Public service pay cut?

tayto lover

GreeBo wrote: »

Clueless indeed.

How many private workers are in a union?

Only the wise ones. The others are suckers.

GreeBo

tayto lover wrote: »

You won’t find unqualified people in the PS.

Yep, just incompetent and job-4-life.

tayto lover

GreeBo wrote: »

Yep, just incompetent and job-4-life.

Maybe you missed the boat then.
Jealousy is a killer.

fliball123

fliball123 wrote: »

It all depends on how far you want to go back if you go back pre 2001 they are increases then we borrowed billions to at least doubled what we pay for PS pay and pensions in about 4 years what a couple of rounds of benchmarking and what ever your having yourself . If you talking post 2012 they are restoration. The fact is neither pay rises nor pay restoration can be afforded currently. No point arguing semantics get to the core of the issue as in:

240 billion in debt
20% less people no longer paying into the income tax pool and are now taking money away from it with welfare.
Another 15billion (at least) will be needed next year
Another covid wave most definitely on the way judging by what was going on over the weekend with loonies acting like they will never get a beer again
Then off course Mr Brexit is looming large

But sure lets give you lads both pay restoration and pay increments because your L'Oreal "your worth it"

We don't forget the numerous scandals of the PS over the last 2 decades
From Garda blowing into their breathalyzers to smear tests that killed a host of ladies..Then of course you have the current stupidity of thing like teachers unions spouting their members can not go back to work but its ok for everyone else to go back and pay taxes to pay them for their summer holidays.

But yeah lets just keep throwing money at you guys maybe some day we will get to a magic figure and have a system that actually working for its citizens.

The quicker we get a second wave and get the IMF back in to do the cutting that all governments don't seem to have the stomach to do.

do you know why national debt figures are never expressed in absolute terms by anyone who is to be taken seriously?

i do

do you know why you pick 2001 as a base rate for what you think public service salaries should be?

i do

as worthless- and refuted several times in thus thread alone- as those two starting points are, they are all that i can find worth tackling from your big long rant

what dyou do yourself? earnings, grants claimed, pension, expenses and perks, training, what is your customer base and when was the last time you used a publicly underpinned or provided service?

and we'll get right to the nub of it, i suppose:

when was the last time your employer asked a repetitive boards.ie contributor with an ace to grind what your salary should be?

because that's really the gist of all these threads.

wah wah wah i want what they have now that things have changed. or i want them not to have it.

wah wah wah my industry hasnt put pensions or unions into place for me nobody should have them.

wah wah wah everybody's ceo should he paid several multiples of their lowest paid employee why isnt the public service like that wah wah wah


wah wah wah the public sector isnt profitable wah wah wah

jesus the same clownish whines and rants. if you threw a political starter terms textbook into a pigpen youd hear approximately the same quality of stuff coming out of it a day later.

the govt everyone votes and pays for will strike a deal with the employees via the usual mechanisms lads.

ye arent up to the detail, why dont ye just relax.

salonfire

tayto lover wrote: »

Only the wise ones. The others are suckers.

Really?

How do you explain the fact that the highest paying jobs in IT, law and Finance which are not unionized?

tayto lover

salonfire wrote: »

Really?

How do you explain the fact that the highest paying jobs in IT, law and Finance which are not unionized?

Check out the bottom of the scale, shop and factory workers where there are no unions allowed.

fliball123

fliball123 wrote: »

This is where the likes of you are not getting it. The private sector is being decimated as you sit there typing companies going to the wall are ramping up quicker than 2008. But you may well get the payrises this year and when we get our second wave and the the 240 billion and 20% unemployment rate ramps up to uncontrollable figures the IMF will be in doing the cutting for us. Then of course you lads can go on crying until 2040 for pay restoration again for the cuts from 2021.

responded to your use of randomly and poorly chosed figures in my last post

only other thing to note is that

ahem

you are incorrect to refer to pay restoration as anything other than restoration

and as stated it is difficult to take you seriously- now its not the only reason butbit is egregious at this stage- when you cannot take correction on this oft-stated point

if you want to be wrong and just have an audience to rant to, you are demonstrating that.

personally id try to do better if i actually wanted people to engage.

tayto lover

Deleted User wrote: »

responded to your use of randomly and poorly chosed figures in my last post

only other thing to note is that

ahem

you are incorrect to refer to pay restoration as anything other than restoration

and as stated it is difficult to take you seriously- now its not the only reason butbit is egregious at this stage- when you cannot take correction on this oft-stated point

if you want to be wrong and just have an audience to rant to, you are demonstrating that.

personally id try to do better if i actually wanted people to engage.

“Take him seriously???” Ha ha he’s flying that kite for years now and getting nowhere.
His hands must be freezing.

fliball123

fliball123 wrote: »

this has been proven to be myth 60Billion out of the 200billion was from the banks who were allowed to by public sector government ministers and of course a banking regulator who was asleep at the wheel. so you guys can take your potion out of that as well. The other 140bilion was for the ramping up of unsustainable welfare and public sector pay and pensions. So you bailed yourselfs out a hell of a lot more than you did the private sector

nothing i said was incorrect nor even open to interpretation

so your response, which is an opinion on a tangent, seems fairly worthless to me tbh, sorry

fliball123

fliball123 wrote: »

7% for a contribution to a defined benefit that very few in the private sector can afford. Pay the full costs please

totally incorrect, of course

that was a 7% *increase* in what was alreqdy being paid, and as has been explained to you many times theres a lot more going on in pension contributions and outcomes than that

but genuinely, again, why would anyone take you seriously when after all this is explained to you by anyone that knows better, you revert to the childish position from which you began?

seriously like?

fliball123

fliball123 wrote: »

You only have to look at the income tax receipts from the years in the last recession to see how much less people were paying so they either got pay cuts or got job cuts either way the private sector got decimated during those years.

who said otherwise?

random tangent, the point i challenged was that not "everybody" lost their jobs and in fact hundreds of thousands did just fine, private and public alike.

poor attempt at a rejoinder from you when you cannot just accept that and need an unrelated rant to deflect

fliball123

tayto lover wrote: »

You’d have to go to the Black Economy to find some cheaper and probably unqualified tradesman.
You won’t find unqualified people in the PS.

That argument holds no water. You need a plumber urgently.

Perhaps but you have the option of not getting the job done and therefore not paying. In the public sector a lot of areas and employees are not fit for purpose, redundant or no longer needed and we are overpaying for them. Like I say an organisation that has 99.99999% increments for clock watching or for time served is a ridiculous waste of money , you could have someone working in there years and just going up the incremental scale and we have to pay for it.

fliball123

Deleted User wrote: »

do you know why national debt figures are never expressed in absolute terms by anyone who is to be taken seriously?

i do

do you know why you pick 2001 as a base rate for what you think public service salaries should be?

i do

as worthless- and refuted several times in thus thread alone- as those two starting points are, they are all that i can find worth tackling from your big long rant

what dyou do yourself? earnings, grants claimed, pension, expenses and perks, training, what is your customer base and when was the last time you used a publicly underpinned or provided service?

and we'll get right to the nub of it, i suppose:

when was the last time your employer asked a repetitive boards.ie contributor with an ace to grind what your salary should be?

because that's really the gist of all these threads.

wah wah wah i want what they have now that things have changed. or i want them not to have it.

wah wah wah my industry hasnt put pensions or unions into place for me nobody should have them.

wah wah wah everybody's ceo should he paid several multiples of their lowest paid employee why isnt the public service like that wah wah wah


wah wah wah the public sector isnt profitable wah wah wah

jesus the same clownish whines and rants. if you threw a political starter terms textbook into a pigpen youd hear approximately the same quality of stuff coming out of it a day later.

the govt everyone votes and pays for will strike a deal with the employees via the usual mechanisms lads.

ye arent up to the detail, why dont ye just relax.

So tackle the ball not the man. The facts and figures have been presented to you and you cant dispute and you want to talk semantics. So come on you know all, tell us all the wisdom of continuing down the line with borrowing to pay a subset of workers a pay rise while we are on the cusp of possibly the biggest global recession the world has seen, Please enlighten us , you have the mic go take center stage.?

fliball123

tayto lover wrote: »

“Take him seriously???” Ha ha he’s flying that kite for years now and getting nowhere.
His hands must be freezing.

The figures are their to be seen you lads keep saying I am wrong with no proof that I am. The figures of the debt, the people joining the dole and how much we are borrowing is there. I cant understand why you are saying my figures (they are not mine I believe organisations like the CSO) are wrong, why would the CSO be lying?

fliball123

fliball123 wrote: »

If a sparks, builder, or plumber etc is charging us to much to do a job we have the choice to change and get a cheaper one or not to get them in at all. We cant do this with the public sector we are stuck with a very out dated, over payed and over complicated system that is nearly unworkable for it citizens.

ppl who have made this assertion have been asked where theyd like to move to

gwan?

fliball123

fliball123 wrote: »

So tackle the ball not the man. The facts and figures have been presented to you and you cant dispute and you want to talk semantics. So come on you know all, tell us all the wisdom of continuing down the line with borrowing to pay a subset of workers a pay rise while we are on the cusp of possibly the biggest global recession the world has seen, Please enlighten us , you have the mic go take center stage.?

i posted a long post, was there anything you could refute in it without it being your demonstrably uninformed and tired opinion or a rant

nb its not an increase its a restoration, thats a fact and not open to interpretation

fliball123

fliball123 wrote: »

The figures are their to be seen you lads keep saying I am wrong with no proof that I am. The figures of the debt, the people joining the dole and how much we are borrowing is there. I cant understand why you are saying my figures (they are not mine I believe organisations like the CSO) are wrong, why would the CSO be lying?

what country are you looking at that has it all sorted and hasnt been affected by covid?

the country that you can opt out of tax in, the country with maximum efficiency and world class services for free?

that is totally grand to live in and again, remember, your test here, not likely to see an economic bump after a generational pandemic?

why arent you already living there?

because- to bring the link back- anyone who makes the infantile point that " i cant just choose another public service system!" is incorrect

you can go and choose any one of them you like.

why havent you?

nb ive already challenged you on your use of an absolute for national debt, any rejoinder to that?

GreeBo

GreeBo wrote: »

Clueless indeed.

How many private workers are in a union?

salonfire wrote: »

Really?

How do you explain the fact that the highest paying jobs in IT, law and Finance which are not unionized?

Seriously? Talk about making a tit out of yourself.

How did you two find boards but apparently can't use Google?

Did either of you follow the links I posted?

I'll put it here for you to read AGAIN

https://touch.boards.ie/thread/post/113948487

Now, perhaps you two could stop making absolute tits of yourselves in these threads by getting some, even small amount of information before engaging. Evidence of your own claims would be nice too and if I really push the boat out, read the actual thread. Numerous users have pointed out the errors in these childish and too be honest, uneducated comments.

runawaybishop

fliball123 wrote: »

Perhaps but you have the option of not getting the job done and therefore not paying. In the public sector a lot of areas and employees are not fit for purpose, redundant or no longer needed and we are overpaying for them. Like I say an organisation that has 99.99999% increments for clock watching or for time served is a ridiculous waste of money , you could have someone working in there years and just going up the incremental scale and we have to pay for it.

Those don't sound like any of the people I work with. Making stuff up doesn't help your arguments

GreeBo

tayto lover wrote: »

Only the wise ones. The others are suckers.

Suckers for not being in a union?
I sense a theme here.

tayto lover wrote: »

Maybe you missed the boat then.
Jealousy is a killer.

Yeah, I'm jealous of not being in a lower paid, unionized, public sector job alright.:rolleyes:

GreeBo

runawaybishop wrote: »

Those don't sound like any of the people I work with. Making stuff up doesn't help your arguments

So in your opinion there are no people in the public sector who are incompetent and just phoning it in everyday?

GreeBo

GreeBo wrote: »

So in your opinion there are no people in the public sector who are incompetent and just phoning it in everyday?

what is the possible relevance of a question like this about a sector of hundreds of thousands of people

genuinely now

salonfire

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

Seriously? Talk about making a tit out of yourself.

How did you two find boards but apparently can't use Google?

Did either of you follow the links I posted?

I'll put it here for you to read AGAIN

https://touch.boards.ie/thread/post/113948487

Now, perhaps you two could stop making absolute tits of yourselves in these threads by getting some, even small amount of information before engaging. Evidence of your own claims would be nice too and if I really push the boat out, read the actual thread. Numerous users have pointed out the errors in these childish and too be honest, uneducated comments.

Not sure what you're supposed to be saying here. I did not deny unions exist in the private sector.

I said that the highest paying jobs in the private sector are typically non union.

GreeBo

Deleted User wrote: »

what is the possible relevance of a question like this about a sector of hundreds of thousands of people

genuinely now

Erm if you remove these people there will be more money for everyone else who isn't incompetent without having to magically find more money from the budget?

Despite the knee-jerk reactions from the obvious PS posters, no one is saying that everyone is useless, just that there are a larger than should be number of people taking a large amount of money from *your* hands while also being useless. Their only skill is not being fired from a job that its pretty impossible to get fired from.

(I honestly thought that was obvious, but there ya go)

salonfire

salonfire wrote: »

Not sure what you're supposed to be saying here. I did not deny unions exist in the private sector.

I said that the highest paying jobs in the private sector are typically non union.

Evidence. You saying, means nothing and what's your point?

GreeBo

GreeBo wrote: »

So in your opinion there are no people in the public sector who are incompetent and just phoning it in everyday?

In your opinion, have you anything to say about the private sector unions that I have shown you twice now?

Anything to say about the union action you laughed at that I have shown you?

salonfire

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

Evidence. You saying, means nothing and what's your point?

On the phone right now, but it's generally accepted the highest paid sector are IT and finance. These are not unionized, eg Google or Facebook, etc.

salonfire

salonfire wrote: »

On the phone right now, but it's generally accepted the highest paid sector are IT and finance. These are not unionized, eg Google or Facebook, etc.

I'm on my phone all week. Can't use Google search on yours?

even so, again, so what if very well paid people who are treated well elect to not join a union? That's their right. What does it matter here? The claims are that unions are a public sector thing, that's nonsense.

salonfire

salonfire wrote: »

Not sure what you're supposed to be saying here. I did not deny unions exist in the private sector.

I said that the highest paying jobs in the private sector are typically non union.

and the richest people in the world tend not to use food banks

isnt it amazing

salonfire

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

I'm on my phone all week. Can't use Google search on yours?

even so, again, so what if very well paid people who are treated well elect to not join a union? That's their right. What does it matter here? The claims are that unions are a public sector thing, that's nonsense.

Thanks for proving my point.

If they are well paid, they are not losers which was the assertion by another poster that I was challenging.