Croke Park II preliminary Talks started today

noodler

ardmacha wrote: »

Is this an inappropriate number? Does the ROI have more policemen or teachers per capita than Manchester?



Which makes we wonder if we have such bad public finances why property tax is not also much higher here?

Our health spend (an indicative example considering its primacy in the context of overall spending) is higher than the average in the OECD.

Spending is the issue.

ardmacha

Our health spend (an indicative example considering its primacy in the context of overall spending) is higher than the average in the OECD

Point taken. But this does not directly say anything about the number of policemen. Sweeping statements about public expenditure have to end and if the discussion is to be in any sense useful more granular comparisons have to be made.

noodler

ardmacha wrote: »

Point taken. But this does not directly say anything about the number of policemen. Sweeping statements about public expenditure have to end and if the discussion is to be in any sense useful more granular comparisons have to be made.

They don't have to end though.

Its a matter of fact debate.

Publkic expenditure is higher than we can afford. This has been the case since 2008 and will be the case until at least 2015.

The debate can't stop because some people see "public expenditure" and think "crap they could be talking about my overtime, salary, allowances, working hours" etc etc.

EDIT: I am sure I have linked this article before and in fairness - its just a comparison of OECD data rather than opinion but the numbers employed don't seem to be an issue - just the salaries.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2012/0914/1224324008263.html

Gumbo

tenton wrote: »

Property tax is much higher in the UK...shoes are cheaper in Ireland than UK. Many things are cheaper in Ireland. You cannot seriously complain about the price of many things in Ireland now. Was in Pennys the other day and saw clothes for next to nothing. McDonalds sell hamburgers for a euro. You can buy a 2 - bedroom apartment in many parts of Ireland for less than a years public service salary now. You cannot do that in England or anywhere else. I think everyone knows in Croke Park2 that there will rightfully be major cuts, as the country cannot afford to overpay so many so much for so long.

Hello Jimmmy.........

ardmacha

EDIT: I am sure I have linked this article before and in fairness - its just a comparison of OECD data rather than opinion but the numbers employed don't seem to be an issue - just the salaries

.

Sadly, Dan O'Brien has not maintained the standard you would expect of a leading newspaper in his articles. There is a great deal of simplistic and selective use of statistics in this article, like others he produces. For instance he says "The evidence overwhelmingly says the public sector saw bigger gains during the boom", data posted several times here on boards shows that both sectors say about the same gains.

The numbers employed in the public sector are not excessive, but a more granular examination might well reveal excessive numbers in particular sectors or excessive numbers of "managers" when compared to the private sector. But people are happy to quote particular unusual cases and then draw unsupported conclusions for the whole public sector, when the only reasonable and mature approach is to look at the sub-sectors without reference to individuals nor the entire, diverse, public sector.

noodler

ardmacha wrote: »

.

Sadly, Dan O'Brien has not maintained the standard you would expect of a leading newspaper in his articles. There is a great deal of simplistic and selective use of statistics in this article, like others he produces. For instance he says "The evidence overwhelmingly says the public sector saw bigger gains during the boom", data posted several times here on boards shows that both sectors say about the same gains.

Nope. That isn't true. 1998-2007 the PS pay Bill doubled.

ardmacha wrote: »

.The numbers employed in the public sector are not excessive,

Nice to see you can agree with something.

ardmacha wrote: »

But people are happy to quote particular unusual cases and then draw unsupported conclusions for the whole public sector,

Again, pointing out that the salaries are higher generally is a prerequisite for any further action.

Don't try and confuse the issue in an effort to downplay its importance.

ardmacha wrote: »

when the only reasonable and mature approach is to look at the sub-sectors without reference to individuals nor the entire, diverse, public sector.

And again, crying out "we are not all overpaid" isn't going to stop the debate.


Pop Quiz: There have been roughly 25bn worth of budget adjustments since 2008. The majority of these have been on the expenditure side.

How many of these billions were related to Public Sector Pay?

woodoo

tenton wrote: »

Property tax is much higher in the UK...shoes are cheaper in Ireland than UK. Many things are cheaper in Ireland. You cannot seriously complain about the price of many things in Ireland now. Was in Pennys the other day and saw clothes for next to nothing. McDonalds sell hamburgers for a euro. You can buy a 2 - bedroom apartment in many parts of Ireland for less than a years public service salary now. You cannot do that in England or anywhere else. I think everyone knows in Croke Park2 that there will rightfully be major cuts, as the country cannot afford to overpay so many so much for so long.

I know who you are already...

ardmacha

noodler wrote:

Originally Posted by ardmacha
when the only reasonable and mature approach is to look at the sub-sectors without reference to individuals nor the entire, diverse, public sector.


And again, crying out "we are not all overpaid" isn't going to stop the debate.

I think you've proved my point. I argued for proper fact based analysis and you invented a quote from me and completely ignored my point. This is the general standard of debate on this matter.

noodler

ardmacha wrote: »

I think you've proved my point. I argued for proper fact based analysis and you invented a quote from me and completely ignored my point. This is the general standard of debate on this matter.

You've been given facts and you choose to dispute them on the basis they are not specific enough.

I haven't said specifically who should have their pay cut, which grades etc.

I have said that our PS is generally very well paid as a proportion of our national income as the OECD statistics prove.

I have also maintained that there is a private-public sector gap which is not wholly explained at all by the public sector being more qualified given that the disparity does not exist in Germany, France and Belgium.

Our own CSO has found this gap, the ECB have (http://www.ecb.europa.eu/pub/pdf/scpwps/ecbwp1406.pdf) and the OECD have.

You have all the proof you need.


I have not prescribed any advice on who should have their salaries cut - on one point we do agree, something more precise than an across the board slash is required. I am simply recognising that there is an issue which requires action.

murphaph

ardmacha wrote: »

. But people are happy to quote particular unusual cases and then draw unsupported conclusions for the whole public sector, when the only reasonable and mature approach is to look at the sub-sectors without reference to individuals nor the entire, diverse, public sector.

Collective bargaining means we have to view you all as a monolithic entity. If you yourselves resigned from the collective bargaining process and stood your own ground, we'd be reading off the same hymn sheet, until then, be prepared to be lumped in with the dead weight (of which there is plenty, along with the odd hero)

Good loser

noodler wrote: »

Again, pointing out that the salaries are higher generally is a prerequisite for any further action.

Don't try and confuse the issue in an effort to downplay its importance.


Spot on there noodler. Your truism initiates the debate - the details are for the CP discussions.

Heard someone say today the Conservatives want to reduce teachers salaries in UK by £4,000. (Could be for beginners)

Wonder will there be a flood of workers out of the Public Service to Dunnes now that they are getting a 4% increase in their wages.

Itchianus

tenton wrote: »

The country of Ireland has the same population as greater manchester and yet has 0.3 million highly paid and pensioned public servants feeding off it.

That might have some relevance if Ireland was also the same size as greater manchester, with the same population density and demographics, and if either Ireland was actually a city, or greater manchester was a country....

Sure why not look at Norway which has a population of just over 5million and see how many public servants they have (WAY more), or see how many they have in New Zealand which has a population a little under 4.5million (they have about 10% less). All of which is a blunt and pointless exercise since it doesn't consider the type, amount and quality of public services.

How many public servants does greater manchester have by the way? Assuming you can actually work it out, or have you just assumed it's less than 300,000?

tenton

Itchianus wrote: »

That might have some relevance if Ireland was also the same size as greater manchester, with the same population density and demographics, and if either Ireland was actually a city, or greater manchester was a country....

Sure why not look at Norway which has a population of just over 5million and see how many public servants they have (WAY more), or see how many they have in New Zealand which has a population a little under 4.5million (they have about 10% less). All of which is a blunt and pointless exercise since it doesn't consider the type, amount and quality of public services.

How many public servants does greater manchester have by the way? Assuming you can actually work it out, or have you just assumed it's less than 300,000?

You are missing the point, or deliberatly ignoring it. The point is, as others have pointed out, we are spending far more on government expenditure, inc on our public service than we can afford. As noddler said a few posts back, our public service pay bill doubled 1998 - 2007.

noodler wrote: »

1998-2007 the PS pay Bill doubled.

I was in a government office the other week and most of the staff were chatting away most of the time...we all know what productivity is like on average there , having family and friends there. That is not to say there are not some hard working and conscientous public servants. As regards Manchester as you say, average public sector pay there is so much lower you could nearly employ two people there for the cost of one public servant here. No wonder the EU/ IMF / UK had to come in a few years ago and rescue us / be our lender of last resort when the average public sector pay in our neighbour was £23.6k and here it was nearly double. Pat Kenny quoted figures recently and he was right. These figures are from a couple of years ago and show how we ended up in this mess. Not much has changed since, with our public servants receiving increments since then. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/7036131/Record-gap-between-public-and-private-sector-pay.html#

Mr. teddywinkles

frankosw wrote: »

Have you ever had reason to call the gardai,or an ambulance?

I assume you sweep your own street and build your own roads too.

Private contractors build roads, council maintains

kippy

tenton wrote: »

You are missing the point, or deliberatly ignoring it. The point is, as others have pointed out, we are spending far more on government expenditure, inc on our public service than we can afford. As noddler said a few posts back, our public service pay bill doubled 1998 - 2007. I was in a government office the other week and most of the staff were chatting away most of the time...we all know what productivity is like on average there , having family and friends there. That is not to say there are not some hard working and conscientous public servants. As regards Manchester as you say, average public sector pay there is so much lower you could nearly employ two people there for the cost of one public servant here. No wonder the EU/ IMF / UK had to come in a few years ago and rescue us / be our lender of last resort when the average public sector pay in our neighbour was £23.6k and here it was nearly double. Pat Kenny quoted figures recently and he was right. These figures are from a couple of years ago and show how we ended up in this mess. Not much has changed since, with our public servants receiving increments since then. thathttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/7036131/Record-gap-between-public-and-private-sector-pay.html#

1. Do you concede that bills for many other services doubled in the same time period?
2. Do you concede that the public service have already had two pay cuts? (once called a pension levy and the other a pay cut)
3. Do you concede that the public service has been effected by every single tax that the private sector have been?
4. Do you concede that there have been signifant cuts in to the over all gross pay and pensions bill and even great cuts in the net pay and pensions bill in the past 4 years?
5. Do you concede that the population of this country has increased since 1998?

What do you wish to see CP2 achieve?

Chips Lovell

Interesting story in the Sunday Times today. They said only 30 people applied for the 1,000 new nursing jobs at the new lower salary rate.

Itchianus

tenton wrote: »

You are missing the point, or deliberatly ignoring it. The point is, as others have pointed out, we are spending far more on government expenditure, inc on our public service than we can afford. As noddler said a few posts back, our public service pay bill doubled 1998 - 2007.

I'm not missing anything - I'm calling you out over a lazy and irrelevant comparison you made. Do you accept that trying to compare the cost of running a country of 4.5m people spread out across 70k square km with the cost of administering a metropolitan area with a similar population is completely nonsensical? - and by the way the population of greater manchester is substantially less than Ireland (c.3 million)

tenton wrote: »

I was in a government office the other week and most of the staff were chatting away most of the time...

Name and shame?

tenton wrote: »

we all know what productivity is like on average there

Really, we all know this? What's the source of this knowledge? Average being a mathematical measure, I'm sure you've got the numbers crunched to support your assertion?

tenton wrote: »

having family and friends there.

So what you're saying is your friends and family who work there are lazy and unproductive? Have you told them this or do you save that up for when you're online and anonymous?

tenton wrote: »

That is not to say there are not some hard working and conscientous public servants.

Oh how gracious of you to concede that there are some hard working PS workers - how many? 10? 100? 1,000? 10,000? 100,000?

tenton wrote: »

As regards Manchester as you say, average public sector pay there is so much lower you could nearly employ two people there for the cost of one public servant here. No wonder the EU/ IMF / UK had to come in a few years ago and rescue us / be our lender of last resort when the average public sector pay in our neighbour was £23.6k and here it was nearly double. Pat Kenny quoted figures recently and he was right. These figures are from a couple of years ago and show how we ended up in this mess. Not much has changed since, with our public servants receiving increments since then. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/7036131/Record-gap-between-public-and-private-sector-pay.html#

Those figures are 3 years old and relate to the Public/Private sector pay gap in the UK, not here?!
But since you brought it up, maybe you'd like to comment on the difference between the average Private Sector pay in Ireland and the UK. You say that average Irish public sector pay is way higher than the UK, but so is average Irish private sector pay. Should that be brought down into line with UK levels as well?

noodler

tenton wrote: »

I was in a government office the other week and most of the staff were chatting away most of the time...we all know what productivity is like on average there , having family and friends there. That is not to say there are not some hard working and conscientous public servants.

I make no bones that I feel the pay bill needs to be further reduced somehow but I really don't think anecdotal statements or observations on PS productivity like that really help the debate.

OMD

Itchianus wrote: »

Those figures are 3 years old and relate to the Public/Private sector pay gap in the UK, not here?!
But since you brought it up, maybe you'd like to comment on the difference between the average Private Sector pay in Ireland and the UK. You say that average Irish public sector pay is way higher than the UK, but so is average Irish private sector pay. Should that be brought down into line with UK levels as well?

In most countries, including UK public sector workers earn less than private sector. This is balanced by better working conditions and better pensions in public sector. In Ireland however, public sector still get the better working conditions but also earn substantially more.

repsol

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Interesting story in the Sunday Times today. They said only 30 people applied for the 1,000 new nursing jobs at the new lower salary rate.

Hire them if they are suitable, and let the other 970 go to Australia if thats what they want.I would rather have a daughter nursing here for 30K pa than have her nursing for 40k pa on the other side of the World,as would most parents.The date has been extended and the 2 previous year graduates can now apply.They will get the applicants . The INO leaders are advocating a boycott,but they all have jobs so it is easy for them to say.

OMD

kippy wrote: »

1. Do you concede that bills for many other services doubled in the same time period?
2. Do you concede that the public service have already had two pay cuts? (once called a pension levy and the other a pay cut)
3. Do you concede that the public service has been effected by every single tax that the private sector have been?
4. Do you concede that there have been signifant cuts in to the over all gross pay and pensions bill and even great cuts in the net pay and pensions bill in the past 4 years?
5. Do you concede that the population of this country has increased since 1998?

What do you wish to see CP2 achieve?

Wages doubled. Cost of goods and services rose by about 40% from 1998 to now.

When increments are taken into account, average public sector worker is earning the same as they were 5 years ago, after pension levy but before taxation, allowing for inflation.

The population has increased since 1998. Which has increased by the greater percentage, the populationir number of public sector workers.

Celticfire

OMD wrote: »

In most countries, including UK public sector workers earn less than private sector. This is balanced by better working conditions and better pensions in public sector. In Ireland however, public sector still get the better working conditions but also earn substantially more.

Have you got a breakdown to show that? Can you show me 10 comparable jobs and their difference in public and private remuneration in these countries?
Or are you going on the raw averages and comparing apples to oranges?

Does the fact that most countries have large military forces that are typically low paid not skew the averages?

kippy

OMD wrote: »

Wages doubled. Cost of goods and services rose by about 40% from 1998 to now.

When increments are taken into account, average public sector worker is earning the same as they were 5 years ago, after pension levy but before taxation, allowing for inflation.

The population has increased since 1998. Which has increased by the greater percentage, the populationir number of public sector workers.

1. You have little or no understanding of increments if that is your opinion.
2. If your main point is true why has the pay and pension bill reduced substantially since 2008?

OMD

Celticfire wrote: »

Have you got a breakdown to show that? Can you show me 10 comparable jobs and their difference in public and private remuneration in these countries?
Or are you going on the raw averages and comparing apples to oranges?

Does the fact that most countries have large military forces that are typically low paid not skew the averages?

If the difference was a few percentage then they would be fair points. But the difference is much more in Ireland and cannot be brushed away by saying our army is not as large as other countries or that I'm comparing apples and oranges. The reality is we have one if the most indebted countries in Europe. It stands to reason we should not have one of the highest paid public sectors. The Troika continually say this. They have experience of international public sector systems. Are they all wrong as well

repsol

OMD wrote: »

Wages doubled. Cost of goods and services rose by about 40% from 1998 to now.

When increments are taken into account, average public sector worker is earning the same as they were 5 years ago, after pension levy but before taxation, allowing for inflation.

The population has increased since 1998. Which has increased by the greater percentage, the populationir number of public sector workers.

Obviously there are no new public servants as there has been a ban on recruitment in place.This is going to skew averages into appearing that wages are the same as 5 years ago.The Garda who was in year 1, 5 years ago,is now in year 6 and is justifiably on a different pay point as he is experienced and probably has completed lots of courses (driving etc) so his productivity is up.The absence of lower paid new recruits distorts the fact that the PS staff has had a severe pay cut.The guy on year 6 is not on the same as a year 6 was 5 years ago.

OMD

repsol wrote: »

Obviously there are no new public servants as there has been a ban on recruitment in place.This is going to skew averages into appearing that wages are the same as 5 years ago.The Garda who was in year 1, 5 years ago,is now in year 6 and is justifiably on a different pay point as he is experienced and probably has completed lots of courses (driving etc) so his productivity is up.The absence of lower paid new recruits distorts the fact that the PS staff has had a severe pay cut.The guy on year 6 is not on the same as a year 6 was 5 years ago.

Equally, those that have left were for the most part the highest earners in each section ie those retiring. Yet the average pay hasn't dropped to reflect this. Is a teacher with 20 years experience really better than one with 10? My experience would suggest the opposite as younger teachers tend to be more enthusiastic and have more ideas.
Workers may be more productive now as they have more experience but then shouldn't PS shut up about how they are now being more productive. By your statement they are being well paid for it. Enough to wipe out the effects of a pay cut and pension levy.

Godge

OMD wrote: »

In most countries, including UK public sector workers earn less than private sector. This is balanced by better working conditions and better pensions in public sector. In Ireland however, public sector still get the better working conditions but also earn substantially more.

Really? You have been making completely unsubstantiated points for a number of pages now. So in the UK public sector workers earn less than private sector? Really?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2065479/Public-sector-workers-earn-4-000-year-pay-premium-compared-private-staff.html

In most countries? Let us take one random country, maybe where they slashed public services, say New Zealand? Really?

http://ideas.repec.org/p/wai/econwp/07-20.html

Another country? How about Canada, US, Australia, UK?

http://ideas.repec.org/a/ebl/ecbull/eb-09-00255.html


I find it amazing that someone can post somthing that a two-minute google search finds to be a complete lie!

Godge

OMD wrote: »

When increments are taken into account, average public sector worker is earning the same as they were 5 years ago, after pension levy but before taxation, allowing for inflation.

Not true. From the CSO:


"In the three years to Q3 2012 public sector earnings have fallen by

€38.25 (-4.0%), and this compares with an increase of €8.56 (+1.4%) in private

sector average weekly earnings in the same period."


http://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/earnings/



Click on "Earnings and Labour Costs" under Current Releases.

Celticfire

OMD wrote: »

If the difference was a few percentage then they would be fair points. But the difference is much more in Ireland and cannot be brushed away by saying our army is not as large as other countries or that I'm comparing apples and oranges. The reality is we have one if the most indebted countries in Europe. It stands to reason we should not have one of the highest paid public sectors. The Troika continually say this. They have experience of international public sector systems. Are they all wrong as well

You are comparing apples and oranges.
On the Public sector pay side of thing it includes lots of professions and managerial roles that are not included in the Private sector average.

Eg, Solicitors,Architects,Engineers,Managers,Consultants,Medical specialists etc. None of which are counted in the Private sector average instead you have large groups of low pay workers in hospitality, services and other low paid jobs that don't even make enough to pay PAYE.

So to compare both is a bit disingenuous even the CSO says that they are not like for like stats..

tenton

Godge wrote: »

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2065479/Public-sector-workers-earn-4-000-year-pay-premium-compared-private-staff.html

so you concede that public sector pay in the UK is nearly half of what it is here.
This despite the fact the UK has higher property tax, fuel charges, water charges , higher rents etc. And despite the fact we are bust / being lent tens of billions of euro anually by the lender of las resort, the IMF, just to keep our show afloat.
Time there was a bit of common sense with our public sector pay rates ( average 49k a year according to statistics )

23.6k a year sterling was average public sector pay in UK exactly 3 years ago, and there was / is a lot of controversy over there about how high that is!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/7036131/Record-gap-between-public-and-private-sector-pay.html#

Godge

tenton wrote: »

so you concede that public sector pay in the UK is nearly half of what it is here.
This despite the fact the UK has higher property tax, fuel charges, water charges , higher rents etc. And despite the fact we are bust / being lent tens of billions of euro anually by the lender of las resort, the IMF, just to keep our show afloat.
Time there was a bit of common sense with our public sector pay rates ( average 49k a year according to statistics )

23.6k a year sterling was average public sector pay in UK exactly 3 years ago, and there was / is a lot of controversy over there about how high that is!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/7036131/Record-gap-between-public-and-private-sector-pay.html#

According to the CSO data average public sector pay in Ireland is 48k euros.

According to the Daily Mail average public sector pay in the UK is 28k sterling about 34k euros.

The pension levy and pension contributions in Ireland are higher, about 7% higher in pay terms, meaning for that comparison the Irish figure should be 93% of 48k which is about 44.5k.

34k is not nearly half of 44.5k so to answer your question, I do not concede the point.

There are other reasons to explain the difference but I am not going to get involved in this. I have never said that public service pay has not been cut.

I have made the following points and I stick by them. I have posted plenty of evidence about this as well.

- Public servants have made a greater contribution to cutting the deficit as they have seen pay cuts and pension levy as well as all the extra taxes that everyone pays.
- Some public servants are overpaid, some are underpaid and some are paid correctly following the cuts but I don't think there is anyone qualified enough on these boards to tell the difference.
- International comparisons are difficult because there are a number of differences in the structures of public sector pay in other countries. The pension levy is one example but there are others.
- Pay cuts in the public sector have been wider and deeper than those in the private sector, the CSO backs this up
- There is a huge amount of uniformed drivel on these boards and misinterpretation of information.

Itchianus

Godge wrote: »

According to the CSO data average public sector pay in Ireland is 48k euros.

According to the Daily Mail average public sector pay in the UK is 28k sterling about 34k euros.

The pension levy and pension contributions in Ireland are higher, about 7% higher in pay terms, meaning for that comparison the Irish figure should be 93% of 48k which is about 44.5k.

34k is not nearly half of 44.5k so to answer your question, I do not concede the point.

And of course it suited Tenton just fine to omit to address the fact that private sector earnings in the UK are also lower than private sector earnings here.

OMD

Godge wrote: »

Not true. From the CSO:


"In the three years to Q3 2012 public sector earnings have fallen by

€38.25 (-4.0%), and this compares with an increase of €8.56 (+1.4%) in private

sector average weekly earnings in the same period."


http://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/earnings/



Click on "Earnings and Labour Costs" under Current Releases.

Once again you say 3 years when I said 5. What I said is true and I have proven it to you before.

OMD

Godge wrote: »

Really? You have been making completely unsubstantiated points for a number of pages now. So in the UK public sector workers earn less than private sector? Really?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2065479/Public-sector-workers-earn-4-000-year-pay-premium-compared-private-staff.html

In most countries? Let us take one random country, maybe where they slashed public services, say New Zealand? Really?

http://ideas.repec.org/p/wai/econwp/07-20.html

Another country? How about Canada, US, Australia, UK?

http://ideas.repec.org/a/ebl/ecbull/eb-09-00255.html


I find it amazing that someone can post somthing that a two-minute google search finds to be a complete lie!

Uk
"We have compared these measures of total compensation for highly educated full-time male employees in the UK public and private sectors who are able to switch easily between the two sectors. While the two sectors start off quite similarly at the age of 21, private sector employees soon develop an income advantage of roughly £5,000 a year, which persists almost to the age of 50. But from the age of 53 onwards, men working in the public sector are better off, including during their retirement years."

From rest of Europe

"The most comprehensive cross-county study** was published late last year. Of 10 euro area countries surveyed, public sector pay was lower that in the private sector in France, Germany and Belgium. Ireland, along with Greece, Spain, Portugal and others, was among the countries where the public sector enjoyed a pay premium"

Godge

OMD wrote: »

Uk
"We have compared these measures of total compensation for highly educated full-time male employees in the UK public and private sectors who are able to switch easily between the two sectors. While the two sectors start off quite similarly at the age of 21, private sector employees soon develop an income advantage of roughly £5,000 a year, which persists almost to the age of 50. But from the age of 53 onwards, men working in the public sector are better off, including during their retirement years."

From rest of Europe

"The most comprehensive cross-county study** was published late last year. Of 10 euro area countries surveyed, public sector pay was lower that in the private sector in France, Germany and Belgium. Ireland, along with Greece, Spain, Portugal and others, was among the countries where the public sector enjoyed a pay premium"

What are you quoting from?

Godge

OMD wrote: »

Once again you say 3 years when I said 5. What I said is true and I have proven it to you before.

Was that you who misrepresented the pay developments by starting before the last of the public sector pay increases but after the last of the private sector pay increases granted under the Towards 2016 Agreement? For twenty years under the social partnership agreements, pay rises were phased differently for both sectors which has allowed both sides to make various half-true proclamations similar to the way you used the stats.

If I recall correctly, I went into detailed CSO statistics to show that the peak to trough profile for the public sector showed a bigger decrease than the private sector and that didn't include the effects of the pension levy.

Gumbo

Godge wrote: »

What are you quoting from?

His own posts.

Godge wrote: »

Was that you who misrepresented the pay developments by starting before the last of the public sector pay increases but after the last of the private sector pay increases granted under the Towards 2016 Agreement? For twenty years under the social partnership agreements, pay rises were phased differently for both sectors which has allowed both sides to make various half-true proclamations similar to the way you used the stats.

If I recall correctly, I went into detailed CSO statistics to show that the peak to trough profile for the public sector showed a bigger decrease than the private sector and that didn't include the effects of the pension levy.

Yes, that was omd.

OMD

Godge wrote: »

Was that you who misrepresented the pay developments by starting before the last of the public sector pay increases but after the last of the private sector pay increases granted under the Towards 2016 Agreement? For twenty years under the social partnership agreements, pay rises were phased differently for both sectors which has allowed both sides to make various half-true proclamations similar to the way you used the stats.

If I recall correctly, I went into detailed CSO statistics to show that the peak to trough profile for the public sector showed a bigger decrease than the private sector and that didn't include the effects of the pension levy.

No I showed CSO figures showing that in the 5 year period public sector wages on average had not fallen when you include pension levy. You kept on talking about 3 year periods saying I was wrong. Once again I am saying over a five year period. I did not make any reference to private rates of pay over the same period.
Once again as now you have decided that peak to trough is a suitable measure (which is totally stupid) and refuse to accept any other measure. By your measure if I get a pay rise today of 20% and you get no pay rise, then tomorrow I get a pay cut of 10% and you get a cut of 5% some how I am the one who is worse off? Ridiculous.

This crisis is now 5 years old. Comparing pre crisis to now is a reasonable comparison. Alternatively 10 years ago to now or 15 years ago to now.

tenton

Godge wrote: »

According to the CSO data average public sector pay in Ireland is 48k euros.

Actually its €49k a year. The CSO statistics were quoted already.

Godge wrote: »

According to the Daily Mail average public sector pay in the UK is 28k sterling about 34k euros.

Actually that the Daily Mail quoted what the average public sector worker, who works full-time, is paid....not the average public sector wage. There is a difference.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2065479/Public-sector-workers-earn-4-000-year-pay-premium-compared-private-staff.html#ixzz2IXed8gqu
Thats why average public sector pay in the UK is considerably less that 28k a year stg.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/7036131/Record-gap-between-public-and-private-sector-pay.html#
See all the controversy over there about how high it is, after several terms of the labour government there, and how many in the UK think their average public sector pay which is nearly half of ours - is too high!

Paulzx

tenton wrote: »

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/7036131/Record-gap-between-public-and-private-sector-pay.html#
See all the controversy over there about how high it is, after several terms of the labour government there, and how many in the UK think their average public sector pay which is nearly half of ours - is too high!

I hardly think that a complete one sided article that is loaded with only one point of view is indicative of the opinion of a whole country:rolleyes:

David Frost, the director general of the British Chambers of Commerce.

Corin Taylor, policy director at the Institute of Directors

ohn Philpott, the chief economist at the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development.

Not exactly a grouping of contributors conducive to debating differing points of view. In fact their real agenda is quite blatant in the article.

Mr Frost said: "This just isn't sustainable. My members are telling me that they are losing workers to the public sector, because not only can they see the better holidays and pensions, but also now the better pay.

In other words we're pissed off because our staff have the temerity to expect better pay and conditions

"But everyone knows the public sector gravy train is going to be derailed."

Once i see those overused rhetorical words "gravy train" I turn my brain off.


An agenda riddled newspaper article is hardly the pulse of a nation

Itchianus

tenton wrote: »

Actually its €49k a year. The CSO statistics were quoted already.



Actually that the Daily Mail quoted what the average public sector worker, who works full-time, is paid....not the average public sector wage. There is a difference.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2065479/Public-sector-workers-earn-4-000-year-pay-premium-compared-private-staff.html#ixzz2IXed8gqu
Thats why average public sector pay in the UK is considerably less that 28k a year stg.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/7036131/Record-gap-between-public-and-private-sector-pay.html#
See all the controversy over there about how high it is, after several terms of the labour government there, and how many in the UK think their average public sector pay which is nearly half of ours - is too high!

Ok I'm gonna try for 3rd time lucky - you keep harping on about the difference between public sector pay in the uk and here, without recognising that there is also a substantial difference between the average private sector pay rates there and here. What would you like to do about that?

tenton

Itchianus wrote: »

Ok I'm gonna try for 3rd time lucky - you keep harping on about the difference between public sector pay in the uk and here, without recognising that there is also a substantial difference between the average private sector pay rates there and here. What would you like to do about that?

First, there is not as big a difference between the private sectors in the 2 countries as there is between the public sectors in the 2 countries.
Second, private sector pay is not paid by the taxpayer.
Third, this thread is about Croke Park 2....therefore public sector pay and government expenditure is what is mainly relevant to the discussion.

repsol

Lot of haters towards the Public Service on here.

Most will either

A)have applied many times unsuccessfully for Gardai ,Fire Brigade etc or not got enough points for nursing or teaching

B)not bothered applying for PS because they were in a better paid job at the time which has now gone pear shaped and are now kicking themselves

C)hate a particular public servant who nicked their wife/girlfriend and view the rest of us getting our pay cut as collateral damage

woodoo

tenton wrote: »

First, there is not as big a difference between the private sectors in the 2 countries as there is between the public sectors in the 2 countries.
Second, private sector pay is not paid by the taxpayer.
Third, this thread is about Croke Park 2....therefore public sector pay and government expenditure is what is mainly relevant to the discussion.

So you want public servants to come down to UK levels but not private sector workers jimmmy

titan18

Itchianus wrote: »

Ok I'm gonna try for 3rd time lucky - you keep harping on about the difference between public sector pay in the uk and here, without recognising that there is also a substantial difference between the average private sector pay rates there and here. What would you like to do about that?

Fwiw, for graduates in IS,IT, finance etc coming out of college, pay in London for some of the bigger investment banks & tech companies are far higher than they are here, even taking into account living expenses

Godge

tenton wrote: »

Actually its €49k a year. The CSO statistics were quoted already.

Wrong.

Q3 2012 CSO statistics show public sector weekly earnings at €925.51. Multiplying by 52.18 to get the annual cost gives a figure of €48,293 which rounds to 48k as I stated and not 49k as you stated.

The link is one of my recent posts.

sean200

tenton wrote: »

so you concede that public sector pay in the UK is nearly half of what it is here.
This despite the fact the UK has higher property tax, fuel charges, water charges , higher rents etc. And despite the fact we are bust / being lent tens of billions of euro anually by the lender of las resort, the IMF, just to keep our show afloat.
Time there was a bit of common sense with our public sector pay rates ( average 49k a year according to statistics )

23.6k a year sterling was average public sector pay in UK exactly 3 years ago, and there was / is a lot of controversy over there about how high that is!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/7036131/Record-gap-between-public-and-private-sector-pay.html#

One thing for sure they don’t moan as much in the UK as some idiots on this
My pay has gone up by I would say 25% since 2008
I do no overtime, get no allowance act
I am now at the top of the scale so they have to do a direct pay cut to get me and I can afford it.
Talks will break down as no nurse or public sector worker will work Sunday for the same rate as weekday pay.
Pay cuts will be imposed and then we will have strikes leading to the government collapse leading to bailout 2 leading to a massive rise in unemployment leading to bailout number two.
Welcome to Greece except they have cut their national debt by 75% while we still pay bondholders idiots or what in this country???

Godge

OMD wrote: »

No I showed CSO figures showing that in the 5 year period public sector wages on average had not fallen when you include pension levy. You kept on talking about 3 year periods saying I was wrong. Once again I am saying over a five year period. I did not make any reference to private rates of pay over the same period.
Once again as now you have decided that peak to trough is a suitable measure (which is totally stupid) and refuse to accept any other measure. By your measure if I get a pay rise today of 20% and you get no pay rise, then tomorrow I get a pay cut of 10% and you get a cut of 5% some how I am the one who is worse off? Ridiculous.

This crisis is now 5 years old. Comparing pre crisis to now is a reasonable comparison. Alternatively 10 years ago to now or 15 years ago to now.

I have pointed out already several times that public sector and private sector wages were never in sync over a period of 20 years. The national pay agreements had different dates for pay rises for those private sector organisations that followed them and for the public sector. This allowed many people to pick and choose starting dates for statisical comparisons to twist data.

Picking a starting date is the easiest way to twist data to suit your argument. Trying to justify it by reference to external events is questionable. For example, when did the crisis actually start? There is debate over that. Even if we had agreement on the correct start date of the crisis, is that the correct date to use or should we use the date on which the policymakers woke up to the crisis and started to take action? You could say that the day they wrote to the unions saying they weren't paying the next pay increase was the start date of the policy response? So there are a lot of externally justifiable start dates, enough to allow us all to pick and choose a date to suit our arguments.

Alternatively, you could do as I suggest, look at the peak and look where we are now and compare the two for each sector. It avoids all the sneaky attempts to mess with the data. Incidentally the three year period (rather than your five-year twisting of the data) was chosen by the CSO, the ones to whom so many on this site bow down to when they look at the headline comparisons.

As for the ludicrous example you gave of a pay rise one day and a cut the next, maybe you would give an example based on something that really happens. There is plenty of evidence that shows that pay cuts happened for everyone in the public sector, that pay freezes with job cuts were common in the private sector and that pay rises have resumed in the private sector. This is the reality reflected in the data.


P.S. Nowhere in any of your statistics and posts have you accounted for the effects of the pension levy which blow a hole in what is left of your argument.

P.P.S. The ironic thing is I am defending the reality of what has happened which is that the public sector have bourne the heaviest burden (as a sector) than either the private sector or the social benefit sector even though I believe that there are still some public servants who should have their pay cut.

sean200

tenton wrote: »

so you concede that public sector pay in the UK is nearly half of what it is here.
This despite the fact the UK has higher property tax, fuel charges, water charges , higher rents etc. And despite the fact we are bust / being lent tens of billions of euro anually by the lender of las resort, the IMF, just to keep our show afloat.
Time there was a bit of common sense with our public sector pay rates ( average 49k a year according to statistics )

23.6k a year sterling was average public sector pay in UK exactly 3 years ago, and there was / is a lot of controversy over there about how high that is!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/7036131/Record-gap-between-public-and-private-sector-pay.html#

nternational pay comparisons

According to the IMF, Irish public service pay was 11.2% of GDP in 2011 (the last year for which figures were available). This compares to an OECD average of 11.1% for OECD countries who are members of the EU (or 10.8% of OECD overall). In other words, Irish public service pay is roughly in line with comparable EU countries as a percentage of GDP even before you deduct the so-called ‘pension levy’ (an average 7% deduction), which is not included in the figures.

If comparisons are made on the basis of GNP, Irish public service pay looks higher. But all our ‘troika’ and EU targets are based on GDP and there are other arguments against using GNP as the comparator.

The most recent and comprehensive data on international public sector labour costs comes from the OECD. Its 2011 report found only two groups - hospital consultants and top central government managers - are paid above international standards.
In general, the OECD report says that the cost of employing Irish public servants is about average when adjusted for price differences by measuring ‘relative purchasing power’. Relative purchasing power is routinely used in international comparisons of pay in the public and private sectors. The OECD says its figures capture the so-called 'pension levy' but not the pay cuts (also worth an average of about 7%) imposed in 2010. You can read more about the OECD report HERE.

Many Irish public servants are paid less than their German counterparts

The figures above show that on average Irish public sector pay is in line with pay in comparable European countries. But research shows that certain large groups of Irish public servants – including clerical officers and primary teachers – are paid less than their German counterparts at every stage of their careers, even though the cost of living is 17% higher here.
FACT

tenton

repsol wrote: »

Lot of haters towards the Public Service on here.

Actually I love it just as much as anyone else in any other country loves their public service. However the fact is the country cannot afford such expenditure. THe IMF were called it. The country is fed up paying increasing amounts of tax to try to pay towards the increased government expenditure.
Why should our public servants, as Pat Kenny said the other week, be paid so much more that both the private sector and public sectors in other countries?