Public service reform

WolfeTone

Registered User
Messages
1,084
entitlement of a mentality that some privileged and cosseted sector

This nonsensical diatribe needs to be called out. Who are the "privileged and cosseted sector"? Teachers, nurses, public servants?

What should we do with them? Have no teachers, no nurses, no public servants? Surely you cannot be advocating something so stupid?
I can only summarize that you advocate for having some other system that includes teachers, nurses and public servants, but under different conditions?
Lets hear them so, albeit I suspect it will amount to little more than a hyperbolic rant.

can discommode the very people who generate the taxes to pay their inflated pay and conditions.

Who are the "very people who generate the taxes"?

Have you ever heard of the wheel?
 

ATC110

Registered User
Messages
427
This nonsensical diatribe needs to be called out. Who are the "privileged and cosseted sector"? Teachers, nurses, public servants?

What should we do with them? Have no teachers, no nurses, no public servants? Surely you cannot be advocating something so stupid?
I can only summarize that you advocate for having some other system that includes teachers, nurses and public servants, but under different conditions?
Lets hear them so, albeit I suspect it will amount to little more than a hyperbolic rant.

A not unexpected irrelevant, diversionary response.
Public servants writ large are the privileged and cosseted sector.

Conditions in-line with the private sector: Effective oversight by a line manager which cannot be rendered useless by the union, performance related pay, reviewable contracts, taxation of subsistence and mileage allowances, Defined Contribution pensions -full cost to be met by the employee, ending of the multiple types of leave available, accountability, redundancy and dismissal potential.

Who are the "very people who generate the taxes"?
The private sector workers who stipend the two thirds shortfall of public sector employee superannuation with no benefit to themselves.
 

WolfeTone

Registered User
Messages
1,084
Conditions in-line with the private sector:

So do away with the public sector altogether?
Have, say, Gardai paid on a commission basis on how many convictions they secure?
Judges could receive bonuses for harsher sentences?
Doctors and nurses restricted to treating those who can afford to pay the cost of medical care.
Teachers to get bonuses on achieving higher grades - how would that affect SNA's?
Civil Servants could be offered share in profits for lucrative contracts.

Is that what you have in mind when talking of private sector conditions?

performance related pay

Already exists.

reviewable contracts

Already exists

taxation of subsistence and mileage allowances

Why? How would that be effective?
In order to claim a mileage allowance, the worker needs to provide their own vehicle, pay for petrol/diesel, wear and tear and watch the value of the vehicle fall because of the additional mileage.
If you were to tax mileage allowance, it would result in workers refusing to travel or result in demands for higher rates.
This would be a totally pointless, and lead to inefficiencies.

Defined Contribution pensions -full cost to be met by the employee

Why? For what purpose? How would this 'reform' bring about improvements.

ending of the multiple types of leave available

??? No annual leave? No maternity leave? No parental leave???
What is this, a joke?

accountability

Already exists.

redundancy and dismissal potential.

Already exists.

I can only deduce that this topic 'Public Sector reform' is nothing more than a whimsical notion based on next to no knowledge of the public sector in the first place.
 
Last edited:

Leper

Registered User
Messages
1,772
ATC1 10 said "taxation of subsistence and mileage allowances" - This is already in existence, but not all of it is taxed. (I can't remember the cut off points for amounts to be taxed).
 

Sophrosyne

Registered User
Messages
1,436
The same rules apply to the public and private sector.

If expenses are on the basis of vouched expenses, or on a scale that does no more than reimburses actual expenses they are not taxable.

The Civil Service mileage and subsistence rates are the usual criteria for round sum expenses.
 

Purple

Registered User
Messages
13,103
Do you mean the supplementary pension payable in limited circumstances to certain public services pensioners?
Public Sector employees come nowhere close to funding their own pensions. They are mostly paid for out of general taxation. Their value is worth an additional 30-50% of salary. I think that's the issue.
 

Itchy

Registered User
Messages
700
I used the Deloitte Pension calculator

Which Public Sector Superannuation scheme did you try to value? Pre 1995, Post 1995, Post 2004 or SPS scheme?

PS pensions are paid out of general taxation. This is nothing to do with the PS. This is a policy choice. There is no reason why this could not be change.
For PS employees who pay class A PRSI, part of the pension is made up of the SCP. This is the approx. €12500. Therefore, the first €25,000 of every public salary earns NOTHING of a pension. Public servants pay contributions on this salary of course.

Revenue value all DB pensions as 20 times the annual payment + value of lump sum. This is for tax purposes not the monetary value.
 

Purple

Registered User
Messages
13,103
Which Public Sector Superannuation scheme did you try to value? Pre 1995, Post 1995, Post 2004 or SPS scheme?
Post 1995. New entrants are on a much more sustainable rate.
PS pensions are paid out of general taxation. This is nothing to do with the PS. This is a policy choice. There is no reason why this could not be change.
What, fully fund it themselves? Do you think their unions would allow that to happen?

For PS employees who pay class A PRSI, part of the pension is made up of the SCP. This is the approx. €12500. Therefore, the first €25,000 of every public salary earns NOTHING of a pension. Public servants pay contributions on this salary of course.
I've already pointed out that the average PRSI contribution amounts to about 15% of the cost of funding the State pension. It's not just Public Servants who don't pay for their pension, it's just about everyone who gets a State pension.

Revenue value all DB pensions as 20 times the annual payment + value of lump sum. This is for tax purposes not the monetary value.
Indeed, as it's only a small fraction of its true value.
 

Purple

Registered User
Messages
13,103
In my opinion and in by experience most State employees work as hard as those in the private sector. They are as competent as those in the private sector and are as interested in doing their job well as those in the private sector. The comparison is often made between private sector employees in small companies and public sector employees in large organisations. This is an unfair comparison.

The problem isn’t pay although the cost to the State going forward of all State pensions, including the contributory and non-contributory pensions, is unsustainable. The problem is the structural inefficiencies in the way public bodies are organised and run, the lack of accountability at management level for that waste and the vested interests which stymie most attempts to restructure in order to reduce waste. This issue is not unique to State bodies but State bodies deliver critical services and so are more important. That is why public sector reform is so important but it is structural reform, not “sacking the wasters” as that doesn’t happen in most private sector organisations either and it’s a falsehood to claim it does.
 
Top