Croke park agreement...

[thedaras]

This is coming between me and my sleep..
The Croke park agreement was finalised a couple of months ago,yet at that stage the government did not know how much the bail out would cost.

My question is..How come (why did ) the government agree to anything when they didn't in fact know how much the bail out would cost?

It would seem very short sighted to agree to something without knowing the full details of the bail out,knowing that this would in fact mean the PS are safe while the rest of us have to make up the balance of the huge difference of the amount of the bail out..

This is not about the PS,rather about the government knowingly agreeing to something when they didn't have the full facts..

 

[Sunny]

Croke Park Agreement is finished. I love the latest idea of thousands of voluntary redundancies in the HSE. Suddenly they can find thousands of people that they do not need?

 

[RonanC]

@ thedaras, did you read the agreement in full? Especially the part concerning any future pay cuts and the Governments opt out clause at the end of the agreement?

15. There will be no further reductions in the pay rates of serving public servants for the lifetime​

of this Agreement. This commitment is subject to compliance with the terms of this Agreement.

28. The implementation of this Agreement is subject to no currently unforeseen budgetary​

deterioration.

 

[michaelm]

This is not about the PS,rather about the government knowingly agreeing to something when they didn't have the full facts..

They agreed to the blanket bank guarantee without full facts so nothing new there. Pretty much every decision they have made over the last 8+ years has been at best suboptimal, ranging to disastrous. Any politician who puts country before party knows it is time for an election.

 

[thedaras]

@ thedaras, did you read the agreement in full? Especially the part concerning any future pay cuts and the Governments opt out clause at the end of the agreement?

Oh right ,does this mean then,that because the bail out was way over what they thought it would be ,that they can now implement the opt out clause?

 

[RonanC]

Oh right ,does this mean then,that because the bail out was way over what they thought it would be ,that they can now implement the opt out clause?

Yes excatly, and the public service and the unions have no right to any form of industrial action if any further pay cuts are introduced

 

[Shawady]

Oh right ,does this mean then,that because the bail out was way over what they thought it would be ,that they can now implement the opt out clause?

I don't think it is that straight forward.
The government has consistantly said the banking situation was nothing to do the budget deficit. When they were softening up the public for cuts in social welfare and PS pay, the said the bailout and the budget adjustments were two seperate items.
I think the union would have a strong case to say when the government used the term 'unforseen budgetery deterioration', it was taken that this had nothing to do with the bank situation. Whether the government accepts that arguement remains to be seen.

Any time figures are published to do with tax intake or the deficit, the MOF has consitantly said the figures are "broadly in line with expectation" so if the croke park deal is revoked, it is not clear what is the 'unforseen budgetery deterioration' is.

 

[Chris]

Croke Park Agreement is finished. I love the latest idea of thousands of voluntary redundancies in the HSE. Suddenly they can find thousands of people that they do not need?

You say it. This is the problem with having large bloated government services filled with people that cannot be laid off for being incompetent or in times of budgetary distress.

They agreed to the blanket bank guarantee without full facts so nothing new there. Pretty much every decision they have made over the last 8+ years has been at best suboptimal, ranging to disastrous. Any politician who puts country before party knows it is time for an election.

Yes indeed, but I would not even give them credit by calling their decisions suboptimal.

 

[Shawady]

My question is..How come (why did ) the government agree to anything when they didn't in fact know how much the bail out would cost?

Two possibilities.
They are so incompetent that they sign up to an agreement and may have to scrap it before it even had a chance to work.
Or, they suspected all along it would difficult to stick with but knew it would be FG/Lab government that would have to renege on it.

The EU is forcing the governemnt to come clean about where new taxes/spending cuts are going to come from.
FF would have been happy to keep it vague.

 

[Bill Struth]

This is coming between me and my sleep..
The Croke park agreement was finalised a couple of months ago,yet at that stage the government did not know how much the bail out would cost.

My question is..How come (why did ) the government agree to anything when they didn't in fact know how much the bail out would cost?

It would seem very short sighted to agree to something without knowing the full details of the bail out,knowing that this would in fact mean the PS are safe while the rest of us have to make up the balance of the huge difference of the amount of the bail out..

This is not about the PS,rather about the government knowingly agreeing to something when they didn't have the full facts..

How do you work that one out? Are you saying that public servants won't be affected by tax rises in the budget?

 

[thedaras]

@Bill Struth;This is my question..does the Croke park agreement mean that the PS are safe and others have to make up the huge bail out amount?
I am confused and am honestly looking for clarification..

 

[RonanC]

Any tax increases will effect everyone, not just private sector workers. Public sector employees pay tax too.

 

[thedaras]

Thanks for that..so in effect the amount of the bail out makes no difference to the Croke park agreement..Right?

 

[Shawady]

The croke park agreement allows for savings to be made in the PS pay bill, just not cuts in actual core pay.

 

[RonanC]

The Government said that the bail out costs were seperate to any budget deficit, but I cant see how they will find €3-5bn in savings from taxes alone. I can honestly say that I think Public Servants will have another pay cut thrown at them, with early retirements across the entire service being introduced in the new year along with huge amounts of vol. redundancies in the near future

 

[Mouldy]

The core of this thread seems to be whether or not the CP deal will survive. In my opinion it should but won’t. Alan Dukes called for it to be implemented in full saying it would reduce cost in the sector, which it was designed to do. However the government may have to renege on it as they haven’t got many other places to go.

The full bailout costs of the banks will not be accepted by the public sector works as an unforeseen event, so any pay cuts applied by the government will end the CP deal on both sides. It could be argued that this was the plan all along from the minister. Quell industrial action by the unions while the banking costs were being worked out then once the numbers become definitive, scrap the deal and put it up to the unions to go on strike in the face of economic Armageddon. That’s been my opinion of the deal since it was voted in.
M