SIPTU Pay Increase- Thank God I don't care anymore

Reality:
Savings = Paycuts
OR
Savings = Layoffs.

Unions claim:
Reform = Savings (and paycuts are a no-go)

Ergo

Reform = Layoffs.

So unions are offering layoffs instead of paycuts ? Yeah, right.

It's all a feckin smokescreen by the unions hoping that distractions will work. The balance sheet still has to balance unfortunately.
 
Deiseblue said:
It would appear that the union's tough stance on pay cuts could pave the way for public sector reform , not a bad trade off I would have thought ?
Click to expand...

How can reform without a reduction in numbers or wages (or both) provide a reduction in the overall wage bill?
 

You are right. The wage bill can only reduced by cuts in pay or cuts in numbers but I think the government should use this to it's advantage.
If reports are right, they are looking for a 5% cut in pay for next year. That is approx 1 billion euro.

Fine Gael issued a statement a few months ago detailing how freezing increments would save 300-400 million euro a year. (I have not got the link so do not know exact figure). A 3% decrease in numbers would save approx 600 million of pay bill. This could nearly be got by natural wastage alone.
Why not impose a 3 year freeze on all increments, annual targets on reduction in numbers and flexibility between all departments.

There still may be some pay cuts needed but I believe that if most PS workers were faced with taking on a bit extra work and flexibility to minimise the effect of their wage packet, the response would be positive.
 
Purple said:
How can reform without a reduction in numbers or wages (or both) provide a reduction in the overall wage bill?
Click to expand...
According to the Tanaiste what the Government wanted was more efficiencies in the Public Sector and it looks like they are prepared to trade this to avoid pay cuts.
There will certainly be a reduction in numbers through natural wastage ( a terrible term I always thought ) and an incentivised early retirement package which will mean 17,000 jobs will go over a 2 year period with a consequent adverse effect on services which it appears we are going to have to live with
 

Why does there have to be a reduction in services?
On the face of it there seems to be a large number of administration staff in the HSE; 49,000 admin staff to 62,000 front line staff.
Admittedly I am not famlilar with this area but if HSE cut its number by 10% (11,000) and all of these came from the Admin side could the system work with 38,000 admin staff?
It could be spread over 3-5 years.
 
Because job losses will be spread across the public sector - nurses , guards , firemen , binmen , teachers etc. as well as admin staff.
 

Of course services could be maintained with less staff. In fact, they could be improved. Many private sector businesses have restructured and re-engineered their organisations many times - taking out headcount, upskilling employees and investing in technology; to remain competitive, while at the same time continually improving quality and customer service.
The public sector acts in exactly the opposite manner i.e. massively increase headcount, introduce meaningless change programmes, invest vast sums in poorly designed and executed technology solutions, resulting in huge cost over-runs, and little if any improvement in quality and service. I wouldn't trust ths government or our public servants to run a bath...let alone a multi-billion economy......
 
Shawady said:
Latrade, thats what I meant in the post above. A freeze on increments could be used to form part of the plan to tackle the PS wage bill.
Click to expand...

I agree with all your points Shawady. In fact the only ones saying there will be a cut back on front line staff and on services is the Unions. Whereas the actual drive in cuts is to cut down on the "unit cost" as in the cost of providing the service and not the service.

The CSO figures on private sector pay cuts is misleading from it is out of date it is all the private sector. If you compare those in the private sector in a similar state to the public sector (as in income vs outcome) the cuts have been 12% on average.

However this is tempered by around 30% cuts in cost of service, i.e. other wage costs (over time, unpaid leave and redundancies in administration, source IBEC surveys).

The good news is that there will be other savings next year so the deficit won't be as bad (one is the lessening in the live register).

The UK and most other countries have yet to face this. They did the opposite to Ireland, they did the stimulants and reduced tax first to create a false economy. Ireland did the pain first in taxes and hopefully the budget will reflect this. But the UK still has to do the pain, their deficit is going to be huge.
 
Shawady said:
Latrade, thats what I meant in the post above. A freeze on increments could be used to form part of the plan to tackle the PS wage bill.
Click to expand...

Freezing increments is a change to existing terms and conditions. Like any change to T&C's be it a public sector or private sector worker, it needs to be agreed with the employee. As the TU represent the employee then it has to be agreed with them.
 
becky said:
Freezing increments is a change to existing terms and conditions. Like any change to T&C's be it a public sector or private sector worker, it needs to be agreed with the employee. As the TU represent the employee then it has to be agreed with them.
Click to expand...
If the unions refuse to agree to changes then the government should legislate to change this and force things through.
 
becky said:
Freezing increments is a change to existing terms and conditions. Like any change to T&C's be it a public sector or private sector worker, it needs to be agreed with the employee. As the TU represent the employee then it has to be agreed with them.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately there's nothing in any private sector contract about increments, apart that you 'may' get one (if that). Are they guaranteed in the public sector, whether or not the employer(the govt/exchequer) can afford them ?
 
Pique318 said:
Unfortunately there's nothing in any private sector contract about increments, apart that you 'may' get one (if that). Are they guaranteed in the public sector, whether or not the employer(the govt/exchequer) can afford them ?
Click to expand...


Yes, the salary scale is quoted on the contract, therfore it forms part of your T and C's.

An increment can be delayed for a year as a sanction but otherwise employees get them every year.

I'm due my last LSI next year and unless the goverment introduce a change in the legislation (which IMO is very unlikely), I expect to get it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register