ICTUs 'Get Up, Stand Up campaign'

Status
Not open for further replies.
D

DerKaiser

Registered User
Messages
1,443
Basically ICTU have mail dropped every home in the country, here are their demands:

1.Tackle the Jobs’ Crisis
2.Stop cuts to peoples’ incomes
3.Protect vital services
4.Safeguard peoples’ homes
5.Make the wealthy pay their fair share

I've nothing to say on this other than point 2 is in direct conflict to points 1 and 3.

Protecting incomes at current levels will only lead to further job losses and less money for providing services.

How about a 'Get real' campaign?
 
They obviously must have plenty money to be sending crap to every home in the country.
 
I hope that they include a return address on any correspondence. Anything that comes through my door will promptly be returned and I hope that their offices are flooded with returned mail.
 
baldyman27 said:
I hope that they include a return address on any correspondence. Anything that comes through my door will promptly be returned and I hope that their offices are flooded with returned mail.
Click to expand...


+1. Return without stamp so they pay the postage.
 
I wonder if point 5 also includes the top officials within the unions earning 6 figures. Nice to direct and speak for the "most vulnerable" from that lofty and safe position. It's only other people's livelihoods and jobs you're playing with for your own personal gain.
 
Given that the top 6% of PAYE earners pay 40% of income tax what exactly do these clowns consider to be a fair share?
 
Purple said:
Given that the top 6% of PAYE earners pay 40% of income tax what exactly do these clowns consider to be a fair share?
Click to expand...

Yeah, I was thinking about the concept of fair share.

Scenario 1

Take a single person on €100k p.a. It's a safe bet to assume they haven't exactly been bumming around all their lives and that they've worked hard to get to that level and end up paying €40k p.a. in tax

Take the reverse situation of someone with a family on the dole living in state sponsored accomodation. Between social welfare and supplemented housing the total benefits could add up to €40k.

Is it acceptable to take another €5k in taxes from the worker and leave the non workers benefits intact? What type signal does that send out in terms of rewarding effort?

Scenario 2

A guy called Jack represents two groups of people. One group (private sector employees) has seen 10% of its members lose their jobs. The other group (public servants) earns 25% more on average than the remaining members of the first group.

The government proposes curring wages of the public servants to make up the public deficit. It feels this is fair due to the earnings gap with similarly qualified private sector workers. The alternative would be a uniform tax increase for all. How can Jack decide what is a fair stance for all the people he represents?
 
Mr Begg and some of his esteemed union colleagues were on the boards of a number of institutions and were members of various oversight committees down the years. They got paid to do specific jobs. Have they forgotten?
 
I was thinking more along the lines that a family earning €100’000 already pays three and a half times as much income tax as a family earning €50’000. Twice the income, three and a half times the tax. That hardly seems fair and it’s definitely a disincentive to work.
 
Begg's proposals is a double whammy for struggling Irish companies.

ONE: A company may be able to cope with reduced income, if their costs are also reduced. Example, if income is reduced 20%, salary bill is reduced 20%.
However Begg wants to prop up cost of living, by keeping wages high for one sector of society.

TWO: Taxes will have to be increased to support his proposal. This will be another hammer blow to struggling companies. We may also be at the wrong side of the laffer curve.

Why doesn't he reduce his own enormous pay packet?


(I will also be sending back his rubbish in an unstamped envelope)
 
pinkyBear said:
As he said himself it would be seen as a bad example...
Click to expand...

Well he has kind of backed himself into a corner on this. Hitting out at the "rich" of which he is a part. But also there is a significant problem with the "optics" (hate that term!) of the current situation for the unions.

First, less people in employment, less subs. Other pay cuts, so any subs based on % of pay reduced. However, it would be a PR nightmare if any of the unions had to introduce pay cuts for their full time staff. No "membership" organisation is in a good position financially at the moment, I don't know how sustainable it will be for some of the unions.

However, back to the point is it not a hard pill to swallow to have someone on a six figure salary asking you to take industrial action and lose out on pay in order to support them? How exactly do they represent the most vulnerable in society?
 
this campaign is an attempted clever ploy by the unions to get support behind them so they can show the govt "look at all these people out protesting" in support of us . So they throw a few issues in together. Its like a few weeks ago, I dont which union, had a survey done on peoples fears of cuts in public services and public pay. The results were something like 2/3 feared these cuts. But again more than one issue is wrapped up in this. Like i worry about cuts in public services but not worried about cuts in ps pay, so for me cut pay and maintain services! Yet If I answered that survey id be one on the "fear" side.

Why dont the unions have a survey asking are you "for or against public sector pay cuts" or a day of protest "against public sector pay cuts" ???
 
what shpuld happen on this day of protest is, the red c people ask protesters who are protesting against NAMA, banks, cuts in dole, farmers etc are they against public sector pay cuts. That would be interesting.
 
So the unions have a plan, Get Up Stand Up or as it should be know GUSU.

Grotesque, Unbelievable, Strange and Unprecedented.

When I hear the word "fair" from a wealthy trade unionist (all of them it seems) Ifeel a little sick.

They're a long way from socialism these days, it looks they've their eye on squeezing the unemployed, state pensioners, low income workers, people with small savings and people trying to fund their own pensions
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top