Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Civil Service Mileage Rate

245

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,384 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    You know those private sector businesses cover their costs by selling products to consumers, right?



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    AJR, Kane Tone - don't waste your time or energy trying to reason with this kind of attitude.

    It's a wasted effort, and will just fall on deaf ears.

    "Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience"



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,384 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Ah,the tired old TikTok videos argument. I thought maybe we might have left that behind with Covid. But apparently not- some people seem to think that medical staff should never get a coffee break or a lunch break.

    I have personal experience of medical staff pulling double shifts to cover for ill colleagues (the ones who put their lives on the line to keep you safe, literally in some cases) in double PPE, for zero payment, just to keep patients alive. You’re welcome btw.


    Social Protection did a lot more than‘just doing their job’ in putting together a new scheme to keep people off the breadline in days, and enrolling tens of thousands of people in weeks.

    As did the HSE, building an entire vaccination infrastructure structure in every county in a few weeks, and rolling out one of the fastest vaccination campaigns in Europe. You’re welcome, btw.


    And who exactly were these staff that got a year off on full pay doing nothing?



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    this

    report for off topic shitposting and move on is my approach these days

    sher on my fat salary my time is worth more than engaging the likes



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,485 ✭✭✭Yorky


    Never argue with public servants you mean. They will defend the indefensible to the enth degree



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,485 ✭✭✭Yorky


    Aka just doing their job, if they were working that is, and a slack time for the majority due to cancellation of elective surgeries et al. Then having the absolute gall to request -and even accept - a €1000 tax free payment. It's just unbelievable.

    If you read my posts rather than cherry-picking points you'd see I've already given examples of public servants who were unemployed on full pay. Teachers also, and no a cobbled together worksheet mass emailed does not consistute "working".

    Using evocative terms to describe people simply doing their jobs is trite. Some worked diligently but that's what they're paid to do. If they happened to be a bit busier for a couple of years out of the 40 year scheme, then the public got a bit of extra value, that is all.

    Lots had a cushy time over the last two years and many did no work at all.

    I don't recall any public servants offering to surrender their unearned wages and claim the PUP like those in the private sector raising the taxes to pay for these people.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,485 ✭✭✭Yorky


    Feel free to ignore and focus on doing the job you're publicly paid to do then.

    If there's nothing wrong, there's nothing to defend



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,384 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    “just doing their job”?

    So pulling double shifts to cover for sick colleagues wearing double PPE the whole time is “just doing their job”?

    Staying away from their families for months on end to avoid bringing the deadly virus home to their parents, their children, their partners is “just doing their job”?

    Literally dying or ending up with Long COVID for just doing their jobs is “just doing their job”?

    So I’m not sure if you managed to work out why those elective surgeries were cancelled? It wasn’t because the team spent five minutes on a TikTok video. It was because the staff and beds were reassigned to deal with very sick people, so that we never had to turn anyone away from Intensive Care for lack of resources, as happened in many other countries.

    You’re welcome, btw.

    You have literally no idea what work those teachers, museum staff and others were doing over that period. It is pure idle speculation on your part, spreading BS rumours to suit some idealogical agenda.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,485 ✭✭✭Yorky


    You can use as much absurd hyperbole to describe the pandemic that never was but it won't change anything.

    The only people spouting such nonsense as you are those with a vested interest in propping up the not-fit-for-purpose public sector. It's no wonder the government are increasingly privatising formerly public services when intransigent attitudes such as yours typify everything that's wrong with the public service.

    I have every idea what those "employed" in the sectors listed were doing-they had a great time off work on full pay for 18 months but kept a low profile to prevent public opinion turning against them.

    The public are generally ignorant of the enormity of the cost of public sector pay-circa €25Bn, more than the welfare budget, and a superannuation bill which is mainly funded by the taxpayer with the recipient paying a small contribution towards it and now an 18 month covid holiday on full pay..It's absolutely disgraceful when that revenue could be put to good use rather than making those in the protected sector wealthy and those in the private sector are paying for it and had to get by on the PUP.

    One day the public will wake up and see the public service for what it is and then there might be a chance of serious reform



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,384 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    The pandemic that never was! Would be hilarious if it wasn't so insulting to the families of those that died and those that continue to struggle with the effects of long Covid and to the 800-odd people still in hospital today. But meybe they're all just a figment of my imagination.

    I've been hearing guff like this for 20 years on various bulletin boards from a small core of bitter and twisted moaners. Maybe it's just one bitter and twisted moaner, who knows. It seems that the public haven't 'woken up' in those 20 years, including the sharpest recession and the deepest cuts to public expenditure in living memory, but sure I guess that's the public fault, right? They're not all as clever as you.

    I don't know if you get your ideas from watching 1970s British movies or what, but the CS you describe bears no relationship to the reality that many of us have been living for years. It is just a figment of your twisted imagination.

    My current management challenge is the bunch of staff I’ve inherited that have carried over leave entitlements of between 20 and 70 days, because they’ve been too busy to take leave. Just one of the bunch had leave requests declined. The others didn’t look for leave to ensure that their jobs got done. I’m working to make sure they take their entitled leave and start working down the backlog. That’s the reality of public service today.

    Give us a laugh and tell us where you got your 'every idea' of those who did nothing for 18 months from?

    You can be sure of one thing - no-one in the civil service would have come up with such a dumb idea as expecting staff to pay for their own work travel expenses, punishing those staff who happen to travel on safety inspections or quality audits or revenue audits or building control inspections or whatever. Silly, bitter, and twisted nonsense.

    Post edited by AndrewJRenko on


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 183 ✭✭Rket4000


    I'm always bemused by the argument that PS employees' salaries are funded by the taxpayer...... Given that PS employees are very definitely taxpayers too...... and those on the higher salaries are paying huge amounts of tax!



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,485 ✭✭✭Yorky


    I'm always bemused by this lack of "understanding" that public servants paying tax is just giving the taxpayer a small rebate from their publicly funded salary. And the taxpayer is still on the hook for paying the majority of the cost of the gold standard superannuation schemes the public servants get



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,485 ✭✭✭Yorky


    I didn't know the PS had a propaganda department until this thread.

    The public sector is so grossly overstaffed that almost everyone is either directly or indirectly benefitting from the overpaid and underworked public service so there obviously hasn't been any public opprobrium.

    But with a cyclical economic bust looming, hopefully this time the media will bring in to sharp focus the cost and gross inefficiency of the public sector and when everyone in the real economy starts losing their livelihoods again, the protected sector will be the subject of their backlash. It just might precipitate the systemic reform chronically required by getting rid of the malignant unions and making the purpose of the public sector about service delivery again rather than for the benefit of its so-called servants.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,384 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Ireland comes out around the middle of the EU tables for public service staffing, so your ‘grossly over staffed’ claim is just another figment of your bitter and twisted imagination. Did a civil servant run off with your missus or what?




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,980 ✭✭✭Degag


    This is a ridiculous assertion. One could not seriously suggest that anyone should travel on their own dime, outside of their regular commute for work purposes.

    I'm in the private sector and would regularly enough have to travel half way up the country to Dublin and back for work purposes. €50+ per journey and considerably more in current times. I don't pay for this nor should i have to. Neither should anyone in the Public sector.

    I guess there could be caveats to this in both sectors - i.e Exec level who are hired on large salaries (6 figures +) where the salary is reflective of their role and need to travel.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,391 ✭✭✭AyeGer


    Yorky i have an example for you of a family member who works for the Public Service, due to her particular specialty she was sent to the other end of the country to sit on an interview panel. These interviews lasted 2 weeks. She had to travel about 400 KM round trip and stay in hotel 8 nights over the 2 weeks. Under your harsh plan she would have been working for nearly nothing by the time these costs were paid for out of her wages for those 2 weeks.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,485 ✭✭✭Yorky


    In that extreme example, travelling expenses would be justified.

    It would be reasonable for public servants to meet their own travelling expenses up to a certain threshold based upon their pay scale and then they could get reimbursed for their out of pocket expenses above that.

    But not the current system where travel and subsistence payments are treated as a highly profitable and tax-free second income funded by the public purse.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,699 ✭✭✭Gusser09


    Public Servant here. I do a lot of KM's per year as part of my role. Probably 10-12,000. I was on a site yesterday 400km's or so round trip.

    I've told my boss I won't be doing it again until either rates go up or diesel goes down.

    If public servants start doing this then a lot of critical tasks and projects will be delayed resulting in bigger losses and costs for the tax payer. I'm not throwing the toys out of the pram or anything and understand that the money has to come from somewhere but it's just mad at the moment trying to keep diesel in the car.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,485 ✭✭✭Yorky


    EU tables are irrelevant. The EU will eventually disband then Ireland will be back to its 1950s state. This is a small agrarian country currently paying the bills out of being a corporate tax-haven and compounding the national debt. It has no natural resources or intrinsic wealth so having a burgeoning public sector with obscene pay rates is pitifully stupid. But don't you be worrying about such trivia and just keep pushing for your mileage increase.

    Missus? Bit of an assumption there. You're in the PS where gender doesn't exist so you'd be better be careful your boss isn't reading this. Oh wait, there's no accountability in the PS so you're grand.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,699 ✭✭✭Gusser09


    Jaysus. You're going to be rightly pissed off when the new pay agreement is published in a few months. Couldn't come at a better time for public servants with inflation through the roof. I'd have thought a few months ago we'd get another 3-4 percent over 3 years. I think it'll be a bit higher now and we will get a decent bump straight away too.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,384 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    EU disbanding?

    If we’re waiting for the EU to disband for me to get my commupance, I’m on safe ground.


    You haven’t, by any chance, noticed what’s happening on the eastern border of the EU recently?

    And anyone can have a missus, male or female. The only one making gender assumptions is you.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,485 ✭✭✭Yorky


    I know all about it unfortunately, all generously involuntarily funded by the SMEs and those in the real economy for those in the protected sector



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,485 ✭✭✭Yorky



    I know those in the public service are completely out of touch but surely you must even have a vague awareness of the pensions time bomb and the unsustainable indebtedness of EU countries?

    And I don't mean just mean the state pension for the plebs-even the superannuation scheme for the elite aka public servants is in jeopardy.

    But again, don't worry about such trivia and enjoy the imminent non-performance related pay rise and keep pushing for that mileage rate increase.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,391 ✭✭✭AyeGer


    I agree with you on one thing, the travel rates are too high, they make it so people are delighted to get out on the road. It should be a bit less so it just feels like a reimbursement rather than a real boon. There is no doubt it is being abused by some staff.

    Did you ever apply for a job in the public service Yorky.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,384 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    It’s funny to be lectured on being “completely out of touch “ by the lad who wants people to pay for their own business travel, because he’s listened to one too many Newstalk rants.

    We had a pension reserve fund some years back, but it had to be emptied to pay the debts run up by the “real economy “.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,485 ✭✭✭Yorky


    Lad? Tsk tsk another assumption.

    I clarified in this thread up to a certain level. It's generally a good idea to read replies before commenting.

    Never listened to Newstalk so no idea what you're talking about.

    You mean paying the debts of people who over-borrowed and then couldn't or wouldn't repay. And the pension reserve fund was a drop in the proverbial ocean and in no way was sufficiently funded.

    Public sector employees should either contribute the full cost of their future "pension" (actually it's reduced pay) or put on a Defined Contribution scheme and let the market dictate their future pension like everyone else.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,391 ✭✭✭AyeGer


    The unions are looking for an increase in pay now for public servants due to the increase in cost of living. I’d suggest a pay rise of no more than 5% or 6% and a slight reduction in T&S rates. That would be fair for the working people in the PS and the reduction in T&S rates would help lessen the incentive to abuse Travel & Subsistence.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,485 ✭✭✭Yorky


    It should only be out of pocket and receipted reimbursement for fuel et al not "a bit less".

    It's a tax free second income for many public servants and is massively abused. Again, something the general public aren't aware of as they're too busy focusing on the fiscally minuscule cost of government rather than the black hole that is the public service.

    By asking if I've ever applied for a job in the ps suggests that if I was personally benefitting from it I'd have nothing to say and my motivation is simple begrudgery. This is a not unsurprising response and says a lot about how people think ie "if it's so good sure go and get a job in it".

    Whether I benefit directly/indirectly/not at all from the largesse of the public purse doesn't change my point.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,485 ✭✭✭Yorky


    If the self-employed and SMEs put up their prices by 5 or 6% they'd have no business. The cosseted PS should forego forego at least 5-6% to help those in the real economy who generate the revenue to pay their wages.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,384 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    You haven't been following what's been happening with inflation then?

    Oooh, there's an interesting move in your position. Now we can be graced with payment for fuel (though it would be impossible to link fuel usage to any particular journey). Should we pretend that we're grateful now with your largesse, your majesty?

    Where exactly is it 'massively abused'? Some factual evidence would be great.

    No, I mean paying the debts of banks and property developers, your beloved 'real economy' according to yourself. That's where the pension reserve fund, according to yourself. Maybe you got too distracted obsessing about CS mileage to actually notice what happened?

    I'm not sure if you understand employee contracts either. Suggesting that employees should contribute the full cost of their pension somewhat negates the value of that aspect of their remuneration. You know that no employer can single-handedly decide to change the terms of an existing employment contract, I'm sure, so yet again, it is another silly, completely impractical suggestion.



Advertisement