How about a ban on pay and job cuts in the private sector unless companies close down. All workers made redundant in the private sector should be given jobs in the public sector. Nurses, teachers and guards should be given 25% pay rises. Other public sector workers should only get 10% for the pain and suffering of the past 12 months. The tax rate for people earning less than 40,000 should be reduced to 0.5%. People earning over 100,000 should pay 94% tax rate and be flogged once a year to pay for this.
IMPACT balloting members
- Thread starter Caveat
- Start date
How about a ban on pay and job cuts in the private sector unless companies close down. All workers made redundant in the private sector should be given jobs in the public sector. Nurses, teachers and guards should be given 25% pay rises. Other public sector workers should only get 10% for the pain and suffering of the past 12 months. The tax rate for people earning less than 40,000 should be reduced to 0.5%. People earning over 100,000 should pay 94% tax rate and be flogged once a year to pay for this.
I would agree broadly with the proposals for restoring confidence as outlined by the Labour Party - see www.labour.ie .
Don't make me read through all that rubbish! Where's the proposal?
Edit; Do you mean [broken link removed]?
If so it tells me nothing. There is zero content and zero about reducing the deficit.
BTW, that rubbish about investing in skills is not going to sort anything out. If we had a really good plan and stuck to it we'd start to see returns in about 15-20 years.
How on God's earth does anything in that document solve the €20 billion hole in our public finances? And I have read it in detail before you ask.
Let's start with this one:
5. Reforming Public Services: Labour is determined to lead reform in our Public Services to deliver better, more cost effective services in the interests both of promoting economic activity and of developing a fairer society.
It is quite obvious to me that it means we must streamline the entire sector and cut where necessary. Or am I reading this wrong?
- Evaluation of public spending in the civil service
5. Reforming Public Services: Labour is determined to lead reform in our Public Services to deliver better, more cost effective services in the interests both of promoting economic activity and of developing a fairer society.
It is quite obvious to me that it means we must streamline the entire sector and cut where necessary. Or am I reading this wrong?
- Far greater mobility of staff within the public sector will be required, so that key posts can be filled by transferring staff from low to high priority areas. With that kind of flexibility in place, payroll costs can be reduced without undue damage to services. The implementation of this scheme should be complemented by full flexibility of movement between all branches of the public and civil service for relevant grades.
- Redundancy package to remove approximately 1000 staff in the management grades
- Redundancy package to remove approximately 1000 staff in the management grades
- Evaluation of public spending in the civil service
- Open recruitment to all public service posts should now be introduced. Every promotional opportunity in the public sector should be advertised for open competition.
€22 billion deficit.
There are no ideas in there.
We have been hearing about public sector reform and greater mobility for at least 10 years now especially when benchmarking was brought in and nothing happened. What will be different this time? We are the middle of an economic crisis. We don't have 5-10 years of borrowing at those or at anywhere near those levels unless you want to cripple the next generation because of our greed and reluctance to suffer some pain. I owe my good fortune career wise to the people who took the medicine back in the 80's and early 90's and who suffered greatly. I want to do the same for the next generation. If that means taxing me to the hilt while I have a job, then do it. Just get us out of this mess.
Like I say, I read the document and its tripe. And I say that as someone who was a Labour supporter until I saw their response to this crisis.
Simple question. Is the deficit gross or net of bank bailout money? What is the deficit excluding money given to the banks, which is a one off?
The excess numbers and overpayment of the "public service" is mainly in the State funded private sector area than those employed by the State. There is a tendancy in debates to lob private sector workers who are paid out of the public purse into the "public pay bill". All this has arisen because we have the worst case scenario from an accountability and funding point of view in many key public service delivery areas i.e. the private sector monopoly. The health service is a classic example - overstaffed, over paid, dont deliver. People forget that the bulk of the health service in Ireland is delivered by private sector organisations i.e. hospitals primarily owned by private religious organisations, and because we dont tender the services or pay them on work done, they take us to the cleaners.
It's still €20-22 billion.
The bank bailout has nothing to do with it. It’s the shortfall in current taxation for current and capital spending.
Given that if tax rates stay the same revenue from taxation will drop again next year as the productive sector of the economy shrinks again and outgoings will increase due to sitting-on-your-hole-for-another-year increments in the public sector we don’t have time to flute around for another six months.
Many people working in the higher grades of the public service are bad managers.
There is no requirement that the Head of Finance is a Finacial Accountant.
The Head of IT needs no IT qualifications.
The one thing they are good at is claiming expenses.
What we see is that the Higher Grades hiding behind the lower grades.
Expect to see more of this.
The Labour party as per normal lacks any bottle for either public sector pay cuts or serious reform.
There is no requirement that the Head of Finance is a Finacial Accountant.
The Head of IT needs no IT qualifications.
The one thing they are good at is claiming expenses.
What we see is that the Higher Grades hiding behind the lower grades.
Expect to see more of this.
The Labour party as per normal lacks any bottle for either public sector pay cuts or serious reform.
So the deficit is 4-5k per person. Why do I have the sneaky feeling that me and my family will pay more than this amount? Its always like that - I dont think there's been any scenario ever in this country where a cost has been added and where me and my family only had to pay our pro rata share or less. Its always more and always significantly more. And our household income is fairly average - it's not as if we're rich.
2 years ago I had 2 interviews for jobs in the public sector(county council if you must know). I attended at their interview site in Dublin City centre. On both occassions I was met and greeted by the trade union rep who attended the interviews and recorded the notes of it. He told me that he was "there to protect my interests" or words to that effect.
An ex of mine works for the department of justice, she was told she would struggle to get promoted unless she joined the union.
What you are suggesting above is a great idea (actually it's a common sense idea that should have always existed) but do you honestly believe that the Labour party and the unions would allow this to simply happen given that the impact on some of it's members may not be positive and given that it would significantly reduce union power in the public sector. Or would they ask for a "co-operation" payment as part of any deal on this?
Here is the recent Exchequer statement:
Press release:
http://www.finance.gov.ie/viewdoc.asp?DocID=6007&CatID=1&StartDate=1+January+2009&m=n
Document:
http://www.finance.gov.ie/documents/exchequerstatements/2009/Excheqstatsept.pdf
You will see that the deficit includes a 4bn investment in Anglo.
It also includes the usual payments to the NPRF, which AFAIK were used for the investments in AIB and BoI.
Sure thing
A friend of mine works in a 3rd level HR department. He said the single biggest issue that comes up from staff is intimidation from the union and the single biggest problem he has is keeping the union out of the HR department. He’s worked in the public sector all his life and is a union member. He used to work in a different 3rd level institute but had to transfer after speaking against a union motion for strike action.