Another quality public servant runs away
- Thread starter shnaek
- Start date
I guess people have the right to make the best financial and personal decisions that suit them and their family (if relevant) at any particular time.
Being in the public service doesn't mean one has to be a martyr to the service at the expense of one's right to live life.
I'm sure the new chief will be equally up to the job.
Nobody is indispensable. - (OK, maybe Michael O Leary but he's not in the public sector and so doesn't count)
Marion
Being in the public service doesn't mean one has to be a martyr to the service at the expense of one's right to live life.
I'm sure the new chief will be equally up to the job.
Nobody is indispensable. - (OK, maybe Michael O Leary but he's not in the public sector and so doesn't count)
Marion
Is that additional 6 months paid at an entry/reduced pay level then - in line with other public sector workers who are availing of early retirement under this exceptional offer?
I presume he will be receiving his pension during this time of supplementary employment + payment for the additional 6 months.
The payment during the 6 months is what interests me.
Marion
I presume he will be receiving his pension during this time of supplementary employment + payment for the additional 6 months.
The payment during the 6 months is what interests me.
Marion
What do you think he should do? Pass it up? And, if so, why?
While I have issues with the whole idea of the "brain drain" from the public sector to take advantage of the end february deadline, ( and the costings involved) I would find it hard , if I was in the same position, not to take advantage of such an offer.
mf
I have no issues with the "brain drain".
Sometimes, people have an over inflated sense of their own worth in relation to a job. I work with colleagues who will talk for Ireland about the inefficiencies of others but can never see the cast in their own eye. (I know that is not the correct reference but I can't think of it as I type.)
As I mentioned we are all dispensable.
There will be many capable people willing and able to fill the roles of those who leave.
Marion
Sometimes, people have an over inflated sense of their own worth in relation to a job. I work with colleagues who will talk for Ireland about the inefficiencies of others but can never see the cast in their own eye. (I know that is not the correct reference but I can't think of it as I type.)
As I mentioned we are all dispensable.
There will be many capable people willing and able to fill the roles of those who leave.
Marion
Look at many previous posts on AAM. We called for a lesser Civil Service. We called for less people to be working in our hospitals. We screamed for a slimmed down public service. We wanted less teachers. Remember the shrined advice "Be careful what you wish for . . ."
Our wishes are now being realised. So we are getting what we wished for.
Our wishes are now being realised. So we are getting what we wished for.
Ceist Beag
Registered User
- Messages
- 1,442
Exactly Leper. This was quite clearly outlined in the program for Government so why the big surprise? That said tho, it does seem like quite a hamfisted way of reducing the numbers, I'm sure there were better ways of achieving the required cuts. I guess that's the problem when one department is making the call for the hugely disperse organisations that make up the public sector. It might have been far more easily managed if the required targets were given to each organisation to achieve by whatever means they deemed most suitable (and even then could have been broken down further within each organisation as they saw fit). This one size fits all approach really is a clumsy approach imho.
No, we are getting an Irish solution to an Irish problem by allowing senior people to retire in one go on very generous pensions which means that the overall pay and pension bill is not reduced by a significant amount. When people called for a smaller public service, they didn't mean simply transfer a large portion of the cost from direct payroll to pensions and issue press releases saying there are now 7500 less people in the public sector even though we are still paying them.
By the way, I don't begrudge anyone taking early retirement. My mother took it as a nurse. Within one week, the hospital rang and wanted her back as agency staff but she refused. Most of her colleagues went back on Agency rates and are getting full pensions. And young nurses still can't get work. That's not reform. That's just incompetent management.
SlurrySlump
Registered User
- Messages
- 636
Could they not have structured it in such a way as to have the teachers take their retirement packages during the summer holiday term?
This all comes back to another irish solution to and irish problem - The pension levy.
If the government had have cut PS pensions in line with PS pay, the pension bill would have been reduced by 14% also and anyone retiring on a PS pension the past two years would have had it reduced. It was a political decision to introduce the pension levy rather than a pay cut.
Yes Deise, but the cuts were less than for current PS workers. Pensions were directly linked when pay was increased and IMO should have been when pay had to be reduced.
As you said, the first 12K of pension were exempt. This was done to prevent the anomoly of PS pensioners earning less than the state old pension, so it was a political decision as they hadn't the balls to cut this even though all other SW payments were reduced.
As you said, the first 12K of pension were exempt. This was done to prevent the anomoly of PS pensioners earning less than the state old pension, so it was a political decision as they hadn't the balls to cut this even though all other SW payments were reduced.
T McGibney
Registered User
- Messages
- 6,758
Thanks for the warning.
I agree with all of that.
I also agree with that.
What's wrong with that?
Lol