Complainer I was a member of SIPTU - I did go to Union meetings but God how boring - the same faces every meeting going on about the same issues every time. Got the impression it was a home from home for some people. The discussion would go off in different directions and have to be brought back by the Chair. Then the arguments would start and it would be "Mr. Chairman point of order.." I gave up, moved jobs and left SIPTU. Life's too short
ICTUs 'Get Up, Stand Up campaign'
- Thread starter DerKaiser
- Start date
- Status
I have nothing against payments in line with inflation. That's not what has been happening for a long long time in this Country.
Yes, subject to not bankrupting the country
Complainer
Registered User
- Messages
- 4,949
Like most similar organisations, you get out of it what you put into it. If you don't like their style, then take a role, take some action, take control and change things.
They said the data they used comes from NES.
S
S.L.F
Guest
I guess that explains why you would be unwilling to take any pay cut at all.
Sometimes employees need to accept a cut to increase their job security.
You'll get your wish this time if there is a pay cut
So if deflation was not a factor you would be quite happy to see pay in the public sector remain unchanged ?
Particularly as deflation may not be a constant factor.
All of these threads go around in circles. The bottom line is that the state, as an employer, doesn't have the money (or the means to raise the money) to pay its wage overheads.
Who, the one who lead the country for the last ten years? (Obviously I'm talking about Jack O'Connor)
S
S.L.F
Guest
I keep saying this but some people, you included, just believe what you want to and make generalisations at the drop of a hat.
Just because someone is defending what they see as wrong doesn't mean they will be affected by it.
I don't work for or in the PS in any capacity, my take home pay won't be affected by a second wage cut.
I'm self employed and have been cutting my prices right to the bone for the last year to get work,
It should have happened last year when they cut the pay for the PS.
S
S.L.F
Guest
You mean they read like the ERSI report
No, they read like a 12 year old from the Soviet Union in the 1950's trying to write on economics.
You raised the question of benchmarking pay against deflation , presumably across all sectors ?Eh?
So you are saying people should only ever get payrises?
I simply asked if deflation was not a factor do you think that pay should remain unchanged ?
Why shouldn't pay (across all sectors) and social welfare be in line with inflation or deflation as the case may be. I am on a pay freeze at the moment but I am better off than this time last year so if my employer came to me and cut my wages, I couldn't really have any complaints.
I think the point that was being made on the ESRI report is a fair one.
First, they identify the problems in trying to complete a like-for-like analysis and they show justification for the method they used. Given that the PMS method is a pretty standard and well accepted economic model that's fair enough.
They also present the problems with the data source. One concern they really do skip over is the question of why was it so difficult to get the data on what the PS roles actually are? However, on the security services bit: not only does the ESRI admit there are weaknesses there, but in section two they describe how they countered these variables. So it is more than fair to say on a pure like-for-like there are huge differences between a Garda and a Nightclub bouncer. However, they took this into account and "upscaled" the private sector equivallent.
Sure it's just some fancy numbers to equal it out, but it does mean a more accurate comparisson and it is a very well established economic model.
So it's actually incorrect to say it was just comparing the gardai to the private security industry. They applied a long established "correction" to make this comparisson.
Had a quick skim through the 2nd link.
The fairer way suggested from the parts I've read involve:
- Using the National Pensions Reserve Fund for day to day use now
- Increasing borrowing because things might be better in 2010
Here's a thought, things will not pick up in 2010, they will get worse.
ICTU are asking will you look back and say that you let it happen?
The biggest risk at the moment is maintaining an artificially high standard of living now and looking back with regret in 10 years time when things will really have been cut to the bone and asking "How could we have let the foolishness continue for so long!"
- Status