Did union’s sell out on the public sector talks??

sean200

Does anybody believe the spin that the government and unions are putting on this agreement?
The unions claim that the won concessions in the talks but if they did how the government is getting the 1 billion cut that they had said they wanted.
The spin that was put out in the media about the cuts that the government asked for would have delivered closer to 2 billion and was done so that the unions could save some grace
As for the fairness of this deal from what I am reading somebody on 80 k would lose just over €825 ( 15000 cut by 5.5 % ) euro but a front line worker on say €45000 would lose up to €3000 who has to work 24/7 52 weeks of the year
The pay-cut should be on the full €80000 but nobody should fall below €65k but FG must have put a stop to that
This agreement is unfair and all front line workers should vote it down and leave any union that agreed this such as SIPTU and Impact.
Front line worker have nothing to fear from a direct pay cut

Kristopherus

sean200 wrote: »

Does anybody believe the spin that the government and unions are putting on this agreement?
The unions claim that the won concessions in the talks but if they did how the government is getting the 1 billion cut that they had said they wanted.
The spin that was put out in the media about the cuts that the government asked for would have delivered closer to 2 billion and was done so that the unions could save some grace
As for the fairness of this deal from what I am reading somebody on 80 k would lose just over €825 ( 15000 cut by 5.5 % ) euro but a front line worker on say €45000 would lose up to €3000 who has to work 24/7 52 weeks of the year
The pay-cut should be on the full €80000 but nobody should fall below €65k but FG must have put a stop to that
This agreement is unfair and all front line workers should vote it down and leave any union that agreed this such as SIPTU and Impact.
Front line worker have nothing to fear from a direct pay cut

Where did you get the info re reductions from? To explain the whole thing simply, in the first place the Govt have reneged on their promise to let CP 1 run its full course. The new agreement is to run from 01/07/2013. This gives the Govt more time to collect their €1bn. And for the PS slaves, they have longer to suffer:)

BuzzFish

sean200 wrote: »

Does anybody believe the spin that the government and unions are putting on this agreement?
The unions claim that the won concessions in the talks but if they did how the government is getting the 1 billion cut that they had said they needed.
The spin that was put out in the media about the cuts that the government asked for would have delivered closer to 2 billion and was done so that the unions could save some grace
As for the fairness of this deal from what I am reading somebody on 80 k would lose just over €825 ( 15000 cut by 5.5 % ) euro but a front line worker on say €45000 would lose up to €3000 who has to work 24/7 52 weeks of the year
The pay-cut should be on the full €80000 but nobody should fall below €65k but FG must have put a stop to that
This agreement is unfair and all front line workers should vote it down and leave any union that agreed this such as SIPTU and Impact.
Front line worker have nothing to fear from a direct pay cut

Fixed that for ya.

Godge

sean200 wrote: »

Does anybody believe the spin that the government and unions are putting on this agreement?
The unions claim that the won concessions in the talks but if they did how the government is getting the 1 billion cut that they had said they wanted.
The spin that was put out in the media about the cuts that the government asked for would have delivered closer to 2 billion and was done so that the unions could save some grace
As for the fairness of this deal from what I am reading somebody on 80 k would lose just over €825 ( 15000 cut by 5.5 % ) euro but a front line worker on say €45000 would lose up to €3000 who has to work 24/7 52 weeks of the year
The pay-cut should be on the full €80000 but nobody should fall below €65k but FG must have put a stop to that
This agreement is unfair and all front line workers should vote it down and leave any union that agreed this such as SIPTU and Impact.
Front line worker have nothing to fear from a direct pay cut

A couple of points -

(1) You are wrong on the pay-cut. The cut will be 5.5% on the full 80k, equating to €4,400 of a pay-cut.

(2) The government is getting less than it wanted. It wanted to cut €1 bn off the budget deficit (remember Howlin's statement that they wanted the public sector to contribute €1bn of the €5.1bn needed). Instead it is cutting €1 bn off expenditure. Because of the taxation loss, the reduction in the budget deficit will be much less. Depending on how you measure the tax foregone, the extra pension payments, etc. the saving to the budget deficit could be as low as €400m. I have demonstrated this repeatedly in the other thread as to how it works but some do not seem to understand.

(3) On front-line workers, it is difficult to see how much they lose out without knowing how often they work Sundays.

Brussels Sprout

sean200 wrote: »

but a front line worker on say €45000 would lose up to €3000 who has to work 24/7 52 weeks of the year

Those front-line workers really do work long shifts!

Riskymove

The union representing higher civil and public servants is to recommend that its members reject the proposed new Croke Park agreement in a ballot.

The executive of the Association of Higher Civil and Public Servants met to consider the proposals at lunchtime.

The union is the first to urge members to reject the proposed new deal.

www.irishtimes.ie

purplecow1977

Reject, reject, reject

Saw this on a Teacher site:
Pay Cut 2010 (average of 7%)
Income levy 2% Jan 2010, replaced 1st Jan 2011 with USC
Pension Levy average 7%
Tax and PRSI increases
Cuts in allowances (for additional qualifications etc)
NQT cuts in salary and withdrawal of academic allowances
Career average pension form Jan 1 1013 for new teachers
Retirement age increased
Longer working week -one hour extra every week (six days per year)
Maternity leave cuts
Decimation of sick leave entitlement
No sub cover for first day of Uncertified Sick Leave
Constant cuts to capitation grant
Abolition of minor works grant
Loss of Summer works scheme
Loss of Modern language initiative
Abolition of posts of responsibility
Cuts to SNAs
New model for NEPS- less assessments, more work for teachers and principals
Cuts to resource hours
Intentional delays of Resource Teaching support provision
Loss of teachers in small schools
Closure of some small schools
Increase in class size
Massive cuts to EAL, General Allocation hours
Loss of VTT, RTT, rural coordinators
Abolition of grant for EAL
Free Bus services for children
In addition to the 13% pay cut teachers all received before the Croke Park agreement, it means that every teacher has been cut by 17% - 26%. NQTs are currently starting on pt 4 of the pays-scale but will not receive an academic allowance. This is a loss of approx €3,200 per year for an honors degree x 35 years of service.

sean200

Godge wrote: »

A couple of points -

(1) You are wrong on the pay-cut. The cut will be 5.5% on the full 80k, equating to €4,400 of a pay-cut.

(2) The government is getting less than it wanted. It wanted to cut €1 bn off the budget deficit (remember Howlin's statement that they wanted the public sector to contribute €1bn of the €5.1bn needed). Instead it is cutting €1 bn off expenditure. Because of the taxation loss, the reduction in the budget deficit will be much less. Depending on how you measure the tax foregone, the extra pension payments, etc. the saving to the budget deficit could be as low as €400m. I have demonstrated this repeatedly in the other thread as to how it works but some do not seem to understand.

(3) On front-line workers, it is difficult to see how much they lose out without knowing how often they work Sundays.

in today papers they are saying that it is a 5.5 % on what you earn over the 65k
They work every second sunday

sean200

Riskymove wrote: »

The union representing higher civil and public servants is to recommend that its members reject the proposed new Croke Park agreement in a ballot.

The executive of the Association of Higher Civil and Public Servants met to consider the proposals at lunchtime.

The union is the first to urge members to reject the proposed new deal.

www.irishtimes.ie

You would expect that as they are the ones on the big money but they are a small union so they wont count
It is SIPTU that counts and they have a lot of front-line satff that they sold out

Mossess

Would it be fair to say that some Union officials are going to investigate the possible effects of the cuts by going to Florida for 3 weeks to see how the recession is hitting a similar public service to our own?



Now that’s commitment!

Godge

Mossess wrote: »

Would it be fair to say that some Union officials are going to investigate the possible effects of the cuts by going to Florida for 3 weeks to see how the recession is hitting a similar public service to our own?



Now that’s commitment!

link?

sean200

Mossess wrote: »

Would it be fair to say that some Union officials are going to investigate the possible effects of the cuts by going to Florida for 3 weeks to see how the recession is hitting a similar public service to our own?



Now that’s commitment!

Now that is today's unions

carpejugulum

Godge wrote: »

(1) You are wrong on the pay-cut. The cut will be 5.5% on the full 80k, equating to €4,400 of a pay-cut.

sean200 wrote: »

in today papers they are saying that it is a 5.5 % on what you earn over the 65k

so which is it??

Godge

carpejugulum wrote: »

so which is it??

http://www.impact.ie/Croke-Park-Agreement/Labour-Relations-Commission-proposals-on-an-extension-to-the-Croke-Park-agreement-.htm


For those with salaries of €65k and greater(including allowances in the nature of pay), their total remuneration is reduced by 5.5% subject to not falling below €65k.
Earnings (including allowances in the nature of pay) between €80,000 and €150,000 will be reduced by 8%
Earnings (including allowances in the nature of pay) between €150,000 and €185,000 will be reduced by 9%
Earnings (including allowances in the nature of pay) over €185,000 will be reduced by 10

fall

purplecow1977 wrote: »

Reject, reject, reject

Saw this on a Teacher site:
Pay Cut 2010 (average of 7%)
Income levy 2% Jan 2010, replaced 1st Jan 2011 with USC
Pension Levy average 7%
Tax and PRSI increases
Cuts in allowances (for additional qualifications etc)
NQT cuts in salary and withdrawal of academic allowances
Career average pension form Jan 1 1013 for new teachers
Retirement age increased
Longer working week -one hour extra every week (six days per year)
Maternity leave cuts
Decimation of sick leave entitlement
No sub cover for first day of Uncertified Sick Leave
Constant cuts to capitation grant
Abolition of minor works grant
Loss of Summer works scheme
Loss of Modern language initiative
Abolition of posts of responsibility
Cuts to SNAs
New model for NEPS- less assessments, more work for teachers and principals
Cuts to resource hours
Intentional delays of Resource Teaching support provision
Loss of teachers in small schools
Closure of some small schools
Increase in class size
Massive cuts to EAL, General Allocation hours
Loss of VTT, RTT, rural coordinators
Abolition of grant for EAL
Free Bus services for children
In addition to the 13% pay cut teachers all received before the Croke Park agreement, it means that every teacher has been cut by 17% - 26%. NQTs are currently starting on pt 4 of the pays-scale but will not receive an academic allowance. This is a loss of approx €3,200 per year for an honors degree x 35 years of service.

What site?

partnership

I just wonder how we have come to this where a trade union movement has negotiated a salary decrease for it's members! I understand that the country is in sh*te but I believe that tax increases are a fairer way of doing things.

Sand

Tax increases have knock on effects to the entire economy. Whereas the issue is that the public sector pay bill is unsustainable. The optimal solution is to reduce public sector pay to a sustainable level.

Tax increases may or may not be required, but they should be carried out as part of a coherent economic strategy - not as a populist solution to out of control spending.

I thought Howlin was very foolish to claim this is the last time public sector workers will be asked to take a hit. This is simply not something he can declare - neither he nor Labour have the clout to make this claim, and they don't control the future economic situation Ireland will face. It could join the long list of Labour promises which are proven to be worthless.

Additionally it also removes the nominal encouragement to the unions to support reform (which they clearly don't and never will) or face pay cuts.

purplecow1977

Here are the LRC proposals

http://www.lrc.ie/documents/2013/LRC%20Proposals%20_FINAL.pdf

yosser hughes

No compulsory redundancies. That's a result considering the state of the country's finances. What is job security worth to you?
Let's not even start talking about pensions, that the private sector can only dream of.

partnership

Sand wrote: »

Tax increases have knock on effects to the entire economy. Whereas the issue is that the public sector pay bill is unsustainable. The optimal solution is to reduce public sector pay to a sustainable level.

Tax increases may or may not be required, but they should be carried out as part of a coherent economic strategy - not as a populist solution to out of control spending.

I thought Howlin was very foolish to claim this is the last time public sector workers will be asked to take a hit. This is simply not something he can declare - neither he nor Labour have the clout to make this claim, and they don't control the future economic situation Ireland will face. It could join the long list of Labour promises which are proven to be worthless.

Additionally it also removes the nominal encouragement to the unions to support reform (which they clearly don't and never will) or face pay cuts.

Since you know such a lot perhaps you could outline exactly what you want public servants to do and how much they should be paid? Personally I feel that the media and other people will not be happy untilt he public servants are working 24/7, 365 days a year, 4 weeks hols (only because it is legislation) and minimum pay.

I have seen what low pay does to the private sector - and it is not good service.

Stheno

yosser hughes wrote: »

No compulsory redundancies. That's a result considering the state of the country's finances. What is job security worth to you?
Let's not even start talking about pensions, that the private sector can only dream of.

Line item 4 in the link in the post above you

Compulsory Exits

yosser hughes

Stheno wrote: »

Line item 4 in the link in the post above you

Yes,that was a proposal.
Did you read the entire document? Are compulsory redundancies NOW proposed?

Sand

partnership wrote: »

Since you know such a lot perhaps you could outline exactly what you want public servants to do and how much they should be paid? Personally I feel that the media and other people will not be happy untilt he public servants are working 24/7, 365 days a year, 4 weeks hols (only because it is legislation) and minimum pay.

Ah, I think I'll avoid following you down into the trenches. But "and minimum pay"? That's remarkably optimistic.

Stheno

yosser hughes wrote: »

Yes,that was a proposal.
Did you read the entire document? Are compulsory redundancies NOW proposed?

I did, and the three appendices

Section 3.6 talks about applying redundancy on a LIFO basis where redeployment is not an option and not enough volunteers are available for redundancy.

Section 3.8 talks about disciplinary action if people do not voluntarily redeploy/relocate which I read as including dismissal.

For those affected by overtime rate cuts on a Sunday there is a proposal included that where staff who work Sundays on an ongoing basis will get a 50% compensation payment throughout the life of the agreement, in section 2.15

partnership

yosser hughes wrote: »

No compulsory redundancies. That's a result considering the state of the country's finances. What is job security worth to you?
Let's not even start talking about pensions, that the private sector can only dream of.

Let's talk about pensions

First of all all public servants HAVE TO PAY INTO THEIR PENSION AS WELL AS PAYING PRSI (post 1995 entrants). Private sector do not have this imposed on them it is their choice whether they pay into a private pension.
A clerical officer on the current scale would have to work 40 years to get the full pension of approx 18500 (12000 of this is the old age pension that all private sector workers get as well). So they pay extra in to get just 6500 extra - with the pension levy they prob pay in more than they get.
People who are in pre 1995 would get the same but would not get old age pension and therefore would not get the household benefits package of free electricty etc. If you are a female you prob took time out to raise the kids so wont even do the full 40 years so the pension is reduced.
Is this a pension you dream of?
Even if you are on higher pay you still need the full 40 years to get anything decent.
New recruits now have a different system where it is aggregated so they will pay more in than they get out. Is that what you dream of?

Gloomtastic!

partnership wrote: »

Let's talk about pensions

First of all all public servants HAVE TO PAY INTO THEIR PENSION AS WELL AS PAYING PRSI (post 1995 entrants). Private sector do not have this imposed on them it is their choice whether they pay into a private pension.
A clerical officer on the current scale would have to work 40 years to get the full pension of approx 18500 (12000 of this is the old age pension that all private sector workers get as well). So they pay extra in to get just 6500 extra - with the pension levy they prob pay in more than they get.
People who are in pre 1995 would get the same but would not get old age pension and therefore would not get the household benefits package of free electricty etc. If you are a female you prob took time out to raise the kids so wont even do the full 40 years so the pension is reduced.
Is this a pension you dream of?
Even if you are on higher pay you still need the full 40 years to get anything decent.
New recruits now have a different system where it is aggregated so they will pay more in than they get out. Is that what you dream of?

Michael D Higgins, after seven years in office, will retire on €125,000 pa for the rest of his life. How much is he contributing to achieve that? Will he also receive a TD's pension?

woodoo

partnership wrote: »

Let's talk about pensions

First of all all public servants HAVE TO PAY INTO THEIR PENSION AS WELL AS PAYING PRSI (post 1995 entrants). Private sector do not have this imposed on them it is their choice whether they pay into a private pension.
A clerical officer on the current scale would have to work 40 years to get the full pension of approx 18500 (12000 of this is the old age pension that all private sector workers get as well). So they pay extra in to get just 6500 extra - with the pension levy they prob pay in more than they get.
People who are in pre 1995 would get the same but would not get old age pension and therefore would not get the household benefits package of free electricty etc. If you are a female you prob took time out to raise the kids so wont even do the full 40 years so the pension is reduced.
Is this a pension you dream of?
Even if you are on higher pay you still need the full 40 years to get anything decent.
New recruits now have a different system where it is aggregated so they will pay more in than they get out. Is that what you dream of?

And that is the gold plated pension they all speak of here.

Gumbo

Gloomtastic! wrote: »

Michael D Higgins, after seven years in office, will retire on €125,000 pa for the rest of his life. How much is he contributing to achieve that? Will he also receive a TD's pension?

Cop on and dont be comparing the presidents pension with the average PS pension :rolleyes:

I will agree though that nobody should get their pension until proper retirement, nobody, and that includes TD's etc

cwboy

purplecow1977 wrote: »

Reject, reject, reject

Saw this on a Teacher site:
Pay Cut 2010 (average of 7%)
Income levy 2% Jan 2010, replaced 1st Jan 2011 with USC
Pension Levy average 7%
Tax and PRSI increases
Cuts in allowances (for additional qualifications etc)
NQT cuts in salary and withdrawal of academic allowances
Career average pension form Jan 1 1013 for new teachers
Retirement age increased
Longer working week -one hour extra every week (six days per year)
Maternity leave cuts
Decimation of sick leave entitlement
No sub cover for first day of Uncertified Sick Leave
Constant cuts to capitation grant
Abolition of minor works grant
Loss of Summer works scheme
Loss of Modern language initiative
Abolition of posts of responsibility
Cuts to SNAs
New model for NEPS- less assessments, more work for teachers and principals
Cuts to resource hours
Intentional delays of Resource Teaching support provision
Loss of teachers in small schools
Closure of some small schools
Increase in class size
Massive cuts to EAL, General Allocation hours
Loss of VTT, RTT, rural coordinators
Abolition of grant for EAL
Free Bus services for children
In addition to the 13% pay cut teachers all received before the Croke Park agreement, it means that every teacher has been cut by 17% - 26%. NQTs are currently starting on pt 4 of the pays-scale but will not receive an academic allowance. This is a loss of approx €3,200 per year for an honors degree x 35 years of service.

fall wrote: »

What site?

Saw this on Facebook. Everything above is correct and happening in our schools.

FixdePitchmark

purplecow1977 wrote: »

Reject, reject, reject

Saw this on a Teacher site:
Pay Cut 2010 (average of 7%)
Income levy 2% Jan 2010, replaced 1st Jan 2011 with USC
Pension Levy average 7%
Tax and PRSI increases
Cuts in allowances (for additional qualifications etc)
NQT cuts in salary and withdrawal of academic allowances
Career average pension form Jan 1 1013 for new teachers
Retirement age increased
Longer working week -one hour extra every week (six days per year)
Maternity leave cuts
Decimation of sick leave entitlement
No sub cover for first day of Uncertified Sick Leave
Constant cuts to capitation grant
Abolition of minor works grant
Loss of Summer works scheme
Loss of Modern language initiative
Abolition of posts of responsibility
Cuts to SNAs
New model for NEPS- less assessments, more work for teachers and principals
Cuts to resource hours
Intentional delays of Resource Teaching support provision
Loss of teachers in small schools
Closure of some small schools
Increase in class size
Massive cuts to EAL, General Allocation hours
Loss of VTT, RTT, rural coordinators
Abolition of grant for EAL
Free Bus services for children
In addition to the 13% pay cut teachers all received before the Croke Park agreement, it means that every teacher has been cut by 17% - 26%. NQTs are currently starting on pt 4 of the pays-scale but will not receive an academic allowance. This is a loss of approx €3,200 per year for an honors degree x 35 years of service.

Jaysus - with all that. Let nobody ever doubt. It was the best job in the country.

That is the problem with the boy who cried wolf.

thebman

partnership wrote: »

Let's talk about pensions

First of all all public servants HAVE TO PAY INTO THEIR PENSION AS WELL AS PAYING PRSI (post 1995 entrants). Private sector do not have this imposed on them it is their choice whether they pay into a private pension.
A clerical officer on the current scale would have to work 40 years to get the full pension of approx 18500 (12000 of this is the old age pension that all private sector workers get as well). So they pay extra in to get just 6500 extra - with the pension levy they prob pay in more than they get.
People who are in pre 1995 would get the same but would not get old age pension and therefore would not get the household benefits package of free electricty etc. If you are a female you prob took time out to raise the kids so wont even do the full 40 years so the pension is reduced.
Is this a pension you dream of?
Even if you are on higher pay you still need the full 40 years to get anything decent.
New recruits now have a different system where it is aggregated so they will pay more in than they get out. Is that what you dream of?

This isn't true, it depends on your contract with your employer.

Some companies insist you join the company pension plan.

rodento

Interesting times, wonder how many people will be forced out of working because of the extra hours are not extractly family friendly or how many people will be forced to defaulted on loans/mortgages because they've been hit by pay cuts along with property tax and water charges

astrofool

partnership wrote: »

Let's talk about pensions

First of all all public servants HAVE TO PAY INTO THEIR PENSION AS WELL AS PAYING PRSI (post 1995 entrants). Private sector do not have this imposed on them it is their choice whether they pay into a private pension.

That's because they're paying for the people currently retired or soon to be retired on massive pensions, who also happen to be those at the higher echelons of union leadership.

I'm sure the government would jump at the chance of moving the public service lock stock and barrel to a private pension system, rather than having to supplement it with tax payers money and more debt.

flutered

Godge wrote: »

A couple of points -

(1) You are wrong on the pay-cut. The cut will be 5.5% on the full 80k, equating to €4,400 of a pay-cut.

put that into perspective, the clown cowen faces a cut of 2,800 from his €148,000 pension, folks have reason to feel hard done by.

Stheno

flutered wrote: »

put that into perspective, the clown cowen faces a cut of 2,800 from his €148,000 pension, folks have reason to feel hard done by.

How did you calculate that?

sock puppet

partnership wrote: »

So they pay extra in to get just 6500 extra - with the pension levy they prob pay in more than they get.

I think you'd be surprised just how little annual contributions of around 5% would get you. You'd probably get around the same pension as you're due to get in the public sector (if you assume working for 40 years in both).

woodoo

rodento wrote: »

Interesting times, wonder how many people will be forced out of working because of the extra hours are not extractly family friendly or how many people will be forced to defaulted on loans/mortgages because they've been hit by pay cuts along with property tax and water charges

The offer is there to take the equivalent paycut and keep your existing hours.

Scofflaw

If your 'contribution' to this (or other PS threads) consists of no more than "you're a shower of overpaid wasters" or "you're a shower of unscrupulous crooks" (delete as appropriate for public/private sector), please don't bother posting.

moderately,
Scofflaw

Stheno

thebman wrote: »

This isn't true, it depends on your contract with your employer.

Some companies insist you join the company pension plan.

And haven't this government promised that it will be mandatory for everyone to be in a pension plan within a couple of years?

Hootanany

I don't think this has really has addressed the Elephant in the room No one should be paid above 100k end off.

Head The Wall

woodoo wrote: »

And that is the gold plated pension they all speak of here.

No that is a bad understanding of maths. What you are paying now will not represent what you will be earning in 20, 30 or 40 years time. Its a stupid comparison

barneystinson

sock puppet wrote: »

I think you'd be surprised just how little annual contributions of around 5% would get you. You'd probably get around the same pension as you're due to get in the public sector (if you assume working for 40 years in both).

What about the employer's contribution though?

Uriel.

Hootanany wrote: »

I don't think this has really has addressed the Elephant in the room No one should be paid above 100k end off.

And why not?

yosser hughes

Stheno wrote: »

I did, and the three appendices

Section 3.6 talks about applying redundancy on a LIFO basis where redeployment is not an option and not enough volunteers are available for redundancy.

Section 3.8 talks about disciplinary action if people do not voluntarily redeploy/relocate which I read as including dismissal.

For those affected by overtime rate cuts on a Sunday there is a proposal included that where staff who work Sundays on an ongoing basis will get a 50% compensation payment throughout the life of the agreement, in section 2.15

Well if you did read it I don't know where you got anything that suggests compulsory redundancies from.

Where redeployment is not an option and taking account of the business needs of the
organisation there may be circumstances where voluntary departure would be
appropriate. In such situations there will be discussions with the relevant unions on the
terms of any arrangement (which will be in line with any centrally agreed arrangements).

My last contribution to this thread was censored however I do think it's important to counter the misinformation and general fallacies that are put forward by those in the public sector because you won't get it from our public sector national broadcaster. There are over 50,000 people in the public sector that earn more than €65,0000. The disparities not only between public sector and private sector in Ireland are huge but also between public sector here and public sector in Germany for example. I really do not think the public sector cohort understand their relative position.

the_syco

Stheno wrote: »

And haven't this government promised that it will be mandatory for everyone to be in a pension plan within a couple of years?

Maybe before the recession hit, but now this isn't going to be possible to implement.

partnership wrote: »

Let's talk about pensions

What percentage does your employer contribute to it?

yosser hughes wrote: »

The disparities not only between public sector and private sector in Ireland are huge but also between public sector here and public sector in Germany for example.

During the boom times, benchmarking was to increase the wage of the public sector to bring it in line with the private sector. When the recession hit, private employers found that they could decrease the amount they either had to pay or the amount they could pay. Until now, the PS thought they were untouchable, but this is seemingly not so. I wonder how far they'll go with the cuts?

BaronVon

Godge wrote: »

A couple of points -

(3) On front-line workers, it is difficult to see how much they lose out without knowing how often they work Sundays.

I work every second Sunday, and between the reduction in Sunday allowance, and the loss of Twilight hours, I will be down €132 a month, or €1716 a year, pre tax.

It seems I'll get a 50% rebate for the Sundays in 2 instalments in 2015, worth €547.

So, factoring in the rebate, I will be down €1169 a year.

BaronVon

the_syco wrote: »

During the boom times, benchmarking was to increase the wage of the public sector to bring it in line with the private sector. When the recession hit, private employers found that they could decrease the amount they either had to pay or the amount they could pay. Until now, the PS thought they were untouchable, but this is seemingly not so. I wonder how far they'll go with the cuts?

Could you expand on the "until now" quote?

I don't think anyone in the PS has felt 'untouchable' for a long time, if ever!

uncle tom

Does anyone know if marking of summer examaninations will be included when calculatin earnings?It is not core salary,is not pensionable and is cotractable year by year.I earn 64,000 in my teaching salary and approximately 4,000 each summer marking exams(it varies depending on how many papers you get each summer)will that additiona work put me above the threshold of 65,000?Any answers appreciated:)

Head The Wall

infacteh wrote: »

Could you expand on the "until now" quote?

I don't think anyone in the PS has felt 'untouchable' for a long time, if ever!

Have you forgotten about CPA 1 already which guaranteed no paycuts for the last few years

Riskymove

Head The Wall wrote: »

Have you forgotten about CPA 1 already which guaranteed no paycuts for the last few years

the one that guaranteed no cuts until 2014?

antoobrien

uncle tom wrote: »

Does anyone know if marking of summer examaninations will be included when calculatin earnings?It is not core salary,is not pensionable and is cotractable year by year.I earn 64,000 in my teaching salary and approximately 4,000 each summer marking exams(it varies depending on how many papers you get each summer)will that additiona work put me above the threshold of 65,000?Any answers appreciated:)

I'd say probably yes:

In addition to the measures on increments above, and as a means to ensuring broad equity of contribution, the parties note that the Government intends to apply a reduction in pay for those on salaries of €65,000 and greater (inclusive of allowances in the nature of pay)