# Richard Bruton + JLC Reform



## cork (30 May 2011)

Why are the government tageting people who get a little extra for working on a Sunday.

They can't take on groups like Hospital Consultants.

They can't take on the quangos or the public sector.

They even get paid an additional payment themselves for turning up for work.

Some of them even claimed it during the Ash Cloud delayed their flights.

JLCs need reform - but the government seem intent to drive people out of low paid jobs onto welfare.


----------



## shanegl (30 May 2011)

Because it was agreed with the IMF


----------



## Purple (30 May 2011)

shanegl said:


> Because it was agreed with the IMF



...and plenty of jobs covered by JLC's are well paid.


----------



## thedaras (30 May 2011)

Electricians to name but one...
In fact there were many electricians who would be happy to take a pay cut so they can keep their jobs ...


----------



## cork (30 May 2011)

Electricians are better paid than those working in shops + hotels.

I worked in jobs that had no overtime.

But I feel Sunday work deserves an additional payment.


----------



## Sunny (30 May 2011)

cork said:


> But I feel Sunday work deserves an additional payment.


 
Why? If you work in an industry that has a 7 day week, why should one day be seen as 'special'? If we want to go down that road, why not declare Sunday a day or worship or something and close the Country down. 
As far as I concerned the only time extra money should be paid for a normal days work is if there are night shifts or extremely unsociable hours involved. Paying someone time and half or double for working a normal day just because it is a Sunday is absurd.


----------



## villa 1 (30 May 2011)

cork said:


> Electricians are better paid than those working in shops + hotels.
> 
> I worked in jobs that had no overtime.
> 
> But I feel Sunday work deserves an additional payment.


 
And so they should, they are skilled craftsmen who have served an apprenticeship


----------



## cork (30 May 2011)

Most industries could easily be considered a 7 day week.

But government seem to be targeting the low paid.

Why doesn't the government start with the hospital consultants that one of their own negottiated?

Why can't they start the process of benchmarking public sector pay aganist the EU norm?

In a Christian Country is not Sunday to be considered special?

Our governmrnt seems to be spineless targeting those who work unsocial hours while leaving the sacred cows alone.


----------



## Purple (30 May 2011)

cork said:


> Most industries could easily be considered a 7 day week.


 Yes, I agree.



cork said:


> But government seem to be targeting the low paid.


 As has been pointed out to you JLC’s also cover well paid sectors.




cork said:


> Why doesn't the government start with the hospital consultants that one of their own negotiated?


 Why not do both?



cork said:


> Why can't they start the process of benchmarking public sector pay aganist the EU norm?


 Why not benchmark social welfare and state pensions as well? (Answer: Because different countries have different cost bases.)



cork said:


> In a Christian Country is not Sunday to be considered special?


 Maybe. Would you be willing to pay (say)20% more for everything on Sunday?



cork said:


> Our governmrnt seems to be spineless targeting those who work unsocial hours while leaving the sacred cows alone.


JLC’s cover much more than Sunday and antisocial hour premiums.


----------



## cork (30 May 2011)

Purple said:


> JLC’s cover much more than Sunday and antisocial hour premiums.




I agree that reform is needed. 

Would you be willing to pay (say)20% more for everything on Sunday?

Does the state already pay Sunday Premiums to some workers?

What is good for the goose is good for the gander - but we have a  government afraid to take on the public sector.

Take the hospital consultants?

Teachers with 3 month holidays?

Don't see Richard Bruton or FG taking these on.


----------



## Purple (30 May 2011)

cork said:


> I agree that reform is needed.
> 
> Would you be willing to pay (say)20% more for everything on Sunday?
> 
> ...



Your post is confusing. Are you answering my points or agreeing with them?


----------



## thedaras (30 May 2011)

Am I correct that the public sector get paid double for Sunday work?

If so it seems very unfair that the private sector (JLCs) would be the only ones to take the hit??..ill resist saying "once again"


----------



## Purple (31 May 2011)

thedaras said:


> Am I correct that the public sector get paid double for Sunday work?
> 
> If so it seems very unfair that the private sector (JLCs) would be the only ones to take the hit??..ill resist saying "once again"



I have no idea if they do or not but rule changes should apply to all.


----------



## cork (31 May 2011)

Purple said:


> Your post is confusing. Are you answering my points or agreeing with them?




The government are shamelessly targeting those who work unsocail hours and ho are on low pay. They lack the courage to tackle work practices in the public sector. They are not purposing a level playing pitch. They are purposing differant practices for the lower paid.

They completely ignore work practices by the public sector.


----------



## liaconn (31 May 2011)

Many small businesses simply cannot afford to pay higher salaries on a Sunday. If they do have to , it could mean having to let someone go or simply not opening on Sunday and losing business.


----------



## Protocol (31 May 2011)

Sunday premium hours should be reformed, after:

*Legal fees* fall, e.g 350 per hour to do probate (search AAM)

*Accountancy and audit* fees fall, e.g. some accountants asked NAMA for 800 per hour

*Commercial rents* fall

*Dental fees* fall, e.g. some charge 360 per hour

*GP* fees fall, e.g. from 50 to 30-40

*Medical consultants* fees fall


----------



## Protocol (31 May 2011)

[broken link removed]

Employers contribute *65,000 pa* on average to the pensions of 147 executives in Irish plcs

They contribute under 5k pa to their overall staff, on average.

And yet we want to push low wages lower??


----------



## Sunny (31 May 2011)

Protocol said:


> Sunday premium hours should be reformed, after:
> 
> *Legal fees* fall, e.g 350 per hour to do probate (search AAM)
> 
> ...


 
Everyone agrees that the cost of professional services needs to fall but that has nothing to do with what is being discussed. It is not an either/or situation.


----------



## Sunny (31 May 2011)

Protocol said:


> [broken link removed]
> 
> Employers contribute *65,000 pa* on average to the pensions of 147 executives in Irish plcs
> 
> ...


 
Irish plcs paying those contributions are not SME's. They are not hotels. They are not bars and restaurants.


----------



## Purple (31 May 2011)

Protocol said:


> Sunday premium hours should be reformed, after:
> 
> *Legal fees* fall, e.g 350 per hour to do probate (search AAM)
> 
> ...



Do remember that the fee charged by a Dentist and GP covers the clerical staff, receptionist, rent, rates insurance etc. It is not their wage.

I am sure that the same applied for some accountants. 

If rents drop then fees will drop.


----------



## becky (31 May 2011)

thedaras said:


> Am I correct that the public sector get paid double for Sunday work?
> 
> If so it seems very unfair that the private sector (JLCs) would be the only ones to take the hit??..ill resist saying "once again"



Yes it's double time on a Sunday.  I presume if it applies to private sector, the public sector would be expected to follow.


----------



## Protocol (1 Jun 2011)

Sunny said:


> Everyone agrees that the cost of professional services needs to fall but that has nothing to do with what is being discussed. It is not an either/or situation.


 
I say start at the top,and work down.


----------



## Protocol (3 Jun 2011)

Here are some details of the rates charged by accountants dealing with the Quinn Ins administration.  Bear these in mind when calling for lower min wages or lower JLC rates.

http://www.independent.ie/business/...ge-euro17m-for-three-months-work-2662615.html


"Michael McAteer and Paul McCann of accountants Grant Thornton each charged *an hourly rate of €475*, the court heard. McAteer's fees for the first three months of the year amounted to €168,625, while McCann's amounted to €94,763.

The highest hourly rate charged was *€735 per hour for Simon Sheaf, director of Grant Thornton's UK-based actuarial team, the court heard.*

He received total fees of £103,000 (€117,000) for work carried out in the first three months of the year.

Patrick Dillon and Dara Kelly, both directors of recovery with Grant Thornton, charged fees of €365 an hour and their total fees amounted to €163,000 and €110,000 respectively.

Michael Neary, a partner in Grant Thornton Corporate Finance, charged €475 an hour and received total fees of more than €110,000.


----------



## Purple (3 Jun 2011)

Can someone who operates in the rarefied air of big accountancy tell me if the fees charged are an hourly rate for a team of people or just the dude named on the bill?
If, for example, Grant Thornton had 15 or 20 people backing up their accountants then the costs are high but not exorbitant.


----------



## Latrade (7 Jun 2011)

Purple said:


> Can someone who operates in the rarefied air of big accountancy tell me if the fees charged are an hourly rate for a team of people or just the dude named on the bill?
> If, for example, Grant Thornton had 15 or 20 people backing up their accountants then the costs are high but not exorbitant.


 
With the large accountancies I've dealt with, the operate similarly to the consultancy services I've worked for in that there are scales of fees. If you want the senior, experienced consultants you pay a premium rate, however, if it's a smaller job and you'd be happy with one of the juniors, it's a lower rate.

Where a team has worked on a project, we would have broken down time, etc into the different rates.


----------



## Latrade (7 Jun 2011)

liaconn said:


> Many small businesses simply cannot afford to pay higher salaries on a Sunday. If they do have to , it could mean having to let someone go or simply not opening on Sunday and losing business.


 
This is the point people have missed, in too many cases these agreements have meant job losses. Employees in many of those case had expressed an interest in taking pay cuts, but because of the agreement, the employer was as low on the pay as they could and in the end it meant redundancies.

This is still skirting around the main issue though, wages have fallen across the board and they can't feasibly fall any more as it stands. However, people often see this as a typical employer response. The truth is that pay is the only cost that an employer can actually negotiate or look to reduce. Energy costs, Local Authority rates, transport, insurance, rents, these are all at or higher than boom prices, but companies are being shut out from effective negotiations in most cases. These need to be addressed at the same time.


----------

