Good article on why we should not be borrowing to pay increases to public servants

Brendan Burgess

Founder
Messages
54,803
A good article by Eamon Delaney

Hard work should be a goal not a penalty, even for public sector unions

Which makes it all the more puzzling that the Government is in danger of immediately blowing the improved public finances and that for short-term electoral gain, they would risk our historic and still precarious recovery.


Minister Brendan Howlin said that he will be prudent but he seems to be endorsing completely the wrong approach by saying that after years of austerity people are asking:’What am I going to get back?’.

...


This is ridiculous: giving the gains of our hard-won recovery, not to hospitals and schools where they are really needed, but to the pay packets of public sector workers, including our already over-paid politicians.
 
The Public Sector establishment got massive pay increases and increases in numbers during the boom. They were cut after the crash but they are now getting them back.
Their Unions feel able to put a gun to the head of the people of Ireland again. There is no evidence so far that they are wrong in that opinion and with a member of their political wing as Minister for Public Expenditure they should be very confident of the outcome they want.

Our children will have to pay for it but that seems to be what the anti-austerity/ anti-take responsibility for our own actions people want.
 
Is there any point in starting another Public V Private thread in an attempt to divide one with the other?

There is an election coming up and the only way a party has any chance of getting substantial votes is to give back a lot of what the Government took over the last number of years.

And they would be fools not to.

People might not like it but the public sector are in for a big increase in there take home pay with cutting the Pension levy and the USC, not to mention Tax cuts and pay increases.
 
This has nothing to do with some public versus private sector argument. It has to do with borrowing money to give pay increases when we are just about solvent as a nation. It is about where we spend our scares resources; do we spend them on the poorest and most vulnerable or do we spend them on minimising the impact of our stupidity and greed on our children and their children... or do we spend them giving pay increases to the relatively well paid.
 
If you speak to friends or family in the Public Sector the majority it seems believe that,

1. They are paid the same or less than the private sector
2. That the modest pay cuts taken during the financial crash should be paid back


I am dissapointed in the current governments strategy of blantantly buying votes. This will further add to to massive pay gap between public and private sector pay. Regardless if you think the very well paid should be paid more,, the fact is that using borrowed money to increase pay is madness.
 
Thing is though (and the above points would broadly reflect my own view), if you were to look at it the other way, who says money is being borrowed to pay increases? What if all capital investment was stopped (completely) and pay increases were given and overall expenditure was reduced? Would we be any better? Obviously not. So you bring back in the capital expenditure and suddenly, you're borrowing to fund this expenditure and not the pay rises!
What I'm saying is why would a pay increase be viewed as using borrowed money (the 3% or so that the State needs to borrow) when other spending, such as the replacement of staff in key areas or capital expenditure, would be viewed as an investment by the State?
 
Another key point is that the arbitrary pay cuts were underpinned by emergency legislation - FEMPI
Minister Howlin is acutely aware that such legislation may not survive a legal action by Public Service Unions given that the Courts may rule that such an emergency no longer exists .
Minister Howlin obviously feels that an orderly wind down of such legislation is an infinitely preferable option & that incremental moderate pay restoration will have to form part of any successful negotiations with the Unions , the Unions are also aware that if FEMPI was to fall foul of legal action then an immediate restoration of pay & terms & conditions would place an impossible burden on the State & they seem to be at one with Minister Howlin that negotiation is the best way forward - still the spectre of legal action is a good bargaining tool going into such negotiations !
From the Unions point of view the forthcoming general election & the fact that the current Government are constantly heralding an improvement in the Countrys economy couldn't have happened at a better time.
 
Last edited:
venice said:
People might not like it but the public sector are in for a big increase in there take home pay with cutting the Pension levy and the USC, not to mention Tax cuts and pay increases.
Click to expand...

The PS may get some of their paycuts restored during 2016, but it won't be a "big rise".
 
I can see why some people are against restoring any element of the PS pay while the State continues to borrow.

However, that logic implies that you are also against any other spending rise, or any tax cut, while the Govt still borrows.
 
Lower paid PS are paid more than the private sector.

However, higher paid PS are paid less than their private equivalents.

Overall, the PS pay premium has now fallen to the range [-1% to 1%], and this is before the third round of paycuts.
 
Protocol said:
The PS may get some of their paycuts restored during 2016, but it won't be a "big rise".
Click to expand...

I agree , pay restoration will be on a moderate scale.
It is imperative that the Unions do manage to achieve forward momentum in the pay & terms & conditions arena in the current negotiations not only for 2016 but to set a template for following years.
Thankfully given the current political & economic climate such forward momentum should be achievable.
 
Protocol said:
Lower paid PS are paid more than the private sector.

However, higher paid PS are paid less than their private equivalents.

Overall, the PS pay premium has now fallen to the range [-1% to 1%], and this is before the third round of paycuts.
Click to expand...

I agree. The argument can be made for pay increases for higher paid public sector employees, if better T’s and C’s, pensions, time off etc. Are ignored but there is no case to be made for pay increases for lower paid state employees.

I also agree that it is hypocritical of many people to look for tax cuts while opposing pay increases for state employees.

There should be no pay increases or tax cuts while we are still borrowing to fund current expenditure.


It should be government policy to be in the top 5 most competitive economies in the world and they should be prohibited from taking any action that would or could knock us out of that top five.
 
I thought public sector workers had got payrises over the last few years except that they are known as increments. I know Haddington Road lengthened the gap between such payments but are they not still in existence?, apologies if I got that wrong

Secondly, if they do exist, what is the average increment worth to an individual? If you include such increments, does anyone know how the average salary of a public sector worker say on €30k 6 years ago has actually changed?
 
See the [broken link removed]. Increments are still being paid but every 15 months rather than 12 months, but only for the duration of the agreement. According to the Brethren in Impact the modest pay cuts will be reversed quite soon anyway.
 
Yes, some would have got increments, those with long scales, e.g. teachers.

Others at top of shorter scales means no increments
 
Due to recruitment embargo for the last number of years, Increments are no longer as issue as most PS staff are at the top of their scale so longer get them.

Protocol said:
The PS may get some of their paycuts restored during 2016, but it won't be a "big rise".
Click to expand...

I feel there will be “big rises” with the promise of bigger if the present Government are in power.

Of course these promises will be broken no matter who is in power.


This pre-election budget is a one off chance for the unions to claw back what was taken over the last number of years.
 
Protocol said:
Lower paid PS are paid more than the private sector.

However, higher paid PS are paid less than their private equivalents.

Overall, the PS pay premium has now fallen to the range [-1% to 1%], and this is before the third round of paycuts.
Click to expand...


The pay cuts imposed on those earning between €65,000 & just over €100,000 under the Haddington Road Agreement are to be restored in full in 2 tranches - April 2017 & 9 months later.
 

I don't expect, nor see it as very likely, that there'll be big rises. Nor do I get the impression from talking to colleagues that they do.
 
Deiseblue said:
The pay cuts imposed on those earning between €65,000 & just over €100,000 under the Haddington Road Agreement are to be restored in full in 2 tranches - April 2017 & 9 months later.
Click to expand...

Isn't the whole point of the current talks to find a way to unwind the HRA so that it doesn't come to that abrupt end? (I hope you're right though, if you can prove it my wife might agree to let me change my 12-year old car...!!)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register