Sit In at the Passport Office

[mathepac]

.... It is not just the private sector that pays taxes or pays for public services.

This is the fallacy that PS workers and their sycophantic unions have been propagating for years, as if the PS is 'self-sufficient' or 'self-financing', the ludicrous 'I am my own Grandpa' argument. Wealth creation is the preserve of the private sector; infrastructure creation and maintenance is primarily the responsibility of the public service using tax money.

Tom, Dick and Harry work hard in their private sector jobs and pay tax. Paddy is a PS worker and collects the tax from Tom, Dick and Harry and uses it to pay his own wages and provide the infrastructure for all of them. Paddy pays tax but that money came from Tom, Dick and Harry to begin with, Paddy created none of it.

If Tom, Dick and Harry are forced to emigrate, Paddy is forced to follow them as there is no wealth being created at home to pay him or to maintain and renew the infrastructure.

Too simplistic a view, downright disrespectful, cynical? Maybe, but possibly useful in order to maintain some perspective as to the roles that the tail and the dog are meant to fulfil.

 

[z107]

Public sector employees do not create wealth, they consume wealth. The public sector does not export anything, or create products etc. There's nothing wrong with that, it's just the way it is.

Everybody with income or captial gains (above threshold levels) and everybody who spends money pays taxes, regardless of whether they are public or private sector employees. As stated above, private sector employees do not have a monopoly on paying taxes.

Private sector employees pay the wages, and taxes, of public sector employees. I've often wondered why public sector people just don't get their payments tax free. For example, if a junior administrator's pay is €90k gross, just pay them €70k (or whatever) without the paperwork of working out taxes. Public sector tax is a zero sum game.

 

[StevieC]

This thread isnt about an us v them private/public sector spat. Its about the unions waking up and realising that the private sector cant afford to pay more tax so that public sector pay/benefits remain untouched. If public sector could afford to pay enough through more capital gains tax etc. then they wouldnt be doing an industrial action. Fact is public sector needs private sector to fund their benefits and private sector is annoyed that the unions seem oblivous to the private sectors plight.

Some people quite rightly said that leaving getting your passport to the last minute wasnt wise but there are people for instance that had no intention of travelling but then find out about the death of a loved one abroad and need to travel, no allowance seems to be made for emergency cases like this.

 

[Firefly]

I've often wondered why public sector people just don't get their payments tax free. For example, if a junior administrator's pay is €90k gross, just pay them €70k (or whatever) without the paperwork of working out taxes. Public sector tax is a zero sum game.

Because, I imagine, PS pensions are based on gross earnings.

 

[Complainer]

This is the fallacy that PS workers and their sycophantic unions have been propagating for years, as if the PS is 'self-sufficient' or 'self-financing', the ludicrous 'I am my own Grandpa' argument. Wealth creation is the preserve of the private sector; infrastructure creation and maintenance is primarily the responsibility of the public service using tax money.

I've never heard anyone claiming that the public sector is self-sufficient or self-financing. That's certainly not what I've said. Could you give just one example of any public sector union official claiming that the public sector is self-sufficient or self-financing?

Tom, Dick and Harry work hard in their private sector jobs and pay tax. Paddy is a PS worker and collects the tax from Tom, Dick and Harry and uses it to pay his own wages and provide the infrastructure for all of them. Paddy pays tax but that money came from Tom, Dick and Harry to begin with, Paddy created none of it.

If Tom, Dick and Harry are forced to emigrate, Paddy is forced to follow them as there is no wealth being created at home to pay him or to maintain and renew the infrastructure.

Too simplistic a view, downright disrespectful, cynical? Maybe, but possibly useful in order to maintain some perspective as to the roles that the tail and the dog are meant to fulfil.

Maybe I'll do a nice Tom/Dick/Harry story about Tom the banker, and Harry the property developer, and Dick the exploitative private sector employer when I have a bit of time. I'm not sure it will add much to the debate, mind you, particularly if (like your story) it is hugely selective in the parts of the story it tells.

Public sector employees do not create wealth, they consume wealth. The public sector does not export anything, or create products etc. There's nothing wrong with that, it's just the way it is.

This is not true. Public sector staff in universities produce valuable research, often paid for by the private sector. Public sector staff in museums/galleries produce exhibitions that bring in revenue. Public sector staff in local authority gyms/swimming pools run classes that bring in revenue. NSAI staff run training and provide auditing services, often paid for by the private sector etc etc etc.

Private sector employees pay the wages, and taxes, of public sector employees.

Again, not true. You seem to have forgotton about the Govt's other sources of taxes beyond income tax, particularly VAT & CGT.

This whole 'them and us' arguement fails to recognise that people can and do move between public and private sector regularly.

 

[DerKaiser]

Face it, regardless of how essential the service being provided is, public sector employees are the antithesis of wealth creation: a financial drain.

In the same way all PAYE workers are a drain on their companies and all profitable enterprise is a drain on consumers.

 

[sandrat]

I just hope all the industrial action ends soon and I too don't understand how the passport office workers can get paid while refusing to work. I am not in the union but am a public sector workers so a lot of my colleagues are working to rule and not doing certain tasks but I must continue to do them or face disciplinary action.

 

[liaconn]

That's because you made a choice not to join the Union. I'm not sure what your complaint is?

 

[Green]

I know this has been voiced before, but, civil servants need to take a reality check. In the good times, many of them benefitted from bench marking against similar positions in the private sector. Many people in those positions in the private sector have now lost their jobs or taken large pay cuts.

I think you will find that all civil servants have taken pay cuts....

 

[sandrat]

That's because you made a choice not to join the Union. I'm not sure what your complaint is?

Not a complaint as such. Just seems strange that it is ok for someone not to do work and still get paid and another to do their work and get paid the same money just because they are/are not a member of a union.

If you go on strike and are in the union you don't get paid but if you stop doing part of your work you continue to get paid as normal.

 

[mathepac]

... Maybe I'll do a nice Tom/Dick/Harry story about Tom the banker, and Harry the property developer, and Dick the exploitative private sector employer when I have a bit of time...

I'll look forward to it and hearing about your assessment of Paddy in his roles as financial regulator, corporate law enforcer and champion of truth, justice, fairness, transparency, dispenser of passports and monitor of minimum wages.

 

[Green]

Just seems strange that it is ok for someone not to do work and still get paid and another to do their work and get paid the same money just because they are/are not a member of a union.

Not strange at all. The union representing the civil servants have given their employers a signed notification of their action under the industrial relations legislation following a ballot of members. Work to rule is a normal part of industrial relations disputes, whereby workers are refusing to carry out certain aspects of their duties or have rescinded cooperation in certain areas.

 

[galleyslave]

I think you will find that all civil servants have taken pay cuts....

that would be because their employer (the state) has no money left to pay them with. Less money in the kitty means lower pay... in the non union sector it usually means pay cuts or layoffs. The unions don't seem to grasp that

 

[Green]

that would be because their employer (the state) has no money left to pay them with. Less money in the kitty means lower pay...

I agree with the latter part of your point. I was just making the point that 100% of civil servants had taken two pay cuts.

 

[liaconn]

Not a complaint as such. Just seems strange that it is ok for someone not to do work and still get paid and another to do their work and get paid the same money just because they are/are not a member of a union.

If you go on strike and are in the union you don't get paid but if you stop doing part of your work you continue to get paid as normal.

You are equally entitled to refuse to do the work as a protest. You just won't get protection from the Union because you are not a paid up member.

 

[Pique318]

I agree with the latter part of your point. I was just making the point that 100% of civil servants had taken two pay cuts.

You don't agree that the state can't afford the wage bill then ?
S'funny, I thought we were billions in debt.

 

[Green]

You don't agree that the state can't afford the wage bill then ?

That aspect was not covered in the post...

 

[Purple]

In the same way all PAYE workers are a drain on their companies and all profitable enterprise is a drain on consumers.

+1
The idea that no public sector worker creates wealth is nonsense.
The private sector is, in general, the engine of the economy but a good public sector is also essential for the economy, and the country, to function property.

This just comes down to an employer being broke; in this case it’s the state. It is hard for any employees to take a pay cut so the employees in the passport office have my sympathy. That doesn’t extend to me agreeing with their industrial action because it’s pointless. There’s no money to pay them anything extra.

 

[DeeFox]

I heard a few minutes of Joe Duffy last Friday in which two people were on to Joe - they were sitting in the locked passport office (with 9/10 others) and said they would not leave until they got their passports. They said they could see the staff behind the blinds but the staff were refusing to talk to them.
Did they get their passports in the end?

 

[Shawady]

Did they get their passports in the end?

There were some peope interviewed on the news on friday, that got their passport (or were promised would get their passport) after the sit-in.