Government to reverse some Public Secor Pay cuts

Gumbo

Head The Wall wrote: »

Really, so €215 Billion is not classed as being especially broke

Government Finance Statistics Quarterly Results Q1 2014

I know single people that have mortgages of 300k or 400k in one instance, and they are not broke. Money has to be borrowed to live. Just like a country needs to borrow to stay open. We will always have government debt. Once or ability to pay that debt is ok, like it is presently. That's the way it's done in Ireland, might be different in England where you are.

Black Swan

MOD REMINDER:
Some of the above posts include comments that are drifting towards getting too personal. Spirited discussion is welcome, but getting too personal is not.

golfwallah

kceire wrote: »

I know single people that have mortgages of 300k or 400k in one instance, and they are not broke. Money has to be borrowed to live. Just like a country needs to borrow to stay open. We will always have government debt. Once or ability to pay that debt is ok, like it is presently. That's the way it's done in Ireland, might be different in England where you are.

People with huge mortgages that are many times their income may not be broke – right now. But they are taking high risks e.g. that their income levels will remain “as is” or rise or that interest rates will remain low. These may not appear to be significant risks now – but things can change very quickly – leading to penury or bankruptcy.

The same principles apply to Government borrowing and spending. Our government is currently borrowing over 122.3% of GDP or 140% of GNP, and continuing to add to the deficit every year. Interest rates are abnormally low at the moment but what risk that this will continue? I would think that there are high risks that interest will increase over the next 10 years or so, placing us at risk of default on our loans. This would not be good for an open economy like ours.

This is some of what colm McCarthy has to say about it in today’s Sunday Independent:

It should be clear that the deficit-reducing efforts have not reached a point where it is safe to ease up. The ongoing budget deficit remains too high to be sustainable. Things are certainly in better shape than they were when the Government took office and it deserves credit for that, but it will have dissipated that credit if it proceeds on a Rake's Progress into the next election, with promises to cut taxes, increase public service pay and generally to proceed as if the war has been won. The economy may be about to recover but there is no conceivable rate of economic growth that will make the sums add up if budgetary restraint is abandoned. A durable recovery is in any event dependent on better export markets and the recent data around Europe is not promising.

Given the enormous debt overhang, the Irish public finances will not prove sustainable until at least a decade of budget surpluses has been achieved. This will take, at least, three successive governments devoted to prudent fiscal management.

Head The Wall

barneystinson wrote: »

Genuine question: what country's PS pay model do the PS bashers think we should be following? Can Fliball or Noodler or any of the others who are galled by our incremental pay scales, point at some country or countries whose lead we should be following?

Ok, so you're just going to ignore what has been posted and try and deflect. That seems to be the typical reaction.

Well considering Ireland is one of the countries in the EU that has the highest percentile difference between Public and Private wages maybe we should follow the lead of countries that have something closer to parity. Most of the countries that had the biggest public & private disparities are surprisingly members of the PIIGS and these reports have taken into account the education and skill set levels. Here are a few reports backing up my claims

Public-private wage differentials and the distribution of skills across sectors

The gap between public and private wages: new evidence for the EU

When compared with the EU average, public workers with lower skills are in a relatively better position in Cyprus, Germany, Spain, Greece, Ireland and Poland (often around 20% or above). The economic conditions of workers with a higher educational attainment are better than average in Cyprus, Spain and Ireland.

If other countries can run themselves a lot better than the PIIGS have with a lower differential then we should at least strive to be more like them for a start.

Black Swan wrote: »

MOD REMINDER:
Some of the above posts include comments that are drifting towards getting too personal. Spirited discussion is welcome, but getting too personal is not.

Agreed, it seems when people can't respond they have to relate to a persons location as if I can't comment from outside of Ireland. I have a much clearer view and don't have a biased opinion as I am neither paying PS wages nor receiving them. It just shows says you can't really rebut what I have posted if all you can do is refer to my location

woodoo

Head The Wall wrote: »

Ok, so you're just going to ignore what has been posted and try and deflect. That seems to be the typical reaction.

Well considering Ireland is one of the countries in the EU that has the highest percentile difference between Public and Private wages maybe we should follow the lead of countries that have something closer to parity. Most of the countries that had the biggest public & private disparities are surprisingly members of the PIIGS and these reports have taken into account the education and skill set levels. Here are a few reports backing up my claims

Public-private wage differentials and the distribution of skills across sectors

The gap between public and private wages: new evidence for the EU




If other countries can run themselves a lot better than the PIIGS have with a lower differential then we should at least strive to be more like them for a start.




Agreed, it seems when people can't respond they have to relate to a persons location as if I can't comment from outside of Ireland. I have a much clearer view and don't have a biased opinion as I am neither paying PS wages nor receiving them. It just shows says you can't really rebut what I have posted if all you can do is refer to my location

One of the reasons for the pay differential (although its only about 14%) is that women in the public service are paid the same as men but in the private sector they are in a lot of part time and low paying jobs. They are paid less than men. This is a problem for the private sector to remedy.

Calling for the public service to come down to meet their low average is not the way forward. Additionally, the public service are better educated and the very top guys in the private sector are not included in the stats. Nothing to see here move on to another subject.

Gumbo

Head The Wall wrote: »

Agreed, it seems when people can't respond they have to relate to a persons location as if I can't comment from outside of Ireland. I have a much clearer view and don't have a biased opinion as I am neither paying PS wages nor receiving them. It just shows says you can't really rebut what I have posted if all you can do is refer to my location

I think calling for people to post up their payslips also pays a big part in it too

barneystinson

Head The Wall wrote: »

Ok, so you're just going to ignore what has been posted and try and deflect. That seems to be the typical reaction.

Well considering Ireland is one of the countries in the EU that has the highest percentile difference between Public and Private wages maybe we should follow the lead of countries that have something closer to parity. Most of the countries that had the biggest public & private disparities are surprisingly members of the PIIGS and these reports have taken into account the education and skill set levels. Here are a few reports backing up my claims

Public-private wage differentials and the distribution of skills across sectors

The gap between public and private wages: new evidence for the EU




If other countries can run themselves a lot better than the PIIGS have with a lower differential then we should at least strive to be more like them for a start.

I thought it was quite a simple, and actually very reasonable question - if you're going to come on the boards and rant about our PS pay system and increments etc., can you point me to the PS pay model that you think we should aspire to?

I'm not trying to deflect anything - we've had the same running arguments for the last I don't know how many years, and anyone who still thinks they can "win" any of those arguments is codding themselves TBH.

I'm asking the question to try to bring the conversation down a constructive road - we aren't perfect, no-one is, but if you want us to improve then who should we be emulating? The Brits?, Ze Germans?, some of the scandinavians? I certainly don't know, but I've no particular axe to grind like so many of the posters on here do...

Do you not think it would be more constructive if instead of saying "the Irish PS should be run the same way as the private sector" (which probably really means "the company I work for" and is clearly a nonsense), people could say, " the Irish PS should be run more like the PS in [insert reasonable comparator developed country here]"?

Am I missing something? Otherwise we'll just keep going round in circles with the "Increments are a pay-rise" - "No they're not" - "Yes they are" Pantomine indefinitely.

Or of course, you can just come out and say that you have a fundamental difficulty with how PS organisations are run, everywhere and always, which is also fine if that's what one believes.

golfwallah

barneystinson wrote: »

I thought it was quite a simple, and actually very reasonable question - if you're going to come on the boards and rant about our PS pay system and increments etc., can you point me to the PS pay model that you think we should aspire to?

I'm not trying to deflect anything - we've had the same running arguments for the last I don't know how many years, and anyone who still thinks they can "win" any of those arguments is codding themselves TBH.

I'm asking the question to try to bring the conversation down a constructive road - we aren't perfect, no-one is, but if you want us to improve then who should we be emulating? The Brits?, Ze Germans?, some of the scandinavians? I certainly don't know, but I've no particular axe to grind like so many of the posters on here do...

Do you not think it would be more constructive if instead of saying "the Irish PS should be run the same way as the private sector" (which probably really means "the company I work for" and is clearly a nonsense), people could say, " the Irish PS should be run more like the PS in [insert reasonable comparator developed country here]"?

Am I missing something? Otherwise we'll just keep going round in circles with the "Increments are a pay-rise" - "No they're not" - "Yes they are" Pantomine indefinitely.

Or of course, you can just come out and say that you have a fundamental difficulty with how PS organisations are run, everywhere and always, which is also fine if that's what one believes.

We don't have to slavishly emulate any other country - that's what helped get us into the financial mess in the first place, IMO. You only have to think "light touch regulation", "bankers pay incentives", etc., that resulted in our own home grown solutions of "benchmarking", "over-reliance on property taxes", "inflated asset values", etc. to see that.

I'd rather see us thinking the situation out for ourselves, looking at the alternatives, making informed and politically doable choices and then committing to implementing them.

But that's before all the interest groups - public v private sector, pensioners, welfare dependants, etc. - all wanting it their way - now!

While the debate about what to do goes on, continuing excess of government expenditure over income is being financed by more borrowings - and adding to an already huge debt mountain. This includes levels of public service pay and pensions that we simply cannot afford. Increases in public service pay will add to that growing debt burden.

This growth in debt financing is a very risky strategy, IMHO.

The missing ingredient, as far as I can see, is more decisive political leadership. What we have now is compromise, long-fingering, inertia and, of course, an eye to the next general election.

barneystinson

golfwallah wrote: »

We don't have to slavishly emulate any other country - that's what helped get us into the financial mess in the first place, IMO. You only have to think "light touch regulation", "bankers pay incentives", etc., that resulted in our own home grown solutions of "benchmarking", "over-reliance on property taxes", "inflated asset values", etc. to see that.

I'd rather see us thinking the situation out for ourselves, looking at the alternatives, making informed and politically doable choices and then committing to implementing them.

But that's before all the interest groups - public v private sector, pensioners, welfare dependants, etc. - all wanting it their way - now!

While the debate about what to do goes on, continuing excess of government expenditure over income is being financed by more borrowings - and adding to an already huge debt mountain. This includes levels of public service pay and pensions that we simply cannot afford. Increases in public service pay will add to that growing debt burden.

This growth in debt financing is a very risky strategy, IMHO.

The missing ingredient, as far as I can see, is more decisive political leadership. What we have now is compromise, long-fingering, inertia and, of course, an eye to the next general election.

So in other words, there isn't a PS system anywhere in the world that we could adopt, that would make you happy?

That's a tall task you're setting our government, to come up with something that in your opinion has never been achieved anywhere ever before, in the middle of a financial crisis.

golfwallah

barneystinson wrote: »

So in other words, there isn't a PS system anywhere in the world that we could adopt, that would make you happy?

That's a tall task you're setting our government, to come up with something that in your opinion has never been achieved anywhere ever before, in the middle of a financial crisis.

The only one on here looking for an overseas PS model to copy is yourself.

I've never said anything about looking for another PS model to copy.

Another PS model to copy should not be the starting point in international comparison - it's certainly not what international lenders look at, i.e. our Debt / GDP ratio and ability to repay loans (see Eurostat). They are more concerned with "what" we achieve as opposed to "how", which is left very much to ourselves.

The objectives here should be what is in the interest of the majority not just vested interests.

Borrowing to finance investment in future wealth generation for the majority is an example of prudent spending. Current account spending on public service pay increases that have to be financed out of borrowings is placing the majority at risk of financial difficulties, should any unpredictable economic events come along that effect international trade.

Its a question of choice and risk management - which is the better thing to do - spend more than you have on day to day activities or limit current spending and invest scarce resources in finding ways out of our financial mess.

barneystinson

golfwallah wrote: »

The only one on here looking for an overseas PS model to copy is yourself.

I've never said anything about looking for another PS model to copy.

Another PS model to copy should not be the starting point in international comparison - it's certainly not what international lenders look at, i.e. our Debt / GDP ratio and ability to repay loans (see Eurostat). They are more concerned with "what" we achieve as opposed to "how", which is left very much to ourselves.

The objectives here should be what is in the interest of the majority not just vested interests.

Borrowing to finance investment in future wealth generation for the majority is an example of prudent spending. Current account spending on public service pay increases that have to be financed out of borrowings is placing the majority at risk of financial difficulties, should any unpredictable economic events come along that effect international trade.

Its a question of choice and risk management - which is the better thing to do - spend more than you have on day to day activities or limit current spending and invest scarce resources in finding ways out of our financial mess.

You can't simply talk about the numbers in isolation and pretend like there isn't the matter of the PS unions to be dealt with, if a course of action other than returning to the pre-HRA status quo is intended.

The reality is that as things currently stand HRA expires mid-2016 and the PS workforce will expect their money back then, in line with the terms of the agreement, no different than anyone in any other job.

Speaking of risk I'd say it would be a substantial risk to attempt to renege on the agreement in place with over 250k workers whose pay, terms and conditions have already been hit several times in the last 5 years.

The reason I asked for people to point to a better PS elsewhere that we can aspire to was so that we could progress the discussion from exactly the type of post you've got there - what you've said isn't unreasonable, but it's not actually proposing anything.

Sheldons Brain

golfwallah wrote: »

The only one on here looking for an overseas PS model to copy is yourself.

I've never said anything about looking for another PS model to copy.

Another PS model to copy should not be the starting point in international comparison - it's certainly not what international lenders look at, i.e. our Debt / GDP ratio and ability to repay loans (see Eurostat). They are more concerned with "what" we achieve as opposed to "how", which is left very much to ourselves.

OK then, I propose decimation. Let the government go out to every tenth citizen and take all their money. That should do it, as it is only the outcome not the means that is important.

Borrowing to finance investment in future wealth generation for the majority is an example of prudent spending. .

In your world building an IDA factory is "investment", educating the people who are going to work in it is "imprudent expenditure".

golfwallah

barneystinson wrote: »

You can't simply talk about the numbers in isolation and pretend like there isn't the matter of the PS unions to be dealt with, if a course of action other than returning to the pre-HRA status quo is intended.

The reality is that as things currently stand HRA expires mid-2016 and the PS workforce will expect their money back then, in line with the terms of the agreement, no different than anyone in any other job.

Speaking of risk I'd say it would be a substantial risk to attempt to renege on the agreement in place with over 250k workers whose pay, terms and conditions have already been hit several times in the last 5 years.

The reason I asked for people to point to a better PS elsewhere that we can aspire to was so that we could progress the discussion from exactly the type of post you've got there - what you've said isn't unreasonable, but it's not actually proposing anything.

I don't have the resources to do the research to enable me to put forward specific proposals you are asking for. It's not for me to do it anyway - that's the job of each individual Government Minister, who have the resources to do this type of thing, and for the cabinet to choose from alternatives.

All I'm saying is we currently can't afford more PS pay increases nor should they be made unless equivalent savings are made elsewhere.

We just can't afford to keep on borrowing to finance current spending - alternatives to spending more and adding to the borrowings have to be found.

barneystinson

golfwallah wrote: »

I don't have the resources to do the research to enable me to put forward specific proposals you are asking for. It's not for me to do it anyway - that's the job of each individual Government Minister, who have the resources to do this type of thing, and for the cabinet to choose from alternatives.

All I'm saying is we currently can't afford more PS pay increases nor should they be made unless equivalent savings are made elsewhere.

We just can't afford to keep on borrowing to finance current spending - alternatives to spending more and adding to the borrowings have to be found.

You must be relieved to be finished with this thread now so

qwert55

public sector pay should be cut by about 20 % over a period of 2 or 3 years, it should be a phased cut. The status quo is unsustainable.
Basically the cost of living is artificially too high in ireland due to the necessity to cover the salaries of 300000 public servants.
By any measures the public sector is overpaid, over pensioned and probably under worked.
The irish economy is still on the critical list.
If the cost of living is not tackled we will become less competitive and Foreign direct investment will not come to ireland because other countries are much more attractive .What we call Austerity is called living within your means in other countries.
Unless the waste in the public sector is tackled the country will never recover.
We should follow the Canadian example when the finance minister Paul Martin made the unpopular decisions that led to cuts in the 90s and eventually the recovery of the economy.
In reality this will not happen here because we have a government who are terrified of the PS voting block

barneystinson

qwert55 wrote: »

public sector pay should be cut by about 20 % over a period of 2 or 3 years, it should be a phased cut. The status quo is unsustainable.
Basically the cost of living is artificially too high in ireland due to the necessity to cover the salaries of 300000 public servants.
By any measures the public sector is overpaid, over pensioned and probably under worked.
The irish economy is still on the critical list.
If the cost of living is not tackled we will become less competitive and Foreign direct investment will not come to ireland because other countries are much more attractive .What we call Austerity is called living within your means in other countries.
Unless the waste in the public sector is tackled the country will never recover.
We should follow the Canadian example when the finance minister Paul Martin made the unpopular decisions that led to cuts in the 90s and eventually the recovery of the economy.
In reality this will not happen here because we have a government who are terrified of the PS voting block

Only 20%? Are you sure that'll do it? Or maybe after that Qwert56 or Qwert57 will be on boards saying EXACTLY the same things as you have said there... this is the trouble with PS bashing, there'll never actually be a point when it's enough. There will always be a noisy (on anonymous Internet forums at least) block of people who will never be satisfied with the pay & conditions in the PS.

Since you bring up Canada, how does their PS pay system work? I haven't looked at it, so I've no preconceived notions, do they have incremental pay scales based on service, or performance related pay, or what?

Edit: so I just googled Canada's PS pay arrangements and they seem to enter into collective bargaining and have fixed payscales for each role/grade, with increments based on time served as far as I can tell...

Peter Flynt

qwert55 wrote: »

public sector pay should be cut by about 20 % over a period of 2 or 3 years, it should be a phased cut. The status quo is unsustainable.
Basically the cost of living is artificially too high in ireland due to the necessity to cover the salaries of 300000 public servants.
By any measures the public sector is overpaid, over pensioned and probably under worked.
The irish economy is still on the critical list.
If the cost of living is not tackled we will become less competitive and Foreign direct investment will not come to ireland because other countries are much more attractive .What we call Austerity is called living within your means in other countries.
Unless the waste in the public sector is tackled the country will never recover.
We should follow the Canadian example when the finance minister Paul Martin made the unpopular decisions that led to cuts in the 90s and eventually the recovery of the economy.
In reality this will not happen here because we have a government who are terrified of the PS voting block

.

Gumbo

qwert55 wrote: »

public sector pay should be cut by about 20 % over a period of 2 or 3 years, it should be a phased cut. The status quo is unsustainable.
Basically the cost of living is artificially too high in ireland due to the necessity to cover the salaries of 300000 public servants.
By any measures the public sector is overpaid, over pensioned and probably under worked.
The irish economy is still on the critical list.
If the cost of living is not tackled we will become less competitive and Foreign direct investment will not come to ireland because other countries are much more attractive .What we call Austerity is called living within your means in other countries.
Unless the waste in the public sector is tackled the country will never recover.
We should follow the Canadian example when the finance minister Paul Martin made the unpopular decisions that led to cuts in the 90s and eventually the recovery of the economy.
In reality this will not happen here because we have a government who are terrified of the PS voting block

You throw in lots of big words, economy, status quo, artificially, unsustainable, Foreign direct investment, but yet your post makes absolute no sense at all.......The mind boggles

Godge

qwert55 wrote: »

public sector pay should be cut by about 20 % over a period of 2 or 3 years, it should be a phased cut. The status quo is unsustainable.

There is no evidence to support this.

Just this week, we saw the introduction of new salary scales for hospital consultants because we cannot recruit them at the current low salary scales. The recent evidence therefore is that at least some PS salaries are too low.

qwert55 wrote: »

Basically the cost of living is artificially too high in ireland due to the necessity to cover the salaries of 300000 public servants.

On what basis do you say this?

Where is the causal link between PS salaries and the cost of living?
Do we have excessive public servants compared to other countries?

qwert55 wrote: »

By any measures the public sector is overpaid, over pensioned and probably under worked.

Maybe you could enlighten us with some of those measures. Recent statistics please.

qwert55 wrote: »

The irish economy is still on the critical list.

Not according to any expert or to any statistics. The ratings agency are raising our rating, the budget deficit is ahead of target. The debt ratio is ahead of target.

We are still a patient, but a rapidly improving one, certainly not on the critical list.

http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/exchequer-figures-the-economy-is-booming-30556065.html

qwert55 wrote: »

If the cost of living is not tackled we will become less competitive and Foreign direct investment will not come to ireland because other countries are much more attractive .What we call Austerity is called living within your means in other countries.

http://www.finance.gov.ie/sites/default/files/Exchequer%20Returns%20end%20August%202014%20information%20note.pdf

If you look carefully into this information, it is possible though unlikely that we could hit the 3% budget target this year instead of next year. At the same time, France is heading for over 4%. ??????? Who is living beyond their means????

qwert55 wrote: »

Unless the waste in the public sector is tackled the country will never recover.

Await examples of waste that is statistically significant, not just anecdotes.

qwert55 wrote: »

We should follow the Canadian example when the finance minister Paul Martin made the unpopular decisions that led to cuts in the 90s and eventually the recovery of the economy.

Canada?

http://chronicle.com/blogs/global/canadian-professors-best-paid-in-the-world%E2%80%94again/32603

The country with the highest-paid professors (public servants you know?)

qwert55 wrote: »

In reality this will not happen here because we have a government who are terrified of the PS voting block

Too late for this government. They imposed pay cuts last year, delayed increments and increased working hours for all public servants, they suffered in the polls. They might as well cut public sector salaries again as they have lost that vote.


It is so easy to come on here and throw out spurious comments about the public sector without providing one bit of hard evidence to back up ill-thought out soundbites.

ardmacha

qwert55 wrote: »

By any measures the public sector is overpaid, over pensioned and probably under worked.

All 280,000 of them? The bomb disposal officers, the bio-technology professors, the Data analysts, the brain surgeons? Evidence please.

golfwallah

qwert55 wrote: »

What we call Austerity is called living within your means in other countries.

Godge wrote: »

If you look carefully into this information, it is possible though unlikely that we could hit the 3% budget target this year instead of next year. At the same time, France is heading for over 4%. ??????? Who is living beyond their means????

This is what our minister for finance, Michael Noonan, had to say yesterday about the tax and spend policies followed by countries like France and Italy:

"The success now is not an accident of nature or an act of God, it's a direct consequence of the policies that were pursued and they were the right policies," Mr Noonan told Today with Sean O'Rourke on RTE Radio 1.

"If you look across Europe, the Baltic states, Germany, Denmark, Sweden all followed these kind of policies and they're growing well now at this stage. If you look at the countries that didn't follow, like Italy and France, who went down the road of tax and spend, they're floundering and they're still in difficulty.

- See more at: http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/ireland-must-learn-from-scandinavian-recovery-noonan-30560608.html#sthash.S64diD4t.dpuf

What we are hearing (from the FG side of Government and to some extent by Labour Tanaiste, Joan Burton) is the need for a careful approach - as opposed to signals from Minister Brendan Howlin in early August about room for public service pay cut reversals: http://www.rte.ie/news/2014/0809/636109-howlin/

barneystinson

golfwallah wrote: »

This is what our minister for finance, Michael Noonan, had to say yesterday about the tax and spend policies followed by countries like France and Italy:
- See more at: http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/ireland-must-learn-from-scandinavian-recovery-noonan-30560608.html#sthash.S64diD4t.dpuf

What we are hearing (from the FG side of Government and to some extent by Labour Tanaiste, Joan Burton) is the need for a careful approach - as opposed to signals from Minister Brendan Howlin in early August about room for public service pay cut reversals: http://www.rte.ie/news/2014/0809/636109-howlin/

Did Brendan Howlin ever actually say he intended to reverse pay cuts before the expiry of the HRA, or was he talking about entering discussions next year well in advance of the expiry of the HRA in 2016, at which point in the absence of a further agreement the PS workforce will be expecting their money back... I had always assumed the latter.

If when the time comes our budget deficit is back under 3%, our unemployment rate is still falling and the economy is growing at any kind of rate, refusing to restore pay as was agreed will be a very tough sell.

fliball123

barneystinson wrote: »

Did Brendan Howlin ever actually say he intended to reverse pay cuts before the expiry of the HRA, or was he talking about entering discussions next year well in advance of the expiry of the HRA in 2016, at which point in the absence of a further agreement the PS workforce will be expecting their money back... I had always assumed the latter.

If when the time comes our budget deficit is back under 3%, our unemployment rate is still falling and the economy is growing at any kind of rate, refusing to restore pay as was agreed will be a very tough sell.

Howlin is irrelevent numerous FG ministers have come out and said that there is no room for PS pay rises above increments. They have offered an olive branch do in the form of tax cuts..so everyone gets a slice of the Pie..Good for FG going forward Labour trying to garner the support of the PS which wont work and has been shotdown...Time to move on guys the thread has run its course..All this is doing is furthering the hatred between ps and private sector

garancafan

fliball123 wrote: »

..All this is doing is furthering the hatred between ps and private sector

Does this mean that you will now desist?

fliball123

garancafan wrote: »

Does this mean that you will now desist?

Desist from what?

mariaalice

Brendan Howlin was VERY careful to say if pay is restored it will be under the HRA and that's all, now I am not sure if the HRA is a legally binding agreement, but if it is and the government don't honour it, then it would be open to the unions to legally peruse it on behalf of its members.

barneystinson

fliball123 wrote: »

Howlin is irrelevent numerous FG ministers have come out and said that there is no room for PS pay rises above increments. They have offered an olive branch do in the form of tax cuts..so everyone gets a slice of the Pie..Good for FG going forward Labour trying to garner the support of the PS which wont work and has been shotdown...Time to move on guys the thread has run its course..All this is doing is furthering the hatred between ps and private sector

What hatred? Do you hate the PS? Do the people working in the PS who you know in your real life, as opposed to your anonymised online one, know that you hate them?

Has anyone in FG,or Labour, actually said that they intend on not honouring the HRA?

You've also been conspicuously absent since I asked you what country's/countries' PS pay systems we should aspire to - or whether you expect Ireland to produce a system for paying our PS that is fundamentally different than the rest of the developed world?

fliball123

barneystinson wrote: »

What hatred? Do you hate the PS? Do the people working in the PS who you know in your real life, as opposed to your anonymised online one, know that you hate them?

Has anyone in FG,or Labour, actually said that they intend on not honouring the HRA?

You've also been conspicuously absent since I asked you what country's/countries' PS pay systems we should aspire to - or whether you expect Ireland to produce a system for paying our PS that is fundamentally different than the rest of the developed world?

Barney you only have to look at this thread to see the 2 fractions at war.

As for you question
Well Long answer = it was put back to you by a different poster that the countries which pay a high premium to their public sector are the piigs counties (Portugal,Ireland, Italy, Greece and Spain) as in all the counties that needed bailouts or close to it, funny how that correlation which was brought to your attention was ignored by you. Check and see what countries which are run well such as Germany, see what their differential is....
Short Answer = one we can afford

I stopped looking on the thread as FG ministers such as Noonan have more or less said Howlin should get back in his box and there is no room to give pay rises above increments and that the deficit would be tackled and tax reductions would be implemented first

Vizzy

fliball123 wrote: »

I stopped looking on the thread as FG ministers such as Noonan have more or less said Howlin should get back in his box and there is no room to give pay rises above increments and that the deficit would be tackled and tax reductions would be implemented first

And do you now agree that increments should be paid(because Noonan has told Howlin "to get back in his box" as you put it) ?

Gumbo

fliball123 wrote: »

All this is doing is furthering the hatred between ps and private sector

fliball123 wrote: »

Barney you only have to look at this thread to see the 2 fractions at war.

The only fractions at war is about 4 or 5 people on this thread.
i dont see the hatred on the street, or in the eyes of the people i help every day, most of them are genuinely thankful.

fliball123

Vizzy wrote: »

And do you now agree that increments should be paid(because Noonan has told Howlin "to get back in his box" as you put it) ?

No I dont agree that increments should be paid , they should of been stopped for the period that we are/were in deficit.

fliball123

kceire wrote: »

The only fractions at war is about 4 or 5 people on this thread.
i dont see the hatred on the street, or in the eyes of the people i help every day, most of them are genuinely thankful.

A few more than that KC yeah there is no hatred on the streets

barneystinson

fliball123 wrote: »

Barney you only have to look at this thread to see the 2 fractions at war.

As for you question
Well Long answer = it was put back to you by a different poster that the countries which pay a high premium to their public sector are the piigs counties (Portugal,Ireland, Italy, Greece and Spain) as in all the counties that needed bailouts or close to it, funny how that correlation which was brought to your attention was ignored by you. Check and see what countries which are run well such as Germany, see what their differential is....
Short Answer = one we can afford

I stopped looking on the thread as FG ministers such as Noonan have more or less said Howlin should get back in his box and there is no room to give pay rises above increments and that the deficit would be tackled and tax reductions would be implemented first

You either deliberately or through carelessness have completely missed my point. Talking about pay differentials / absolute rates of pay is one thing, and in fact IIRC the discussion about the differential ended with the most recent and most detailed report suggesting that while in absolute terms the differential was 40-something %, after taking all the relevant factors into account, the differential was somewhere between 0% and 14%. And that was before factoring in the PRD.

You seem to want to keep having the same argument, which no-one will "win" because everyone's minds are made up. So to try to move the discussion along I've asked a simple question, about the SYSTEM within which PS pay operates. That is a system of incremental pay along a scale at each different grade, with increases based on time served subject to satisfactory performance. Ive asked you to tell me what other country's system should we be trying to emulate, since ours is so flawed in your opinion. you've mentioned Germany. Have a look at the German system, I think you'll find they pay incremental pay based on period of service.

As someone who has repeatedly expressed fundamental opposition to such pay systems, how do square that circle?

By the way I'm already on an increment freeze at the moment until at least 2016, so you've already got what you want from me, from everyone else at my grade and above, and everybody else who's already at the top of their scale, which is an ever increasing number of people.

fliball123

barneystinson wrote: »

You either deliberately or through carelessness have completely missed my point. Talking about pay differentials / absolute rates of pay is one thing, and in fact IIRC the discussion about the differential ended with the most recent and most detailed report suggesting that while in absolute terms the differential was 40-something %, after taking all the relevant factors into account, the differential was somewhere between 0% and 14%. And that was before factoring in the PRD.

You seem to want to keep having the same argument, which no-one will "win" because everyone's minds are made up. So to try to move the discussion along I've asked a simple question, about the SYSTEM within which PS pay operates. That is a system of incremental pay along a scale at each different grade, with increases based on time served subject to satisfactory performance. Ive asked you to tell me what other country's system should we be trying to emulate, since ours is so flawed in your opinion. you've mentioned Germany. Have a look at the German system, I think you'll find they pay incremental pay based on period of service.

As someone who has repeatedly expressed fundamental opposition to such pay systems, how do square that circle?

By the way I'm already on an increment freeze at the moment until at least 2016, so you've already got what you want from me, from everyone else at my grade and above, and everybody else who's already at the top of their scale, which is an ever increasing number of people.

You have just stated that it is 40% (by a third party who has nothing to gain or lose from it) and yet you start bringing in deflections away from the actual figure..So I will keep this in language you can understand, the actual figure is in fact the actual figure you can try and dilute it anyway you please and yet again you swerve the question again. Why is it that all the piigs countries have the same deficit problem and the one area of commonality with regards to spending as a country is the high differential between pay in the public and the private sector?

There is a very high wage discrepancy still between the 2 sectors. Sorry if your increments have been frozen but currently we cannot afford them ....when we are out of the mire you increments will be reinstated

And someone is winning as I say when Noonan came out and told Howlin to get back in his box, the country won.

Godge

fliball123 wrote: »

numerous FG ministers have come out and said that there is no room for PS pay rises above increments.

Link please?

fliball123

Godge wrote: »

Link please?

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/noonan-no-room-for-public-sector-pay-increases-635251.html

I believe O'donahue and Varadkar when interviewed on different shows have echoed this..but the big kahuna is Noonan

Godge

fliball123 wrote: »

You have just stated that it is 40% (by a third party who has nothing to gain or lose from it) and yet you start bringing in deflections away from the actual figure..So I will keep this in language you can understand, the actual figure is in fact the actual figure you can try and dilute it anyway you please and yet again you swerve the question again. Why is it that all the piigs countries have the same deficit problem and the one area of commonality with regards to spending as a country is the high differential between pay in the public and the private sector?

There is a very high wage discrepancy still between the 2 sectors. Sorry if your increments have been frozen but currently we cannot afford them ....when we are out of the mire you increments will be reinstated

And someone is winning as I say when Noonan came out and told Howlin to get back in his box, the country won.

You have no understanding of statistics or comparability.


Take a country of 10 people.

There are four private sector workers earning a salary of 30k each. There are two business owners exploiting those workers and taking 200k each out of their business.

In the public sector there are four people, two cleaners earning 25k and two administrators earning 35k.

Average pay in the public sector is 30k. Average pay in the private sector is 30k.

The two business owners agitate that the public sector is inefficient and that there should be more contracting out. The public sector decides to outsource cleaning. The two cleaners become employees of the private sector company who cut their wages to 20k.

Average pay in the private sector drops to €26k, average pay in the public sector rises to €35k. The two business owners see an increase in profits and also agitate that the public sector is overpaid even though nothing has changed except they have increased their exploitation of workers. Public service pay is cut to €30k and the taxes on the two business owners go down.

So, business owners see profits go up and taxes go down, both private and public sector see wages fall and the likes of filiball fall for the argument that the public sector are overpaid.

Godge

fliball123 wrote: »

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/noonan-no-room-for-public-sector-pay-increases-635251.html

I believe O'donahue and Varadkar when interviewed on different shows have echoed this..but the big kahuna is Noonan

That was July, the public sector finances improved by August when Howlin spoke, you are out of date as usual.


http://www.rte.ie/news/2014/0809/636109-howlin/


Please find me a link to someone saying no room for public sector pay increases since August.

fliball123

Godge wrote: »

That was July, the public sector finances improved by August when Howlin spoke, you are out of date as usual.


http://www.rte.ie/news/2014/0809/636109-howlin/


Please find me a link to someone saying no room for public sector pay increases since August.

Noonan was responding to Howlin .. so we are out of debt or the deficit yet?

fliball123

Godge wrote: »

You have no understanding of statistics or comparability.


Take a country of 10 people.

There are four private sector workers earning a salary of 30k each. There are two business owners exploiting those workers and taking 200k each out of their business.

In the public sector there are four people, two cleaners earning 25k and two administrators earning 35k.

Average pay in the public sector is 30k. Average pay in the private sector is 30k.

The two business owners agitate that the public sector is inefficient and that there should be more contracting out. The public sector decides to outsource cleaning. The two cleaners become employees of the private sector company who cut their wages to 20k.

Average pay in the private sector drops to €26k, average pay in the public sector rises to €35k. The two business owners see an increase in profits and also agitate that the public sector is overpaid even though nothing has changed except they have increased their exploitation of workers. Public service pay is cut to €30k and the taxes on the two business owners go down.

So, business owners see profits go up and taxes go down, both private and public sector see wages fall and the likes of filiball fall for the argument that the public sector are overpaid.

Your argument works on a small sample size like 10 but when the numbers are around 300k in the ps and 1.7m in the private they fall short. Thats kind of stats 101 the larger the sample size the more accurate the results. So you obviously have no understanding of stats by limiting it to 10 and then stacking the stat in favour of your argument. The report as a whole is everyone working in the public and private sector the whole sample size and you or barney can try and dilute it all you want..But it is there in black and white and is a slap in the face of people working in the private sector and the ps and unions are rightly scoffed at when they are asking for more pay rises above increments

Your gas Godge

lets take 10 employees 9 private sector employees all earning the minimum wage and one public sector earning over 200k a year...stats when not using the full compliment can be bent to what ever you want..but when the sample size is the entire picture you cant

ardmacha

fliball123 wrote: »

Your argument works on a small sample size like 10 but when the numbers are around 300k in the ps and 1.7m in the private they fall short. Thats kind of stats 101 the larger the sample size the more accurate the results. So you obviously have no understanding of states by limiting it to 10 and then stacking the stat in favour of your argument. The report as a whole is everyone working in the public and private sector the whole sample size and you or barney can try and dilute it all you want..But it is there in black and white and is a slap in the face of people working in the private sector and the ps and unions are rightly scoffed at when they are asking for more pay rises above increments

Your gas Godge

lets take 10 employees 9 private sector employees all earning the minimum wage and one public sector earning over 200k a year...stats when not using the full compliment can be bent to what ever you want..but when the sample size is the entire picture you cant

The concept does not fall short on a bigger scale. Unfortunately, I've had cause to recently attend a number of medical people, all of these earn considerably more than me in a year, however their earnings are not salaries. Someone doing a similar job in a public role would also be decently paid, if not quite as highly, but would have a salary. So the private salaries would not be influenced by this class of person, but the public salaries would. A judge may not earn more than the barrister appearing his court, but he is counted as high PS salary, while the barrister is a businessman and not counted in the private salaries.

You talk of black and white, but have entirely failed to refute the arguments provided, other than by rambling on to no particular purpose.

barneystinson

fliball123 wrote: »

Your argument works on a small sample size like 10 but when the numbers are around 300k in the ps and 1.7m in the private they fall short. Thats kind of stats 101 the larger the sample size the more accurate the results. So you obviously have no understanding of stats by limiting it to 10 and then stacking the stat in favour of your argument. The report as a whole is everyone working in the public and private sector the whole sample size and you or barney can try and dilute it all you want..But it is there in black and white and is a slap in the face of people working in the private sector and the ps and unions are rightly scoffed at when they are asking for more pay rises above increments

Your gas Godge

lets take 10 employees 9 private sector employees all earning the minimum wage and one public sector earning over 200k a year...stats when not using the full compliment can be bent to what ever you want..but when the sample size is the entire picture you cant

Mother of God, I'm embarrassed for you.

You cannot compare Apples and Oranges - as you've just said there are 1.7m people working in the private sector (I don't know if that's right or not but it's your figure so we'll run with it). That 1.7m includes every person on minimum wage in every shop, fast food restaurant etc., tradespersons, factory operatives, airline pilots, zookeepers etc etc etc

And the public sector comprises (again your figure) 300k different people doing, by and large, different jobs to most of the other €1.7m.

So can you explain to me how in your mind does taking a bald average figure give you anything that you can compare???

Trying to base your argument on that headline statistic is like saying we should do away with male / female toilets because the average worker in Ireland has slightly more than one breast, and slightly less than one testicle. It's mathematically true, and statistically sound, but bears no resemblance to reality.

The figures only bear a resemblance to reality when you take into consideration the differences in the composition of the two sectors. There is no "average" PS worker, just as there is no "average" private sector worker. As I already mentioned above, every minimum wage job in the country is in the private sector, so straight away even you must be able to see that is going to drag the average there down.

fliball123

ardmacha wrote: »

The concept does not fall short on a bigger scale. Unfortunately, I've had cause to recently attend a number of medical people, all of these earn considerably more than me in a year, however their earnings are not salaries. Someone doing a similar job in a public role would also be decently paid, if not quite as highly, but would have a salary. So the private salaries would not be influenced by this class of person, but the public salaries would. A judge may not earn more than the barrister appearing his court, but he is counted as high PS salary, while the barrister is a businessman and not counted in the private salaries.

You talk of black and white, but have entirely failed to refute the arguments provided, other than by rambling on to no particular purpose.

Ardmacha the full report is there, as I say the larger the sample size the more accurate the results, the class of person, education does not come into it? We are paying top dollar for public sector employees, now is this the case with the private sector, I would say yes in the areas you state, but at least you have a choice to shop around and if you think its too much you have the choice to walk away and do with out the service of that individual. We cannot do this with people/services in the public sector..and it could be argued that we pay on the double for things like calling out a fire brigade, going to a GP , going to Hospital, for water the list goes on and on...

You also leave out the argument of the public sector employee's pension and how much the private sector employee would have to pay to get something in the region of the ps. Taking one offs like you have and a small sample size like Godge does can be tilted either way.

Taking the whole sample size of both cannot be diluted ... It is what it is.

Also if we are to look at what services we receive for the very high taxes (both direct and indirect)we pay it IMO we get a very poor return.

Godge

fliball123 wrote: »

Noonan was responding to Howlin .. so we are out of debt or the deficit yet?

So Noonan can predict the future now.

Your link was dated July while Howlin spoke in August.

Really????

Noonan was replying to the so-called socialist Ruth Coppinger who propsed pay increases of 5-10%.

Howlin, a month later, was talking about a phased reversal of the pay cuts

They are two different things.

Riskymove

fliball123 wrote: »

Taking the whole sample size of both cannot be diluted ... It is what it is.

jaysus...we are heading for another 1,000 posts of these circular arguments

Fliball, no one disputes the accuracy of the stats...it is the interpetation or use of that statistic that is the problem

ardmacha

fliball123 wrote: »

Ardmacha the full report is there, as I say the larger the sample size the more accurate the results, the class of person, education does not come into it?

If you are saying that the type of job someone does should not affect their salary, then we are on entirely different wavelengths. You are in some utopia, or perhaps North Korea, whereas I am in the real world.

Godge

fliball123 wrote: »

We are paying top dollar for public sector employees, now is this the case with the private sector, I would say yes in the areas you state, but at least you have a choice to shop around and if you think its too much you have the choice to walk away and do with out the service of that individual.

This is where your ignorance of the statistics and the methods behind them shines clearly.

Ardmacha referenced doctors and barristers in the private sector. THEY ARE NOT IN THE STATISTICS for the private sector (apologies for shouting but you are failing to see the point). Therefore the private sector wages are artificially deflated because judges and consultants are in the public sector wages.

Similarly, I reference the contracting out of low-paid cleaning and security services by the public sector. There are virtually no such low-paid employees left in the public sector as most of these services have been contracted out. Again, that artificially deflates the private sector average.

As for the choice argument, most of the population live in a place where you can choose which school, you can choose which hospital etc so choice does exist in public services..

fliball123

barneystinson wrote: »

Mother of God, I'm embarrassed for you.

You cannot compare Apples and Oranges - as you've just said there are €1.7m people working in the private sector (I don't know if that's right or not but it's your figure so we'll run with it). That €1.7m includes every person on minimum wage in every shop, fast food restaurant etc., tradespersons, factory operatives, airline pilots, zookeepers etc etc etc

And the public sector comprises (again your figure) 300k different people doing, by and large, different jobs to most of the other €1.7m.

So can you explain to me how in your mind does taking a bald average figure give you anything that you can compare???

Trying to base your argument on that headline statistic is like saying we should do away with male / female toilets because the average worker in Ireland has slightly more than one breast, and slightly less than one testicle. It's mathematically true, and statistically sound, but bears no resemblance to reality.

The figures only bear a resemblance to reality when you take into consideration the differences in the composition of the two sectors. There is no "average" PS worker, just as there is no "average" private sector worker. As I already mentioned above, every minimum wage job in the country is in the private sector, so straight away even you must be able to see that is going to drag the average there down.

Funny that when the apples an oranges were compared twice during the benchmarking process..who is embarrassed now? TWICE it was done and all record of it was shredded and burnt.

Further to your argument both sectors work, there are a lot of low level PS employees working as well, and thats according to the low level ps guys and girls on here and are we to be believe them.

So is this a philosophical question what constitutes people working harder or who should be paid more?

Should a middle management in the HSE who has feck all to do all day get the high wage they are on? How individual do you or ardmacha want to go for every slant you put on these stats there is one that will disprove it..

The only stat that cant be disproved is the headline stat of 40% differential in favour of the public sector.

You go do a search over the last decade of absolute farcical scenarios that have played out in the public sector

Such as losing xrays
botched up operations
god I could go on and on with this..

Now look at what we pay them.

Now do the same with the private sector and you will see the same..

The difference is we have a choice to pay or not to pay in the private sector with one caveat and thats the banks and it was the politicians who made this so.

fliball123

ardmacha wrote: »

If you are saying that the type of job someone does should not affect their salary, then we are on entirely different wavelengths. You are in some utopia, or perhaps North Korea, whereas I am in the real world.

Ardmacha the public sector is not worth 40% more in wages then the private sector. They do not work 40% harder than the private sector. They get benefits that far outstrip those within the private sector. We get a pretty poor level of service through out the public service for what we pay. So regardless of education or class.. Ask yourself the question whats the difference between a dosser or a dosser with a degree ??

The likes of yourself always heads off on a tangent such as north korea when the poster is on the right right track

fliball123

Godge wrote: »

This is where your ignorance of the statistics and the methods behind them shines clearly.

Ardmacha referenced doctors and barristers in the private sector. THEY ARE NOT IN THE STATISTICS for the private sector (apologies for shouting but you are failing to see the point). Therefore the private sector wages are artificially deflated because judges and consultants are in the public sector wages.

Similarly, I reference the contracting out of low-paid cleaning and security services by the public sector. There are virtually no such low-paid employees left in the public sector as most of these services have been contracted out. Again, that artificially deflates the private sector average.

As for the choice argument, most of the population live in a place where you can choose which school, you can choose which hospital etc so choice does exist in public services..

Once again I ask you are they worth 40% more overall. You could also argue that the likes of tycoons and business owners earning millions and millions would skew the figure upwards for the private sector..once again I stated that any argument you make for one sector can be countered with another stat, but the overall figure cannot be ignored..Especially when the ps are looking for more and when we get a very poor return for it.