The Difficult task of Public Service reform.

[onq]

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.

 

[Complainer]

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?

 

[Purple]

You mean they are taking credit for the reduction that came about as a result of the policy they put in place?

No, that policy was put in place by the last government. As far as I remember you were against it at the time.

 

[partnership]

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.

 

[Sunny]

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.

 

[partnership]

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. I am not talking about extra jobs here. I am not stupid and understand there needs to be a balance of public and private. The time to let go people from the public service is when there are jobs available in the private sector for them to do so they will not be dependent on the state. I would like to see a proper analysis of what this saves rather than make people redundent to satisfy the whims of the media driven anti public sector.

Regarding people on the dole - there is an argument to be made that people who get the dole should contribute in some way. I would welcome a discussion on how to allow people on the dole to contribute perhaps through one day a week volunteering be it helping the elderly, cleaning up, running youth activities etc. I am not in favour of the internship the way it is set up. A lot of the jobs advertised are jobs which are of no benefit training wise and are simply a way for businesses to make more profits. An example was where a major supermarket were offering stacking shelves as an internship.

 

[Firefly]

First of all the jobs that are currently in the system are required to deliver services that people need.

Why did Enda Kenny announce the closure/merging of 50 quangos last night? What some person wants and what everyone needs are 2 different things.

 

[Slim]

The Public Service/Sector is made up of many parts that deliver what are deemed to be essential and necessary public service, i.e. Gardai, Teachers, Welfare, water and sewerage services, tax collection etc etc. There is a general feeling that these services are overstaffed, particularly in the administration and management areas. Perhaps there are some who could be better deployed than in their current jobs, but we have created a society where high levels of customer service is demanded, quality assurance is a new industry and health & safety a new dictator. To provide these and many more 'add ons' we have to put people in place to deliver them. As times are hard, we look to these 'add ons' for cuts, understandably. But the axe of the cutters is blunt and is focussed on budgets, so we cut the budgets, so we are left short of nurses, teachers, Gardai etc.

On the other hand, we should only be providing a level of public service that can be paid for out of taxation. Successive governments have failed to plan for this and now we will endure a running down of public services (not just public servants), abrogation of the duty of care back to families along with the cost of third level education, etc.

 

[frankmac]

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.

 

[Complainer]

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.

And if earnings are increasing in the private sector, then presumably you'd support comparable increases in the public sector?

From

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.

 

[orka]

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

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.

 

[Firefly]

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.

 

[Complainer]

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.

 

[Firefly]

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?

 

[Complainer]

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?

 

[Firefly]

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?

 

[Purple]

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?

If I get a painter to paint my house and, after it's done pay him for completing our contract, have I made him redundant?!

No? I didn’t think so.
You’re a smart guy; you know the difference between a contractor and an employee.

 

[Complainer]

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.

 

[Firefly]

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.

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. They are private sector self-employees providing contract services to a public body (as I myself have done).

Perhaps, you have examples of permanent employees in the public sector who have lost their jobs because of the current crisis as per all of those in the private sector?

I hope this answers the first question you asked in post 35. As for the latter question...I'm a contractor myself.

 

[Complainer]

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.

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.