The argument was made to me earlier in this discussion that workers on above average wages were willing to take bigger cuts to protect their less well paid colleagues. Does this nursing ballot and a similar one by the doctors show that to be false?Originally Posted by micls
Only basket case countries got to the IMF. I read one article that suggested the IMF would look for at least 30% cut in public sector wages - I would doubt they would care about whether that implemented by pension levies, pay cuts or cuts in numbers.
Spot on Pete. Argentina is a good example. Cuts in wages as you described, plus 20% redundancy in the public sector IIRC.
Probably increased taxes too, something this bumbling Government won't make a decision on without the Taxation Commission (made up of vested interests) to hide behind. There's two sides to this, but the Government is successfully making it about public sector pay, as to talk about taxes is to admit their own mistakes in making the public finances too reliant on consumption taxes.
If you attack me with stupidity, I'll be forced to defend myself with sarcasm.
No doubt taxes need to go up in addition to cut-backs. It's ridiculous really as whilst a tax rise will never be popular, it's not like it will be an unexpected surprise.
But the FF Ard Fheis reinforced what a bunch of spineless backslappers they are.
If you look at the taxation commission membership, there is not a hope it will come out with a progressive taxation system. Too many banker, stockbrokers and accountants plus IBEC - the very section of society that lead us into this mess. It'll be regressive taxes, with lots of avoidance measures to keep them in work. More fool Hayes and the farmers for agreeing to have anything to do with it. It's the perfect Quango for Lenihan and Cowen to hide behind, whilst being sure not to upset their paymasters.
If you attack me with stupidity, I'll be forced to defend myself with sarcasm.
The INTO is the teachers organisation not the nurses.
Personally I am willing to take the hit but I think it's structured awfully. Those on higher wages should be paying more and those on lower wages should simply have a pay freeze.
As it stands the pension levy proposal is badly thought out and laid out.
Im repeating myself now but I also have a problem with the large amount of temporary teachers(also into members) taking the same cut as permanent teachers.
Dunno about nurses but is the doctor one not the junior doctors? Who are now being asked to work the same overtime but not get paid for it?I cant see anyone standing for that if true. Im far from certain on that though just hearing snippets from different people
All this talk of the super-wealthy bearing the burden of any tax increase is wishful thinking.
There simply isn't enough suitably high earners to make a difference to the overall tax revenue. You'd have to put the marginal rate close to 100% which would probably push them out of the country.
It's may not be morally right, but it's the reality. Maximum tax benefit is gained through taxing the average earner.
It'd be progress if they just paid any of the bloody burden.
Tax exiles should have to pay a minimum contribution to keep their citizenship, and/or the time in the country before tax is due should be severely reduced.
Maybe teachers are different, but in the wider public sector they're not entitled to pension, but are expected to pay for it. Overtime and Allowances are not pensionable, but they count towards the levy too.
Last edited by dahamsta; 02/03/2009 at 12:51 PM.
If you attack me with stupidity, I'll be forced to defend myself with sarcasm.
I know its a complicated system wheich I have little hope of understanding but surely some of those temp teachers are filling for for others on career breaks? I believe the limit is currently 5 years which seems far too long. I believe Michael Martin was or is on a "career break" from his teaching position which is a just an abuse of the system.
I know tax increases are on the way primarily on PAYE rates but I can't see how the public service numbers can be maintained in the coming years as tax increases required would be too much. Even if Labour are in government they will realise that a pay cut or cut in numnbers will be required next year.
Some yes. There are many reasons for being temporary.
You are entitled to 5 years career break over the course of your career.It can be used all together or separately
...and their support too. RTE interviewed an amount of them over the weekend and found exactly one who didn't come across as a certifiable moron. He at least admitted he was only there for the crack in evenings.
One woman, perhaps giving a sneaky peak into her own world, opined that Enda Kenny couldn't run a dog fight.
" I wish to God that someone would be able to block out the voices in my head for five minutes, the voices that scream, over and over again: "Why do they come to me to die?"
Martin is on "parliamentary leave". Up until last month a number of TDs were still claiming some sort of allowance. I'll try and google it (it was in the Indo)
Noel Dempsey resigned lat month too
54,321 sold - wws will never die - ***
---
New blog if anyone's interested - http://loihistory.wordpress.com/
LOI section on balls.ie - http://balls.ie/league-of-ireland/
PAYE changes would effect the public sector as well, so on top of the levy they'll be paying a relatively big contribution as well as the inevitable productivity that recruitment embargo's mean.
At least with Labour there would be a plan, and some semblance of it being fair. I've said it before, the main problem with the Levy is the weighting, an average of 7.5% whilst those on the highest rates pay an average of 9.2% is a nonsense - they're the people who benefit most from the pension and earn the most to be able to afford it. The pension is based on the standard state contributory pension that everyone can get, plus an extra amount* - the higher up the scales, the bigger the extra amount.
*another of the great Public Sector Pension myths - when they talk of the actuarial cost, they don't take into account the state contributory pension that makes up part of the final pension.
If you attack me with stupidity, I'll be forced to defend myself with sarcasm.
Well said Macy.
In Trap we trust
Amen to that. Failing that, they shouldn't be allowed into the country. We'd be a lot better off without the likes of Tony O'Reilly anyway.
That is a very naive view. If you don't pay people like the Financial Regulator enough you won't get the best. Oh wait.....
And we've the best politicians money can buy...That is a very naive view. If you don't pay people like the Financial Regulator enough you won't get the best. Oh wait.....
If you attack me with stupidity, I'll be forced to defend myself with sarcasm.
Sorry about mixing up the teachers and nurses, the acronyms are similar. I think my point is stands though.
I agree with you and the others saying that the higher paid should take more of the burden but as it is groups like the teachers and junior doctors, both of whom are on well above the average wage, are threatening strike over the current amount. I don't see them volunteering for an even bigger cut, as was claimed above.
Yup. Other countries are jealous when they see them at EU meetings.
Posting Permissions
Quote
Bookmarks