Is it true that Anglo staff got two weeks christmas bonus?

If it can be demonstrated that these payments earn or save money, more than they cost in themselves, only then should they be given.
 
Anglo is a zombie bank, reduced to trawling after debts.

Like most Irish banks it cannot raise the money it needs on the bond markets.
Its most profitable source of inter-bank commerce is also closed to it - it is crippled.

I see no reason to pay high-powered banker bonuses or salaries to glorified debt collectors.
With nearly half a million on the dole, careers on hold or destroyed, it seems highly inappropriate.

RE Purple's point:

I accept that public sector workers have to be paid.
The question is how much they should currently be paid.
The balance of payments suggests they are being paid too much.

I am not commenting on them in relation to their indivudual incomes but as a whole.
There is a sense of continuing to pay for services instead reducing our need for those services.
Prevention is better than cure and unless we close the gap between income and expenditure we are in difficulty.

ONQ.
 
onq said:
I accept that public sector workers have to be paid.
The question is how much they should currently be paid.
The balance of payments suggests they are being paid too much.

ONQ.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't agree with you there ONQ .... perhaps we need a cull in numbers in the PS but the sentence above is too sweeping for my liking.

The whole thing could be compared to your defence of architects' fees on AAM and how people need to be paid a wage commensurate with the work/service they provide.

By all means reform the PS but culling PS pay in a slash and burn way is no way to solve it. Cut pay for those who don't perform but at least let the performing worker who earns his/her pay earn it without saying they are being paid too much.

Think of how emotive it gets when someone suggests a few hundred euro should well cover an architect/engineer when employed to prepare plans for a planning submission etc.

I know you said you weren't commenting on individuals within the PS but the quoted text above makes it hard to differentiate between the individual and the whole.
 
Well there has to be some public services that we can no longer afford. regardless of well the people perform.
 
PaddyBloggit said:
I wouldn't agree with you there ONQ .... perhaps we need a cull in numbers in the PS but the sentence above is too sweeping for my liking.
Click to expand...
I qualified it fully by stating:

"I am not commenting on them in relation to their individual incomes but as a whole."

The whole thing could be compared to your defence of architects' fees on AAM and how people need to be paid a wage commensurate with the work/service they provide.
Click to expand...
As I said, I am not making comments on individuals or what some people think the market will bear.
I don't want to pull this thread back to a topic that's addressed elsewhere but you're not comparing like with like.

I didn't defend against the need to reduce the numbers of architects - I accept that.
I was concerned that unqualified and incompetent people were doing the work of designers.
That's like a holistic practitioner doing the work of a trained nurse or consultant in an intensive care unit.

By all means reform the PS but culling PS pay in a slash and burn way is no way to solve it. Cut pay for those who don't perform but at least let the performing worker who earns his/her pay earn it without saying they are being paid too much.
Click to expand...
Are you reading my posts or confusing them with someone else's?
I didn't suggest ANY method of reduction.
I pointedly didn't suggest individuals were being paid too much - I stressed that I was referring to the overall balance of payments figures and what they implied.

Think of how emotive it gets when someone suggests a few hundred euro should well cover an architect/engineer when employed to prepare plans for a planning submission etc.
Click to expand...
Paddy, have a go at me all you want for what I posted, but please not for words you appear to be putting in my mouth.
Read my post again and you'll see I didn't make the comments you're suggesting that I did make.
Then please clarify where you think you're coming from.
I know you said you weren't commenting on individuals within the PS
Click to expand...
No only did I say I wasn't commenting on individuals - I DIDN'T comment on individuals.
...but the quoted text above makes it hard to differentiate between the individual and the whole.
Click to expand...
My argument went straight to the macro figures.
It did not suggest what people should accept as pay.
It didn't suggest how to remedy the situation within the service.
It didn't even suggest that job cuts were the only way to make the service more efficient.
It strongly suggested that we should look at ourselves and see what we could do to prevent problems arising.

===========================================

Now if you WANT me to make suggestions in that regard I can offer some speculative comment if you like, but so far I haven't done so in this thread.
I think we need a value-for-money audit of the health service

- who brings what to the table
- what need is there for it
- what does it cost to deliver it.
- how much is it costing us to source
- can we source it more cheaply elsewhere
- can we free up hospital resources without risk
- can we deliver some services within the community
- what is the most cost-efficient [not cheapest] way to do this

We need to undertake an in depth PESTEL and SWOT analysis of the whole health service and move forward with a workable plan.

Three obvious ways to reduce the health spend are:

1. Use of Generic Drugs
This is widely reported in medical journals adn I would support the use fof the best available in certain critical cases. Early intervention should allow the use of more cost efficient alternatives. This goes back to early identification and care at GP level, with clinics providing backup as required.

2. Overtime.
Cannot reduce overtime when there is a huge demand for certain services - that's a given. We need to manage populations more effectively in terms of repeat visits, hazardous lifestyles and future proofing health problems.

3. Prevention.
Our binge-drinking, drug-taking culture is storing up more problems for the next generation to pay for in terms of chronic renal failure and cirrhosis of the liver to name but two.
Some will argue that this is a matter for education, but its more a matter for peer pressure and expecting people to act responsibly.

You'll notice I still haven't talked about "job cuts" per se.
I don't believe in them as such - our wealth is in our people and we're losing enough.
Create conditions which reduce the effects the need and natural attrition will deal with the rest.

ONQ.
 
AlbacoreA said:
Well there has to be some public services that we can no longer afford. regardless of well the people perform.
Click to expand...

There are lots we can't afford.
We can't afford several billion Euros worth of them.
But as my previous post to answer PaddyBloggit makes clear, cost-cutting needn't begin with job cuts.
We can identify specific cost reductions like using generic drugs and reducing the need for overtime - that would be a better solution IMO.

ONQ.
 
My response was genuine ONQ ... it was a reaction to your post.

I follow your posts with interest and at one point I even defended your posting 'style' vigorously.


Your 'style' has, however, annoyed me in the post that I commented on.

Just as you get your back up when someone suggests paying peanuts to architects I too get my back up when I feel that a swipe is being taken at PS workers.

I wasn't having a go at you. No hidden agenda. I responded to your post as I read it.


I guess I found it a bit rich that you spoke about a group 'being paid too much' when you have staunchly defended your profession here on AAM after it was suggested that a few hundred euro should be enough for their services.

I believe I'm well worth my wage and I work hard for it ... I have taken a serious hammering with 'cuts' etc. .... my work rate hasn't dropped accordingly (like many others in the PS) so general talk of a group being paid too much provoked a response.
 
not only do they get free danish, free newspapers also. Many staff in there have no work to do( most of their customers are gone and no interbank dealing going on), just killing time waiting on redundancy. Not saying this is a nice wait, frustrating and boring but they still getting paid.Also they recently completed personal courses on worth about 3k per staff member for a six day course.....money still being wasted. I agree you cannot blame staff on the ground for the wrongdoing of senior management but remember lots of staff did very well from stock options over the years...well the ones that cashed them in anyway.
 

Paddy,

You jumped at a conclusion.
I don't have the luxury of a "permanent and pensionable".
That doesn't mean I would support swinging cuts that put people out of a job - on the contrary, I know what that's like.

But I turn away from that option not from a sense of empathy or ethics, but because putting large amounts of people out of work is not a solution.
Take their discretionary spending out of the economy and its going to be even worse off than it is now.

The country cannot pay its way at the moment and that is a fact.
My suggestions
[listed above] show the approach that I believe should be used - minimal job losses but maximising cost reductions where possible.

I have no need or desire to see people at the bottom of the pecking order suffer more cuts, but i'd be happy to slash the salaries of people earning over €200K who are still deluding themselves that they are worth that kind of money.

This distortion crept into the public service because people at the top table started looking at what the private section were getting and fooled themselves into thinking that this money level of attracted the best talent.

Those of us who actually are high achievers as opposed to those who play office politics know well the fallacy, and these guys ring fence this erroneous assumption because it suits them to do so - most bankers on that level of salary and above are a total waste of space.

It is a myth that they are competent in financial matters.

Despite being told in detail why we needed them to lend [hint@: to allow a Recovery], they are not only NOT allowing a recovery, but according to one estate agent I spoke to last week, are refusing loans to viable businesses after the preliminary review indicated a "yes" answer from "the Man from del Monte".

Yes, its nice to be recognised for your achievements, and money is one of the more useful ways to reward people, but its not everything, and someone has yet to show me what a Grade One civil servant with an arts degree and honours Irish and a fáinne actually bring to a top table.

So let's separate the wheat from the chaff, drop the top earners salaries by a third and see who remains - they'll be the ones with ability and interest in doing the job, as opposed to the knuckle-draggers who are just waiting for the "seniority" to kick in.

ONQ.
 

(shakes head)

Terrible, if what you say about them having no work is true why not just send them home on salary, close down that part of the building and save some money?

ONQ.
 
I know because I have friends working there. They also shake their heads with such a waste of money.
 
I hope they're not doing it while scoffing the Danish pastries or we'll have a cleaning bill on tip of the treat...

 
onq said:
............. ONQ.
Click to expand...

The simple reason why I reacted so negatively to your post was because of the use of the sentence:

'The balance of payments suggests they are being paid too much.'

Putting that down in print tarred everyone with the same brush no matter how much a person clarified it after the fact.

onq said:
Yes, its nice to be recognised for your achievements, and money is one of the more useful ways to reward people, but its not everything,
Click to expand...

It is, however, needed to buy food, fuel, pay bills etc. All other expressions of gratitude cannot keep the wolf from the door.

onq said:
and someone has yet to show me what a Grade One civil servant with an arts degree and honours Irish and a fáinne actually bring to a top table.
Click to expand...

I'm flabbergasted that you'd come out with such a generalisation. But then again, I'm probably not, seeing that our views on this matter are poles apart.

Time to draw a conclusion to this I think as we'll only end up going around in circles.

You have your views, I have mine and we can agree to differ - one of the benefits of living in a democracy (regardless of who's running it).
 
maureen said:
I know because I have friends working there. They also shake their heads with such a waste of money.
Click to expand...

As do i and have been told this is not the case. I have been told that there is one free news paper which is communal for their canteen area.

No danishes, no coffee.
 
I don't know about danish pastry but they do get fresh fruit and newspapers. Not necessarily a paper for everyone but an office supply I suppose. The courses were definitely done by most anyway. Not everyone might want to admit these things.
 
its not that big of a deal, i dont believe any of the hype. What office doesnt have a newspaper at reception? Are we going to start giving out if they get free milk for their free tea?

Fair play to them if they did take part in courses, their reps are tarnished from working in there when the vast majority did nothing wrong. They need all the upskilling they can get.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register