Economic Recovery

Anyone hear Jack O'Connor this morning on Newstalk?

Hilarious. Whilst deep down he had a point (that nobody in business or Goverment is admitted that they fu.. messed up over the last 10 years in creating and feeding an unsustainable bubble), it had precious little to do with solving the problem.

4 day week proposal by the unions is interesting but ultimately doesn't actually deliver anywhere near 20% savings. Its also protects the lazy and incompetent as equals to those who are actually productive in their jobs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OneRedArmy

4 day week proposal by the unions is interesting but ultimately doesn't actually deliver anywhere near 20% savings.

---

What is the 4 week proposal?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OneRedArmy

4 day week proposal by the unions is interesting but ultimately doesn't actually deliver anywhere near 20% savings. Its also protects the lazy and incompetent as equals to those who are actually productive in their jobs.

---

I've long given up on Newstalk - it's come a long way since the days of Dunphy, never mind McWilliams....

Why wouldn't it deliver anywhere near the 20% savings? Gross wages are cut by a fifth if you do a four day week. I doubt it'd get through though, as too many couldn't afford that kind of cut. But I'll admit I haven't read or heard the proposal in detail at this stage. Would agree with your second part though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Macy

Why wouldn't it deliver anywhere near the 20% savings?

---

Because the fixed cost element of employing someone in a full-time position doen't reduce when you reduce their salary (pension, HR costs, admin, benefits etc. etc.).

Pensions would be linked to what you're working. I'd accept the others, but they wouldn't change with any pay cut would they?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Macy

Pensions would be linked to what you're working. I'd accept the others, but they wouldn't change with any pay cut would they?

---

Are not public sector pensions defined benefit? I would assume that means if you retire at Grade X your retirement allocation is linked to the salary of a Grade X going forward? I think this is why they say 5% rise in wages means 5% rise in costs of pensions? Defined contribution would have no such link.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pete

Are not public sector pensions defined benefit? I would assume that means if you retire at Grade X your retirement allocation is linked to the salary of a Grade X going forward? I think this is why they say 5% rise in wages means 5% rise in costs of pensions? Defined contribution would have no such link.

---

It's based on the last years salary, and there's a formula for working out how much of that you get. Full pension is based on 40 years service, but anytime you take unpaid leave it reduces the amount or increases the time you have to work to get the full pension.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OneRedArmy

Anyone hear Jack O'Connor this morning on Newstalk?

Hilarious. Whilst deep down he had a point (that nobody in business or Goverment is admitted that they fu.. messed up over the last 10 years in creating and feeding an unsustainable bubble), it had precious little to do with solving the problem.

4 day week proposal by the unions is interesting but ultimately doesn't actually deliver anywhere near 20% savings. Its also protects the lazy and incompetent as equals to those who are actually productive in their jobs.

---

Surely this is an og by the Unions... simple logic is if they are saying that all P/Servants would be prepared to work a 4 day week and thus take 20% off the wage bill, then it follows that they can manage in 4 days what it presently takes them 5 days to do.... ergo the Public Service is overstaffed by 20% !!

It's an og anyway, as there's no way significant numbers could afford the cut. I'm not sure what they were thinking, although I think it was Begg who flew this kite first, and he's brutal in recent years in saying things out of place.

From a PR perspective the unions should not have said cuts was off the agenda. They should not have commented on before discussions as just showing their inflexibility now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pete

From a PR perspective the unions should not have said cuts was off the agenda. They should not have commented on before discussions as just showing their inflexibility now.

---

Social Partnership is an Pariah to Democracy and a totally inflexible solution to the countries dire economic situation, I am beginning to think that Brian Lenihan is starting to see this, unfortunately the Buffoon Cowen being a conservative intransigent Stubbornite cannot see this and will therefore be the shortest sitting Taoiseach in state history.

Social partnership was one of the main factors that got this country out of the mess in the 80's. It was during the boom times that it probably wasn't necessary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Macy

Social partnership was one of the main factors that got this country out of the mess in the 80's. It was during the boom times that it probably wasn't necessary.

---

I can't see how anyone could argue that social partnership didn't serve the country well until very recently, although there's no doubt that its easier to keep all sides happy when there is a lot of money sloshing around.

But equally its hard to see unions rolling over and meekly agreeing to the governments requests as it would call into question their raison d'etre.

I can't personally see it surviving.

Brian Lenihan penned piece in the Times today has him suggesting the social partners are not governing but the government are informing them in advance so everyone is on board. :rolleyes:

Surely when he has all these difficult important decisions to make he should just get on with it & not take months "informing" his "partners" ?

Anyone see Prime Time show last night? George Lee, who in fairness I have time for, didn't really come up with any solution other than saying the government need a plan. My dog knows that, but when pushed by M o C, he didn't put any bones on it at all. Maybe he wasn't expecting the question but surely he must have had an idea. I know it's not his job but...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fr Damo

Anyone see Prime Time show last night? George Lee, who in fairness I have time for, didn't really come up with any solution other than saying the government need a plan. My dog knows that, but when pushed by M o C, he didn't put any bones on it at all. Maybe he wasn't expecting the question but surely he must have had an idea. I know it's not his job but...

---

I watched it with interest, I have to say the sanguine Estate Agent was quiet funny a bit like an Atheist whistling past the graveyard, but its fair to say George Lee fairly chastised him.. Back to the programme its quiet clear we are in deep deep trouble driven by a cosy cartel of Banks, Politicians and Developers -That much is clear - But the second half of the programme regarding the so called "Smart Economy" as a solution to our economic problems was a little bit too aspirational and ambiguous.. Are we heading for a Depression? - I think so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reality Bites

But the second half of the programme regarding the so called "Smart Economy" as a solution to our economic problems was a little bit too aspirational and ambiguous

---

I disagree - that man with the perpetual motion machine will be the solution ot all our problems. We will be the new arabs, selling energy to the rest of the world and we'll rich, rich, rich I tell you...


(check it out:



http://www.steorn.com/

"Orbo produces free, clean and constant energy - that is our claim. By free we mean that the energy produced is done so without recourse to external source. By clean we mean that during operation the technology produces no emissions. By constant we mean that with the exception of mechanical failure the technology will continue to operate indefinitely.

The sum of these claims for our Orbo technology is a violation of the principle of conservation of energy, perhaps the most fundamental of scientific principles. The principle of the conservation of energy states that energy can neither be created or destroyed, it can only change form."
)

[QUOTE][code]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reality Bites

I watched it with interest, I have to say the sanguine Estate Agent was quiet funny a bit like an Atheist whistling past the graveyard, but its fair to say George Lee fairly chastised him.

---

Had to laugh when he said a positive was the falling oil price making us more competitive, did he assume Ireland was getting special prices or something?? The other one was the farmers buying land and then he mentioned he had a very good girl looking after residential! It was better than the fools and horses on Uk GOLD!

The Romer-Bernstein report in the States says that “a dollar of infrastructure spending is more effective in creating jobs than a dollar of tax cuts.”

Do people think this is a good way to maybe prevent a depression.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OneRedArmy

I can't see how anyone could argue that social partnership didn't serve the country well until very recently, although there's no doubt that its easier to keep all sides happy when there is a lot of money sloshing around.

---

The didn't serve the workers all that well during the boom. Many would've been better going it alone for the minimal legislative benefits compared with the productivity increases over the same time. The employers side made hay, and they still want it to be the workers that take the pain now (I don't see IBEC, ISME et al offering anything in the recent debates, it's all about reducing their burden at the expense of workers).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OneRedArmy

But equally its hard to see unions rolling over and meekly agreeing to the governments requests as it would call into question their raison d'etre.

---

There seems to be an opinion that they can't negotiate pay cuts anyway. Indeed the INO are saying they legally don't have the right to negotiate a pay cut, and saying that the Government don't have the right to impose it on individual workers.