won't save much money.

sarumite

woodoo wrote: »

I would like to see the following:

• Abolish the pension levy and introduce a pay-cut to take its place
• Reduction of Travel and Subsistence payments by 20%
• Abolish about 75% of all allowances paid.
• Changes to overtime arrangements, increase core hours time from 8am to 8pm where any work done at these times is paid single time.

• No increase to working week
• No freezing of increments

I would agree with most of this. I do think that there is no reason a person shouldn't work 39-40 hours a week. 34-35 hour weeks should be a thing of the past.

coolshannagh28

fliball123 wrote: »

Should be interesteing heard Dorrans off one union defending nurses and midwifes and stating that the government seem to be going back to the well that is the public sector looking for savings. I felt like kicking the radio and why Pat Kenny didnt have the balls to say the water that comes into the well that is the public sector pay and pensions via private sector taxes is being hit severely. I mean over the next 30 years we have a pension bill of 116billion on pensions in the public sector alone. How in Gods name was this allowed to happen. Forget about Anglo the up and coming pensions for retiring public servants is going to make our kids and grand kids paupers. But typical union no concessions and no pay cuts and no numbers cut for his people. if they all take this stance there is major trouble ahead. I just hope the government have the balls to actually demand savings that can tangibly be seen not the current smokescreen that is going on. If the PS and unions can save 1 billion with out cutting front line services or giving an even more diminished service to the people without cutting people or wage it should have been done years ago. I think there will be some unrest after this one.IMO. I agree with a previous poster of cuts at the lower end being minimal and anything under say 30k not touched but for amounts over this cuts should scale upwards. mayb 25% for any money earned over 150k, 20% anything between 100k and 150k, 15% anything between 50k and 100k and 10% for anything money earned between 30k and 50k Then the mess that is the pensions need to be looked.

You have to hand it to Liam Doran ,he is a hell of a representative ,every time I hear his voice I grind my teeth in frustration ,yet by the end of the interview he has convinced me that nurses are the most put upon people in creation and deserve a pay rise. With his articulate level of lobbying and pushover Howlin across the table nurses definately have nothing to fear from CP2.

Paulzx

sarumite wrote: »

I would agree with most of this. I do think that there is no reason a person shouldn't work 39-40 hours a week. 34-35 hour weeks should be a thing of the past.

I'm a public servant and i actually work a 42 hour week. Unfortunately, I get dragged into the cushy 33 hour bracket thats bandied around constantly. There needs to be some sort of standardisation across the whole public sector of working hours.

It was done with the annual leave so working hours should be the same. I don't understand how for example a grade 3 clerical officer in Galway Co.Co. can work a different number of hours per week to the exact same grade in Kerry Co. Co.

JustAThought

Put all administrative staff and managers on a one year warning of possible termination of contract.

That should focus some attentions .

Review and prune back harshly at the end of the year with appropriate changes to job specifications.

Should get many results.

Unlimited jobs for life? Ffs.

rightwingdub

Pay cuts of between 15-50% dpending on salary under the following

<€30k 15%
€30,001-€70,000 25% (eg 25% of the next €40,000)
€70,001-€110,000 35% (eg 35% of earnings between 70-€110k)
€110,001-€150,000 45% (eg 45% of earnings between €110,001-€150,000)
>€150k 50%

Wake up people smell the coffee drastic pay cuts need to happen. Abolish all allowances

A further 75,000 redundancies as well in the ps. All public sector workers should be put on defined contribution pension schemes.

As for politicians cut Kennys salary to €160k, senior ministers to €140k, junior ministers €110k, TDS €70k, senators ZERO.

Outsoucing needs to happen as well eg passport offices, catering, kitchen porters, admin work in the Garda siochana.

Privatsie the prisons.

rightwingdub

spikethedog wrote: »

10% cut on all welfare payments in my opinion as well. That would save over €2 billion annually.

I would advocate a minimum 25% cut in welfare spending including a 15% cut in the oap. Welfare spending needs to be cut by at least €6 billion.

ardmacha

<€30k 15%
€30,001-€70,000 25% (eg 25% of the next €40,000)
€70,001-€110,000 35% (eg 35% of earnings between 70-€110k)
€110,001-€150,000 45% (eg 45% of earnings between €110,001-€150,000)
>€150k 50%

The usual nonsense of "formulas" where there is no reasoning whatsoever provided and where the adjustments are exactly the opposite of surveys of differences between private and public sector pay. This process needs to introduce efficiency and proper management, not something achieved by actions completely devoid of any principle of basis in fact.

rightwingdub

ardmacha wrote: »

The usual nonsense of "formulas" where there is no reasoning whatsoever provided and where the adjustments are exactly the opposite of surveys of differences between private and public sector pay. This process needs to introduce efficiency and proper management, not something achieved by actions completely devoid of any principle of basis in fact.

Public sector pay needs to be brought into line with what is affordable and at the moment the public sector pay and pensions bill is completely unaffordable, I also firmly believe that a country should be run like a private enterprise should be run, that means reducing spending drastically in the areas that are responsible for the budget deficit.

ardmacha

I also firmly believe that a country should be run like a private enterprise should be run,

I don't see that a country is like a private enterprise. But since you do, I presume that you would like to see it stop providing its services at prices which don't cover its costs?

Hootanany

It's simple Benchmarking works both ways implement it.
And all TDs 60k vouched expensive s Enda Kenny 70k the Hobbit in the Aras should do it for nothing free house and all. We cannot afford these Parasites anymore.

not yet

SW 21 Billion = no return whatsoever.

PS 15-16 billion = wide range of services which keep this country functioning.

I know where I would cut. As some ''people'' have said on here ''30-40'' pay cut and 50,0000 let go. would decimate our economy, It would means billions taken out of circulation by the very people who spend.

rightwingdub

not yet wrote: »

SW 21 Billion = no return whatsoever.

PS 15-16 billion = wide range of services which keep this country functioning.

I know where I would cut. As some ''people'' have said on here ''30-40'' pay cut and 50,0000 let go. would decimate our economy, It would means billions taken out of circulation by the very people who spend.

Anyone who is unemployed for more than 18 months shouldn't receive welfare benefits they would then be solely eligible for food stamps, abolish the lone parent family payment, cut the dole by 25%, oap by 15%, child benefit to €90 per month per child capped at 3 kids, cut rent allowance by 40% etc.

squod

spikethedog wrote: »

10% cut on all welfare payments in my opinion as well. That would save over €2 billion annually.

Someone will have to explain this to me. How are we to save €2bn through a 10% cut in payments?

Silentcorner

Before we thrash out our own particular suggestions, we may want to look at WHO will be negotiating on our behalf.

These negotiations have very real implications for all sectors of Irish society, it is either cut services, cut wages, cut services and wages.

I have two requests on that front

1 Members of the Troika negotiate on behalf of the taxpayer
2 Brendan Howlin is not left within a country mile of the negotiating venue

Before I'm torn apart by certain posters, I stress the above is a wish list...

opti0nal

rightwingdub wrote: »

.Outsoucing needs to happen as well eg passport offices..

Driving licenses are being outsourced. They're going to cost us more and the work and profits have gone to France and Switzerland.

sarumite

opti0nal wrote: »

Driving licenses are being outsourced. They're going to cost us more and the work and profits have gone to France and Switzerland.

How much does a current driving licence cost? HOw much will the new ones be?

Gumbo

opti0nal wrote: »

Driving licenses are being outsourced. They're going to cost us more and the work and profits have gone to France and Switzerland.

sarumite wrote: »

How much does a current driving licence cost? HOw much will the new ones be?

Exactly. Drivers licence will now cost you €55 from the 19th January. Currently cost you €20-€25.

Wicklowandy

not yet wrote: »

SW 21 Billion = no return whatsoever.

PS 15-16 billion = wide range of services which keep this country functioning.

I know where I would cut. As some ''people'' have said on here ''30-40'' pay cut and 50,0000 let go. would decimate our economy, It would means billions taken out of circulation by the very people who spend.

To be fair, welfare payments are spent in the economy, probably in their entirity.

After having a good, permanant pensionable private sector job from leaving college, i have spent the last 3 years on contracts of 6-9 months and some periods of having to sign on. My wife has been the same for two years.

Our combined income has peaked and troughed during this period, but we've managed to stay afloat, and even though the two of us are working now (at over 50% nett less than we were 3yrs ago for similar work) we ' re always preparing for the possible ending and non renewal of contracts.

People on long term social welfare payments are being driven deeper and deeper into a hole, and the economy suffers in every way; there is not enough jobs or training courses for everybody.

A lot of opinion on this thread is taken from a perspective of secure employment; ill ask you a question; do you believe if you were a recent graduate today, you would get anything like the opportunities you got at the time, and would progress as far as you have? If you answer yes, you're blind to the future of our country and have a massive sense of entitlement.

Cuts are needed, but protection has to be there for the lowest paid workers and job seekers. To cut heavily at this level will only hurt our economy more.

sarumite

kceire wrote: »

Exactly. Drivers licence will now cost you €55 from the 19th January. Currently cost you €20-€25.

They cost more than that though. The current cost of €20-25 doesn't include the any costs paid for out of taxation. That is a just a extra fee on top of what is already paid through general taxation.

Gumbo

sarumite wrote: »

They cost more than that though. The current cost of €20-25 doesn't include the any costs paid for out of taxation. That is a just a extra fee on top of what is already paid through general taxation.

Forget the hidden costs for the moment. The end cost to you and me is increasing by €35. A service provided by the public sector is €20 which will now be contracted out and will now cost me and you €55. That's a mega increase % wise, although broken down over the 10 years it will be valid it's not major.

Also we will be getting a new credit card style licence so maybe it's worth the increase. My point is that once all these services that people are screaming to be contracted out occurs, then the price we pay will go through the roof by the end user.

For example, what if tomorrow councils decided to charge the full cost of a planning application to the public? Your typical domestic application which costs joe soap €34 will jump to €500 over night. Some services have to be subsidised and thus make a loss to be deemed a public service.

woodoo

sarumite wrote: »

34-35 hour weeks should be a thing of the past.

I think it should be the future. A much better work life balance. The elites have us all working too much.

35hrs is 9 to 5 with an hour for lunch.