What are all the publicly employed people actually doing?

[thedaras]

I agree with latrade around the last sentence and some but not all of the rest of the post.

However you will not have to look too far to see the vitriol ,so it seems some people are willing to be reasonable and others just cant help themselves.

I can clearly see posters who are being reasonable and accepting that their is a human element to this,but characteristicly the same confrontational posts still keep coming,and they are doing more harm than good

 

[Firefly]

All true and no one's saying otherwise, but I feel that some do post in haste regarding the PS without recognising that their wishes may well mean a drop in some of the essential services

I think "essential" services should at least be defined. In these times and for the amount we have to borrow I think that those non-essential services should be cut or reduced. At least temporarily until we get our house in order.

(granted some posters feel there should be no PS at all, but I personally support a social "ambulance"), but also thousands now without a job/income. Not a handful, not a few hundred, people are talking about a reduction in numbers of thousands, possibly even tens of thousands. We owe it to those people and to ourselves to make sure that any reduction is right and not just decimation.

I totally agree. Any cut/reduction to services should be done on a case by case basis and should IMO exclude essential services.

..I don't see why discussions always come down to the T&Cs of the PS, or casting aspersions on the work ethic of the entire PS, that's irrelevant.

I totally agree. It's pointless - there are wasters in the private sector too. Granted, they have a higher chance of being sacked IMO, but they're still there.

The numbers, the efficiency and the service we ought to provide are to be discussed as best we can. Bringing anything else into the argument only hints at taking a bit too much pleasure in what is likely to be a very hard time for the individuals involved and ultimately for us all as we will have to carry the additional burden of the thousands laid off.

I agree with the first part of this. On the 2nd part, from a financial perspective it would be cheaper for the country to pay someone the dole rather than a full salary.

Lastly on the deficit: yes let's not forget that we have to make that "adjustment", but let's also not forget why we have to make such a severe adjustment. And when we remember that, ask just how much of that has to do with those who took jobs in the PS. Ask why it is so essential that they are part of the sacrifice that has to be made for this 85bn bailout, when Government decisions and action (well intended or not) meant such drastic measures are necessary. And ask why we're shocked, appalled and offended when they don't take the sacrifice, loss of job, livelihood and family life readily, willingly and passively when those who actually did make this 85bn hole make no sacrifice and suffer no consequences.

I agree. The PS were not at fault. I think it's a q of affordability. Several posters have agreed our PS is too big. By indentifying non-essential services I think we would have a good starting point to identify reductions

Essential a discussion as it is, let's go about it with a bit of class, dignity and humanity and a little less bloodlust. Accept that those in our sights for a very bleak future are naturally going to defend their position and their future.

I agree and hope non of my posts have appeared as offensive. There are many people in the private sector in the same boat after having taken cuts and don't know what's going to happen after Xmas.

 

[Brendan Burgess]

Folks

This has been discussed enough and will inevitably descend into more public service bashing.

Brendan