Why is everyone going on strike?

Jawgap

Graham wrote: »

How about the comparisons to their fellow countrymen in the private sector?

I've no problem with that.

As I said before I left the PS when the pay differential became too much to ignore.

You can use the CSO figures all you want, but there should be some honesty around the problems with their dataset and methodology.

Jawgap

Jawgap wrote: »

Me? No.

The markets in their collective wisdom see us as a decent bet, much better than the UK and the US - almost as good as France and not quite as good as Germany.

What markets for debt issued in 2020 exist today for you to take this information from?

Theresa May and William Hague both voicing problems with the low interest rate environment we are living in. If/When we move even slightly away from today's dynamics, that will affect the cost of debt servicing.

If we could fix all of our debt today to today's interest rates, then that would be superb. However, instead what will happen in 2020 is that the majority of that 20bn liability will be rolled over and re-issued at the prevailing price.

Your point about credit being cheap only holds true if the credit will always be cheap. What cost if you are wrong?

Jawgap wrote: »

Indeed it is which is why bond prices are a decent aggregate metric for our economic outlook - if the investors thought we were going to struggle to pay off our debt or that it was at unsustainable levels, surely 10 year bonds would be difficult to sell? any evidence we're having trouble getting bonds away our having to pay a premium for the privilege?

No, I think the markets are more than happy with how we have been attempting to recover from the effects of the financial crash. Our ability to repay is related to our state's well being of course.

It doesn't take much for them to change their mind, as Theresa May found out last week. Policy changes such as "beginning to inflate the state again" with borrowed funds would be seen as a backwards step, and a step away from the path we've been striving towards.

tayto lover

hmmm wrote: »

We can't go on forever paying higher and higher wages for public sector workers, while cutting back on services to pay for it - we're already paying Swedish taxes for Albanian levels of service. At some stage a government will have to make a stand, and they will be rewarded for it by the electorate.

On the contrary.
Where nurses and gardai are concerned public opinion is definitely on their side and against the Govt.

L

hmmm wrote: »

We can't go on forever paying higher and higher wages for public sector workers, while cutting back on services to pay for it - we're already paying Swedish taxes for Albanian levels of service. At some stage a government will have to make a stand, and they will be rewarded for it by the electorate.

Counterintuitive as it seems, the major reason we're overpaying is because the Government doesn't like to pay now to save later or redirect resources.

Case in point the HSE has four times the number of administrators as nurses and doctors combined (about 20k medics/nurses of around 100k) because after it was formed by amalgamation of four health boards, the government kept all the staff rather than pay out redundancy to those who were no longer necessary (admittedly tricky as it'd have to be voluntary redundancy under Croke Park). The HSE's former HR director even said they're drastically overstaffed for admin/management.

At the same time, Ireland has serious problems retaining graduating doctors and nurses as the UK, America and Australia all offer far higher salaries. Considering each lost medic represents around €120k of state funding by that point, it's a pretty nuts example of penny wise, pound foolish.

So by cheaping out on offering tempting redundancy, the government is long term bleeding itself dry while delivering subpar service. That's similar if not as obvious in most areas of government employ.

Chips Lovell

hmmm wrote: »

...we're already paying Swedish taxes for Albanian levels of service....

Nope, we really aren't.

Some commentators point to the “Nordic model” of relatively high taxes and public expenditure as one we should aspire to. To reach Nordic levels of income taxation (including PRSI) everybody in Ireland would have to pay more but the increase would bear most heavily on the bottom half of the income distribution. For example, if the tax rates in Ireland were at the average of the 5 Nordic countries a single person on half average earnings would pay an additional €3,200 per year and a single individual on two and a half times average earnings would pay about €2,000 more.

The Muppet

Deleted User wrote: »

Peter Flynt wrote: »

Then judging by this logic you seem to be suggesting that public sector pay should be cut further?

By how much further do you feel that PS wage should be cut?

Presumably you're seeking a cut of 4bn in PS wages only to reduce the deficit to zero?

This will lead to public sector wage cuts across the board of approximately 30%.

So that 23K garda or nurse will have their wage reduced to approx 16K.

This will lead to a significant reduction in general taxation.
Do you want public servants to pay for that as well?

I'm afraid you have asked me a lot of questions without having the courtesy to answer my single question.

I'm more than happy to engage and discuss, if you choose to.

I'll ask again;
How do we pay for the PS Increases that you are proposing?

Well we could go after the 6 billion per year in the black economy or the 13 billion from Apple and they are unlikely to be the only ones .

Jawgap

Deleted User wrote: »

What markets for debt issued in 2020 exist today for you to take this information from?

I'm not sure I understand this question but bonds with a maturity beyond 2020 would be trading a lot higher than they are now if investors thought we were about to hit a massive speedbump in 2020 - additionally, no one would be buying anything the NTMA issued......any sign they're having trouble getting bonds away?

Deleted User wrote: »

Theresa May and William Hague both voicing problems with the low interest rate environment we are living in. If/When we move even slightly away from today's dynamics, that will affect the cost of debt servicing.

I don't doubt that as I type the NTMA are hoovering up as much cheap sterling as they can to pay off our bi-lateral loan to the Brits, so I wouldn't be overly concerned about BoE rates going up, in fact it's what we really need so the sooner the better for our export driven, strategically important agri-food industry.

Deleted User wrote: »

If we could fix all of our debt today to today's interest rates, then that would be superb. However, instead what will happen in 2020 is that the majority of that 20bn liability will be rolled over and re-issued at the prevailing price.

Eh, no.....most of it will be dealt with long before it matures - NTMA don't wait for the day of maturity before re-structuring.

Deleted User wrote: »

Your point about credit being cheap only holds true if the credit will always be cheap. What cost if you are wrong?

Unquantifiable costs - all I'm saying is that the collective wisdom of the markets suggests that, barring an unforeseen external shock, low interest rates are with the Eurozone for the foreseeable.

Deleted User wrote: »

No, I think the markets are more than happy with how we have been attempting to recover from the effects of the financial crash. Our ability to repay is related to our state's well being of course.

It doesn't take much for them to change their mind, as Theresa May found out last week. Policy changes such as "beginning to inflate the state again" with borrowed funds would be seen as a backwards step, and a step away from the path we've been striving towards.

All that happened last week was the birds starting coming home to roost - the wonder wasn't that Sterling 'suddenly' weakened, it was how didn't it weaken for so long after the Brexit vote.

Feasog Dearg

So much talk of gross pay and averages...

Simple exercise, folks. Go to taxcalc.eu and input any figure as a salary. Your own, make one up, what ever. Leave the drop down as PAYE worker, write down the net. Then, change the drop down to Public Servant and jot down the net.

Notice a difference? Thank FEMPI for this.

So, please consider that the gross pay does not equate to the same take home pay across the sectors. At €40,000 it's €31167 (PAYE) Vs €29442 (PS) - €1725, or €143.75 less per month. At €50000 it's €36267 (PAYE) Vs €33552 (PS) - €2715, or €226.26 LESS per month!

So, the more a PS worker earns, the more is taken via FEMPI - which goes back into the coffers.

So, by all means, compare Private Sector and Public Sector. But base at least some of your conclusions on net (take home) pay.

Graham

Feasog Dearg wrote: »

So, by all means, compare Private Sector and Public Sector. But base at least some of your conclusions on net (take home) pay.

Not really a valid exercise if the gross pay for doing the same job is significantly higher on one side of the comparison.

K-9

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

Nope, we really aren't.

Indeed, Ireland's tax to GDP ratio is low compared to Scandinavian countries.

Of course people can point to how our GDP figure is over inflated, that means our Government debt figure is under estimated.
We're employing extra Guards and other public servants which is needed after moratoriums, redundancies and retirements but the country needs to be careful it doesn't grant increases that it could well be seeking back in a few years.

It's arguable how sustainable the Corporation tax revenues are plus we're at record low interest rates for borrowing.

We can't just assume this will continue for years like we did with property taxes.
The other problem is we are chipping away at tax rates while increasing expenditure.

K-9

A person on minimum wage doesn't pay much tax and that was reduced after the budget. That's is the compensation for our high cost of living.

realitykeeper

Jawgap wrote: »

People don't want to just 'survive' - it's nice to have a bit of a life!

If people keep demanding more they will get a life of weeping and gnashing of teeth. It should be obvious for the good of everyone in the country, the population must act a a collective focused on hard work for little or no pay as well as voluntary suffering from those who cannot cope.

This country (along with the entire western world) is heading toward disaster at breakneck speed. A sudden and dramatic u-turn in our self obsessed ways may deflect our national nemesis.

newwan

Jawgap wrote: »

People use the comparison with EU and OECD rates to claim PS workers here are paid over generously, but they only use the headline rates and ignore the net rates because it doesn't suit the argument.

Just like people use the CSO figures for a good ol' fashioned PS bashing but conveniently ignore them when they show that the coffers are not nearly as empty as the popular press makes out or shows that they are empty for reasons other than to do with the assumption that it's down to weak revenues.

So if everyone agrees there is plenty of money to pay for the PS wage rise do you agree that the PS is already very well paid?

Harvey Normal

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

Nope, we really aren't.

I think before we paid that tax we'd like to see that paying the existing tax works. And extra 2000 a year from someone on 2.5 times income wouldn't get very much from the HSE. Look at how they treated the vast sums spent in the boom.

Btw we have a much higher marginal rate at the level it comes in at than Sweden which is in many cases the worst of both worlds.

oscarBravo

Harvey Normal wrote: »

Btw we have a much higher marginal rate at the level it comes in at than Sweden which is in many cases the worst of both worlds.

That's an inevitable consequence of the fact that all taxes seem to be measured by a single yardstick: whether it's progressive or regressive. Progressive good; regressive bad. Any move towards making taxes less progressive is pounced upon as "attacking the most vulnerable".

Which is true as far as it goes, but another metric is being ignored: sustainability. Sure, it's superficially good for the most vulnerable to have their direct tax burden reduced: but it's not good for them when the entire economy goes down the crapper because of an unsustainably narrow tax base.

maryishere

Graham wrote: »

and yet we still have one of the best paid public sectors in Europe and PS pay rates continue to outstrip their private sector equivalents. That's before you start looking at the rock solid job security, gold-plated pensions and other associated PS benefits.

Correct. And why should our public servants in Dundalk be paid nearly double what public servants in Newry are paid? Its time a realistic look was made at public sector pay in Ireland. It is one of the few countries in the western world where the equivalent of a years average public sector pay could buy a fine 2 bedroomed apartment in many counties. Sure Dublin is out of line, but thats because the government has located too many jobs there....and promised de-centralisation but then did not follow through on it (leading to the estates which were built for de-centralised workersbecoming ghost estates ).

tayto lover

maryishere wrote: »

Correct. And why should our public servants in Dundalk be paid nearly double what public servants in Newry are paid? Its time a realistic look was made at public sector pay in Ireland. It is one of the few countries in the western world where the equivalent of a years average public sector pay could buy a fine 2 bedroomed apartment in many counties.

Because PS's in the south have to pay for things that PS people in the north get for free i.e. health treatment.

maryishere

maryishere wrote: »

Correct. And why should our public servants in Dundalk be paid nearly double what public servants in Newry are paid? Its time a realistic look was made at public sector pay in Ireland. It is one of the few countries in the western world where the equivalent of a years average public sector pay could buy a fine 2 bedroomed apartment in many counties. Sure Dublin is out of line, but thats because the government has located too many jobs there....and promised de-centralisation but then did not follow through on it (leading to the estates which were built for de-centralised workersbecoming ghost estates ).

Because the cost of living in northern Ireland is a lot cheaper than the south.

maryishere

bubblypop wrote: »

Because the cost of living in northern Ireland is a lot cheaper than the south.

The way to fix that is to reduce vat rate in the south so. Two wrongs do not make a right. And the cost of living is not THAT much higher in the north to warrant such a disparity in p.s. wages north and south.

tayto lover

maryishere wrote: »

The way to fix that is to reduce vat rate in the south so. Two wrongs do not make a right. And the cost of living is not THAT much higher in the north to warrant such a disparity in p.s. wages north and south.

It is not higher in the north, it is much lower.
Try buying a new car here then go up there and see the difference.

If you are going to compare wages here with wages there then you have to take EVERYTHING into account.

PeadarCo

oscarBravo wrote:

Which is true as far as it goes, but another metric is being ignored: sustainability. Sure, it's superficially good for the most vulnerable to have their direct tax burden reduced: but it's not good for them when the entire economy goes down the crapper because of an unsustainably narrow tax base.

I think this hits the nail on the head with regard to the general conversation on taxes and spending. There's no talk about sustainability. With regard public pay rates and services in general any increases have to be sustainable in the medium term. If they re not its going to another case of pay cuts or job losses in a few years time. Its the same with regard taxes. Unfortunately the political system encourages and rewardsshort term thinking and that hasn't changed since 07.

maryishere

tayto lover wrote: »

Try buying a new car here then go up there and see the difference.

If you are going to compare wages here with wages there then you have to take EVERYTHING into account.

Most private sector workers I know here in the Republic never buy new cars. However, some things are cheaper here than in N. Ireland : for example, property tax...their house rates are higher than our property tax. Petrol / diesel was cheaper here too.
Why are public servants in Dundalk paid near double what those paid in Newry are? They can both shop online, fly from their choice of northern or southern airport on holidays etc. Our our Dundalk ones are looking for even more now?

tayto lover

maryishere wrote: »

Most private sector workers I know here in the Republic never buy new cars. However, some things are cheaper here than in N. Ireland : for example, property tax...their house rates are higher than our property tax. Petrol / diesel was cheaper here too.
Why are public servants in Dundalk paid near double what those paid in Newry are? They can both shop online, fly from their choice of northern or southern airport on holidays etc. Our our Dundalk ones are looking for even more now?

You are wrong about the cost of living.
Things are dearer here, weekly shop, medical and dentists etc.

K-9

bubblypop wrote: »

Because the cost of living in northern Ireland is a lot cheaper than the south.

And that's why somebody on minimum wage here pays little in tax and PRSI.

maryishere

tayto lover wrote: »

You are wrong about the cost of living.
Things are dearer here, weekly shop, medical and dentists etc.

A lot of people in Dundalk are doing their weekly shop in Newry, or online. And you can go to a dentist in N. Ireland or Hungary if you want to. I know many things are more expensive here, but is that enough to warrant such a massive premium public sector workers in the Republic are already paid?

tayto lover

maryishere wrote: »

A lot of people in Dundalk are doing their weekly shop in Newry, or online. And you can go to a dentist in N. Ireland or Hungary if you want to. I know many thinks are more expensive here, but is that enough to warrant such a massive premium public sector workers in the Republic are already paid?

So you think that 23K is good money for a nurse or garda starting off?

Graham

tayto lover wrote: »

So you think that 23K is good money for a nurse or garda starting off?

It's not far from the norm for starting off in any career.

What happened to the rent allowance that formed part of the package offered to the Gardai?

Green Peter

The government are arrogant beyond belief, they have treated public servants as ****e it's now coming home to roost

tayto lover

Graham wrote: »

It's not far from the norm for starting off in any career.

What happened to the rent allowance that formed part of the package offered to the Gardai?

I don't know.
But any allowance is not pay. It's an allowance for a particular purpose like overnight allowance and such.
I get subsistence allowance if i'm away for a day or two. If somebody told me it was pay then i'd have words with them.

JustTheOne

Increase in wages=increase in expense for people using the services.

Thanks SF, AAA, PBP.

tayto lover

JustTheOne wrote: »

Increase in wages=increase in expense for people using the services.

Thanks SF, AAA, PBP.

I don't think there's too many nurses, garda or teachers in any of those organisations.

JustTheOne

tayto lover wrote: »

I don't think there's too many nurses, garda or teachers in any of those organisations.

They support the luas workers, Dublin bus etc.

Now everyone is on the bandwagon.

Graham

tayto lover wrote: »

I don't know.
But any allowance is not pay. It's an allowance for a particular purpose like overnight allowance and such.
I get subsistence allowance if i'm away for a day or two. If somebody told me it was pay then i'd have words with them.

I think €4000 towards your accommodation is significant however you label it.

tayto lover

JustTheOne wrote: »

They support the luas workers, Dublin bus etc.

Now everyone is on the bandwagon.

Wanting parity, restoration of wages and fair play is hardly a bandwagon.

tayto lover

Graham wrote: »

I think €4000 towards your accommodation is significant however you label it.

It's still not pay and there's obviously a reason for it.

Graham

tayto lover wrote: »

Wanting parity, restoration of wages and fair play is hardly a bandwagon.

Parity with who, it's certainly not the private sector. That particular 'partnership' was dropped fairly rapidly when the private sector tanked.

evolving_doors

maryishere wrote: »

Its just greed plain and simple, coupled with the excessive power of the unions in some sectors, with no power in others. According to the c.s.o., our average public sector wage is over €49k, which is way more than the average private sector wage. Indeed our public servants in Dundalk are paid nearly double what the public servants in Newry are paid. Then you get people on golden pensions. Irish society is very unfair.

1. You're comparing a waiter in the private sector to a surgeon in the public sector.
2. Public sector are more educated to third level standard (in percentage terms). So shock horror, more education =mo money (on average)
3. Public sector pension arrangement is no longer what you claim , it's career average.
4. Quote a starting salary scale for teacher / ignore the fact that majority are on pro rata (part time) for a number of years.
5. No matter what they get paid it's invariably too much for some.
6. Come join us if you think it's all milk and honey. It would be illogical to stay where you are in the private sector if you can cream it over the fence with us.

tayto lover

Graham wrote: »

Parity with who, it's certainly not the private sector. That particular 'partnership' was dropped fairly rapidly when the private sector tanked.

Teachers wanting parity with other teachers.

I didn't hear many of you shouting when the PS were being cut oddly enough.
I'm not a PS worker myself but I can see how unfair it was. I want the best people as nurses, garda, fire officers, teaching etc. Too many nurses have left.

maryishere

tayto lover wrote: »

restoration of wages .

Public sector wages in '05 -'06 were based on unsustainable tax receipts from stamp duty etc in the property sector.....and a discredited government at the time. Those days are all gone sunshine.

Cookie_Monster

Deleted User wrote: »

This has almost nothing to do with the question I have asked you.

Simple logic. We are currently running (still) a deficit. If PS Pay is to be increased, Government Revenues must increase by proportionally more than that pay increase.

Where are the revenues coming from that you hope to put towards Public Sector pay increases?

You state that they can be met. They cannot, without increasing revenues. I'm open to it. Just tell me where the money comes from.

Well, you don't have to increase revenues...

It's simple innit, lets just cut services. AGS for example, don't need new cars, lets cut back on training, lets not hire more staff or provide current staff with the required equipment. Lets close more rural stations and close bigger ones overnight to save on overtime and power.

Plenty of cash saved to pay more now
never mind that the service has been devastated (further)

Jawgap

newwan wrote: »

So if everyone agrees there is plenty of money to pay for the PS wage rise do you agree that the PS is already very well paid?

Very well paid?

I can only really speak for the bit of the PS I worked in and no, relative to what my private sector colleagues were getting it was not well paid, which is why I bailed.

However, it was very well paid relative the average industrial wage. Don't worry though, the guy who replaced me is on a lot less, but unfortunately he has a fraction of the experience and what might be described as entry level quals......but at least he's cheap.

maryishere

Gebgbegb wrote: »

1. You're comparing a waiter in the private sector to a surgeon in the public sector.

No, I'm comparing the architect or secretary or cleaner or admin assistant in the
private sector compared to the architect or secretary or cleaner or admin assistant in the public sector.

And why should the public sector vet in Fermanagh be paid half of the public sector vet in Donegal?

JustTheOne

tayto lover wrote: »

Teachers wanting parity with other teachers.

I didn't hear many of you shouting when the PS were being cut oddly enough.
I'm not a PS worker myself but I can see how unfair it was. I want the best people as nurses, garda, fire officers, teaching etc. Too many nurses have left.

The average garda wage is 56,000 excluding their pension they don't have to pay into.

tayto lover

maryishere wrote: »

No, I'm comparing the architect or secretary or cleaner or admin assistant in the
private sector compared to the architect or secretary or cleaner or admin assistant in the public sector.

And why should the public sector vet in Fermanagh be paid half of the public sector vet in Donegal?

We've been through that already moonbeam.

tayto lover

JustTheOne wrote: »

The average garda wage is 56,000 excluding their pension they don't have to pay into.

Do we have to go through that spiel about averages yet again.

I get 100 K, you get 30 K and Joe gets 20 K.
The average is 50 K but Joe is unhappy and you're not chuffed either.

Graham

Jawgap wrote: »

I can only really speak for the bit of the PS I worked in and no, relative to what my private sector colleagues were getting it was not well paid, which is why I bailed.

To be honest that's probably the way it should be and fair play to you for moving on.

It used to be a trade off working in the PS. Wages were lower than the private sector but the other benefits including a great pension made up for the differential.

maryishere

JustTheOne wrote: »

The average garda wage is 56,000 excluding their pension they don't have to pay into.

The starting salary in the PSNI is £19,383. Its a lot more dangerous job - they are all recommended to still check under their car (and in the 4 wheel arches) for booby trap bombs each time before they get it to it, whatever the weather, for example. And Gardai here complain?

tayto lover

maryishere wrote: »

The starting salary in the PSNI is £19,383. Its a lot more dangerous job - they are all recommended to still check under their car (and in the 4 wheel arches) for booby trap bombs each time before they get it to it, whatever the weather, for example. And Gardai here complain?

You said you work in Dundalk and 2 garda were murdered there in the last few years. Shame on you for making little of them.

Jawgap

Graham wrote: »

To be honest that's probably the way it should be and fair play to you for moving on.

It used to be a trade off working in the PS. Wages were lower than the private sector but the other benefits including a great pension made up for the differential.

Again, I don't know where people get the idea of this great pension?

My 10 years benefits from my PS pension are less than my benefits from another (UK/US) pension in which I've about 8 years worth of contributions.

I'd love to take a credit from my PS pension and port it to a private scheme but there's no mechanism allowing you to opt out.

Cookie_Monster

tayto lover wrote: »

It's still not pay and there's obviously a reason for it.

it's a benefit and should be included though, just like the pension or any other benefit that people receive as part of a package. There aren't many professional level jobs these days that just provide pay and nothing else...