# Croke Park agreement and a new government



## anastasiablu

What will happen if elements of the Croke park agreement (namely extended working day( 8-8)) are implemented and a new government appointed decides to throw out the Croke Park agreement ,  will public servants (in health sector) now on new hours have pay cuts and redundancies on the near horizon. If so God help all of you waitng for results to your lab tests because our numbers have decreased and hours extended to such a degree that the waffle from Harney et al that services will not be effected is so far removed from the truth its not funny.


----------



## PaddyBloggit

'tis a case of ...... wait and see.

As it stands the Croke Park Agreement is the only game in town so that's what we play.


----------



## pinkyBear

Judging by this article in the indo today  don't hold out much hope of any reform at all....


----------



## gianni

pinkyBear said:


> Judging by this article in the indo today  don't hold out much hope of any reform at all....


 
I wouldn't hold out much hope for an impartial article on this subject from the Indo...


----------



## RonanC

Ah more of the same from our Indo "friends"... Lies and lies again! 

This 'privilege day' issue has been in the news since the Croke Park Agreement (CPA). 



> It claimed the move would have saved €4.6m -- based on a simple calculation of the number of civil servants, the number of extra days they got and their average pay


 
It was actually the Dept. of Finance and the former Government who claimed it would save this amount. 



> But yesterday the unions succeeded in preserving their members' rights to the privilege days after a civil service dispute's body delivered a damning verdict on the State's case for change.


 
As far as I know, it was the PSEU and AHCPS who represent middle and senior ranking civil servants (EO's & HEO's to AP's PO's and Secretary Generals) who took the case to the Arbitration Board as their members stood to lose these leave days. The CPSU who represent lower paid, mainly clerical officers in the CS (who only get the minimum entitlement to annual leave (20days), plus 1 extra day after 5 years service, plus one more after 10) has already reached an agreement with Government that these privilege days would be converted into official annual leave days under the CPA. 



> Lower-paid civil servants, who have 29 days' annual leave,


 
There are *no* "low paid" civil servants getting 29 days annual leave. Fact!
Higher Executive Officers get 29 days leave only after 10 years service at that grade. The maximum a low paid civil servant can get is 23 days and this is for a Staff Officer grade.


----------



## Purple

RonanC said:


> The CPSU who represent lower paid, mainly clerical officers in the CS (who only get the minimum entitlement to annual leave (20days), plus 1 extra day after 5 years service, plus one more after 10) has already reached an agreement with Government that these privilege days would be converted into official annual leave days under the CPA.



Is that 20 days plus the extra two now that they aren't celebrating Empire Day or the Kings birthday anymore?
If so did they only get 18 days before that or have they just given up the two days?
If they just gave them up did they get a payment to do so?


----------



## Shawady

I think this quote from the article is interesting.

"_The department said it would get extra productivity from staff doing two more days' work in the year -- though it could not give details of how that would work in practice or how the savings would be made_."

It sounds more like it was a populist decision by the previous government rather than looking for real reform. Lower paid staff were going to get an extra 2 days annual leave to compensate for loss of privledge days so they would not be working any extra days in a year.


----------



## RonanC

Purple said:


> Is that 20 days plus the extra two now that they aren't celebrating Empire Day or the Kings birthday anymore?
> If so did they only get 18 days before that or have they just given up the two days?
> If they just gave them up did they get a payment to do so?


 
Its 20 days for full time employee's and I would estimate that there is many who are part time or job sharers, so they would get a percentage of this. 

The 'privilege days' have been taken for many many years and are in addition to the annual leave entitlement. I had no idea what they were for, but only knew that you could take one day at Christmas and one at Easter. I dont know of any Government department or office that closes during these days and arrangements are made to ensure sufficient cover is in place while staff take their 'leave'. 

If you fail to take the day for whatever reason, you lose the entitlement to it and at the end of the day, its up to local management to grant this leave on the basis that business should continue without major disruption. 

The figures I posted above are for 5 days working staff and are part of their contracts of employment.


----------



## Purple

OK, so it's currently 22 days leave a year (20 +2) minimum.


----------



## RonanC

Purple said:


> OK, so it's currently 22 days leave a year (20 +2) minimum.


 
Yes and the proposal was to incorporate these privilege days for CO/SO grade staff into official annual leave days, and this figure remain at 22 days for a commencing CO in full time employment or equivalent, rising to 23 days after 5 years, and 24 days after 10 years. All other grades would be subject to a reduction of one day or loss of both days depending on their current annual leave entitlement.


----------



## Purple

So there would be a reduction of one day for lower grade staff, yes?


----------



## RonanC

Purple said:


> So there would be a reduction of one day for lower grade staff, yes?


 
No. The reduction would apply to higher grades only who already receive more annual leave in comparision to CO's & SO's. HEO's and up would be the only grades who currently receive more than 25 days per year in the CS. 

See here


----------



## Shawady

From what i read, if privledge days were removed, grades with 20 to 24 days leave with get an extra two days leave compensation ( so would be no worse off).
Grades with 25 to 29 days holidays would get one day's leave compensation (so would have one less day off a year).
Grades with 30 or more days holidays would receive no extra annual leave days ( so would have two day's less off a year).


----------



## Purple

The net saving would not be much then, would it?


----------



## Shawady

I assume there are more lower paid grades than higher ones so no, I don't think the net saving would be that much.
IMO a compromise solution could have been to get rid of the day at Easter for everyone but keep the one at Christmas as a lot of people (public and private) take leave around this time anyway.


----------



## Sunny

Shawady said:


> From what i read, if privledge days were removed, grades with 20 to 24 days leave with get an extra two days leave compensation ( so would be no worse off).
> Grades with 25 to 29 days holidays would get one day's leave compensation (so would have one less day off a year).
> Grades with 30 or more days holidays would receive no extra annual leave days ( so would have two day's less off a year).


 
And to me, this seemed perfectly fine and logical. I don't think ordinary civil servants would have a problem. However, once again it appears senior civil servants decided that this didn't suit them as unlike lower grades, they don't get overtime and tend to work more 'out of office' hours so they thought losing 2 days leave hit them disproportionaly. They used the same argument to defend their bonuses. This is the group where reform is most urgently needed. They don't seem to realise that some of them already get paid more than the leader of Germany. I think they are more than compensated for the work they do.


----------



## Firefly

I would have thought the longer you worked in an area the better/more important you would be (perhaps increments reflect this I don't know), so surely it would make sense to have less holidays as you advance up the scales?


----------



## Sunny

I don't think it was just about the saving in monetary terms though. I think they are trying to standardise the terms and conditions of employment in the public and civil sector to make redeployment easier. This is where the real savings would be found.


----------



## dereko1969

Those at the lower grades can work up flexi-time so the 20 days (now 22) could actually end up being 38 days (now 40). The higher grades don't work flexi and would generally work more than the minimum hours.


----------



## gianni

dereko1969 said:


> Those at the lower grades can work up flexi-time so the 20 days (now 22) could actually end up being 38 days (now 40). The higher grades don't work flexi and would generally work more than the minimum hours.


 
Flexi-time is *not* universal in the Civil Service. Some offices have it and some don't. Your statement above is misleading. 

Also misleading is the inference that flexi-time leads to more days off. The Civil Service flexi-time arrangement (when available!) allows the employee to structure their working time within some strict limits... the general jist being that the employee has the potential to work an additional 1.5 days in a given 4 week period and then to take this time within the next 4 week time period - subject to management approval.

All time off gained is equal to extra time worked.


----------



## mammyof2

gianni said:


> Flexi-time is *not* universal in the Civil Service. Some offices have it and some don't. Your statement above is misleading.


 
Which Departments don't have flexi-time for the relevant grades? I have never come across one that doesn't. 

And, as a civil servant represented by one of the Unions that took the issue to arbitration, I think it was a major own goal. It looks ludicrous to the general public that mid ranking and senior civil servants are making such a fuss about a minimum change to their working conditions. I have 31 days leave. That's plenty. I don't need an additional 2 days and neither does anyone else at my grade or more senior grades.


----------



## Leper

Flexi-time is a German concept.  It was introduced there to have people ending work at different times and somewhat alleviating congestion on their roads at peak times.  The system works with win/win/win situations for the employer, staff member and motorists.

If it works lets use it.


----------



## Sunny

Yeah, I don't have a problem with flexi time. It's the one area where the public sector really shows up the private sector as it was never really embraced by companies for some reason. Obviously it doesn't work for every industry or company but it would work for plenty and staff really appreciate it.

I see the Agency staff pay dispute in the health service is going to the Croke Park Body today. Let's see what they come back with. Do you think Brendan Howlin is on the phone to Joan begging forgiveness and asking her to take over?


----------



## Purple

I have no problem with flexitime either. I do have a problem with such a short standard week. All public employees should have a standard working week of 39 hours.


----------



## Sunny

Purple said:


> I have no problem with flexitime either. I do have a problem with such a short standard week. All public employees should have a standard working week of 39 hours.


 
I agree. An old collegaue of mine joined the Central Bank last year. Couldn't believe that there are people in there on a 33 hour week. I wouldn't be as mean as you though! I would accept a 37.5 hour week.


----------



## csirl

> Which Departments don't have flexi-time for the relevant grades? I have never come across one that doesn't.


 
There is no flexi-time or overtime for management grades in the civil service - they are expected to work whatever hours are necessary to get the job done. My brother and one of my neighbours are both at management level in the civil service and both would usually work a few extra hours per week beyond normal office hours for no extra pay. Asked my brother about priviledge days last night and he said that most regard them as annual leave that must be taken on certain days when non-public offices are closed - would prefer for it to be called what it is i.e. annual leave as the term 'priviledge day' makes it seem like a perk.


----------



## Purple

Sunny said:


> I agree. An old collegaue of mine joined the Central Bank last year. Couldn't believe that there are people in there on a 33 hour week. I wouldn't be as mean as you though! I would accept a 37.5 hour week.



Wow, 18% shorter than the standard 39 hour week.
We really have become a very soft nation.


----------



## Purple

csirl said:


> would prefer for it to be called what it is i.e. annual leave as the term 'priviledge day' makes it seem like a perk.


 It is a perk; anything over 20 days a year is a perk.


----------



## Deiseblue

Purple said:


> I have no problem with flexitime either. I do have a problem with such a short standard week. All public employees should have a standard working week of 39 hours.


 
And yet according to the CSO report dated 15/3/2011 On Employment & Labour costs weekly paid hours in the Public Sector averaged 32.1 as opposed to 31.8 hours in the Private Sector.


----------



## Sunny

Purple said:


> Wow, 18% shorter than the standard 39 hour week.
> We really have become a very soft nation.


 
My standard week in the private sector has always been 37.5 hours. An 8.5 day with 1 hour lunch break. Of course, my average week is often much longer but that's just the nature of the job.


----------



## Shawady

Purple said:


> Wow, 18% shorter than the standard 39 hour week.
> We really have become a very soft nation.


 
Is 39 hours standard?
I worked in a large private company and the standard was 35 i.e. 7 hours a day.


----------



## Sunny

Deiseblue said:


> And yet according to the CSO report dated 15/3/2011 On Employment & Labour costs weekly paid hours in the Public Sector averaged 32.1 as opposed to 31.8 hours in the Private Sector.


 
Does that not just reflect the reduced hours that employees have been put on in many sectors?


----------



## Deiseblue

Sunny said:


> Does that not just reflect the reduced hours that employees have been put on in many sectors?



Working on presumptions here but I would imagine that in both sectors the following influential factors were applied by the CSO in calculating the average weekly paid hours :

Part time work

Job sharing

Overtime

As I say merely a presumption on my part and as such unlike the majority of my posts should not be treated as Gospel


----------



## Deiseblue

Shawady said:


> Is 39 hours standard?
> I worked in a large private company and the standard was 35 i.e. 7 hours a day.



As indeed did I & the average working day was 6.5 hours.

9 to 5 with an hour for lunch and two 1/4 hour tea breaks daily.


----------



## RonanC

Standard Civil Service full time week is6hr 57mins per day, or 34.75hr per week. Civil servants clock out for lunch and must take a minimun of 30mins. 

I would usually put in between 40-42 clocked hours a week, and over a month this is a build up of 22.75 to 31hr flexi, but I can only carry 11.5hr to the next month, and therefore usually lose the balance. Now I can take a longer lunch, or head home early at 4pm some days to reduce this balance before the end of a particular flexi period. I sometimes lose it, and this means i've worked for free. But I have no issue with this as I know the rules and its my decision if I want to work late to get something finished.


----------



## Purple

Deiseblue said:


> And yet according to the CSO report dated 15/3/2011 On Employment & Labour costs weekly paid hours in the Public Sector averaged 32.1 as opposed to 31.8 hours in the Private Sector.



That’s the average week worked including part time and full time employees and so is meaningless in this context.


----------



## csirl

Purple said:


> That’s the average week worked including part time and full time employees and so is meaningless in this context.


 
Agree - figures should be quoted in terms of average hours per whole time equivalent.


----------



## Deiseblue

Purple said:


> That’s the average week worked including part time and full time employees and so is meaningless in this context.



Part time workers and full time employees , job sharing and overtime are common to both sectors and as such the CSO figures that show that Public Sector workers work a marginally longer paid week than Private Sector workers is hugely relevant.

That is of course presuming that the CSO employed the parameters I refer to above.

I think it is common sense to presume that an awful lot of factories , shops , Banks , Insurances Companies & Office staff still work a standard 9.30 to 5.30 day with one hour for lunch and two 1/4 hour tea breaks .

As someone who has worked in multiple private sector industries I certainly have found that to be the case.


----------



## Deiseblue

Sunny said:


> I agree. An old collegaue of mine joined the Central Bank last year. Couldn't believe that there are people in there on a 33 hour week. I wouldn't be as mean as you though! I would accept a 37.5 hour week.



That is actually a longer working week than applies in Bank of Ireland which currently stands at 32.5 hours , I presume the same applies in AIB as both bank's terms and conditions are broadly the same.


----------



## shnaek

Can I ask Shawady and Deiseblue what companies they were? It's always been 39+hours where ever I worked.


----------



## RonanC

shnaek said:


> It's always been 39+hours where ever I worked.


 
Shnaek, does this include lunch breaks or would they count as extra hours? 39hr week would be 8am til 5pm or 9am til 6pm?


----------



## Shawady

shnaek said:


> Can I ask Shawady and Deiseblue what companies they were? It's always been 39+hours where ever I worked.


 
It was a well known drinks company.
They had flexi time and you were required to clock in on average 7 hours a day i.e. 35 hours a week.
You were obviously clocked out for lunch break.


----------



## shnaek

RonanC said:


> Shnaek, does this include lunch breaks or would they count as extra hours? 39hr week would be 8am til 5pm or 9am til 6pm?



39 without breaks. 9 til 6 generally.


----------



## RonanC

shnaek said:


> 39 without breaks. 9 til 6 generally.


 
Ok thanks for that.


----------



## Purple

We work 8-4.30 with a half hour for lunch as standard. Most people start between 6.30 and 7.30 and finish between 4.30 and 7.30.


----------



## dereko1969

gianni said:


> Flexi-time is *not* universal in the Civil Service. Some offices have it and some don't. Your statement above is misleading.
> 
> Also misleading is the inference that flexi-time leads to more days off. The Civil Service flexi-time arrangement (when available!) allows the employee to structure their working time within some strict limits... the general jist being that the employee has the potential to work an additional 1.5 days in a given 4 week period and then to take this time within the next 4 week time period - subject to management approval.
> 
> All time off gained is equal to extra time worked.


 
I've worked in 4 Government Departments and flexi-time was available to staff at certain levels in all those Departments, I never stated that flexi-time was available to all, you're being misled by something you thought I stated which I didn't.

I'm sorry but your logic is seriously impaired where you state that working flexi does not lead to *more days off*, it does. The fact that they have been worked on previous days where the staff member was attending work anyway does not negate that fact.

As for Purple's statement that anything over 20 days annual leave is a perk, well that's just rubbish, next we'll have weekends are a perk, time and a half is a perk, getting paid more than the minimum wage is a perk.


----------



## Deiseblue

shnaek said:


> Can I ask Shawady and Deiseblue what companies they were? It's always been 39+hours where ever I worked.



Certainly , it was Bank of Ireland.

I worked 9 to 5 with a 1 hour lunch break with a 1/4 hour break in the morning and another in the afternoon.

I worked similar hours in a Flour Mills , a drinks factory , a furniture manufacturers and a refridgeration company - all with differing starting and clocking off times but all 8 hour days less 1.5 hours for lunch and breaks.


----------



## Purple

Deiseblue said:


> Certainly , it was Bank of Ireland.
> 
> I worked 9 to 5 with a 1 hour lunch break with a 1/4 hour break in the morning and another in the afternoon.
> 
> I worked similar hours in a Flour Mills , a drinks factory , a furniture manufacturers and a refridgeration company - all with differing starting and clocking off times but all 8 hour days less 1.5 hours for lunch and breaks.



OK, we give 15 minutes in the morning paid and, if you are finishing after 6.30, you get another 15 minute paid break at 4.30. That accounts for 1.25 to 2.5 hours a week.


----------



## Purple

dereko1969 said:


> As for Purple's statement that anything over 20 days annual leave is a perk, well that's just rubbish, next we'll have weekends are a perk, time and a half is a perk, getting paid more than the minimum wage is a perk.



No, weekends are not part of a standard week. 20 days holidays are the legal minimum; everything after that is a perk.


----------



## shnaek

Deiseblue said:


> Certainly , it was Bank of Ireland.
> 
> I worked 9 to 5 with a 1 hour lunch break with a 1/4 hour break in the morning and another in the afternoon.
> 
> I worked similar hours in a Flour Mills , a drinks factory , a furniture manufacturers and a refridgeration company - all with differing starting and clocking off times but all 8 hour days less 1.5 hours for lunch and breaks.



I knew it! I'm being screwed! 
This working lark is all a bit of a con. Way too much stress, late nights, weekend work...
In fact, the more I think about it, the more appealing living off the state becomes. Then I can persue my art and not worry about all the commerce...


----------



## gianni

dereko1969 said:


> I've worked in 4 Government Departments and flexi-time was available to staff at certain levels in all those Departments, I never stated that flexi-time was available to all, you're being misled by something you thought I stated which I didn't.



My apologies, I took your statement of:



dereko1969 said:


> Those at the lower grades can work up flexi-time so the 20 days (now  22) could actually end up being 38 days (now 40).



to mean that those at the lower grades can work up flexi-time. I didn't realise that you meant some of those at lower grades can work up flexi-time.



dereko1969 said:


> I'm sorry but your logic is seriously impaired where you state that working flexi does not lead to *more days off*, it does. The fact that they have been worked on previous days where the staff member was attending work anyway does not negate that fact.


 
I concede the point that you might have more entire days off. But as you will have worked up the time over previous days then it is not a perk granting additional time off. It is a perk allowing you to structure your working day to better suit your work/life balance.


----------



## gianni

mammyof2 said:


> Which Departments don't have flexi-time for the relevant grades? I have never come across one that doesn't.



I have a relative working as an EO who does not have flexi-time (don't want to give too much info as she might be identifiable) and also a neighbour of mine is a CO in the local police station - she doesn't have flexi time either.


----------



## frankmac

So now that the Croke park Agreement has celebrated its first birthday would anycone care to give a synopsis of what reforms have been achieved in the first year?


----------



## south_dub

*Holiday entitlements for hours "worked" up*

What is missing from this debate is the fact that many PS workers get holiday entitlements for hours "worked up". 

Example: A PS worker on 35 hours a week could for example leave on Friday at 11 or 12 depending on what hours they have worked during the week. Instead they work till 3 or 4 or 5 and add those 3,4 or 5 hours on to their holidays.

In this way a lot of PS workers do a "normal" week of 38 or 39 hours but are able to build up their holidays.

Two personal experiences on this:

1. Sitting beside a guy on a flight who was PS and had worked up and carried over enough holidays that he was on a holiday a month. His total entitlement that year was 48 days.
2. Sister in law is PS and "works up" a huge number of holidays when she gets pregnant so her paid maternity leave can be extended to something private sector workers can only dream about. Last time she took 10 months paid leave.

So, as always in these debates we don't really hear the real story. Ah well.


----------



## Sunny

south_dub said:


> 1. Sitting beside a guy on a flight who was PS and had worked up and carried over enough holidays that he was on a holiday a month. His total entitlement that year was 48 days.
> 2. Sister in law is PS and "works up" a huge number of holidays when she gets pregnant so her paid maternity leave can be extended to something private sector workers can only dream about. Last time she took 10 months paid leave.


 
I work in the private sector and have seen both things happen.


----------



## Complainer

south_dub said:


> What is missing from this debate is the fact that many PS workers get holiday entitlements for hours "worked up".
> 
> Example: A PS worker on 35 hours a week could for example leave on Friday at 11 or 12 depending on what hours they have worked during the week. Instead they work till 3 or 4 or 5 and add those 3,4 or 5 hours on to their holidays.
> 
> In this way a lot of PS workers do a "normal" week of 38 or 39 hours but are able to build up their holidays.
> 
> Two personal experiences on this:
> 
> 1. Sitting beside a guy on a flight who was PS and had worked up and carried over enough holidays that he was on a holiday a month. His total entitlement that year was 48 days.


You're talking about flexi-time - which is common in the public sector and many parts of the private sector. In the public sector, the usual rule is that you're limited to 1.5 flexi-days off in any given month. If you work up additional time (as many people do), you lose it (as many people do). The max that anybody could be adding to their holidays is 1.5 days in any month.



south_dub said:


> 2. Sister in law is PS and "works up" a huge number of holidays when she gets pregnant so her paid maternity leave can be extended to something private sector workers can only dream about. Last time she took 10 months paid leave.


I worked in a hi-tech multi-national - software company - household name - where the mammies would routinely take 11 months paid leave for each child, and some added on unpaid parental leave. This has nothing to so with being in the public sector.



south_dub said:


> So, as always in these debates we don't really hear the real story. Ah well.


 You're right - we certainly dont hear the real story here on AAM.


----------



## south_dub

Complainer said:


> You're talking about flexi-time - which is common in the public sector and many parts of the private sector. In the public sector, the usual rule is that you're limited to 1.5 flexi-days off in any given month. If you work up additional time (as many people do), you lose it (as many people do). The max that anybody could be adding to their holidays is 1.5 days in any month.
> 
> 
> I worked in a hi-tech multi-national - software company - household name - where the mammies would routinely take 11 months paid leave for each child, and some added on unpaid parental leave. This has nothing to so with being in the public sector.
> 
> 
> You're right - we certainly dont hear the real story here on AAM.



Ah, here we go again. The usual "I have seen it happen in the private sector therefore the fact it is endemic in the public sector is fine".

Again, we dont see the the full picture. Are you referring to PS workers with recent contracts or PS workers on older contracts? I have worked in the private sector for many years and have never seen a new mum take 11 PAID months, there is always an unpaid portion at the end. What is typical in most private sector firms is that you are not allowed to carry over ANY holidays unless there are special circumstances. This is the practice NOW. The point is that the private sector has moved on, the public sector have not.

To silence all the apologists and prevent the usual public sector selectively dishing out statistics I would love to see the following statistic:

Average number of days taken as holidays per year in the private sector and public sector. 

I am not talking about holiday entitlements, no so don't bother. I am talking about the number of actual days taken as a holiday and privilege day and a "lodge your paycheck" day and a worked up day and a carried over day and a "go to races" day and a "xmas shopping" day and etc..

That will tell its own story and everything else is a load of rubbish.


----------



## Sunny

south_dub said:


> Ah, here we go again. The usual "I have seen it happen in the private sector therefore the fact it is endemic in the public sector is fine".
> 
> Again, we dont see the the full picture. Are you referring to PS workers with recent contracts or PS workers on older contracts? I have worked in the private sector for many years and have never seen a new mum take 11 PAID months, there is always an unpaid portion at the end. What is typical in most private sector firms is that you are not allowed to carry over ANY holidays unless there are special circumstances. This is the practice NOW. The point is that the private sector has moved on, the public sector have not.
> 
> To silence all the apologists and prevent the usual public sector selectively dishing out statistics I would love to see the following statistic:
> 
> Average number of days taken as holidays per year in the private sector and public sector.
> 
> I am not talking about holiday entitlements, no so don't bother. I am talking about the number of actual days taken as a holiday and privilege day and a "lodge your paycheck" day and a worked up day and a carried over day and a "go to races" day and a "xmas shopping" day and etc..
> 
> That will tell its own story and everything else is a load of rubbish.


 
So you haven't even seen statistics to back up your rant and are slagging hundreds of thousands of people because of a man on a plane and your sister in law?

There is a forum for letting of stream. You should post there.


----------



## south_dub

Sunny said:


> So you haven't even seen statistics to back up your rant and are slagging hundreds of thousands of people because of a man on a plane and your sister in law?
> 
> There is a forum for letting of stream. You should post there.



Ah lovely, so now I am letting off steam eh? 

Wow.

Look, everything is based on anecdotal evidence until the stats prove it. But there is a LOT of anecdotal evidence from my own experiences and from neighbours and friend who are working in the public sector. I KNOW it goes on and a lot, I personally don't need these stats because I KNOW myself it goes on but I don't have the stats to prove it - great defence by the way ...  attack the fact that there is no proof rather than admit it happens.

Again, the stat that would prove it all is really simple:

How many days were taken as leave or holiday/vacation days in 2010/2009 in the public sector and private sectors? This figures should not just regurgitate the usual "Well, now, eh a worker starting here has to make do with a 22 day entitlement" but actually be the number of days the employee was out of the office, EXCLUDING the usual 11 day sick day "entitlement".


----------



## Complainer

south_dub said:


> Ah, here we go again. The usual "I have seen it happen in the private sector therefore the fact it is endemic in the public sector is fine".
> 
> Again, we dont see the the full picture. Are you referring to PS workers with recent contracts or PS workers on older contracts? I have worked in the private sector for many years and have never seen a new mum take 11 PAID months, there is always an unpaid portion at the end. What is typical in most private sector firms is that you are not allowed to carry over ANY holidays unless there are special circumstances. This is the practice NOW. The point is that the private sector has moved on, the public sector have not.


Now I'm confused. It's not very helpful to refer to PS when are debating public sector and private sector, as both of these being with P. You might want to clarify.

I've also worked in the private sector for many years - 20+ years. I've carried over holidays in some cases, and I've seen people take 11 months paid maternity leave.

You don't have a monopoly of personal experience.


----------



## Leper

If there is one thing I have learned over my many years is to take with a grain of salt anything that is said to me in an aircraft.

Do the people sitting next to you on a plane not talk of getting their fare for €1.50 Return while you (stupid) paid €250.00 One Way anymore? No, of course not, they are all on their 7th holiday this year alone and how awful it is to sit near somebody who actually works for a living. Wisen up, smell the coffee when you are being wound up.

Oh yes, when you are returning from your sun holiday later this year you will learn of the nurse who went to your destination last year and on returning home her doctor advised her she was pregnant.  But, hadn't she eaten a lettuce leave with luminous eggs and a lizard grew inside of her womb. Even this story made the Sunday World a few years ago and enough of eejits believe it.


----------



## Brendan Burgess

Nothing new being added anymore

Brendan


----------

