A very interesting point was made by Charlie Weston on Matt Cooper with respect to the pension levy.
It's within the newly agreed Green program for government to reduce tax relief on pensions to a universal 30% rather than the marginal rate. As such as the pension levy calculations go out the window and every PS worker will pay a much higher pension levy contribution.
7-8% (3-4%) would go to 5-6%
In the case of the public sector, this would affect the pension levy and also pension contributions for post 95 employees.
Careful here, remember that most public sector workers, hired pre AND post 1995, pay pension conts.
It's the civil servants that don't.
Apologies, I work in civil service post 95.
Do public sector workers such as nurses, doctors, teacher pre 95 pay pension contribution also?
I'm also pre-95 public service and I pay 6.5% - there's an additional 1.5% for Spouse's and Orphans which employees used to have an option to join or not, but I think it became compulsory back in the early 90s?
Also pay modified PRSI contribution (D).
Apologies, I work in civil service post 95.
Do public sector workers such as nurses, doctors, teacher pre 95 pay pension contribution also?
Yes, most, if not all, public servants hired pre 1995 pay 5% + 1.5% of gross wage in superannuation for their pension.
Example: I know of teachers who always paid 6.5% of wages since they were hired in the 70s.
My thoughts exactly.Surely the Union leaders would have the correct information?
Just heard that too on the Last Word, I thought all pension deductions were tax deductable. Surely the Union leaders would have the correct information? I'm confused too.
Eddie Hobbs on Matt Cooper reckons the cut is 4% not 7% as it attracts tax relief. That assertion hasn't been challenged.
Listening to Vincent Brown every single striker he interviews reckons they've taken a 7.5% pay cut - no matter what you look at it that can't be right.
The 7.5% figure has been bandied about as an average yet every worker seems to think they themselves have taken a 7.5% cut. They all appear to be from the lower end of the pay range. There is a sliding scale and there's no way those people would be at the high/average end.
It appears to me as if these workers are either being misinformed or just don't understand what they themselves are actually being paid.
I think the guys at the bottom are being used to protect their higher paid colleagues.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?