Time off for Christmas shopping in public service.

No - the private sector generally don't get paid lunches, so a 39 or 37.5 hr week is actual hours worked, excluding ALL breaks, certainly for me it is.

The same everywhere i have worked. My 39 hour week is actually 41.5 hours spent in the building.

There is however usually 2 paid 15 minute brakes per day.
 
The point is that someone working up to Christmas Eve in the public sector may get more than 20 days holidays a year and may only have to work a laughably short week (such as 35 hours).
If they are working 4 hours less than the bare minimum in most of the private sector and practically al of the SME sector that adds up to a half day a week or 24 extra days off a year.
The whole picture is required before comparisons can be made.

Also factor that people working longer hours and extra days are often getting paid extra for it, recieve a bonus, get time in lieu, or its their own business anyway and they get a % of the profits and take time off as they want. For example, its often claimed that some IT contractors earn so much, that they can afford to take months off at a time! There are plenty of private sector, workers/companies, SE who do not work beyond office hours. Which is obvious if you ever tried deal with them outside office hours.
 
Also factor that people working longer hours and extra days are often getting paid extra for it, recieve a bonus, get time in lieu, or its their own business anyway and they get a % of the profits and take time off as they want. For example, its often claimed that some IT contractors earn so much, that they can afford to take months off at a time! There are plenty of private sector, workers/companies, SE who do not work beyond office hours. Which is obvious if you ever tried deal with them outside office hours.
I guess these calculations should also take into account the amount of time spent posting on Askaboutmoney.com when supposedly 'working'.
 
For example, its often claimed that some IT contractors earn so much, that they can afford to take months off at a time!

I doubt this true in any kind of general sense, if an IT contractor doesn't work for months at a time it is because there is no work available.
 
I doubt this true in any kind of general sense, if an IT contractor doesn't work for months at a time it is because there is no work available.

Exactly, an IT contractor has to set his rates to expect to be out of work for long periods of time. And get hit very quickly by an down-turn in things.

I could earn far more than I do if I was contracting, but choose the (relative) security of a full time job over it.
 
I guess these calculations should also take into account the amount of time spent posting on Askaboutmoney.com when supposedly 'working'.

Anyone that claims they work 100% of the time is living in fantasy land. So lets not go with that tired old line.
 
Exactly, an IT contractor has to set his rates to expect to be out of work for long periods of time. And get hit very quickly by an down-turn in things.

I could earn far more than I do if I was contracting, but choose the (relative) security of a full time job over it.

Well I know a few who take extended holidays, do other projects because they are earning so much. What they are doing at the moment I have no idea. A couple of months back everyone was still getting good contracts.

But thats the issue isn't it. You can choose a safer career in the public sector, or similar, or you can go a riskier route of contracting, starting your own business, becoming self employed. Both sides tend to be quite dismissive and cynical of the other. But IMO its lot like the paper, scissor, rock game. There are ups and downs to both.
 
Anyone that claims they work 100% of the time is living in fantasy land. So lets not go with that tired old line.
Have a look at the thread title. Are you suggest that it is OK to have an 8-page thread about some people getting a couple of hours off, but it is NOT OK to highlight the fact that some people are spending considerable amounts of work time day in and day out hanging out on AAM (while boasting with much bravado about how many hours a week they work)?

That doesn't seem like a very balanced approach to me.
 
But thats the issue isn't it. You can choose a safer career in the public sector, or similar, or you can go a riskier route of contracting, starting your own business, becoming self employed.

Which is precisely why public sector workers should be paid less than the private sector, there is an ancillary benefit in having such job security.
 
Exactly, an IT contractor has to set his rates to expect to be out of work for long periods of time. And get hit very quickly by an down-turn in things.

I could earn far more than I do if I was contracting, but choose the (relative) security of a full time job over it.

Agreed. Contracting isn't all it's made out to be.
 
Agreed. Contracting isn't all it's made out to be.
You can be sure of that!
Certainly no looking at internet/AAM, or not getting the job done when I was contracting.
Anyone that claims they work 100% of the time is living in fantasy land. So lets not go with that tired old line
I can honestly say that when I was contracting I definitely was productive 100% of the time. I learned new technologies in my own time. Companies I contracted for wouldn't tolerate less. Often, as soon as I walked in the door on a new contract I was shown my desk with PC all set up, and I started working immediately.
 
Some assumptions (feel free to play with the numbers and check my sums)

We have 275,000 civil & public servants
They are each paid 20% more (on average) than the average industrial wage, say €700 p/w or €20 per hour
They each work 45 weeks of the year

Half of them take their Christmas half-day, one hours banking time per week, and two privelege days per annum.

Christmas Shopping Cost = 137,500 X €20 X 3.5 Hours = €9,625,000

Banking Time Cost = 137,500 X €20 X 1 Hours X 45 weeks = €123,750,000

Privelege Day Cost = 137,500 X €20 X 7 X 2 = €38,500,000

I think that comes to a total of €171,875,000 for little hidden perks - its the sheer scale of the thing that makes it hard to swallow.

Ok - these numbers are ridiculous - to be accurate the use of the numbers to justify the attached argument (that civil and public servants' perks cost €171million approx) is actually absurd!!! First, these are not direct costs as they are already included in payroll and what the example represents is potential productivity costs that could accrue from these people working during these times.
So, let's look at another example of an argument using the same figures and let's use that to justify something outrageous:
Roughly half of the 275,000 c+p servants have /use computers in their work- for H&S reasons they are obliged to shut them down when they go home which means that each morning they must start them up. The average start up time is around 3 minutes (I'm erring on the side of faster PCs) that means that we have
3mins x 137,500 servants x 235 working days x €20 per hour divided by 60 to take account of the minutes unit giving a grand total of
€32,312,500
That's right folks - it costs over €32 million euro for civil and public servants to turn on their computers (they must watch the full log on due to the need to enter details at various points)
Which makes me realise that if we account for the extra minute it takes to enter these details that it adds on another €10million or so.
There can be only one conclusion when you look at the scale of the problem - cut the computers, back to pen and paper, that's how you make sure they are working all the time!
What about the idea of shaking hands at meetings - perhaps Mathepac you could do a costing on that and see if the numbers would justify abolishing it.
 
Have a look at the thread title. Are you suggest that it is OK to have an 8-page thread about some people getting a couple of hours off, but it is NOT OK to highlight the fact that some people are spending considerable amounts of work time day in and day out hanging out on AAM (while boasting with much bravado about how many hours a week they work)?

That doesn't seem like a very balanced approach to me.

No one needs time off for christmas shopping thats just daft.

Theres a lot of martyrs around alright. Martyrs for what though...
 
You can be sure of that!
Certainly no looking at internet/AAM, or not getting the job done when I was contracting.

I can honestly say that when I was contracting I definitely was productive 100% of the time. I learned new technologies in my own time. Companies I contracted for wouldn't tolerate less. Often, as soon as I walked in the door on a new contract I was shown my desk with PC all set up, and I started working immediately.


Abraham Lincoln: "Give me six hours to chop down a tree and I will spend the first four sharpening the axe."
 
Have a look at the thread title. Are you suggest that it is OK to have an 8-page thread about some people getting a couple of hours off, but it is NOT OK to highlight the fact that some people are spending considerable amounts of work time day in and day out hanging out on AAM (while boasting with much bravado about how many hours a week they work)?

That doesn't seem like a very balanced approach to me.


Why do you keep deflecting the points being made? Posters from the public sector were making the point that they were working up to and including Christmas Eve as if that was exceptional in the private sector. I pointed out that such posts are meaningless unless yearly holidays are given. If you only work a short week (35 hours) and you get more than 20 days holidays a year then you are still better off than most private sector employees even if you have to work Christmas Eve.
Your blanket defence of every point made about the public sector does little for your credibility on these threads. Do you think that there is no scope for reform in the public sector?
Do you think there are no public sector workers who hide behind their union and job security and do bugger all?
Do you think that the country can continue to pay the public sector wage bill?
Have you ever read a book on economics that was written by someone without a beard?
 
That's right folks - it costs over €32 million euro for civil and public servants to turn on their computers (they must watch the full log on due to the need to enter details at various points)
Which makes me realise that if we account for the extra minute it takes to enter these details that it adds on another €10million or so.
There can be only one conclusion when you look at the scale of the problem - cut the computers, back to pen and paper, that's how you make sure they are working all the time!
What about the idea of shaking hands at meetings - perhaps Mathepac you could do a costing on that and see if the numbers would justify abolishing it.

An absolutely ridiculous argument. For a start, you can subtract one employee's PC start-up time as the person who originally informed me about the Christmas shopping time also has 2 desks in 2 different parts of the city, one of which he has never even seen, much less waited 3 minutes for the attached PC to warm up. If you want to go down that road why not start calculating the cost of relieving one's self at the taxpayer's expense??? A PC is necessary, half days for shopping are not.

Let's not forget that the public service is paid for by the taxpayer and, as such, we have a right to highlight these perks and also have a right to be unhappy about them. To the poster (apologies, can't figure how to quote from 2 posts) who wants to know about hours worked per week, holiday entitlements, etc., I'm self-employed.I finished work at 1.30 on the morning of Christmas Eve, grabbed a few hours sleep and went back to work for about 3 hours until noon. Then I went shopping. Do I continue?? If so, I can go on a rant about how difficult it was to afford shopping which, in part, I can squarely blame the public sector for.
 
Regarding this, as usual everyone is looking at the average rate of pay. However, a lot of civil servants would be below this level of pay (36,400 per year). I would have no problem with a reduction for higher paid civil servants but wages of the lower paid should not be affected.

Some assumptions (feel free to play with the numbers and check my sums)

We have 275,000 civil & public servants
They are each paid 20% more (on average) than the average industrial wage, say €700 p/w or €20 per hour
They each work 45 weeks of the year

Half of them take their Christmas half-day, one hours banking time per week, and two privelege days per annum.

Christmas Shopping Cost = 137,500 X €20 X 3.5 Hours = €9,625,000

Banking Time Cost = 137,500 X €20 X 1 Hours X 45 weeks = €123,750,000

Privelege Day Cost = 137,500 X €20 X 7 X 2 = €38,500,000

I think that comes to a total of €171,875,000 for little hidden perks - its the sheer scale of the thing that makes it hard to swallow.
 
Regarding this, as usual everyone is looking at the average rate of pay. However, a lot of civil servants would be below this level of pay (36,400 per year). I would have no problem with a reduction for higher paid civil servants but wages of the lower paid should not be affected.

Why? The ESRI report states that the pay gap between public and private sector is larger at the lower tiers. Furthermore, if a lot of civil servants are on lower rates of pay then cuts at this level will have the greatest impact in reducing the public sector wage bill.
 
Abraham Lincoln: "Give me six hours to chop down a tree and I will spend the first four sharpening the axe."
Abraham Lincoln was a civil servant, wasn't he?

I can go on a rant about how difficult it was to afford shopping which, in part, I can squarely blame the public sector for.
I, too, believe this.
Inflated Public Sector wages have increased prices in general to the extent that normal people can no longer afford basics.
 
This is getting annoying - next they'll be after the day we get off for our birthdays.
 
Back
Top