Public service pension levy announced

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeilMcD

Yeah the regulator was told to put them. ESB have asked to have them reduced but was refused. ESB makes up 40 per cent of the market now. So to blame high prices on them is simply wrong and to blame it on the company paying their workers what the agreed last year is even worse.

---

Especially when the Government is one of the bloody social partners that agreed the national agreement in the first place! I think approx 40 companies paid at the same time as the ESB, i.e. on time in line with the national agreement.

It has happened in every market that the Government has interferred with to try and bring in competition. Competition is supposed to lead to lower costs and a better service. Our telecoms infrastructure is an embarrassment, prices for all utilities have gone up to encourage people to enter the market, health insurance has gone up as the Government keep on moving the goal posts on the VHI. We're too small a market for competition and ultimately it's the Government backers who end up making the money and taking the benefit.

Public sector unions might be protesting against the government cuts but I can't see them getting much support from unemployed people if they picket the Social Welfare offices. That would be a serious own goal.

Simple Maths seems to be missing from the skills of the Unions leaders. While some public services are paid by users most revenue for the state comes from taxes. Less private sector jobs means less revenue for the state. To close the gap need to either reduce costs or increase taxes.

Now that the issue has died down not sure what the unions solution to pension levy is. Seems they have agreed 2 billion of cuts required but are not suggesting an alternative. If pension levy on low paid is cut that will mean bigger levy for those at the higher scales - would the unions favour that?

It seems public sector workers pay 6.5 of their gross wages to pension + another 4.5% for average earner does not seem unfair. I pay similar amount to my company pension & no chance will ever get close to public sector guaranteed pension. I would guess my employers pension better than most.

The unions did provide an alternative to the government. One which saved €1.4 billion from public pay roll and raised taxes for higher earners in public and private sector as part of social partnership

IBEC bolted and the government changed he goalposts

Average worker now pays 13% into pension now Pete

Oh and if we're talking about lack of maths skills, how about this levy resulting in people on 30k a year losing more than those on 42k. Sound fair to anyone?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dodge

The unions did provide an alternative to the government. One which saved €1.4 billion from public pay roll and raised taxes for higher earners in public and private sector as part of social partnership

---

How much was cutbacks and how much was higher taxes? The tax increases are likely to come on top of the cuts, not instead of them.

The €1.4 billion was all cutbacks, but focussed on higher earners. The increased taxes would've doubley (should be a word) effected highly paid public servants and apparently all public service unions had agreed to it

Leaving aside the issue of taxes then, what you're saying is that the Unions offered cutbacks equal in size to the current ones but with a different distribution?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bald Student

Leaving aside the issue of taxes then, what you're saying is that the Unions offered cutbacks equal in size to the current ones but with a different distribution?

---

exactly

Without wanting to steal Dodge's thunder, I believe that is the case, yes. There probably wouldn't be cuffufal over the levy if it was more reasonably distributed - an average of 7.5% with the very top only paying 9.2%, and the net effect as outlined by Dodge above.

Still good to know the levy is going for the greater good - disadvantaged children with learning disabilities have their teachers cut, banks get €7bn to bail them out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Macy

Without wanting to steal Dodge's thunder, I believe that is the case, yes. There probably wouldn't be cuffufal over the levy if it was more reasonably distributed - an average of 7.5% with the very top only paying 9.2%, and the net effect as outlined by Dodge above.

Still good to know the levy is going for the greater good - disadvantaged children with learning disabilities have their teachers cut, banks get €7bn to bail them out.

---

Public sector workers exist to implement the policies of Government.

Government screwed up (and are ultimately responsible for this mess), ergo your pay suffers.

Similarly, bank senior executives screwed up, so my pay has suffered regardless of my own performance.

It's no more complicated than that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OneRedArmy

Public sector workers exist to implement the policies of Government.

Government screwed up (and are ultimately responsible for this mess), ergo your pay suffers.

Similarly, bank senior executives screwed up, so my pay has suffered regardless of my own performance.

It's no more complicated than that.

---

Your pay has suffered, but what of the execs. I wouldn't necessarily argue against a hit, but it's how it's done and who pays most is the issue. That should be a concern for all workers in any sector

It's laughable for the senior execs of IL&P expecting some kind of pat on the back for a 10% cut in pay, for example. Ditto the Government ministers, with two pensions who expect ordinary civil servants to take the bulk of the pain whilst they take a meesly hit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dodge

The €1.4 billion was all cutbacks, but focussed on higher earners. The increased taxes would've doubley (should be a word) effected highly paid public servants and apparently all public service unions had agreed to it

---

But that would be a 1.4 tax increase for public & private. Given maybe 20% of workers are public thats not much of a cut for the public sector.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pete

But that would be a 1.4 tax increase for public & private. Given maybe 20% of workers are public thats not much of a cut for the public sector.

---

You didn't really read the full post, did you pete

€1.4 billion was to be saved solely from the public service bill (as now, but with the distribution being fairer)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dodge

You didn't really read the full post, did you pete

€1.4 billion was to be saved solely from the public service bill (as now, but with the distribution being fairer)

---

The levy has to be adjusted to iron out anomalies that mean a worker earning 39,000 ends up paying more than someone on 48,000 due to increased tax relief for the person in the higher band. That's just plain ridiculous, it should definitely be weighted more towards the higher earners.

ICTU repeatedly refer to their 10 point plan as something the Government should focus on. I just read it.

It's the most aspirational, pie-in-the-sky work of fiction I've ever read. It also has no numbers in it. By all means advance a Social Solidarity Pact, but you can't ignore the financial gap or address it with glib generalizations like "people should contribute in line with their ability to do so".

The fact remains that the public sector needs to reduce it's staff costs. If laying people off is verboten, then reducing per employee cost in the only alternative. Whilst expecting the senior execs to bear the brunt of this might be equitable, the numbers rarely add up due to the public services organizational structure.

The basis of that plan worked for Sweden. And they are saying that should be the basis of discussions not that it's the finished artical. Maybe we should use the Government and IBEC plans as starting points? :rolleyes:

7.5% average, with a top rate of only 9% shows there is some room for movement on making the pension levy much more equitable.

First imapct of yesterdays strike

Quote:

---

The Department of Social and Family Affairs has today warned that some benefit payments will be issued later than normal next week due to the one-day strike which took place yesterday.

Members of the Civil, Public and Services Union (CPSU) were involved in industrial action against the pensions levy yesterday, leading to the closure of social welfare offices around the State.

Due to the strike, 4.500 customers, who would normally get their illness benefit or occupational injury benefit payment this Monday will not receive it until the following day.

---

God help civil servants if the IMF come in. Pensions levies will be the least of their worries. If anyone wants to see the nightmare scenario, look into the austerity packages the IMF implement as payback for a bailout. Everything gets cut, except of course taxes.

Sorry for my ignorance but what is IMF?

INTO are balloting for strike action this week. I think the proposed dates are the 29th/30th of March

The International Monetary Fund. They're like a global lender of last resort for countries. In simple terms, if you need their help they'll be telling you how to run things.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Poor Student

The International Monetary Fund. They're like a global lender of last resort for countries. In simple terms, if you need their help they'll be telling you how to run things.

---

Ok. Thanks.