# Public service reform



## ATC110 (24 Jan 2020)

There is not one political party or Independent even talking about public service reform or the public cost of the PS superannuation stipend.
This would involve dissolution of the public sector unions as they are the sole reason for poor/no service delivery.
The purpose of public services is not for the benefit of the employees but that’s increasingly the case. Public Sector unions are no longer required due to the numerous employment law protections enjoyed by the PS employees; Larkin would never have envisaged the benefits enshrined in law today.
It’s generally accepted that PS unions are preventing the reforms necessary taking place. 
From workers going on strike to be paid extra for additional training taking place during the working day, the multiple types of paid leave on top of annual leave, which local authority employees are entitled to and rigidity of work practices and work location, major reform is urgently needed.
No government with any budget can ever improve public service delivery until this takes place.


----------



## WolfeTone (24 Jan 2020)

ATC110 said:


> This would involve dissolution of the public sector unions as they are the sole reason for poor/no service delivery.



Was this post moved from the "Rise in extremist politics"?
How are public service unions the sole reason for poor/no service delivery and who are you calling upon to dissolve them?



ATC110 said:


> The purpose of public services is not for the benefit of the employees but that’s increasingly the case.



Public services are a broad brush, could you be a little more specific?



ATC110 said:


> Public Sector unions are no longer required due to the numerous employment law protections enjoyed by the PS employees



Surely union members are best placed to decide if they want to be in a union or not?



ATC110 said:


> It’s generally accepted that PS unions are preventing the reforms necessary taking place.



Is it? Any specific reform in mind?



ATC110 said:


> From workers going on strike to be paid extra for additional training taking place during the working day,



Is this upskilling?



ATC110 said:


> the multiple types of paid leave on top of annual leave



Such as?


----------



## ATC110 (24 Jan 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> _Was this post moved from the "Rise in extremist politics"?
> How are public service unions the sole reason for poor/no service delivery and who are you calling upon to dissolve them?_
> 
> They're preventing reform - their sole interest is the protection of their members rather than service delivery.
> ...


----------



## Sophrosyne (24 Jan 2020)

"Flexi-leave from October to January" ???. 

It would be unbelievable - if it were true, that is.


----------



## WolfeTone (24 Jan 2020)

Sophrosyne said:


> "Flexi-leave from October to January" ???.
> 
> It would be unbelievable - if it were true, that is.



I hope you are not suggesting that its anything but true?


----------



## josh8267 (25 Jan 2020)

The Private Sector Workers Can thank the Public Service Unions in a round about way for Getting the FF/FG/LAB cartel to restore pension age to 65,
Anyone who gets tax relief on there pension Contributions Can Also Thank The Public Service Unions In a Round About Way

When the tax Relief  on pensions first Came into the private sector it was from lobbying by Members of the Cosy Cartel in the private sector for high earning sectors who pointed out they should be allowed to amass large Gold Plated Pensions just like the Unions in the public service had secured for there Members,
Later just like now with pensions  FF/FG /LAB Second Class Menbers Cought Wind Of What Was Going ON ,

There was two things the Political Cartel could have Done  Reform The Public Service Pensions and restrict tax relief
Well you know how that finished up The Had To Give The Same Tax Break To All Of There Second Class Members,,
So a Big thank you to the public service Unions From Average In Come Private Workers,
The Vested Interest  Lobby Groups are already starting to pay , You Know the old FF Election Slogan  Lot Done More To Pay,

When FF/FG/LAB Get Caught out they put there hands into the pockets of there First Class Supporters Pockets As Bertie Would say  For A Dig Out,

I often Hear people talking about public service reform and when I dig a little deeper I find out they Support or are Members of Parties who failed to reform even though the member mouthing off put them in a position to do so,

I worked in the private sector all of my working life in an Engineering Company working on low Margins with very good repeat Business (, I Believe the Public service pension  in around about way was the driving force behind lots of small company pension Schemes,


----------



## cremeegg (25 Jan 2020)

ATC110 said:


> There is not one political party or Independent even talking about public service reform or the public cost of the PS superannuation stipend.
> This would involve dissolution of the public sector unions as they are the sole reason for poor/no service delivery.


To say that public sector unions are the sole reason for poor service delivery, is a bit of a cop-out.

I used to believe this, but I have come increasingly to think that weak management is a larger part of the problem. PPars was primarily a management failure. The cost overruns in the Children's Hospital are primarily a management failure in the making.

The reasons for weak management are manifold, and strong unions are part of the issue, but its not Dublins fault that Mayo can't win an All-Ireland.

The career path for public sector managers, particularly those in senior positions now, was leave school, get a paper pushing job with the health board and work your way up. These people are stars of office politics, brilliant at working the system, not so good at changing the system.

Politics undermines public sector management. Any reform has to avoid offending short term political calculations, which include but are not limited to calculations around workers interests.

Centralising cancer services is a show case of how management can overcome theses issues, but in a well managed health service it could have been implemented much more quickly. And it might also have addressed the issue of people travelling for hours by bus from Donegal to Galway for chemo.


----------



## josh8267 (25 Jan 2020)

cremeegg said:


> To say that public sector unions are the sole reason for poor service delivery, is a bit of a cop-out.
> 
> I used to believe this, but I have come increasingly to think that weak management is a larger part of the problem. PPars was primarily a management failure. The cost overruns in the Children's Hospital are primarily a management failure in the making.
> 
> ...


spot on


----------



## Purple (27 Jan 2020)

ATC110 said:


> There is not one political party or Independent even talking about public service reform or the public cost of the PS superannuation stipend.
> This would involve dissolution of the public sector unions as they are the sole reason for poor/no service delivery.
> The purpose of public services is not for the benefit of the employees but that’s increasingly the case. Public Sector unions are no longer required due to the numerous employment law protections enjoyed by the PS employees; Larkin would never have envisaged the benefits enshrined in law today.
> It’s generally accepted that PS unions are preventing the reforms necessary taking place.
> ...


Unless you feel like answering an endless number of vague questions from Wolfie I wouldn't waste my time, if I was you.
I think you'll find that the Public Service is badly run but not by the people who run it 9yes, I know that doesn't make sense but they are in the Union), efficient and everyone in it works above and beyond the call of  duty. They are all also grossly underpaid.
All gardai, Doctors, Teachers, Nurses and all other so-called front line staff and bordering on super hero status. No, the only problem is the government and "managers".

The above is, or course, despite all evidence to the contrary.

Now, I've saved you a week's worth of your spare time.


----------



## WolfeTone (27 Jan 2020)

Purple said:


> Unless you feel like answering an endless number of vague questions from Wolfie



Ouch! Its the start of a new week and perhaps the January blues have been shed? Time to go full throttle? 

I will leave aside for the moment the inherent authoritarian diktat in ATC110 comment, which would have no place in a constitutional democracy. 
I wont even ask a question, let alone a vague one. The notion of defining public sector reform as primarily, sorry solely, an issue to do with public sector unions is simplistic at best, completely devoid of any understanding of what the public service is and what it is for at worst. 
Just so as to be clear, so im not interpreted as being vague, the OP is clueless.


----------



## ATC110 (27 Jan 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> Ouch! Its the start of a new week and perhaps the January blues have been shed? Time to go full throttle?
> 
> I will leave aside for the moment the inherent authoritarian diktat in ATC110 comment, which would have no place in a constitutional democracy.
> I wont even ask a question, let alone a vague one. The notion of defining public sector reform as primarily, sorry solely, an issue to do with public sector unions is simplistic at best, completely devoid of any understanding of what the public service is and what it is for at worst.


Nothing changes in service delivery due to union intransigence. 



WolfeTone said:


> Just so as to be clear, so im not interpreted as being vague, the OP is clueless.



This is like wrestling with a pig; I'll follow Purple's suggestion


----------



## Purple (27 Jan 2020)

ATC110 said:


> Nothing changes in service delivery due to union intransigence.


The Unions have a veto over any and all changes so yes, in effect they are a big part of the problem but ultimately strikes etc are a failure of management. when employees get to elect their bosses how can we expect anything other than what we have?


----------



## dereko1969 (27 Jan 2020)

What reforms in the Public Sector are you looking for?
Given your point about Public Sector superannuation I presume you want PS employees to have their pension entitlements diminished? What sort of a reduction should they get?
I thought we were due an anti-public sector rant, just like buses now we've had two in a day!


----------



## Purple (27 Jan 2020)

dereko1969 said:


> What reforms in the Public Sector are you looking for?
> Given your point about Public Sector superannuation I presume you want PS employees to have their pension entitlements diminished? What sort of a reduction should they get?
> I thought we were due an anti-public sector rant, just like buses now we've had two in a day!


I'd like to see standardised contracts for all HSE grades so that, for example, nurses at the same grade in each hospital are on the same contract. That would enable far more efficient payroll systems.
I'd like to see best practice formalised across the Hospitals and rolled out in each hospital so that, for example, if St Vincent's hospital have the best method for managing admissions through A&E then all hospitals must use their system etc.
I'd like to see the  retirement age for State employees the same as the State pension age (and that age should be 67 and then 68 and older as we live longer).

I'd like to see far more shared services across the entire State sector.
I'd like to see the Public Services card used for accessing all State services.
I'd like to see self funded pensions for everyone so that we don't foist even more of our costs on our grandchildren and their children.
While that's being rolled out I'd like to see the abolition of the Pension Levy for State employees , to be replaced by a smaller pay cut so that the burden can be shared by retired State employees.

That sort of thing.

Some of the money saved could be used to expand the Public Sector as it has not grown in line with general population or economic growth.


----------



## josh8267 (27 Jan 2020)

Purple said:


> I'd like to see standardised contracts for all HSE grades so that, for example, nurses at the same grade in each hospital are on the same contract. That would enable far more efficient payroll systems.
> I'd like to see best practice formalised across the Hospitals and rolled out in each hospital so that, for example, if St Vincent's hospital have the best method for managing admissions through A&E then all hospitals must use their system etc.
> I'd like to see the  retirement age for State employees the same as the State pension age (and that age should be 67 and then 68 and older as we live longer).
> 
> ...


There will be no changes in the HSE  , While FF/FG/LAB Cosy Cartel  keep speaking out of both sides of there Mouth at the same time,

Try spotting FF/FG/LAB second class supporters around Election Time singing there praises ,in the 30 to 50 age group The good news is the love paying extra tax for FF/FG/LAB to buy there way back to power,
You know that the say about doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different results,


----------



## Purple (28 Jan 2020)

josh8267 said:


> There will be no changes in the HSE  , While FF/FG/LAB Cosy Cartel  keep speaking out of both sides of there Mouth at the same time,
> 
> Try spotting FF/FG/LAB second class supporters around Election Time singing there praises ,in the 30 to 50 age group The good news is the love paying extra tax for FF/FG/LAB to buy there way back to power,
> You know that the say about doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different results,


The alternative is the extreme left of the Shinners, the communists of Solidarity or your local parish pump politician. I'd love to have a centralist progressive party to vote for but all parties in Ireland are well to the left of centre on economic issues.


----------



## Deiseblue (28 Jan 2020)

ATC110 , perhaps you you could outline your proposals to dissolve public sector unions ?
Bearing in mind that employees have a constitutional right to be represented by a Union do you simply suggest that the State simply follows Hitler’s example in outlawing Trade Unions in 1933 and sequestering all their funds ?
Presumably you would also like to see all Private Sector Unions dissolved as well ( a number of Unions represent both public and public sector workers ) - after all by not dissolving private sector unions then the state could be accused of favouritism!
Do you foresee a Strike that would render the State ungovernable?
Bearing in mind the above I would certainly think it would be infinitely simpler to wrestle a slippery pig.
I do look forward to reading your proposals.


----------



## josh8267 (28 Jan 2020)

Purple said:


> The alternative is the extreme left of the Shinners, the communists of Solidarity or your local parish pump politician. I'd love to have a centralist progressive party to vote for but all parties in Ireland are well to the left of centre on economic issues.


I remember the General election in Dec 1992  27 Dail when John Bruton saying he would not go into Government With Democratic  Left ,
After the Election He kept his word he would rather be in opposition than go into Government with Democratic Left,
When the dark forces controlling the leavers of power brought down the first Government ,
Without a General election Neither FF/FG wanted to face the people Forced Brution to Enter Government With the Democratic Party finishing up give all of there TDs position of Influence  From 1994 to 1997, You can trace most of the changes for the good In Ireland  back to This Government,

There are forces within  FF/FG/LAB which need to be broken UP,
I myself have no time for SF unless FF/FG /LAB change how the treat people we will have SF in Government
Looking at the debate last night it seems the worm is turning after years of silence people are beginning to protest about how they were treated by the main Political parties,
Where do people like myself Who see the unfairness because  FG/FF/LAB are afraid to reform the parts of government working against the people,

Just for record I don't buy your line about Unions, Most of the reform needed affecting you and I if you are honest has nothing to do with Unions,


----------



## ATC110 (30 Jan 2020)

Deiseblue said:


> constitutional right to be represented by a Union do you simply suggest that the State simply follows Hitler’s example in outlawing Trade Unions in 1933 and sequestering all their funds ?
> Do you foresee a Strike that would render the State ungovernable?



Then change the constitution. Yes, I agree with that 1933 policy.
Public Sector Unions are the enemy of the people, the real subversives undermining the viability and independence of the state. Every time there is an exchequer surplus it is subsumed in to PS pay (ergo if the Apple $13B is ever released ), in a militant belligerent way discommoding the public most detructively,  rather than being invested in service delivery which is the raison d'etre of the PS . If there's no surplus they incessantly demand more money regardless so the National Debt increases; they don't care whether the state can afford it or not.

When the only guarantees in the public service are that the wages of its employees are paid whether the actual service is delivered or not there's a serious problem; it's purpose is not to pay wages.

The public generally support public sector employees because they are largely ignorant of their job security, wealth and the daily cost to the taxpayer culminating in the two-thirds stipend for their DB pensions. Also, the PS is so large that everyone is directly/indirectly connected to a PS employee so it's seen as an attack on 'us' to critique the PS; easier to attack 'them', the 158 TDs, the cost of the latter being fiscally insignificant.


----------



## Purple (31 Jan 2020)

josh8267 said:


> At110
> All of my family work in the private sector, It upsets me how the heading of your post only mentions Public servants REFORM
> Government REFORM and the closing all Pension loopholes,
> Google
> ...


I find your posts really hard to read. The punctuation, when present, is in the wrong places. There are capital letters everywhere and there is no structure. 
You keep telling people to Google "Pension 370000". Why not post the details of what you are trying to say here? It is a discussion forum after all.

_"The public servant they served us well up to there retirement,"_ Are you related to Yoda?

To be clear; whatever loopholes there are in private sector pensions the abyss the state is facing is the cost of unfunded State pensions over the coming decades. They will suck up more and more of our current expenditure until the State is bankrupt again.


----------



## josh8267 (31 Jan 2020)

Purple said:


> I find your posts really hard to read. The punctuation, when present, is in the wrong places. There are capital letters everywhere and there is no structure.
> You keep telling people to Google "Pension 370000". Why not post the details of what you are trying to say here? It is a discussion forum after all.
> 
> _"The public servant they served us well up to there retirement,"_ Are you related to Yoda?
> ...


I know for sure the public servants I grew up with who are now retiring are as good as the people now retiring in the private sector,

The are the same people If I switched the private sector workers I know into the public sector workers I know, The same service I would get,

The only thing I know for sure is The parties I voted for all of my life have left massive loopholes In the system for vested Interest group which need to be reformed,
By the way Googling loopholes will not get you a good result,


----------



## Purple (31 Jan 2020)

josh8267 said:


> The are the same people If I switched the private sector workers I know into the public sector workers I know, The same service I would get,





Purple said:


> _"The public servant they served us well up to there retirement,"_ Are you related to Yoda?



Right I was it seems.


----------



## Deiseblue (31 Jan 2020)

So a constitutional change enabling a total ban on Trade Unions in the State and a sequestering of their funds following Hitler’s example in 1933 is what you wish to see happen .
In even your most optimistic moments do you really think that there is even the remotest chance that this unlikeliest of events will ever happen ?
We are only gradually seeing Public Sector salaries returning to 2007 pre recession levels with the Government as employers and the Unions representing employees agreeing graduated increases over that time period as finances improved - pay negotiations after all are a two way street.
Indeed the only Public Sector wide strike I remember was a one day affair years ago and subsequent strike days by nurses and teachers only lasted a couple of days.
The maximum public sector pension is 50% of final salary for some and 50% of a career averaged salary for others depending on when you were first employed .
Sure there is a lump sum equivalent to 1.5 times your salary after 40 years service but I’m sure employees would far prefer to have the option of availing of a 2/3rds pension given life expectancy levels .
Unlike me , a retiree from a private sector DB scheme , Public Sector employees do not receive the OAP rather it is integrated into their pension and all this for contributions equating to approximately three times what I contributed towards my infinitely better scheme .
I take great consolation in knowing that your wishes will simply remain wishes.


----------



## ATC110 (31 Jan 2020)

josh8267 said:


> I know for sure the public servants I grew up with who are now retiring are as good as the people now retiring in the private sector,
> 
> The are the same people If I switched the private sector workers I know into the public sector workers I know, The same service I would get,
> 
> ...



What?


----------



## ATC110 (31 Jan 2020)

Deiseblue said:


> So a constitutional change enabling a total ban on Trade Unions in the State and a sequestering of their funds following Hitler’s example in 1933 is what you wish to see happen .
> In even your most optimistic moments do you really think that there is even the remotest chance that this unlikeliest of events will ever happen ?
> We are only gradually seeing Public Sector salaries returning to 2007 pre recession levels with the Government as employers and the Unions representing employees agreeing graduated increases over that time period as finances improved - pay negotiations after all are a two way street.
> Indeed the only Public Sector wide strike I remember was a one day affair years ago and subsequent strike days by nurses and teachers only lasted a couple of days.
> ...



No mention that PS workers only pay circa one third of the cost of their future "reduced pay" with the taxpayer paying the remainder; it's not a pension as that would suggest it's funded rather than financed out of day-to-day taxation.
Due to diminishing returns Defined Benefit pensions are virtually obsolete now so why should one sector be shielded from the rigours of the free market economy with the taxpayer funding it? Put them all on fully self-financed Defined Contribution schemes.
Public Sector Unions hold the country to ransom to get what they want by suspending essential services and/or discommoding the public. They are the real subversive organisations undermining the future viability and sovereignty of the state.


----------



## Deiseblue (31 Jan 2020)

Again absolute wishful thinking - Trade Unions major function is to protect and where possible enhance the terms and conditions of their members for which they need make no apologies .
It simply goes to show that you are always better off in a Union than not.
Whereas I’m simply pointing out the realities of the mutually agreed position between employer and employee I’m afraid your wishes/solutions are simply pie in the sky.


----------



## WolfeTone (1 Feb 2020)

ATC110 said:


> Defined Benefit pensions are virtually obsolete now so why should one sector be shielded from the rigours of the free market economy with the taxpayer funding it?



So you want to invoke Hitlers policy of outlawing trade unions. 
Do you realize how that sounds? 

We live under a constitutional democracy, I respect your right to hold the views that you do. 
But only insofar as that you respect my right to hold my views that I do (being the right to be a member of a trade union). 
Do you respect my right, and others, to hold such a view? 

It may be of some relevance to countenance that trade unions exist across the world. The only exception, thinking off the top of my head, is Saudi Arabia. 
Are you an Arab prince?


----------



## Purple (1 Feb 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> So you want to invoke Hitlers policy of outlawing trade unions.
> Do you realize how that sounds?
> 
> We live under a constitutional democracy, I respect your right to hold the views that you do.
> ...


Trade Unions are a big part of the problem in that they protect the haves from the have-nots. They styme reform and are an enemy of the public good, as are all vested interest groups. If they weren't an enemy of the public good then they wouldn't be doing their job as, at their core, they are there to get as much money for as little work for their members. The result is that precious State income is wasted, old people die on trolleys, children with special needs don't get the support they need, there's no money for youth mental health services so children's lives are ruined before they start (or ended before they start). The list is endless. 

Unions are most of the holes in the leaky bucket that is the State sector. In my opinion the people who run them and the people in them who are not agitating for reform have blood on their hands. I fully respect your right to support such organisations but I find it tragic that you do and I say that not trying to score a point, rather I believe it deeply. Trade Unions have become the pigs at the table at the end of Orwell's Animal Farm and the people they were set up to represent are outside in the cold looking in the windows. 

I wouldn't ban Unions, maybe because of my family's links to the foundation of the Trade Union movement in this country, but I would hope that they could be more than the amoral vested interest groups that will sacrifice absolutely anything and anyone on the altar of that self interests.


----------



## WolfeTone (1 Feb 2020)

Purple said:


> Trade Unions are a big part of the problem in that they protect the haves from the have-nots. They styme reform and are an enemy of the public good, as are all vested interest groups. If they weren't an enemy of the public good then they wouldn't be doing their job as, at their core, they are there to get as much money for as little work for their members. The result is that precious State income is wasted, old people die on trolleys, children with special needs don't get the support they need, there's no money for youth mental health services so children's lives are ruined before they start (or ended before they start). The list is endless.
> 
> Unions are most of the holes in the leaky bucket that is the State sector. In my opinion the people who run them and the people in them who are not agitating for reform have blood on their hands. I fully respect your right to support such organisations but I find it tragic that you do and I say that not trying to score a point, rather I believe it deeply. Trade Unions have become the pigs at the table at the end of Orwell's Animal Farm and the people they were set up to represent are outside in the cold looking in the windows.
> 
> I wouldn't ban Unions, maybe because of my family's links to the foundation of the Trade Union movement in this country, but I would hope that they could be more than the amoral vested interest groups that will sacrifice absolutely anything and anyone on the altar of that self interests.



I couldn't disagree more.
That said im not immune from criticising my own trade union or trade unions in general for some positions they have taken in the past .
But to conflate that as evidence of 'blood on hands' and proof that 'old people die on trolleys' is down to them is silly.


----------



## ATC110 (1 Feb 2020)

Deiseblue said:


> Again absolute wishful thinking - Trade Unions major function is to protect and where possible enhance the terms and conditions of their members for which they need make no apologies .
> It simply goes to show that you are always better off in a Union than not.
> Whereas I’m simply pointing out the realities of the mutually agreed position between employer and employee I’m afraid your wishes/solutions are simply pie in the sky.



PS trade unions are unnecessary and an oxymoron; workers' rights are enshrined in national and EU law and working for the PS is not a 'trade'. The government is the employer, paying these gold-plated wages and conditions from borrowed funds adding to the national debt. They're not some avaricious arch-capitalist organisation.
PS militant union intransigence has led to an embedded and entitled workforce who are on a perpetual work-to-rule and totally inflexible. Dail staff on strike for more pay to use the infamous printer being a case in point. No wonder the government has handed over responsibility to the private sector for housing, care and nursing provision - staff can be employed on an as-and-when needed basis rather than legion numbers of underworked and overpaid PS staff who are virtually unsackable whether there's work for them or not


----------



## ATC110 (1 Feb 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> So you want to invoke Hitlers policy of outlawing trade unions.
> Do you realize how that sounds?
> 
> We live under a constitutional democracy, I respect your right to hold the views that you do.
> ...



What?


----------



## josh8267 (1 Feb 2020)

ATC110 said:


> PS trade unions are unnecessary and an oxymoron; workers' rights are enshrined in national and EU law and working for the PS is not a 'trade'. The government is the employer, paying these gold-plated wages and conditions from borrowed funds adding to the national debt. They're not some avaricious arch-capitalist organisation.
> PS militant union intransigence has led to an embedded and entitled workforce who are on a perpetual work-to-rule and totally inflexible. Dail staff on strike for more pay to use the infamous printer being a case in point. No wonder the government has handed over responsibility to the private sector for housing, care and nursing provision - staff can be employed on an as-and-when needed basis rather than legion numbers of underworked and overpaid PS staff who are virtually unsackable whether there's work for them or not


When I see views like the above I know proper Government reform will never happen there is much reform needed in the private sector than the public sector,


----------



## Sophrosyne (1 Feb 2020)

ATC110 said:


> No wonder the government has handed over responsibility to the private sector for housing, care and nursing provision - staff can be employed on an as-and-when needed basis rather than legion numbers of underworked and overpaid PS staff who are virtually unsackable whether there's work for them or not



Do you know that agency nursing costs the exchequer more than public sector nursing equivalents?

Absolutely, reform is needed but you are not going about this the right way.


----------



## josh8267 (1 Feb 2020)

Purple said:


> Trade Unions are a big part of the problem in that they protect the haves from the have-nots. They styme reform and are an enemy of the public good, as are all vested interest groups. If they weren't an enemy of the public good then they wouldn't be doing their job as, at their core, they are there to get as much money for as little work for their members. The result is that precious State income is wasted, old people die on trolleys, children with special needs don't get the support they need, there's no money for youth mental health services so children's lives are ruined before they start (or ended before they start). The list is endless.
> 
> Unions are most of the holes in the leaky bucket that is the State sector. In my opinion the people who run them and the people in them who are not agitating for reform have blood on their hands. I fully respect your right to support such organisations but I find it tragic that you do and I say that not trying to score a point, rather I believe it deeply. Trade Unions have become the pigs at the table at the end of Orwell's Animal Farm and the people they were set up to represent are outside in the cold looking in the windows.
> 
> I wouldn't ban Unions, maybe because of my family's links to the foundation of the Trade Union movement in this country, but I would hope that they could be more than the amoral vested interest groups that will sacrifice absolutely anything and anyone on the altar of that self interests.


Until we see major reform and the closing off loopholes and fairness there cannot be any reform ,

They is a lot of vested interest groups ripping the taxpayer  and giving nothing back in return,

They are bringing this country down and most don't want to see but they will pay for is in the future and i am not talking about Unions, in fact unions in some cases could do more to point out what is going on because long term it will affect there members,


----------



## MOB (1 Feb 2020)

Deiseblue said:


> Unlike me , a retiree from a private sector DB scheme , Public Sector employees do not receive the OAP rather it is integrated into their pension and all this for contributions equating to approximately three times what I contributed towards my infinitely better scheme .



Ah come on now;  no point comparing apples with unicorns;  You have said before that you took the early retirement package from BOI.  Your pension is the result of a clearly unsustainable arrangement with a bank that was bailed out by the rest of us and on pension terms no longer offered by that bank anyway.


----------



## josh8267 (1 Feb 2020)

MOB said:


> Ah come on now;  no point comparing apples with unicorns;  You have said before that you took the early retirement package from BOI.  Your pension is the result of a clearly unsustainable arrangement with a bank that was bailed out by the rest of us and on pension terms no longer offered by that bank anyway.


One more reason why reform is needed in the private sector


----------



## MOB (1 Feb 2020)

josh8267 said:


> One more reason why reform is needed in the private sector



Well, perhaps more is needed.  OK - no perhaps about it;   But the point is that BOI was able to drop its unsustainable scheme.


----------



## Deiseblue (2 Feb 2020)

MOB said:


> Ah come on now;  no point comparing apples with unicorns;  You have said before that you took the early retirement package from BOI.  Your pension is the result of a clearly unsustainable arrangement with a bank that was bailed out by the rest of us and on pension terms no longer offered by that bank anyway.


I have posted on many occasions the details of my extremely generous early retirement package from Bank of Ireland .
I did this in various threads to illustrate exactly where the “ rolls royce “ type pensions exist particularly when one can claim the OAP in addition to one’s occupational pension unlike public sector employees.
I also posted this information to illustrate the benefits of working in a hugely unionised sector.
The defined benefit pension scheme still exists in Bank of Ireland ( indeed they would have loved to have dropped it but thankfully the Union kiboshed that ) - my wife retired some 10 years after me on exactly the same terms albeit with longer service and therefore a more generous pension and a larger lump sum.
All Bank of Ireland staff recruited before 2007 will remain as deferred members of the DB scheme until retirement so this scheme could feasibly run for another 33/34 years , indeed such is the Bank’s desperation to alter this scheme they offered to buy back deferred members pensions with little success.
Employees recruited post 2007 have access to a life balanced scheme which is part defined benefit and part voluntary defined contributions - contributions to the DC portion being voluntary .
An employee can contribute 3% to the DC scheme which will be matched by the Bank - employees received a 3% pay increase to set off their contributions.
It should also be noted that such employees can also claim the OAP in addition to their occupational pension.
This at a time when the deficit in the DB pension was running at 1.6 billion euro ( thankfully the deficit has been reduced to approx 400 million ) , I believe that the Union did an extremely good job in negotiating the new hybrid scheme , a scheme apparently that has proved attractive to other companies.


----------



## Leper (2 Feb 2020)

Déise, you continuously post better than most on this forum. You sometimes appear to be the one cured leper who returned to say thanks. You make no illusions especially with your union references especially on the good pay-off you received when the bank decided to ditch you. You earned every penny of it and you owe nobody any apology for what you got.

Don't forget it paid the bank to get rid of you. BOI and AIB brought in experts to implement early-retirement/voluntary exit deals. The banks made money on these deals when everything is considered. You made a few bob too and best of luck to you. Enjoy.

Incidentally, I heard recently of the demise of Johnny Matthews,(Waterford FC) an excellent footballer who made many of his team-mates look good.


----------



## Deiseblue (2 Feb 2020)

Thanks Leper .
Johnny died on Christmas Day , won a record 7 League titles , scored against Man United and Celtic and had a goal wrongly disallowed against Real Madrid.
More importantly a lovely guy who brought great joy to the City.


----------



## Purple (3 Feb 2020)

Sophrosyne said:


> Do you know that agency nursing costs the exchequer more than public sector nursing equivalents?


No they don't. The State doesn't have to fund the pension of the agency nurse etc. The total cost of an agency is far lower.


----------



## Purple (3 Feb 2020)

Deiseblue said:


> This at a time when the deficit in the DB pension was running at 1.6 billion euro ( thankfully the deficit has been reduced to approx 400 million ) , I believe that the Union did an extremely good job in negotiating the new hybrid scheme , a scheme apparently that has proved attractive to other companies.


Funded by bailout money if I remember correctly.
The bank has to make massive profits to fund that DB pension scheme. I hope Leper considers that when he is thinking about how the banks "robbed" him when he had a mortgage. 
Your pension is paid for my mortgage holders, small businesses and large businesses. 
I don't begrudge you any of it; you took the job knowing that a fantastic pension was part of the package. State employees do the same. The package (pay and pension) for a average Garda is worth over €100,000 a year. The package for the average nurse is worth over €70,000 a year. I've no problem with what they earn. I do have a problem when their Union representatives tell lies about it. 
My issue with the State sector is waste and inefficiency, not pay and pensions.
I completely agree that there is waste and inefficiency in the private sector but for the most part they are not providing essential public services.


----------



## Leper (3 Feb 2020)

Purple said:


> No they don't. The State doesn't have to fund the pension of the agency nurse etc. The total cost of an agency is far lower.



The cost per hour of an agency nurse is far higher than the rate paid to a staff nurse. Yes the agency pays for the agency nurse's holidays (inbuilt+) into the much higher hourly rate charged to the hospital. The agency doesn't pay the agency nurse his/her pension, the state does. Now an agency nurse arrives for say an evening's work or for night duty having worked earlier in another hospital; the increased chances of cross contamination come into play. What I am saying is usually the rule not the exception.


----------



## Purple (3 Feb 2020)

Leper said:


> The cost per hour of an agency nurse is far higher than the rate paid to a staff nurse. Yes the agency pays for the agency nurse's holidays (inbuilt+) into the much higher hourly rate charged to the hospital. The agency doesn't pay the agency nurse his/her pension, the state does.


The State does not pay the agency Nurse the same pension that it pays to a staff Nurse.


Leper said:


> Now an agency nurse arrives for say an evening's work or for night duty having worked earlier in another hospital; the increased chances of cross contamination come into play. What I am saying is usually the rule not the exception.


The working time act should stop that happening.


----------



## Purple (3 Feb 2020)

The important thing is not how much State employees get paid but rather the efficiency of the structures they work within.
Waste is structural.


----------



## Leper (3 Feb 2020)

Purple said:


> The important thing is not how much State employees get paid but rather the efficiency of the structures they work within.
> Waste is structural.



I don't know what you mean by "Waste is structural."



Purple said:


> The State does not pay the agency Nurse the same pension that it pays to a staff Nurse.
> 
> The working time act should stop that happening.



The Agency Nurse (most likely) will have a pension plan of his/her own and perhaps has a pension from the hospital already (Agency Nurses are very often former hospital nurses from the public sector and even work in the former capacity of staff nurse in even the same ward). We're getting involved in semantics here. Very often a retired hospital nurse has a hospital plus a state pension. The nurse is entitled to these in specific circumstances. But, have no doubt about it in the big picture (and the practical picture) Agency nurses cost the tax payer more financially, such is the nature of the work. The chances of Agency nurses bringing infection from another hospital to another cannot be ignored either. If you think I'm talking bunkum, the next time you visit a hospital just look at the amount of hospital staff leaving the building and not using the hand cleansers  near the door.

What Purple thinks the Working Time Act should stop and how it actually works are at odds. The nurses are not to blame for this.


----------



## Purple (3 Feb 2020)

Leper said:


> But, have no doubt about it in the big picture (and the practical picture) Agency nurses cost the tax payer more financially, such is the nature of the work.


That is incorrect. The State is paying the agency nurse an hourly rate for the hours they work. 
If they employ a staff nurse they will also be funding their pension. That is a massive extra cost (at least 35% on top of their pay) plus their other perks. If the agency nurse has a state pension from another source that is not relevant as there is no additional state pension liability accruing due to their employment as an agency nurse.


----------



## Purple (3 Feb 2020)

Leper said:


> I don't know what you mean by "Waste is structural."


Process duplication, inefficient systems etc.


----------



## Leo (3 Feb 2020)

Purple said:


> Process duplication, inefficient systems etc.



Plus factor in that incompetent or lazy agency nurses don't last.


----------



## Purple (3 Feb 2020)

Leo said:


> Plus factor in that incompetent or lazy agency nurses don't last.


Yes, that's a bonus as it is impossible to get rid of incompetent or lazy Staff nurses.


----------



## ATC110 (3 Feb 2020)

Sophrosyne said:


> Do you know that agency nursing costs the exchequer more than public sector nursing equivalents?
> 
> Absolutely, reform is needed but you are not going about this the right way.



You are making a simplistic comparison based on hourly pay rates. Factor in the superannuation subsidy, 3 months full pay plus 3 months half pay sick leave every five years, compassionate leave, perpetual work to rule, virtual unsackability and general inflexibility then agency nurses are a much more prudent choice. 



Sophrosyne said:


> Absolutely, reform is needed* but you are not going about this the right way*.



Until a government is prepared to take on the PS unions the above-mentioned untenable situation will remain and service delivery will deteriorate further


----------



## Purple (3 Feb 2020)

josh8267 said:


> Not much a employer can do public or private if a worker is double jobbing ,I know lots of people who double job ,there main employer has no way of knowing what they spent there time doing  once they finish work until the return again,  Employer's can only make sure they are not breaking the working time act, Employee's  breaking they act doing agency type work are harder to police,


It's a bit different when they are working for the same employer in both jobs. They only have one PPS number. Standardisation of contracts for nurses across all hospitals would save the State tens of millions a year. Of course the Unions won't let that happen. They don't care about waste but that is exactly the sort of process duplication that I am talking about.


----------



## Purple (3 Feb 2020)

Leper said:


> What Purple thinks the Working Time Act should stop and how it actually works are at odds. The nurses are not to blame for this


No, their employer and their Union are to blame. The nurse who knowingly breaks the working time act by working as a Staff nurse and an agency nurse should be sacked on the spot if caught.


----------



## Purple (3 Feb 2020)

When Irish Water was set up 4000 Council Employees (calling them workers would be stretching it) who ran the water network from all over the country were moved into Irish water. Simply by centralising the running of the water infrastructure it was realised that . SIPTU used its veto over all government decisions to ensure that the other 2000 were paid for doing nothing. That's 2000 out of 4000. 
There are 102,000 people working for the HSE (67,000 direct and 35,000 indirect). How many of them could be got rid of if things were structured properly? 
The average pay for a Public Sector employee is €50,500. Including the cost of their pension that figure is around €70,000. Therefore the 2000 slackers in Irish Water cost the State €14 million a year or around a half a billion over their working life. 

How much could be saved in the HSE?
If that money was saved;
How many more hospitals could be built?
How many more nurses would be employed?
How many children with special needs could be helped to have a fulfilled life?
How many families could be saved from the tragedy of teenage suicide?
How many drug rehabilitation places could be provided?

Is it still unreasonable to say that the people who resist that change have blood on their hands?


----------



## josh8267 (3 Feb 2020)

Purple said:


> No, their employer and their Union are to blame. The nurse who knowingly breaks the working time act by working as a Staff nurse and an agency nurse should be sacked on the spot if caught.


There are lots of employers in the private sector not breaking the working time act, but know there employees are , I haven't seen anyone sacked yet in the private sector,
Its a big problem in the private sector from a safety point of view ,Public and other employees are being put in danger all the time,
Employees whose overtime are restricted by the work in time act in there main job's often finish up having to do away more hours to hold there 2nd job ,


----------



## josh8267 (3 Feb 2020)

Purple said:


> When Irish Water was set up 4000 Council Employees (calling them workers would be stretching it) who ran the water network from all over the country were moved into Irish water. Simply by centralising the running of the water infrastructure it was realised that . SIPTU used its veto over all government decisions to ensure that the other 2000 were paid for doing nothing. That's 2000 out of 4000.
> There are 102,000 people working for the HSE (67,000 direct and 35,000 indirect). How many of them could be got rid of if things were structured properly?
> The average pay for a Public Sector employee is €50,500. Including the cost of their pension that figure is around €70,000. Therefore the 2000 slackers in Irish Water cost the State €14 million a year or around a half a billion over their working life.
> 
> ...


The main parties in Ireland FF?FG/LAB at present are out bidding one another to spend as much money as possible, if the take in one euro in tax they want to spend two, 
Might as well see the public service getting it as vested interest in the private sector, so says a retired  private sector worker, josh,


----------



## Leper (3 Feb 2020)

Purple said:


> No, their employer and their Union are to blame. The nurse who knowingly breaks the working time act by working as a Staff nurse and an agency nurse should be sacked on the spot if caught.



Blame the employer, blame the union, blame the nurse.  Nurses who work for hospitals and agencies simultaneously do not contravene any act. They are entitled to do so. Furthermore, an agency nurse is entitled to work in more than one hospital on the same day and does not contravene any act either.  Many, many nurses work as little as eight hours weekly, others will work more and there are some fulltime nurses who work 84 hours weekly (7x12 hour shifts). Nurses on lesser hours can legally work for an agency. This suits nurses as they can largely choose the hours they wish to work.

Even before any union would get involved if one of them were sacked, hospital managements would be up in arms as there would be a worse nurse shortage.


----------



## Purple (3 Feb 2020)

Leper said:


> Blame the employer, blame the union, blame the nurse.  Nurses who work for hospitals and agencies simultaneously do not contravene any act. They are entitled to do so. Furthermore, an agency nurse is entitled to work in more than one hospital on the same day and does not contravene any act either.  Many, many nurses work as little as eight hours weekly, others will work more and there are some fulltime nurses who work 84 hours weekly (7x12 hour shifts). Nurses on lesser hours can legally work for an agency. This suits nurses as they can largely choose the hours they wish to work.
> 
> Even before any union would get involved if one of them were sacked, hospital managements would be up in arms as there would be a worse nurse shortage.


I think you need to check your facts there Leper. Nurses work a 39 hour week. If they do 12 hour shifts then they do 3 shifts a week. If they choose to do overtime, of work as an agency nurse or deliver pizza outside of those hours then fair play to them but that's their own business.

Again, the issue is structural reform. The framing of such discussions in an emotional and emotive context suits their unionised brethren in the Irish Times and the Public Sector Broadcaster, RTE, but it doesn't suit the people of Ireland who suffer the consequences of the gross structural inefficiencies within the State Sector. But keep on message, conrade.


----------



## josh8267 (3 Feb 2020)

some work one week on one off


----------



## Leper (4 Feb 2020)

Purple said:


> I think you need to check your facts there Leper. Nurses work a 39 hour week. If they do 12 hour shifts then they do 3 shifts a week. If they choose to do overtime, of work as an agency nurse or deliver pizza outside of those hours then fair play to them but that's their own business.
> 
> Again, the issue is structural reform. The framing of such discussions in an emotional and emotive context suits their unionised brethren in the Irish Times and the Public Sector Broadcaster, RTE, but it doesn't suit the people of Ireland who suffer the consequences of the gross structural inefficiencies within the State Sector. But keep on message, conrade.


Hi Mr Purple,
1. "Nurses work a 39 hour week" - You've got that spectacularly wrong; I can almost hear every hospital nurse in the country laughing and guffawing, I kid you not. Have you heard of the week-on-week-off system where nurses work 84 hours night duty in Week 1 and are off in Week 2? They are "compensated" for the additional hours worked too. A fulltime nurse is paid for 39 hours weekly basic pay. I had been under the impression that you knew how hospitals are staffed, but I am wrong.

2. Your second point is in your head and with respect perhaps not in the head of most others. But, keep on posting. Union membership is on the increase because of such posts. I shared a jacuzzi in the leisure centre last night with some of my union friends and we concurred that you are one of the union's excellent recruiters. Keep it up!


----------



## Purple (4 Feb 2020)

Leper said:


> 1. "Nurses work a 39 hour week" - You've got that spectacularly wrong; I can almost hear every hospital nurse in the country laughing and guffawing, I kid you not. Have you heard of the week-on-week-off system where nurses work 84 hours night duty in Week 1 and are off in Week 2? They are "compensated" for the additional hours worked too. A fulltime nurse is paid for 39 hours weekly basic pay. I had been under the impression that you knew how hospitals are staffed, but I am wrong.


The standard nursing roster is 3 x 12 hour shifts one week and 4 x 12 hours the following week. With standard overtime rates this adds about 25% to their income. If the nurse is working 84 hours in a week then they will get 106.5 hours pay, with two weeks off on full pay in addition that works out at 61.5 pay hours a week or 184.5 pay hours for 84 hours worked. I'd take your hand off for that sort of a fantastic roster.


----------



## Leper (4 Feb 2020)

Purple said:


> The standard nursing roster is 3 x 12 hour shifts one week and 4 x 12 hours the following week. With standard overtime rates this adds about 25% to their income. If the nurse is working 84 hours in a week then they will get 106.5 hours pay, with two weeks off on full pay in addition that works out at 61.5 pay hours a week or 184.5 pay hours for 84 hours worked. I'd take your hand off for that sort of a fantastic roster.



Purple, I 


Purple said:


> The standard nursing roster is 3 x 12 hour shifts one week and 4 x 12 hours the following week. With standard overtime rates this adds about 25% to their income. If the nurse is working 84 hours in a week then they will get 106.5 hours pay, with two weeks off on full pay in addition that works out at 61.5 pay hours a week or 184.5 pay hours for 84 hours worked. I'd take your hand off for that sort of a fantastic roster.





Purple said:


> The standard nursing roster is 3 x 12 hour shifts one week and 4 x 12 hours the following week. With standard overtime rates this adds about 25% to their income. If the nurse is working 84 hours in a week then they will get 106.5 hours pay, with two weeks off on full pay in addition that works out at 61.5 pay hours a week or 184.5 pay hours for 84 hours worked. I'd take your hand off for that sort of a fantastic roster.



I thought Purple would reply something along the lines "Hey Guys, I got that wrong . . . " But, no - Purple comes on with standard this and standard that (more nursing hours calculations he just made up and are spectacularly wrong also). Purple you got it wrong and you're getting it wrong again. When in a hole stop digging (standard local union talk whenever we goofed, but at least we'd admit to our errors, something others seldom did). I think I'll have to come out of retirement to stop the guffaws from the nurses.


----------



## Purple (4 Feb 2020)

Show me a published list of nursing rosters where they work 7 days a week for 12 hours a day. They are certainly entitled to overtime after the first 39 hours. Show me something other than your opinion. If I'm wrong then I'll say so but show me the evidence. Show me where they work 84 hours and don't get any overtime. At the moment I just don't believe you.

By the way, working 12 hours a day is no big deal. Doctors, builders, shopkeepers and many running small businesses do it and they don't get 2 days off for each day worked.


----------



## Deiseblue (4 Feb 2020)

Another hugely positive Ipsos MRBI Civil Service Satisfaction survey report for 2019 required by the PublicService reform plan 2014-2016.
48% of the Public had interaction with at least one of the Departments.
85% of those surveyed were satisfied with both the service received ( up from 83% in 2017 and 76% in 2015 ) and the outcome of their most recent contact ( up from 87% in 2017 and 83% in 2015 )
Dissatisfaction is at it’s lowest since 2009 . dropping from 39% in 2009 to 20% in 2019.
89% said that service levels are mostly meeting or exceeding expectations ( again up from 87% in 2017 and 83% in 2015 ).
Kudos indeed guys and gals.
It always good to see some facts to support the idea that Public Sector reform is actually happening rather than anecdotal comments to the contrary.


----------



## Purple (4 Feb 2020)

Deiseblue said:


> Another hugely positive Ipsos MRBI Civil Service Satisfaction survey report for 2019 required by the PublicService reform plan 2014-2016.
> 48% of the Public had interaction with at least one of the Departments.
> 85% of those surveyed were satisfied with both the service received ( up from 83% in 2017 and 76% in 2015 ) and the outcome of their most recent contact ( up from 87% in 2017 and 83% in 2015 )
> Dissatisfaction is at it’s lowest since 2009 . dropping from 39% in 2009 to 20% in 2019.
> ...


How long would a business last if 1 in 10 of your customers unhappy with the product or service you are providing?
What does "Mostly happy" mean?
Opinion Survey results are, as the name suggests, opinions. That said it does show an improvement but considering the extra funding that had been made available there should be an improvement.


----------



## Leper (4 Feb 2020)

Purple said:


> Show me a published list of nursing rosters where they work 7 days a week for 12 hours a day. They are certainly entitled to overtime after the first 39 hours. Show me something other than your opinion. If I'm wrong then I'll say so but show me the evidence. Show me where they work 84 hours and don't get any overtime. At the moment I just don't believe you.
> 
> By the way, working 12 hours a day is no big deal. Doctors, builders, shopkeepers and many running small businesses do it and they don't get 2 days off for each day worked.



1. Purple, you're still digging and once again you're wrong and worse again failing to admit it. Let me go on record as saying:- All the HSE hospitals and probably all the others which have night duty rosters mainly work  7 nights x 12 hours per night (8.00pm - 8.00am) on one week of the fortnight and nil on the next week. If you can't come to terms with this I'm afraid you're not well informed on the matter.

2. Overtime payments to nurses apply as follows:- Work 39 hours in a week and whatever is rostered over this amount can be considered paid overtime. The exception is nurses on night duty rostered on-a-week-on-week-off system do not get overtime unfless they are called in during the hours outside of 8pm - 8.00am.


3. I am sorry that you don't believe me. What I am saying is not my opinion they are facts.  I am certain of my facts and it appears no matter what I say you'll disbelieve. Ask any nurse or nurse manager and you'll see I'm correct. 

4. I'm glad you're not some Cork Hotshot based in Dublin and seconded to Cork and you trying to be kept in Cork permanently by trying to browbeat experienced union officials who would be looking for clarification of minutes during a meeting with you because you appear to disagree with everything. 

5. You want evidence of the truth of what I'm saying. Like I said earlier ask any nurse.

6. I never said working 12 hours per day is a big deal. Can you show me evidence where I said that?


----------



## Leo (4 Feb 2020)

Leper said:


> All the HSE hospitals and probably all the others which have night duty rosters mainly work 7 nights x 12 hours per night (8.00pm - 8.00am) on one week of the fortnight and nil on the next week. If you can't come to terms with this I'm afraid you're not well informed on the matter.



My cousins who are nurses in HSE hospitals don't work anything like those rosters.


----------



## Purple (4 Feb 2020)

Leo said:


> My cousins who are nurses in HSE hospitals don't work anything like those rosters.


My understanding was the standard roster was 3 x 12 hours one week with 4 x 12 hours the following week. There was an attempt to move to 6 or 8 hours shifts but, as usual, the Union blocked it.


----------



## Purple (4 Feb 2020)

Leper said:


> 1. Purple, you're still digging and once again you're wrong and worse again failing to admit it. Let me go on record as saying:- All the HSE hospitals and probably all the others which have night duty rosters mainly work  7 nights x 12 hours per night (8.00pm - 8.00am) on one week of the fortnight and nil on the next week. If you can't come to terms with this I'm afraid you're not well informed on the matter.
> 
> 2. Overtime payments to nurses apply as follows:- Work 39 hours in a week and whatever is rostered over this amount can be considered paid overtime. The exception is nurses on night duty rostered on-a-week-on-week-off system do not get overtime unfless they are called in during the hours outside of 8pm - 8.00am.
> 
> ...


Evidence please.


----------



## Leper (4 Feb 2020)

Purple said:


> Evidence please.



I'm not going to trawl through any hospital intranet to dig up what is widely known. Like I said earlier:- Ask any nurse who works night duty.


----------



## Deiseblue (4 Feb 2020)

Leper said:


> I'm not going to trawl through any hospital intranet to dig up what is widely known. Like I said earlier:- Ask any nurse who works night duty.


Totally with you Leper , I know nurses in Waterford University hospital who work extraordinarily unsocial and long hours both in the main hospital and the psychiatric unit.
Hopefully the 5000 additional nurses promised by FG or the 4000 promised by FF are quickly brought on board to alleviate the staffing crisis.


----------



## Leo (4 Feb 2020)

Purple said:


> There was an attempt to move to 6 or 8 hours shifts but, as usual, the Union blocked it.



Yep, and those still working who moved to merged hospitals like Tallaght are still on separate contracts, unions were open to merging all staff to a single contract but only if ridiculous pay increases were granted.


----------



## Leper (4 Feb 2020)

Leo said:


> Yep, and those still working who moved to merged hospitals like Tallaght are still on separate contracts, unions were open to merging all staff to a single contract but only if ridiculous pay increases were granted.



I can't comment on this as I do not know the full story and what I post is as truthful as I can do.


----------



## Leo (4 Feb 2020)

Leper said:


> I can't comment on this as I do not know the full story and what I post is as truthful as I can do.



If all nurses are working the hours you suggest, why did the INMO not raise that in the most recent dispute? Why did they celebrate achieving the 37.5 hour working week? My family members' experience doesn't tally with what you're saying.


----------



## Leper (4 Feb 2020)

Leo said:


> If all nurses are working the hours you suggest, why did the INMO not raise that in the most recent dispute? Why did they celebrate achieving the 37.5 hour working week? My family members' experience doesn't tally with what you're saying.



A few years ago fulltime nurses had their basic working hours contract reduced from 39 to 37.5 weekly. Austerity after the recession dictated that the hours were to be increased again. Many in the public service had their working times increased without pay. So, it was with the nurses and midwives.

Leo, I take it that you don't believe me regarding what fulltime nurses work when on Night Duty. I worked in the Irish hospital system and know what nurses and other grades work. The 39 hour week for all nurses is a basic number (let's call it a whole time equivalent). It suits hospitals to have nurses work seven nights in a row where they work 84 hours Monday to Sunday. They are off duty the following week where some other nurse will work the seven nights. To comply with the contract the 84 hours is divided into two 39 hour weekly slots with 6 hours owing to the nurse. The nurse gets a premium for working the nights and the Sunday hours i.e. Night Duty Allowance 84 hours and Sunday Duty 12 hours. I even forgot to mention the Saturday Allowance although it's quite small. If any nurse is looking in I bet he/she will say "Hey Lep, you never mentioned the hand-over time, which we work without pay."

For the record:- Nurses who work Night Duty of 84 hours weekly do not get paid overtime for this. They may be called into the hospital after their Night Duty to work extra hours during daytime. The daytime hours may be overtime. A nurse can get called into the hospital on the week off. This will be paid overtime. The nurse has the option of taking time in lieu for the extra hours worked too, but usually they accept the overtime payments due.

Why does this not tally with your family members? - In some hospitals nurses may opt not to work night duty, some opt not to work weekends, some opt to work weekends only. Some opt to work less than the 39 hours Monday to Friday. Others opt not to work Bank Holidays. I'm talking large hospitals here; some private hospitals wouldn't have the need for a large night duty attendance. Some hospitals reduce staff numbers at weekends. Have a look at the ads from hospitals which require additional staff; you'll see "work hours to suit you" - that's how desperate hospitals are to recruit qualified  nurses.

Leo, do me a favour an show this post to your family members and see if they agree or disagree with it.  If they disagree feel free to inform me. However, I am confident that they will endorse my post.


----------



## michaelm (4 Feb 2020)

Leper said:


> that's how desperate hospitals are to recruit qualified nurses.


One of my kids is considering nursing.  I'm not encouraging it.  You'd want to have a real vocation to be a nurse in the Irish health system.


Leper said:


> "Hey Lep, you never mentioned the hand-over time, which we work without pay."


Methinks there should be a (paid) half hour overlap at hand-over time.


----------



## Purple (4 Feb 2020)

michaelm said:


> One of my kids is considering nursing.  I'm not encouraging it.  You'd want to have a real vocation to be a nurse in the Irish health system.


They are very will paid but the structures within the health system cause gross waste (misallocation of resources and duplication of process) and the resulting suffering of patients and their families can make it an unpleasant and stressful place to work.


----------



## ATC110 (4 Feb 2020)

Today’s actions of the TUI and ASTI unions prove my point entirely.
They’re demanding, actually commanding because they will get it, pay parity between junior and senior teachers, which is an absurdity. 
Why don’t the overpaid senior teachers offer to reduce their pay in line with junior teacher pay for this purpose? That would be an unprecedented goodwill gesture and the revenue saved could be sent on infrastructure and service provision rather than personal enrichment.

Jeopardising children’s education and discommoding parents for their own selfish avaricious reasons; they’re utterly disgraceful.


----------



## Purple (4 Feb 2020)

ATC110 said:


> Today’s actions of the TUI and ASTI unions prove my point entirely.
> They’re demanding, actually commanding because they will get it, pay parity between junior and senior teachers, which is an absurdity.
> Why don’t the overpaid senior teachers offer to reduce their pay in line with junior teacher pay for this purpose? That would be an unprecedented goodwill gesture and the revenue saved could be sent on infrastructure and service provision rather than personal enrichment.
> 
> Jeopardising children’s education and discommoding parents for their own selfish avaricious reasons; they’re utterly disgraceful.


A relative of mine is a school vice principal. She proposed that retired teachers take a 5% cut in their pension (2.5% net of tax) and that would fund pay equalisation. Of course that won't happen but it would be fair, equitable and cost neutral.


----------



## Leper (4 Feb 2020)

ATC110 said:


> Today’s actions of the TUI and ASTI unions prove my point entirely.
> They’re demanding, actually commanding because they will get it, pay parity between junior and senior teachers, which is an absurdity.
> Why don’t the overpaid senior teachers offer to reduce their pay in line with junior teacher pay for this purpose? That would be an unprecedented goodwill gesture and the revenue saved could be sent on infrastructure and service provision rather than personal enrichment.
> 
> Jeopardising children’s education and discommoding parents for their own selfish avaricious reasons; they’re utterly disgraceful.


 
I support the actions of the TUI and ASTI. They have been campaigning for years for equality. Strike action is the only action they have left. Too much talk made them walk.

"Jeopardsing children's education" - Not a bit of it. These are the same children striking  for a cleaner planet.

"Discommoding parents" - Yes, somebody is always discommoded during any kind of strike.

"Selfish, avaricious reasons" - No - It's about equality.


----------



## Firefly (4 Feb 2020)

ATC110 said:


> Today’s actions of the TUI and ASTI unions prove my point entirely.
> They’re demanding, actually commanding because they will get it, pay parity between junior and senior teachers, which is an absurdity.



IMO the only reason they are demanding this is that they know they cannot get an increase themselves until this gap is closed! They're not doing it for the new teachers, who let's not forget, they were happy to throw under the bus..


----------



## Purple (4 Feb 2020)

Leper said:


> I support the actions of the TUI and ASTI. They have been campaigning for years for equality. Strike action is the only action they have left. Too much talk made them walk.
> 
> "Jeopardsing children's education" - Not a bit of it. These are the same children striking  for a cleaner planet.
> 
> ...


Strikes are always about more money. Nothing else.
My children didn't go on the climate action "strike" which wasn't really a strike as the kids aren't employed by the school and they were campaigning for the greater good, not something that you could accuse the teachers of doing.


----------



## Leper (4 Feb 2020)

You're right Purple, I don't know of any strike that wasn't about money. In this instant equal pay is the issue.

and the best one yet that the retired teachers should take a cut in their pension to pay what's owed. It's nearly enough to send me to Boards.ie


----------



## Leo (4 Feb 2020)

Leper said:


> Leo, do me a favour an show this post to your family members and see if they agree or disagree with it.  If they disagree feel free to inform me. However, I am confident that they will endorse my post.



As I said, I've spoken to them about this before, they have told me quite a different story to what you are saying here. They can if they choose work additional hours, but they get enhanced pay and time in lieu. Such hours don't suit one who has three kids, she works the regular nights one week, days the next pattern Purple outlined.


----------



## Sunny (4 Feb 2020)

It's pretty obvious what is needed here. We need another round of benchmarking.... We should get a commission set up. Maybe get Bertie and Charlie back doing some public service....


----------



## Leper (4 Feb 2020)

Leo said:


> As I said, I've.  spoken to them about this before, they have told me quite a different story to what you are saying here. They can if they choose work additional hours, but they get enhanced pay and time in lieu. Such hours don't suit one who has three kids, she works the regular nights one week, days the next pattern Purple outlined.



All I ask you to do is to inform us of the differences from my posts. What I posted is the full truth. That's not too difficult, is it?


----------



## Deiseblue (4 Feb 2020)

Leper said:


> You're right Purple, I don't know of any strike that wasn't about money. In this instant equal pay is the issue.
> 
> and the best one yet that the retired teachers should take a cut in their pension to pay what's owed. It's nearly enough to send me to Boards.ie


It simply beggars belief that a teacher employed on the 31st January 2012 earns 14% initially and 10% more over 10 years than a teacher employed on the 1st February 2012 and it should be noted that both teacher unions were informed that if they had not agreed to the amended pay scales that they would be introduced under FEMPI , they were also assured that this would be temporary until the economy improved-well it's going gangbusters according to the Government so it's time to pony up.
It's brilliant to see so many ASTI teachers standing in solidarity with TUI members .
Great timing as well just before the election.


----------



## Sophrosyne (4 Feb 2020)

Agency nursing pensions is a red herring.

What is happening now is firefighting at its very worst and costing a fortune.

The HSE has a problem in recruitment and retention, leading to shortfalls in medical care, due to global competition for medical staff.

Why would they stay here to be subjected to constant criticism of self-appointed pseudo medical or healthcare experts, when they can go elsewhere and command better pay and working conditions and where their contribution to national healthcare is valued?

Indiscriminate criticisms solve nothing and would not be given the time of day by anyone in a decision-making capacity.

To give Purple (sometimes) and cremeeg their due, systemic problems are usually a managerial failure. I would add to this in the case of the public service, counterproductive political interference.

From my own experience of working in large organizations, albeit in the private sector, stick a plaster on it rather than solve it can often be the managerial preference and they would dare anyone to disagree. This is fine as an expedient but underlying problems still obtain and eventually snowball.

However, at least we did not have to suffer the problem of having to comply with the wishes of TDs and ministers trying to make a name for themselves, dictating operational policy and methodology and pulling us in all directions to meet their diverse political and often unrealistic goals.

I think any problem-solving has to start with _realistic_ expectations of our various public services given, exchequer constraints and strangely I don’t think these decisions should necessarily be political. But rather when these decisions have been made by citizen consensus, then all politicians of whatever hue have to row in.


----------



## Purple (4 Feb 2020)

Sophrosyne said:


> Agency nursing pensions is a red herring.


No it isn't. Pensions are a massive cost.


Sophrosyne said:


> The HSE has a problem in recruitment and retention, leading to shortfalls in medical care, due to global competition for medical staff.
> 
> Why would they stay here to be subjected to constant criticism of self-appointed pseudo medical or healthcare experts, when they can go elsewhere and command better pay and working conditions and where their contribution to national healthcare is valued?


 They leave, mostly, because of the stress caused by the broken system they work within. The pay levels here are very competitive internationally. It's the other bits like training and promotion that are sub-par.
If money was the solution we'd have the best healthcare system in the world.


Sophrosyne said:


> From my own experience of working in large organizations, albeit in the private sector, stick a plaster on it rather than solve it can often be the managerial preference and they would dare anyone to disagree. This is fine as an expedient but underlying problems still obtain and eventually snowball.


True but those organisations aren't delivering health and other critical services. 


Sophrosyne said:


> However, at least we did not have to suffer the problem of having to comply with the wishes of TDs and ministers trying to make a name for themselves, dictating operational policy and methodology and pulling us in all directions to meet their diverse political and often unrealistic goals.
> 
> I think any problem-solving has to start with _realistic_ expectations of our various public services given, exchequer constraints and strangely I don’t think these decisions should necessarily be political. But rather when these decisions have been made by citizen consensus, then all politicians of whatever hue have to row in.


I think that's a very important point and central to the discussion. A hospital on every corner, or even every county, isn't a realistic policy expectation. The current government's Sláintecare policy is a big step in the right direction. Long term planning at a political level should be done through the committee system. That applies to many areas, not just health.


----------



## Sophrosyne (4 Feb 2020)

Agency nursing is a result of firefighting. Pension savings as a result of use of agency nursing is a pseudo argument because they should not be needed in the first place; certainly not to the extent that they are.

I never claimed that pay was the _only_ reason why medical staff emigrate. Whether the pay here is internationally competitive is unproven.

The organization I worked for was a global leader. Whether we delivered critical services or otherwise is irrelevant. Ours took measures against the patch-it-up and other detrimental mentalities of certain managers. Problem-solving or lack of it affects _any_ organization.

Nor did I suggest that problem solving should be confined to health.

As a nation we are not particularly stupid, nor are we less inventive than others but we are constrained by provision of services along traditional and political lines that are no longer fit for purpose and are difficult to change. We need to aspire to better.

What I am suggesting is that instead of public services motivated by diverse political aspirations, it could be by citizen aspiration, which would of course have to be realistic. However, I think this is highly achievable.


----------



## WolfeTone (4 Feb 2020)

Ive lost my functionality to give 'Likes' on this forum. Not sure if its a glitch or otherwise. 
So notional 'Likes' to @Leper and @Deiseblue and @Sophrosyne articulating intelligent points. Devoid of the hyperbolic demagoguery deriving from others in clear display of not understanding the workings of public services.


----------



## WolfeTone (4 Feb 2020)

Purple said:


> Strikes are always about more money. Nothing else.



Pay _and _conditions. 
Strikes during the War of Independence were primarily in support of the release of political prisoners. 
The Dunnes Stores Anti-Apartheid strike had nothing to do with pay. 
And there are other examples of workers striking just have their union recognized by their employer as their chosen representative. 
In 25yrs I have been on strike for 1.5 days. One full day to have my union represent me when my terms were altered without negotiation. The half day was for better pay (I think? - I was so long ago I forget).


----------



## Leo (5 Feb 2020)

Leper said:


> All I ask you to do is to inform us of the differences from my posts. What I posted is the full truth. That's not too difficult, is it?



I did, but you don't seem to like it. My wife is on a similar 39 hour contract (many of her colleagues stuck with the 37.5 hour week as I'm sure you know the increase to 39 couldn't be enforced across the board - leading to further complexities and costs in rostering and payroll), any time worked over 39 hours earns tie in lieu, and usually premium payments.

If what you are claiming is true across the board, why do you think the unions are quite happy with the situation?


----------



## Leo (5 Feb 2020)

Purple said:


> A hospital on every corner, or even every county, isn't a realistic policy expectation.



Yet that's what the locals want. Of course what they don't know is the poorer outcomes of decentralised specialist services.


----------



## Leper (5 Feb 2020)

Leo said:


> I did, but you don't seem to like it. My wife is on a similar 39 hour contract (many of her colleagues stuck with the 37.5 hour week as I'm sure you know the increase to 39 couldn't be enforced across the board - leading to further complexities and costs in rostering and payroll), any time worked over 39 hours earns tie in lieu, and usually premium payments.
> 
> If what you are claiming is true across the board, why do you think the unions are quite happy with the situation?



1. I don't know of any hospital which did not implement the increase from 37.5 to 39 hours for nurses on a weekly contract. I know the unions objected to the increase, but austerity measures took over and the nurses took it on the chin like the rest of the Public/Civil Service. The hourly rate decreased also which affected other payments as well as the basic pay. Those who opted to work for 37.5 hours per week were paid for 37.5 hours only (at the reduced hourly rate) and took on a decrease in wages. If your wife opts to work overtime they (and everybody else who opted for 37.5 hours weekly) will have to work the first 1.5 hours @ single time before overtime rates kick in.  

2. If you read my post again you'll see I'm referring to fulltime nurses working a full roster of night duty.  If there is any sentence, phrase or word in my post that's untrue please feel free to advise. With respect I think your wife and yourself are sharing the same confusion.

3. The nursing unions are not happy with the situation; I don't know how you arrived at the opposite conclusion.


----------



## Leo (5 Feb 2020)

Leper said:


> 1. I don't know of any hospital which did not implement the increase from 37.5 to 39 hours for nurses on a weekly contract.



They all implemented it, but every existing staff member was allowed to choose to remain on 37.5 hours if they wished. That was included in the INMO guidance of the time, and is still covered in their official guidance on accrual of annual leave. Have your source with membership log in to their portal and you can review their guidance on the T&Cs of current contracts.



Leper said:


> The nursing unions are not happy with the situation; I don't know how you arrived at the opposite conclusion.



They have released hundreds of press releases over the past few years on their causes and all active disputes across the health service, if what you claim is indeed systematic, I'd have thought they might even mention it once?


----------



## Leper (5 Feb 2020)

Leo said:


> They all implemented it, but every existing staff member was allowed to choose to remain on 37.5 hours if they wished. That was included in the INMO guidance of the time, and is still covered in their official guidance on accrual of annual leave. Have your source with membership log in to their portal and you can review their guidance on the T&Cs of current contracts.
> 
> 
> 
> They have released hundreds of press releases over the past few years on their causes and all active disputes across the health service, if what you claim is indeed systematic, I'd have thought they might even mention it once?



1. You're right Leo. All the hospitals implemented the increase in hours. Nurses were given the option of working 37.5 or 39 hours. Many nurses didn't work these hours anyway and they also could hold onto their preferred hours @ the low rate of pay. I have no argument on this point.

2. Don't worry the nursing unions (there's more than one) will fall into the situation of the secondary teachers. They are keeping their powder dry currently, but there will be union movement to restore full pay and for work of the lesser hours.

3. Are you fully familiar with the fulltime night duty situation that I pointed out?


----------



## Leo (5 Feb 2020)

Leper said:


> 2. Don't worry the nursing unions (there's more than one)



I'm well aware, INMO represent the vast majority though. 



Leper said:


> They are keeping their powder dry currently



So I can only conclude after years of silence they have no issue with a systematic issues like you describe. You may have a different interpretation.



Leper said:


> 3. Are you fully familiar with the fulltime night duty situation that I pointed out?



I'm not, and I only know a few people working in the hospitals, but they're not familiar with it either.


----------



## Deiseblue (5 Feb 2020)

The various public sector Unions first priority is the restoration of pay , a priority that has paid dividends with hopefully the question of equality of pay being resolved shortly although progress has been made in this area - not enough though.
The question of rowing back on the additional hours sector wide will be very much to the forefront in upcoming negotiations on public sector pay.


----------



## ATC110 (5 Feb 2020)

Leper said:


> I support the actions of the TUI and ASTI. They have been campaigning for years for equality. Strike action is the only action they have left. Too much talk made them walk.
> 
> "Jeopardsing children's education" - Not a bit of it. These are the same children striking  for a cleaner planet.
> 
> ...



On reflection childrens' education isn't necessarily jeopardised by a strike. Many are capable of self-guided study instead of the potluck of getting a good or bad teacher, the latter possibly on the same pay scales or even higher than the former; And untouchable.

The sheer arrogance and entitlement of a mentality that some privileged and cosseted sector can discommode the very people who generate the taxes to pay their inflated pay and conditions. 

Already addressed equality - let the overpaid senior teachers lower their wages in line with the already generously paid junior teachers.

This is wrestling with a pig territory.


----------



## WolfeTone (5 Feb 2020)

ATC110 said:


> entitlement of a mentality that some privileged and cosseted sector



This nonsensical diatribe needs to be called out. Who are the "privileged and cosseted sector"? Teachers, nurses, public servants?

What should we do with them? Have no teachers, no nurses, no public servants? Surely you cannot be advocating something so stupid?
I can only summarize that you advocate for having some other system that includes teachers, nurses and public servants, but under different conditions?
Lets hear them so, albeit I suspect it will amount to little more than a hyperbolic rant.



ATC110 said:


> can discommode the very people who generate the taxes to pay their inflated pay and conditions.



Who are the "very people who generate the taxes"?

Have you ever heard of the wheel?


----------



## Sophrosyne (5 Feb 2020)

ATC110 said:


> This is wrestling with a pig territory.



But who is the pig?


----------



## ATC110 (6 Feb 2020)

Sophrosyne said:


> But who is the pig?


Well if the cap fits


----------



## ATC110 (6 Feb 2020)

WolfeTone said:


> This nonsensical diatribe needs to be called out. Who are the "privileged and cosseted sector"? Teachers, nurses, public servants?
> 
> What should we do with them? Have no teachers, no nurses, no public servants? Surely you cannot be advocating something so stupid?
> I can only summarize that you advocate for having some other system that includes teachers, nurses and public servants, but under different conditions?
> Lets hear them so, albeit I suspect it will amount to little more than a hyperbolic rant.



A not unexpected irrelevant, diversionary response. 
Public servants writ large are the privileged and cosseted sector. 

Conditions in-line with the private sector: Effective oversight by a line manager which cannot be rendered useless by the union, performance related pay, reviewable contracts, taxation of subsistence and mileage allowances, Defined Contribution pensions -full cost to be met by the employee, ending of the multiple types of leave available,  accountability, redundancy and dismissal potential.  



WolfeTone said:


> Who are the "very people who generate the taxes"?


The private sector workers who stipend the two thirds shortfall of public sector employee superannuation with no benefit to themselves.


----------



## WolfeTone (6 Feb 2020)

ATC110 said:


> Conditions in-line with the private sector:



So do away with the public sector altogether?
Have, say, Gardai paid on a commission basis on how many convictions they secure? 
Judges could receive bonuses for harsher sentences? 
Doctors and nurses restricted to treating those who can afford to pay the cost of medical care.
Teachers to get bonuses on achieving higher grades - how would that affect SNA's? 
Civil Servants could be offered share in profits for lucrative contracts. 

Is that what you have in mind when talking of private sector conditions?



ATC110 said:


> performance related pay



Already exists.



ATC110 said:


> reviewable contracts



Already exists



ATC110 said:


> taxation of subsistence and mileage allowances



Why? How would that be effective?
In order to claim a mileage allowance, the worker needs to provide their own vehicle, pay for petrol/diesel, wear and tear and watch the value of the vehicle fall because of the additional mileage.
If you were to tax mileage allowance, it would result in workers refusing to travel or result in demands for higher rates.
This would be a totally pointless, and lead to inefficiencies.



ATC110 said:


> Defined Contribution pensions -full cost to be met by the employee



Why? For what purpose? How would this 'reform' bring about improvements.



ATC110 said:


> ending of the multiple types of leave available



??? No annual leave? No maternity leave? No parental leave???
What is this, a joke?



ATC110 said:


> accountability



Already exists.



ATC110 said:


> redundancy and dismissal potential.



Already exists.

I can only deduce that this topic 'Public Sector reform' is nothing more than a whimsical notion based on next to no knowledge of the public sector in the first place.


----------



## Sophrosyne (7 Feb 2020)

ATC110 said:


> Well if the cap fits



Charming!



ATC110 said:


> The private sector workers who stipend the two thirds shortfall of public sector employee superannuation with no benefit to themselves.



Do you mean the supplementary pension payable in limited circumstances to certain public services pensioners?


----------



## Leper (7 Feb 2020)

ATC1 10 said "taxation of subsistence and mileage allowances" - This is already in existence, but not all of it is taxed. (I can't remember the cut off points for amounts to be taxed).


----------



## Sophrosyne (7 Feb 2020)

The same rules apply to the public and private sector.

If expenses are on the basis of vouched expenses, or on a scale that does no more than reimburses actual expenses they are not taxable.

The Civil Service mileage and subsistence rates are the usual criteria for round sum expenses.


----------



## Purple (7 Feb 2020)

Sophrosyne said:


> Do you mean the supplementary pension payable in limited circumstances to certain public services pensioners?


Public Sector employees come nowhere close to funding their own pensions. They are mostly paid for out of general taxation. Their value is worth an additional 30-50% of salary. I think that's the issue.


----------



## Sophrosyne (7 Feb 2020)

Purple said:


> Their value is worth an additional 30-50% of salary. I think that's the issue.



Can I ask how you are working that out Purple?


----------



## Purple (9 Feb 2020)

Sophrosyne said:


> Can I ask how you are working that out Purple?


I used the Deloitte Pension calculator


----------



## Itchy (9 Feb 2020)

Purple said:


> I used the Deloitte Pension calculator



Which Public Sector Superannuation scheme did you try to value? Pre 1995, Post 1995, Post 2004 or SPS scheme? 

PS pensions are paid out of general taxation. This is nothing to do with the PS. This is a policy choice. There is no reason why this could not be change.
For PS employees who pay class A PRSI, part of the pension is made up of the SCP. This is the approx. €12500. Therefore, the first €25,000 of every public salary earns NOTHING of a pension. Public servants pay contributions on this salary of course. 

Revenue value all DB pensions as 20 times the annual payment + value of lump sum. This is for tax purposes not the monetary value.


----------



## ATC110 (14 Feb 2020)

...


----------



## Purple (14 Feb 2020)

Itchy said:


> Which Public Sector Superannuation scheme did you try to value? Pre 1995, Post 1995, Post 2004 or SPS scheme?


 Post 1995. New entrants are on a much more sustainable rate.


Itchy said:


> PS pensions are paid out of general taxation. This is nothing to do with the PS. This is a policy choice. There is no reason why this could not be change.


 What, fully fund it themselves? Do you think their unions would allow that to happen?



Itchy said:


> For PS employees who pay class A PRSI, part of the pension is made up of the SCP. This is the approx. €12500. Therefore, the first €25,000 of every public salary earns NOTHING of a pension. Public servants pay contributions on this salary of course.


 I've already pointed out that the average PRSI contribution amounts to about 15% of the cost of funding the State pension. It's not just Public Servants who don't pay for their pension, it's just about everyone who gets a State pension.  



Itchy said:


> Revenue value all DB pensions as 20 times the annual payment + value of lump sum. This is for tax purposes not the monetary value.


 Indeed, as it's only a small fraction of its true value.


----------



## Sophrosyne (14 Feb 2020)

ATC110 said:


> That's absurd, as you know.




You are incorrectly attributing a quote to me!

Please rectify.


----------



## Firefly (14 Feb 2020)

.


----------



## Purple (14 Feb 2020)

In my opinion and in by experience most State employees work as hard as those in the private sector. They are as competent as those in the private sector and are as interested in doing their job well as those in the private sector. The comparison is often made between private sector employees in small companies and public sector employees in large organisations. This is an unfair comparison.

The problem isn’t pay although the cost to the State going forward of all State pensions, including the contributory and non-contributory pensions, is unsustainable. The problem is the structural inefficiencies in the way public bodies are organised and run, the lack of accountability at management level for that waste and the vested interests which stymie most attempts to restructure in order to reduce waste. This issue is not unique to State bodies but State bodies deliver critical services and so are more important. That is why public sector reform is so important but it is structural reform, not “sacking the wasters” as that doesn’t happen in most private sector organisations either and it’s a falsehood to claim it does.


----------



## ATC110 (14 Feb 2020)

..


----------



## ATC110 (14 Feb 2020)

Sophrosyne said:


> You are incorrectly attributing a quote to me!
> 
> Please rectify.



Have tried multiple times to edit the post but what appears on the edited screen disappears once the changes are saved so I've had to delete the posts


----------



## Sophrosyne (14 Feb 2020)

ATC110 said:


> Have tried multiple times to edit the post but what appears on the edited screen disappears once the changes are saved so I've had to delete the posts



Thank you.


----------

