Another public sector reform thread: the negative impact on private sector

[Question R24U]

Being a well known fan off public sector kicking I would tend to agree with most off what you say, that said however we also need to be realistic at what can be achieved. 30% cuts would not work as we would have wide spread strikes so perhaps a more measured move such as a 7%-10% cut from top rates only while concentrating on scrapping totally pointless sectors would be better.... one for the chop is certainly FAS that should be abolished over a a time scale of say 5 years to be replaced with job centers, 3rd level can be dependent on to fill the void.

Are you "purge the public sector promoters" only interested in saving taxpayer costs and do not look beyond to that to see if there are any problems caused by public sector to the private sector?

Is there anyone in the real economy, who can point to negative impacts caused by a) mis-mangaement b) union blockages c) over-regulation and licencing d) barriers to entry e) employment, health and safety laws, that could be solved without causing a public sector strike?

[hopi watcher]

if you can show me a link that proves that Irish public servants are underpaid compared to their OECD counterparts, I will gladly eat a lot of hats

simple facts (as I see them):

We pay our public servants too much (on a like for like basis with other OECD countries).
Their pensions are too generous.
They are neither much better nor much worse than public servants (on an individual basis) in other OECD countries however actual delivery of services appears to be worse than the average.
We have chronic understaffing in some areas (think speech therapists), we have armies of pen pushers doing nothing in other areas (think HSE admin).

We can't squeeze much more out of the tax base (and if we do, it will further depress the economy), the spending side of the budget needs to cut back drastically. Public sector wages need to be cut.

these are problems that the government needs to address urgently. Not doing so in the face of union or other pressure will lead to further deterioration in the public finances and eventual implosion of the economy.

Does the Government have the balls to do this? Apparently not...

The fact is that our public servcie is one of the leanest in Europe. Get the relevent OECD report and read it. It appears to me that what you and opthers are really complaoining about is the management of public servants. You should look to the politicians in this regard and the practise over the years of Ministers appointing friends and familiy members to key posts.

[Boggle]

The fact is that our public servcie is one of the leanest in Europe. Get the relevent OECD report and read it. It appears to me that what you and opthers are really complaoining about is the management of public servants. You should look to the politicians in this regard and the practise over the years of Ministers appointing friends and familiy members to key posts.

The fact is that anyone I know with a decent public service job got that job because a relative of his or her worked there. The thing is a joke, mainly manned by wasters and posers and heaven forbid that the best candidate gets the job.

My brother wors in the public sector and I can tell you for a fact that the only reason he got the job was because a close friend (who was terminally ill at the time) made sure he did. Since getting there, my brother is always complaining about the blatantly obvious nepotism that exists but its in nobodies interest to rock the boat so everybody stays quite.

Listen, you could cut all wage levels by 5 to 10% on lower pay and 20-30% for higher pay and nobody would leave. The reason they won't leave is because all they have to do is turn up in the morning and go home in the evening and hopefully, if they are bad enough at their job, they might even get a promotion to get paid even more. Lets face it, the only way to get fired is to get caught stealing.

[Question R24U]

The fact is that anyone I know with a decent public service job got that job because a relative of his or her worked there. The thing is a joke, mainly manned by wasters and posers and heaven forbid that the best candidate gets the job.

My brother wors in the public sector and I can tell you for a fact that the only reason he got the job was because a close friend (who was terminally ill at the time) made sure he did. Since getting there, my brother is always complaining about the blatantly obvious nepotism that exists but its in nobodies interest to rock the boat so everybody stays quite.

Listen, you could cut all wage levels by 5 to 10% on lower pay and 20-30% for higher pay and nobody would leave. The reason they won't leave is because all they have to do is turn up in the morning and go home in the evening and hopefully, if they are bad enough at their job, they might even get a promotion to get paid even more. Lets face it, the only way to get fired is to get caught stealing.

Is any of this based on real evidence (rather than the type these use in tribunals, such as hearsay and conjecture)? If so, provide it.

[hopi watcher]

The fact is that anyone I know with a decent public service job got that job because a relative of his or her worked there. The thing is a joke, mainly manned by wasters and posers and heaven forbid that the best candidate gets the job.

My brother wors in the public sector and I can tell you for a fact that the only reason he got the job was because a close friend (who was terminally ill at the time) made sure he did. Since getting there, my brother is always complaining about the blatantly obvious nepotism that exists but its in nobodies interest to rock the boat so everybody stays quite.

Listen, you could cut all wage levels by 5 to 10% on lower pay and 20-30% for higher pay and nobody would leave. The reason they won't leave is because all they have to do is turn up in the morning and go home in the evening and hopefully, if they are bad enough at their job, they might even get a promotion to get paid even more. Lets face it, the only way to get fired is to get caught stealing.

If you are going to engage, any chance of leaving out the clap trap. If our public services stopped working you would be the first to notice and, no douibt, complain. The attack on the public service is a spin to distract from the fact that the wealthy in this country pay little or no tax and they want to keep it that way. The public service is being portrayed as the 'enemy without' to draw fire. Can we cop on please.

[zakalwe1]

Are you "purge the public sector promoters" only interested in saving taxpayer costs and do not look beyond to that to see if there are any problems caused by public sector to the private sector?

Is there anyone in the real economy, who can point to negative impacts caused by a) mis-mangaement b) union blockages c) over-regulation and licencing d) barriers to entry e) employment, health and safety laws, that could be solved without causing a public sector strike?

question: why do public sector workers make up 85% of the union membership?

is working for the govt really that sh!tty? do they send children up chimneys, force workers to stick hands in the mechanical loom to clear blockages, are the department workers working 60 hour weeks? does the govt keep them in on christmas eve, force them to pay for the coal in the stove beside them, prevent them from having christmas dinner with tiny tim?

do they f@ck!

the only person i know in the civil service farted around college in a goatee with minimal effort, landed a job in a non-important entity, swans in at 9.30 and out at 4.30 (proud of the fact), skips his half hour tea breaks and takes a shorter lunch, and manages to "work" up an additional 2 weeks per year time in lieu which he takes as a holiday. the guy doesn't break a sweat all week and is proud of the fact.

[Question R24U]

question: why do public sector workers make up 85% of the union membership?

is working for the govt really that sh!tty? do they send children up chimneys, force workers to stick hands in the mechanical loom to clear blockages, are the department workers working 60 hour weeks? does the govt keep them in on christmas eve, force them to pay for the coal in the stove beside them, prevent them from having christmas dinner with tiny tim?

do they f@ck!

the only person i know in the civil service farted around college in a goatee with minimal effort, landed a job in a non-important entity, swans in at 9.30 and out at 4.30 (proud of the fact), skips his half hour tea breaks and takes a shorter lunch, and manages to "work" up an additional 2 weeks per year time in lieu which he takes as a holiday. the guy doesn't break a sweat all week and is proud of the fact.

So if working for the public service is so good, you must feel quite foolish in not applying during the expansion in numbers 1997 to 2007 to bring us more towards OECD norms?

[zakalwe1]

So if working for the public service is so good, you must feel quite foolish in not applying during the expansion in numbers 1997 to 2007 to bring us more towards OECD norms?

its a comfortable life for the unambitious, the lazy and the incompetent. i am none of those. and i intend (i may not make it there but will try) to be quite rich. hard work and luck in the private sector will get me there, not a public service job. by the way, i fully support nurses, doctors, gardai, firemen, teachers etc getting paid more. i just can't stand the waste in the number of admin staff.

[Big Bobo]

question: why do public sector workers make up 85% of the union membership?

is working for the govt really that sh!tty? do they send children up chimneys, force workers to stick hands in the mechanical loom to clear blockages, are the department workers working 60 hour weeks? does the govt keep them in on christmas eve, force them to pay for the coal in the stove beside them, prevent them from having christmas dinner with tiny tim?

do they f@ck!

the only person i know in the civil service farted around college in a goatee with minimal effort, landed a job in a non-important entity, swans in at 9.30 and out at 4.30 (proud of the fact), skips his half hour tea breaks and takes a shorter lunch, and manages to "work" up an additional 2 weeks per year time in lieu which he takes as a holiday. the guy doesn't break a sweat all week and is proud of the fact.

Sounds like you're jealous

[Boggle]

Is any of this based on real evidence (rather than the type these use in tribunals, such as hearsay and conjecture)? If so, provide it.

If I had the evidence then I wouldn't be moaning about it here, would I?? Are you saying that I am lying? Or is it you just know whats going on and are happy as long as you are on the inside looking out??

If you are going to engage, any chance of leaving out the clap trap. If our public services stopped working you would be the first to notice and, no douibt, complain. The attack on the public service is a spin to distract from the fact that the wealthy in this country pay little or no tax and they want to keep it that way. The public service is being portrayed as the 'enemy without' to draw fire. Can we cop on please.

Oh, its all a big conspiracy? Funny how so many lay folk feel the same about job-for-lifers.
And yes, there is an issue with tax loopholes for the rich and that must be tackled also so start a new thread on that and stop attempting to use "smoke and daggers" to distract from the fact that the Public Service in this country is a joke which sooner or later is gong to have to be tackled before this place goes down the tubes.


I find it hilarious that not one of you guys could be arsed even pretending that what I'm saying isn't true. Its another gentlemans club full of underworked idols which the unions have protected to the balls - and worse again, they know it.