Give and Take For Public sector Pay cuts!

[riker1969]

Your type shouldn't be given the option of a wage cut. You should simply be sacked.

Such an expansive argument, probably from an 'expansive head' Im sure. What exactly is my type! You who have my ten lines to go on?!

[libertarian-right]

i pretty much agree fully with meriwether2.

We prevent stimulating the economy by keeping Anglo afloat for the short term...i do not think anyone sees any benefits for this action by FF??

We prevent stimulating the economy by negotiating with the management of these banks..as meriwether2 said, all fired and replaced. Why negotiate with these crooks?

We prevent stimulating the economy by not promoting indigenous firms (I think everyone would agree that we would rather save Waterford Crystal then Anglo)

We prevent stimulating the economy by not researching into renewable energies and ways of starting business that harvest this new research.

There is just too much at stake and I despair at FF handling and lack of leadership. They are corrupted to the core. Cuts will be needed as the private sector has suffered the full effect thus far but I would like to see civil servants stick to the man!

[bobbysands81]

It should be noted that as well as agreeing an 11 month pay freeze Civil Servants are also enduring a 4% pay cut (in real terms) as well as the 1% levy.

Given that we did not cause this mess I think we're shouldering quite a lot of the pain.

[riker1969]

Why is it that you'll only take a paycut if your demands are met? None of my demands were met. Ditto with hundreds of thousands of private workers. Lots of them lost their job, lots of them took pay cuts. Lots more hanging on by a thread and working 3 day weeks, taking early holidays etc, all in an effort to keep their employment. . Why are you more special than the rest of us to 'demand' certain things be done before you face reality that the public sector pay bill is too high? Either benchmarking is okay (and it should work both ways, i.e. time for a pay cut for you nice folks) or benchmarking is the unions way of sinking the county. Make up your minds. But lose the 'demands' mentality. The private workers will devour you if you go on strike over a miserable 10% when most would be delighted to take a 10% cut in return for job securtiy. Get over your privileged headbanging. Lords you most certainly are not.

1. How about you start a creche? Or is that too creative and risky for a public service workers?

2. No opinion. Probably come out on the side of agreeing with you.

3. But of course. Taxing the benifit in kind of a public pension and a job for life would be a great place to start.

4. Completely agree. Its scandalous.

Exactly how could I start a creche and keep my job? Secondly pension arrangements for the ppublic sector is not tax evasion. You know that. You might change them but current arrangements are not illegal so a bit of cop on! You are doging issue of childcare-obviously you dont pay for it yourself and why should I be forced to start one?? Suggesting I start one is hardly a coherent childcare policy for the nation? We dont have one nor even a promise of one. Im presuming you dont have kids -ask around at the cost but please be sitting down when you do.

[bobbysands81]

Why is it that you'll only take a paycut if your demands are met? None of my demands were met. Ditto with hundreds of thousands of private workers. Lots of them lost their job, lots of them took pay cuts. Lots more hanging on by a thread and working 3 day weeks, taking early holidays etc, all in an effort to keep their employment. . Why are you more special than the rest of us to 'demand' certain things be done before you face reality that the public sector pay bill is too high? Either benchmarking is okay (and it should work both ways, i.e. time for a pay cut for you nice folks) or benchmarking is the unions way of sinking the county. Make up your minds. But lose the 'demands' mentality. The private workers will devour you if you go on strike over a miserable 10% when most would be delighted to take a 10% cut in return for job securtiy. Get over your privileged headbanging. Lords you most certainly are not.

1. How about you start a creche? Or is that too creative and risky for a public service workers?

2. No opinion. Probably come out on the side of agreeing with you.

3. But of course. Taxing the benifit in kind of a public pension and a job for life would be a great place to start.

4. Completely agree. Its scandalous.

Go get yourself a job in the public sector then, you'll find it's not the slice of cake all seem to think it is. In the Civil Service you can have thousands of people going for a few dozen jobs - not great odds eh?

I made a decision a few years ago to forgo higher pay for job security.

[meriwether2]

It should be noted that as well as agreeing an 11 month pay freeze Civil Servants are also enduring a 4% pay cut (in real terms) as well as the 1% levy.

Given that we did not cause this mess I think we're shouldering quite a lot of the pain.

You keep saying this.

An overbloated public sector wage bill is part of the problem. It means less money for the public finances.
Is this computing?

Secondly, the 1% levy and inflation is being felt by everyone.
The difference is that the private sector is also shouldering wage cuts, redundancies and 3 day weeks.

I don't think you're 'shouldering quite a lot of the pain' at all.

[meriwether2]

I made a decision a few years ago to forgo higher pay for job security.

Yourself, leftfemme and Kevin Doyle were asserting not so long ago that job security cannot be monetised, and thus, should not be considered part of the wage packet of a civil servant.

Looks like it can after all.

[bobbysands81]

You keep saying this.

An overbloated public sector wage bill is part of the problem. It means less money for the public finances.
Is this computing?

Secondly, the 1% levy and inflation is being felt by everyone.
The difference is that the private sector is also shouldering wage cuts, redundancies and 3 day weeks.

I don't think you're 'shouldering quite a lot of the pain' at all.

I reckon that in real terms Civil Servants are currently taking about a 10% wage cut as it is.

Overbloated public sector wage bill??? Ah the oul sound bites with no basis in reality, try reading the OECD Report.

[meriwether2]

I reckon that in real terms Civil Servants are currently taking about a 10% wage cut as it is.

Overbloated public sector wage bill??? Ah the oul sound bites with no basis in reality, try reading the OECD Report.

No basis in reality? Try:

-The recession is the fault of tax evasion by the private sector,
-Everyone should take a 10% wage cut because the civil servants should,

and other assorted inanities for size.

[Oppenheimer]

Your type shouldn't be given the option of a wage cut. You should simply be sacked.

Such an expansive argument, probably from an 'expansive head' Im sure. What exactly is my type! You who have my ten lines to go on?!

Actually, beyond the venom in the post, I think there is a point to be made at least in terms of the costs that could be saved. It should be the case that redundancies are made first before pay cuts are considered. The fact that the private sector is shrinking is an illustration of the fact that a larger public service is not needed. This is not to say that you specifically should be made redundant, I don't know what you do but redundancies should be made in oversubscribed departments.

I agree that you will be disincentivised if you get a pay cut so IMO it is better to make redundancies and for those left in work, there is no disadvantage salary-wise.