Public Service Allowance Scandal


I heard David Begg on the radio this morning and he was all sweetness and light. Of course the trade unions want to engage about these relatively minor allowances while diverting attention from the reallly big issues that must be tackled.

I think Howlin is probably correct (albeit unknowingly) for not falling for this media driven diversion and keeping his powder dry for the real battle - renegotiation of the CPA.
 
I agree with that; they should lead by example.
Everything from travel to leaders allowances should be changed or removed.
 
I fail to understand what part of any of the stuff subject to allowances do people not understand when applying for jobs. I mean, if you trained to be for example a nurse, a garda or a fire fighter, unsociable hours, weekends, etc. are a given. If you apply for a job with the waste disposal or sewage cleaning company, regardless of whether public or private, some nasty dirt is inevitable. If you applied for a traffic warden's job, you should be issued with an uniform and appropriate footwear procured by your employer by public tender rather than be given a footware allowance. I can go on forever with examples. Yet the crux of the problem is that many of those allowances are seen as part of annual salary rather than just an allowance which can be withdrawn at any time.
 
ajapale said:
I think Howlin is probably correct (albeit unknowingly) for not falling for this media driven diversion and keeping his powder dry for the real battle - renegotiation of the CPA.
Click to expand...

I've come around to that way of thinking as well.
 
Originally Posted by ajapale
I think Howlin is probably correct (albeit unknowingly) for not falling for this media driven diversion and keeping his powder dry for the real battle - renegotiation of the CPA.
Click to expand...

If he cant manage a few cuts to allowances that even the Unions seem embarrassed over I do not see him locking horns with anyone except the voters in his constituency when he comes a knocking at their door.
 
Just watch as the unions lead us on a merry dance as we seek to make savings from these allowances which as I have said before:

1)some of which only apply to a handful of employees
2)some of which are very small annual payments
3)some of which have a strong business rationale.
4)some of which exist in the private sector.

Yes the unions will lead us on a merry dance (negotiations, labour court,parliamentary inquiries) egged on by a tabloid mentality press and with the complicity of Minister Howlin all this will be a diversion and will delay tackling the really big important issues facing the public finances.
 

Howlin is quite happy to leave the allowances on the table, and further fuel the public/private divide that the last Govt started and that this Govt is largely continuing. It is a tactic designed to harden up the public attitudes towards public sector staff, with an eye to what comes after the Croke Park agreement.
 
I dont think people will ever forget the way this government is behaving, its just a bide your time now until next election. An allowance for turning up for work, why would a union rep ever give up any of their allowances.

noah
 
So Labour have turned on their own? Wow.
 


Is that a good thing or a bad thing? Would it be good that we paid less to civil servants and had more money for services I wonder. Maybe we should pay them more and we'd get better services. Aren't civil servants now delivering more under Croke Park?
 
I agree that negotiations on CPA 2 are likely to be challenging , to say the least.

It will be extremely difficult , for a start , to persuade Unions to return to the table without first providing assurances on core pay & pensions etc.
 
Deiseblue said:
I agree that negotiations on CPA 2 are likely to be challenging , to say the least.

It will be extremely difficult , for a start , to persuade Unions to return to the table without first providing assurances on core pay & pensions etc.
Click to expand...

So they will only talk if the government agree not to talk about 80% of the issues?
 
Purple said:
So they will only talk if the government agree not to talk about 80% of the issues?
Click to expand...

I believe that the Unions will seek assurances on pay & pensions before agreeing to entering negotiations - that will certainly be their starting position
 
Deiseblue said:
I believe that the Unions will seek assurances on pay & pensions before agreeing to entering negotiations - that will certainly be their starting position
Click to expand...

And how do you propose that current pay & pensions be funded into the future?
 
Firefly said:
And how do you propose that current pay & pensions be funded into the future?
Click to expand...

Tax the rich!!!
If only we did that everything would be perfect; no crime, no social problems, no disease, no wars, no child would go hungry, the world would be at peace... It would be like the Star Trek version of Earth but as imagined by Shaggy from Scooby-Doo.
 
Purple said:
Tax the rich!!!
Click to expand...

Hot off the press:

The Nevin Economic Research Institute (Neri), which was set up in March and is funded by trade unions, said the State could instead shore up €1 billion by increasing taxes on high earners and wealth groups.


[broken link removed]

So, according to a think-tank funded by the unions, taxing the rich will bring in an extra 1BN a year. Even if that were the case, how do we go about funding the rest of the budget deficit? Anyone?
 
Easy; tax the rich more!
See people who choose to work longer and harder than most of us in order to earn more money and/or people who earn more by being really clever and capable are willing to see well over half their marginal income taken away in income tax.
Just ask people this question; “Would you be willing to sacrifice time with your children and other loved ones so that the state can take away more than half of what you earn?” I’m sure most people would be happy with that.
 
Purple said:
Easy; tax the rich more!
Click to expand...

Not arguing with you (as we pretty much sing from the same hymn sheet)..

Applying the law of diminishing marginal returns, if we keep taxing the rich more, we will get less and less of an increase. Assuming that the think-tank estimates are valid (considering the "research" has been funded by the unions, I would think the estimates are optimist), then further taxing the rich would only slightly increase this 1BN figure. The next thing any sane, rich person would do then is to arrange the off-shoring of their assets. However, (as I argued in another thread to Complainer, who didn't answer) say the rich donned the green jersey and sucked this up for the good of the county, we still need to come up with over 12bn to balance the books. I hope that this "research" for once and for all puts to bed the idea that taxing the rich will solve our problems becuase it won't.

There are too many people depending on the taxpayer for their livelyhoods - salaries & pensions, dole payments, GP medical card payments, IT service companies, "entrepreneurs" who are trying for all their might to extract money from Enterprise Ireland (and I know a few personally)....the list goes on and on.
 

The Government via the Croke Park Agreement have charged PS management & the Unions with delivering verifiable targetted savings which have delivered impressive savings .

It's , perhaps , time to look now at achieving savings from other areas - such as finally means testing child benefits , the OAP & 3rd level fees/grants .

Other areas such as the level of Corporation Tax , CGT & the reintroduction of Wealth Tax & the level of private school funding may , perhaps , be looked at again.

And yes the question of a higher tax rate for high earners also bears scrutiny .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register