I don't think I said anything about about substancial increases. maybe mixing me up with different poster?Originally Posted by Dodge
If there are to be cuts it would seem more likely to hit admin rather than guards/techers/nurses.
Fair enough.
There won't be cuts. There'll be "natural wastage" and the first thing to go will be the various Quangos, semi state boards and maybe even the multitude of consultants now employed by the public sector bodiesIf there are to be cuts it would seem more likely to hit admin rather than guards/techers/nurses.
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/
Slightly disingenous to complain that averages are an unfair measure when used to reflect public sector pay, then immediately quote the same measure in respect of the private sector!
Really, instead of having to wait for this report to be published, the government should have the competence to make the relevant decisions themselves.
Instead, we have a Taoiseach, who has lost 4 polls in 14 months, we have a Tanaiste, who doesn't seem to be able to save, let alone attract jobs here, we have a Finance Minister who can't run a prudent budget, and social partnership talks that achieve little.
The SW minister estimated at budget time last year, that unemployment would be c290k in 2009, while the ESRI projected it to be 8%. Instead, tomorrow's figures will result in 400,000 claiming, and a rate of 12%, resulting in more huffing and puffing in the Dail chamber, but after Friday night, the Dail docks for almost 3 months. God only knows how bad things will get in the meantime.
Whats your point in relation to public sector expenditure?
That the government can't be relied on to make the right decisions for the country.
It's as Michael Ring said a few weeks ago: "You're like a football team going for relegation, everything you do is wrong".
Averages alone are rubbish, but it at least shows how you can use them to suit your arguement - there's a lot of bs about how great things are in the public sector compared to the private sector. In the wider public sector, people are worried about their employment prospects and their terms and conditions of employment - there might be more security, but it isn't absolute.
If you attack me with stupidity, I'll be forced to defend myself with sarcasm.
It seems almost certain the report will not be published at least not in the short term. In the meanwhile there will continue to be leaks presumably from the affected departments (they have preview of their own area) & the government takes a holiday for 2 months.
It is hilarious the government keeps telling us they are making the hard decisions when they have delayed decisions at every opportunity. If they need to cut spending or raise taxes better to do it now than delay.
The Dail has another 1-2 weeks left before break until SEPTEMBER. Apparently won't even be a cabinet meeting from early July to late August.
Think I read in one of the 'papers that the last cabinet meeting before the "recess" (made for puns by the way) is July 15th
I thought they resumed in mid-September actually so August would be an improvement. Of sorts...
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/
Time to stop messing about and for the Govt. to announce with effect from today a 20% reduction in all Public Servant's salaries (including judges) on the basis that according to last weeks IMF report, Public Sector salaries are now 20% higher than the private sector. That doesn't take into account the very generous pension costs that are provided almost gratis by the state.
IMO a 20% reduction is very fair, it would be a 40% reduction if the hidden cost of pensions funding and a "no redundency" premium as applied to public Sector wages in other countries was factored in... if they don't like it then they can resign and see if they can find a better paid job in the private sector... we've had benchmarking now's the time for retrenchmarking.
The IMF just took that from the ERSI report (from 2006) about graduates (which in itself used hourly rates rather than actual salary - for example it only took a teachers "in school" time if though that was all their work).
Pensions cost the state virtually nothing and are self funded through contributions (and that was before the levy). This will only change if there is a purge of numbers or a closing of these schemes to new members. You should tell the CIE & Dublin Bus workers about how they are safe from redundancy because they are in the public sector
Pension Levy, plus unpaid increases due in the last benchmarking (using the pension as the excuse) add up to more than your 20% "pension premium" anyway. And again, the public sector pension bill costs the state bugger all in reality since the pensions are paid from current contributions.
Pity more who now go on about how great life is in the public sector didn't get a job there before the recruitment embargo - they would've earned more and have a 100% safe job, well in your world at least.
Which compared like jobs and gave the increases based on that. The last round would've given further increases, but gave nothing to most because of the pension. I'd have no problem with a further round tbh - it won't happen because it suits people to use anecdotal "all the private sector are taking wage reductions" better than actual evidence.
If you attack me with stupidity, I'll be forced to defend myself with sarcasm.
Rather than engage in a long debate which i suspect would be worthless based on the fact that our views are so far apart... I'll agree to diagree with everthing you've stated above including your inference that the IMF don't know what they're talking about and the gem about how pensions cost nothing as they are self funded from current contributions... and hopefully IMO FF will have the nerve to implement everything recomended in the Bord Snip report...which I can assure you includes a 20% cut in Public Sector wage costs and other general spending cuts that will affect almost every person in the country...am looking forward to hearing the Public Sector pig squeal having had years of lazily grazing at the trough on the back of the rest of the workers of this countryThe IMF just took that from the ERSI report (from 2006) about graduates (which in itself used hourly rates rather than actual salary - for example it only took a teachers "in school" time if though that was all their work).
Pensions cost the state virtually nothing and are self funded through contributions (and that was before the levy). This will only change if there is a purge of numbers or a closing of these schemes to new members. You should tell the CIE & Dublin Bus workers about how they are safe from redundancy because they are in the public sector
Pension Levy, plus unpaid increases due in the last benchmarking (using the pension as the excuse) add up to more than your 20% "pension premium" anyway. And again, the public sector pension bill costs the state bugger all in reality since the pensions are paid from current contributions.
Pity more who now go on about how great life is in the public sector didn't get a job there before the recruitment embargo - they would've earned more and have a 100% safe job, well in your world at least.
Which compared like jobs and gave the increases based on that. The last round would've given further increases, but gave nothing to most because of the pension. I'd have no problem with a further round tbh - it won't happen because it suits people to use anecdotal "all the private sector are taking wage reductions" better than actual evidence.
Last edited by Calcio Jack; 01/07/2009 at 3:45 PM.
Moderator: Can we keep the thread on topic as opposed to general public v private debate.
I guess the report will be more specific about expenditure cuts than just across the board wage cuts as don't need months to come up with that proposal. I would expect suggestions to cut varies projects, departments & quangos. I would also guess they would look at those bodies, determine what they do & impact if they are closed. Shouldn't be too difficult to find savings in any large bureaucracy on that basis.
I have no doubt the government are sacred to implement cuts & probably hoping for miraculous global economic turnaround in the next few months.
Whatever about the size of the adjustment required, either benchmarking has to be made a two way process (with proper valuation of public sector t's&c's and benefits), or the benchmarking increases should simply be reversed.
Benchmarking was another crazy FF idea when they thought the money would never run out.
The IMF report references an ERSI report from 2006, which is on graduate pay differences. I made no such inference, just pointed out where they got the figures from.
Whilst it may not suit the current witchhunt, it is actually true. There was a Commission on Public Sector Pensions a few years ago - look it up.
I suspect it'll be the overall wage bill that'll be reduced rather than a further reduction in individuals pay anyway. If it was the type of reductions you are suggesting, the main result would be a further reduction in consumer spending that would ultimately leave everyone squealing like pigs.
If you attack me with stupidity, I'll be forced to defend myself with sarcasm.
[QUOTE=Macy;1185622]The IMF report references an ERSI report from 2006, which is on graduate pay differences. I made no such inference, just pointed out where they got the figures from.
Perhaps you haven't read the full report..what you are doing is taking out of context a selective quote to support your inference
Whilst it may not suit the current witchhunt, it is actually true. There was a Commission on Public Sector Pensions a few years ago - look it up.
paying the penions of retired Public Servants out of current spending is the way their cost is met... however saying that is an ok way of meeting their ongoing cost based on (1) demographics and (2) the levels of pensions payable is completely unsustainable , a huge drain on Govt day to day spending i.e. we have to borrow to pay both public Servants salaries and pensions, ergo the reason we need cut salaries and force Public Servants to fund the 'real' cost of their pensions like those in the private sector.... of course we could also give a choice to Public Servants don't bother to contribute to your pension whilst working and receive a reduced pension on retirement i.e. the samr deal that those in the private sector have
I suspect it'll be the overall wage bill that'll be reduced rather than a further reduction in individuals pay anyway. If it was the type of reductions you are suggesting, the main result would be a further reduction in consumer spending that would ultimately leave everyone squealing like pigs.
Correct but will give us a basis to regroup and rebuild our economy by coming from a low cost base...if we continue as is (borrowing 25 billion per annum) to pay excessive salaries and pensions to public servants , then in a few years we as a nation will be bankrupt , with little or no chance of recovery in our lifetimes.... so there are no easy painless solutions to this....however reducing Public Servants salaries and offering them the choice of paying for their own pensions or accepting a reduced one will at least go a huge way towards controlling our public finances and put both the private and public sector on an equal footing in terms of carrying the burden of solving this issue.... one other thing we'd need to enforce with the Public Sector is greater productivity , not saying they don't work hard now just that they need to work even harder and smarter in the future.[/B][/B][/B][/B]
Last edited by Calcio Jack; 02/07/2009 at 8:14 AM.
I see IMPACT are so worried by the prospect of the reports recommendations that they are mobilising for a strike vote already.
Let the backsliding begin...
How is it a drain on day to day Government spending, if it's paid out of contributions and existing funds? The net effect is zero in terms of Government spending. The first part of the pension is made up of the standard contributory pension, so between the pension contribution, prsi and foregone benchmarking 2, public servants are paying over 20% for their pensions. Over 30% if you see the pension levy as a pension contribution rather than a pay cut.
If you attack me with stupidity, I'll be forced to defend myself with sarcasm.
Because the amount coming into the fund from both prsi contributions and the amount paid by pension contribuions is no where near enough to fund the future liabilities.
In relation to the current day to day cost of pensions, you can't claim that it is cost neutral because pension costs are only one of the many different costs that Govt pays. You have to look at the totality of Govt day to day spending against the amount of revenue the Govt takes in via paye, vat etc. And as things stand this year we'll have a deficit of approx €25 billion. That is the context under which the need to cut all aspects of Govt spending needs to be viewed.
It's time for Public Servants to realise that thier cosy pay arrangements can't be ring fenced anymore but to accept that they have to take a hit along with the private sector to ensure that the money is available to fund other vital public services.
The bottom line is that the Govt is like a company that is in administration and needs to take some very heavey decisions to allow it to come out of administration or it goes bankrupt and the receiver (aka the IMF) takes over
Is this the Private Sector that saw pay increases of 4% according to the CSO
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/
Posting Permissions
Quote
Bookmarks