Redundancy payments spread over 3 years for public sector and taxed at standard rate

[patslatt]

Why not pay pubic sector workers a years salary to emigrate for five years or more.?

Natural wastage is of the order of 3% to 5% in many sectors and would effect reduction of the public service by about 20% over four years through natural wastage.

Those induced to take five years leave or more would be allowed to return to the service after five years or more to take up their original post or a similar one.

The scheme would allow public servants to gain experience in other countries, and would probably be welcomed by the unions.

There seems to be far fewer voluntary resignations in the recession,according to a radio report.

Many positions are specialised and can't be filled internally by moving personnel,many of whom are very inflexible about moving anyway.

[patslatt]

To give some one 30 years x 6 weeks redundancy would cost 180 weeks salary.

Are they then to go on an early pension payment.

Young workers with short service will not be tempted by six months salary to give up a State job particularly if they have bought or want to buy a home in times of recession / depression.

If someone has five years to go and redundancy requires three years pay,redundancy is almost pointless.That level of payment is in effect a form of seniority biasing the allocation of redundancies against young civil servants.

The problem with seniority in redundancy,according to a civil service friend,is that many civil servants recruited in the 1970s and the 1980s have a poor work ethic. They delay his department's work,enjoy two hour liquid lunches and numerous tea breaks.

The only practical solution would be to tax the redundancy at full income tax rates.