Okay let me ask a different way, do you think it matters?
If you do, why?
If you don't, why mention it?
The government were taking credit for a level of reduction that will happen anyway with a "no recruitment, no replacement" policy in place.
You mean they are taking credit for the reduction that came about as a result of the policy they put in place?
It does not make sense to me to get rid of jobs in public sector and put people on the dole. Yes I agree that people need to reform how they do things, that will mean better and ore services but not sure how much we actually save in getting rid of people with the loss of tax, payment of dole for those who qualify or pensions.
Using that logic, why not give every unemployed person a job in the public sector. Then we wouldn't have to pay them the dole and they would be paying tax.
First of all the jobs that are currently in the system are required to deliver services that people need.
It does not make sense to me to get rid of jobs in public sector and put people on the dole. Yes I agree that people need to reform how they do things, that will mean better and ore services but not sure how much we actually save in getting rid of people with the loss of tax, payment of dole for those who qualify or pensions.
Personally, I believe cutting jobs is not going to substantially improve things. Its the cost of those jobs and the pensions that is the problem. There needs to be salary and pension cuts comparable to other sectors.
The public sector is financed by the taxpayer. If incomes are dropping in the private sector then the taxes required to fund the public sector are also dropping. Its a no brainer.
Over a two year period average hourly earnings in the public sector fell by 3.9% compared with a marginal increase of 0.1% in the private sector.
You can't really tell anything from looking at overall averages. With an average public hourly rate of €28.90 vs €19.33 in the private sector, there's obviously a big variation in the mix of job types, skill levels, qualifications, experience etc. - so overall averages are meaningless. The private sector may have lost proprtionately more lower paid jobs resulting in an increase in the average even while underlying salaries reduce. Or the public sector may have lost higher paid contracters resulting in the decrease in the public average. Could be many explanations for overall average increases or decreases.http://www.finfacts.ie/irishfinancenews/article_1023084.shtml
Over a two year period average hourly earnings in the public sector fell by 3.9% compared with a marginal increase of 0.1% in the private sector
And if earnings are increasing in the private sector, then presumably you'd support comparable increases in the public sector?
Unfortunately, the level of earnings is only half of the story...even if earnings are increasing for some workers in the private sector, there are still over 400 thousand of them unemployed. That less workers paying taxes to fund public services and more drawing the dole...a double whammy.
The private sector don't have a monopoly on dole queues. There are many former public sector staff on the dole as well.
Would those be temorary/contract staff (really working for themselves) or permanent staff?
Does it make any difference? They're still on the dole? Do you take the same dismissive view of any private sector staff who where temporary or on contract?
Does it make any difference? They're still on the dole? Do you take the same dismissive view of any private sector staff who where temporary or on contract?
I'll gladly answer your question, but how about you answer my question first?
Let me rephrase my point then. You claim that "even if earnings are increasing for some workers in the private sector, there are still over 400 thousand of them unemployed". This is factually untrue, as it implies that everybody on the dole was a private sector worker.
Wrong again - there were many people in the public sector on fixed term contracts, typically 2-3 contracts relating to specific roles. As these contracts expired, they ended up on the dole. They were not contractors, and they were employed directly by public bodies. And now they form part of the 400k on the dole. As I said at the outset, the private sector does not have a monopoly of the dole queue.There may be many people on the dole who worked in the public sector and they may be listed as "staff", but they are not employees. In fact they are self-employed contractors unless they have written contracts specifying their permanent status. Contractors can be taken on for a myriad of jobs...short term in nature such as a backfill or project requirement or for longer fixed-term contracts. In all cases though these workers are not state employees.
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?