Leftfemme2 -
Instead of pontificating the amount you do why don't you actually answer some questions rather than spouting the usual left wing rubbish...
How are companies supposed to fund these defined benefit schemes???
Also considering bonuses were included in the private sector wages when calculating them for benchmarking why shouldn't benchmarking reflect that when they are gone?
That is not the main issue. The main issue, i.e what this thread is predicated on is whether Davy Stockbrokers salary cuts where an example to the civil service. I have addressed that issue on more than one occasion on this thread.Originally Posted by Respvblica
As for your allusions to the differences between Public and Private sector job validations within a downturn can you please point to the amount of jobs that where cut within the civil service during the last recession?
It can only be considered an anomaly if this the only time public sector jobs weren't cut during a recessionary downturn.
Also can you point to the percentage increase between GDP and numbers employed by the Civil Service during the past 20 yrs, extrapolate if they are linear and therefore inexorably interdependent. Contrast this to the curve of Private sector job creation in relation to GDP increase over the same period. This will establish an expansion ration between the two whilst giving you a point of reference to commence your contraction ratios. Of course they must all be linear otherwise your justification for job cuts falls down at the first hurdle.
'Hello. My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die.'
Inigo Montoya.
Blah blah blah, it is not up to the public sector to answer these questions. The Private Sector managed DB schemes in the past, they can do it again if they so choose. It is up to you to fight for a proper pension, not me nor anybody else in the public service. I also find it extra-ordinary that I actually have to try and convince you that you are entitled to a decent pension. The mind boggles.
That is not true and simply exposes your total ignorance to the subject at hand. Bonuses are not part of the Public sector payment structure, they are unique to the private sector. They are impossible to gauge as a percentage value and therefore could not be considered in any meaningful way. The proof is there for all to see in the CSO figures. Civil servants are still being paid less (Gross salary V Gross Salary) than their Private sector equivalents. That isn't taking into account the bonuses those private sector workers would have received since benchmarking 1 was implemented so how could they have been a factor when determining benchmarking in the first place?Also considering bonuses were included in the private sector wages when calculating them for benchmarking why shouldn't benchmarking reflect that when they are gone?
'Hello. My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die.'
Inigo Montoya.
I am a Doctor. A medical doctor not the spin variety which seems to populate this thread in the most appalling self-defeatist manner I have seen for some time. Either the PDs have perfected a brainwashing technique that convinces people it is actually in their interests to argue for a race to the bottom or we have a few over reaching economics students who believe that a few years study allows them to pontificate to everyone that they actually know best despite having the life experience of a piece of cheese.
'Hello. My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die.'
Inigo Montoya.
I would. They're either capable and qualified or they aren't. I'm sorry for your friend with the 3 failed businesses but she had the same opportunities as me and every other citizen of the state. She made her choices and obviously made bad ones. I made mine. Thats life. She made a judgment call and got it wrong - if fail to see how thats an argument against the civl/public service.Sure, tell that to all the labourers, restaurant and supermarket workers who have lost their jobs or are about to and they'll laugh into your face.I take that back. I just saw what Respvblica after you wrote. Yeah, I bought my home for 'security'(?!)- not because I wanted to move out into a home of my own. Hey Respvblica - newsflash - you can apply for the jobs in the civil service, from CO all the way up. In fact 2/9's of PO jobs are open recrutiment.. so why not try your hand and let us know how you get on...
Anyone here who thinks the civil service is that f****** great, go join it and put up with the crap we do and lets see what you think about the great wages and great pension yadda yadda.
A relative of mine has spent her inheritance on 3 failed business adventures(shops). Didnt go to well, and now she's out on the scrapheap with large debts still to pay. Another friend recently died of a heartattack after working through christmas due to job-pressure and getting the frighteners put on him because they told him he wasnt cutting it any more at 55. I guess its tough luck, but remember its the people taking risks, the people setting up businesses that generate the money that you eventually line your pockets with.
In reality those of us without degrees and high IQs or having good contacts dont have any hope of making it to civil service.
Anyone with a job for life is in a pampered group as far as I'm concerned.
I re-iterate, the PAS advertise public service jobs very regularly. Sutiably qualified people are welcome to apply, just as they are for accountancy jobs, doctors jobs etc. You seem to almost suggest anyone can do the job of a civil servant, quite simply not the case.
See you have no idea what you are talking about with regards to funding a DB scheme.....These schemes used to be in existence when the mortality age was far lower which meant on avg people were only claiming a pension for a far smaller period of time compared to when they were working and salaries were far lower than they used to be.....How you think you can justify and say that it is affordable to pay someone a pension based on what they will be earning in 40 years time when they haven't been contributing a fraction of the amount required to pay for it is delusional - Yes the issue with the public sector is that it is the private sector primarily who are funding the pyramid scheme that is the public sector DB scheme and when you see the estimated liabilities for this at 75bn Euro today and is expected to increase to 500bn by 2025 which the NPF will only be able to cover about 25-30% of.....Blah blah blah, it is not up to the public sector to answer these questions. The Private Sector managed DB schemes in the past, they can do it again if they so choose. It is up to you to fight for a proper pension, not me nor anybody else in the public service. I also find it extra-ordinary that I actually have to try and convince you that you are entitled to a decent pension. The mind boggles.
That is not true and simply exposes your total ignorance to the subject at hand. Bonuses are not part of the Public sector payment structure, they are unique to the private sector. They are impossible to gauge as a percentage value and therefore could not be considered in any meaningful way. The proof is there for all to see in the CSO figures. Civil servants are still being paid less (Gross salary V Gross Salary) than their Private sector equivalents. That isn't taking into account the bonuses those private sector workers would have received since benchmarking 1 was implemented so how could they have been a factor when determining benchmarking in the first place?Also considering bonuses were included in the private sector wages when calculating them for benchmarking why shouldn't benchmarking reflect that when they are gone?
With regards to your claim that bonuses can't be measured and taken into account please see Page 10 of the Benchmarking report which took them into account or read further down the report to pages 37-39 where they explain the methodology used to do so...
According to the CSO National Employment Survey for 2006, public sector workers enjoy average earnings which are 49% higher than the private sector. Research from the European Central Bank (ECB) found that between 1999 and 2006, average public sector pay in Ireland increased by 67%, while that in the euro area grew by just 22%. In the private sector, average pay in Ireland increased by 42% compared to just 15% in the euro area. Benchmarking has resulted in Irish public sector pay growing faster than any other country in the EU and actual pay levels overtaking those in almost every other OECD country."
As for your claim that there is no bonus scheme in the public sector can you please explain - Ministers blame civil servants for cock-ups and last week it was reported that the cream of the crop had received bonuses for achieving objectives.Three senior civil servants received over 20,000, with one securing a 25,000 pay-out. Most of the senior civil servants - 13 top Gardai and 12 Army officers - received bonuses of at least 10% of their salaries. These are based on self-assessment forms and a review by each Department's Secretary-General of how specific goals have been achieved. The Committee for Performance Awards (CPA), which monitors the awarding of the bonuses, warned Department heads not to be so generous with taxpayers' money after giving over 2.1m in special bonuses to 185 senior civil servants. The CPA also expressed its concern that in nearly one-third of government departments these annual objectives, or targets, have not been issued by April, when one-quarter of the performance period had elapsed. The bonuses were paid in respect of 2005 and in October 2005, new controls were introduced by Minister for Finance Brian Cowen on large IT projects and contracts for infrastructure, following a public outcry.
Pay - Irish Public Service 2001-2006: Salaries up 59%; Payroll up 18% - 38,000 additional workers and Pensions up 81.3%: Average industrial wage rise in the period was 19%.Irish public service salaries have risen by 59% in the past five years and the payroll has expanded by 38,000 extra staff.
Increases in public sector over the period due to general rounds total 2,479m (or 24.3%), special pay increases (primarily Benchmarking) total 1,328m (or 13%), and other factors (such as extra numbers) total 2,193m (or 21.6%).
The increase in the average industrial wage for a male worker in the period 2001-2005, was 19%.
The Exchequers annual wages and pensions bill increased sharply from 10.2 billion in 2001 to 16.2bn last year, with what has been termed "benchmarking" accounting for up to 1.32bn of the rise.
The number of public servants grew by 38,760, or 18%, since 2001 to 257,013 last January.
The education sector saw the biggest increase with pay costs rising by 65%. Health sector pay surged by 63% in the period, civil service salaries rose 48% and in the security sector they rose by 34.8%.
The average weekly earnings for non-health service public sector workers stood at 848 last September, according to the CSO.This was above the 754 for the banking and insurance sector and 579 for industrial workers.
Public sector pay rose by 8% in 2005 and pensions now account for 10% of the total pay bill, up from 8.6% in 2001. The pensions bill has increased from 876m in 2001 to 1,588m in 2006 representing an 81.3% increase over the period. The increase in the health sector has been 104%. Pensioners also received the special benchmarking increase of an average of 9%.
In August 2006, it was reported that senior civil servants had been paid average bonuses of 11,000 in respect of 2005.
Some of the largest performance-related bonuses were paid to senior Department of Health officials.
Three public servants received over 20,000, with one getting 25,000. Most of the senior civil servants - 13 top gardai and 12 defence forces chiefs - received bonuses of at least 10% of their salaries.
The bonuses are based on self-assessment forms and a review by each Department's Secretary General of how specific goals have been achieved.
The Committee for Performance Awards (CPA), which has a responsibility for monitoring the awarding of the bonuses, warned Departments not to be so generous with taxpayers' money after giving over 2.1m in special bonuses to 185 senior civil servants.
The CPA also expressed concern that in nearly one-third of Government Departments, the annual objectives, or targets, have not been issued by April, when one-quarter of the performance period had elapsed.
Their report shows that seven assistant secretaries in the Department of Health received an average of 13,730 each. In no case were any of the public servants rated for a zero award, although none received the maximum 20%.
A 532,000 bonus pot was shared among 46 senior staff at the Department of Foreign Affairs, most of whom are ambassadorsAgain plenty of evidence of bonus in the public sector world...
If you are going to post cut and paste at least accredit your source otherwise its plagiarism
The bulk of your post is lifted ver batum from a piece published in the Irish independent in November of last year, it was penned by Danny McCoy who is director of policy for IBEC. The article of course was subsequently rubbished by the OECD report which came out 6 months later. No mention of that from you though, just peddling more tripe as fact
We shall take his teachers claims for instance which are probably the most exaggerated of his claims. He claims Teachers here are being paid 35% than their UK equivalents?
The Average salary of a teacher in England and Wales is £34,000 or 43,000 Source
Even using McCoys ridiculous figure of a median salary of 48,000 for Irish teachers(ridiculous because the absolute top salary for teachers is 56K) that does not come anywhere near his claim of 35% difference. Its utter bunkum and indicative of the calibre of the Irish Independent that it published such lop sided spin without proofing or verification.
'Hello. My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die.'
Inigo Montoya.
This is getting tedious, now its the fault of higher mortality rates that your employer is ripping you off and denying you the right of a decent pension scheme. This is getting laughable and particularly tiresome having to wade through the reams of cut and pastes you have lifted from elsewhere.
Why don't you post the link so that everyone can see for themselves. I'm rather surprised you didn't cut and paste the relevant passage, it has been your want to do so of late.With regards to your claim that bonuses can't be measured and taken into account please see Page 10 of the Benchmarking report which took them into account or read further down the report to pages 37-39 where they explain the methodology used to do so...
This is simply untrue and whats more you know it. There are no CSO figures to back up the claim that Civil Servants are paid 49% higher than their Private Sector equivalents. Please stop lying. IBEC would have a field day in partnership and Unions wouldn't have a leg to stand on if that where the case. This totally exposes your ignorance to the process at hand and your willingness to swallow any contorted crap to attack the Public Sector worker.According to the CSO National Employment Survey for 2006, public sector workers enjoy average earnings which are 49% higher than the private sector.
Are you really McCoy by any chance? Who by the way most definitely isn't concerned about his job, and is on a DB pensions scheme.
Thats because we were playing catch up. Seriously if you dont understand what the figures represent stop quoting them.Benchmarking has resulted in Irish public sector pay growing faster than any other country in the EU
This little add on of yours is a complete lie. Put up or shut up.and actual pay levels overtaking those in almost every other OECD country."
CSO figures and the OECD report itself repudiates most of your claims
There you go again. You simply have no grasp of the concept of what the Civil Service is. Those bonus' apply to a tiny tiny minority of the top brass. 13 of the highest ranked Gardai out a force of 12,500, 12 of the highest ranked officers out of a force of 10,500. No body else within either organisation received a bonus because there was no facility to pay them a bonus. You lumping in the top 0.1% of an entire organisation to demonstrate that a bonus scheme exists for that organisation is particularly disingenuous bordering on haphazardly dishonest. These are grades along with other senior Civil Servants that are outside the pay agreements and have their own body (The Review Body on Higher Remuneration in the Public Sector) which examines their pay and conditions and issues awards accordingly.As for your claim that there is no bonus scheme in the public sector can you please explain -[b] Ministers blame civil servants for cock-ups and last week it was reported that the cream of the crop had received bonuses for achieving objectives.Three senior civil servants received over 20,000, with one securing a 25,000 pay-out. Most of the senior civil servants - 13 top Gardai and 12 Army officers - received bonuses of at least 10% of their salaries.
As is said this is getting tiresome. You have shown yourself to be completely against workers rights and are arguing for a race to the bottom under the guise of the nation interest. I suspect you have more than a passing regard for IBEC or are possibly in their employ. Either way you and your opinions will not be heard within a mile of the talks so really what you offer here is totally irrelevant, only information that is completely irrefutable will be considered, not the spin you offer which as I have shown time and again can be easily blown out of the water. Its a mixed blessing that although your ranting is largely limited to a politically irrelevant website, its a pity that such obvious bias exists and that you have swallowed every utterance of IBEC as absolute gospel.
'Hello. My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die.'
Inigo Montoya.
Spare me the scientific gobbeldygook! I'd prefer that peoples jobs, even pampered public service one, were not dependent on statistics and curves. Thats were your benchmarking came from -Yuk!That is not the main issue. The main issue, i.e what this thread is predicated on is whether Davy Stockbrokers salary cuts where an example to the civil service. I have addressed that issue on more than one occasion on this thread.
As for your allusions to the differences between Public and Private sector job validations within a downturn can you please point to the amount of jobs that where cut within the civil service during the last recession?
It can only be considered an anomaly if this the only time public sector jobs weren't cut during a recessionary downturn.
Also can you point to the percentage increase between GDP and numbers employed by the Civil Service during the past 20 yrs, extrapolate if they are linear and therefore inexorably interdependent. Contrast this to the curve of Private sector job creation in relation to GDP increase over the same period. This will establish an expansion ration between the two whilst giving you a point of reference to commence your contraction ratios. Of course they must all be linear otherwise your justification for job cuts falls down at the first hurdle.
All we need to do, is ensure that the conditions of employment are as fair and flexible as does in the private sector. Workers have rights, but if their is a shortfall in public revenue, the government should be able to make redundancies. Those formerly employed by the state can then go and find another job like everyone else.
As it is many public servants are in effect untouchable - would you agree?
Health workers, teachers, police, top civil servants cannot be touched. Why, because they are essential services? We need to be more flexible and dynamic in our thinking for the future.
To be honest I hate the partnership principal. It smacks of the big boys, the unions, IBEC, the elites getting together and slicing the cake up between them. They are not serving the country at large, but themselves. Joe Citizen who doesnt belong to the union or doesnt have a big inheritance has to fight for himself and often against them. Workers rights need to enforced through legislation, perhaps something in the constitution, and then when we have that we should drop this antique victorian idea of class struggle and trade unionism. We should also drop this stalinist penchant for deciding salary increases on mass via some pseudo-scientific method. Make conditions the same for everyone and then let the market decide- under regulated conditions for sure, but out of the hands of the madmen unions and corrupt politicians.
"They take away our freedom in the name of liberty"
Of course a health worker like you is eminently more qualified to deal with economics than economics students.I am a Doctor. A medical doctor not the spin variety which seems to populate this thread in the most appalling self-defeatist manner I have seen for some time. Either the PDs have perfected a brainwashing technique that convinces people it is actually in their interests to argue for a race to the bottom or we have a few over reaching economics students who believe that a few years study allows them to pontificate to everyone that they actually know best despite having the life experience of a piece of cheese.
"They take away our freedom in the name of liberty"
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote