Yes as private sector employees must contribute to their pensions, however I do believe the lower paid workers should be exempt from this, and the higher paid workers should pay a higher levy. The system being introduced has not been given enough thought as is usual from our government.

I strongly oppose the levy in its current form.  There seems a belief that civil servants don't contribute towards their pension but this is not the case.

I am 39 years old and have been a civil servant for almost 3 years.  I worked for the previous 20 years in the private sector but unfortunately was not in a position to contribute to a pension fund, as my salary for most of this time was quite low and many of the organisations I worked for did not have a pension scheme.

At present I pay 6.5% of my salary in "normal" pension contributions which will provide me with a civil service pension of about 15% of my current salary at age 65 - hardly a "rolls royce" pension.  As this will obviously not be enough to live on, I am making additional contributions (AVC) to a private pension fund of almost 12% per month in the hope that it might be worth enough when I retire to give me a good standard of living.  I will have to reduce these contributions considerably to finance the levy which is almost 7% in my case.

If more than 18% of my salary is not enough of a contribution, I don't know what is!  I agree that the higher paid do need to contribute more but not just in the public service.  Don't hit those of us who are just trying to take personal responsibility for our retirement.

NO. Why pick on public servants? It suits the Government to have a scapegoat and the fact that this question is being asked proves my point. We are all discussing public service pensions. Why are we not discussing all pensions? The Government could bring in a national pension fund for all citizens, collected by the Revenue Commissioners as part of the PRSI system and and administered by the National Treasury Agency. With employers and state adding to the fund it would mean that everybody would have a guaranteed pension as a fixed percentage of their wages when they retire.

There was a woman on the radio interviewed yday (cant remember the exact station as it was my Mum who told me about it) and she is currently living in Ballyfermot. Because of medical conditions with both her heart and her leg, she has to travel to see one specialist in James' and one in Tallaght. She cannot afford a car, and her local bus service has been pulled as part of Dublin Bus trying to claw back money by pulling routes. She is private sector. I am sure you all saw RTE news last night where they interviewed the bus driver and his wife who used to work for Jacobs, they will BOTH be unemployed by the end of this month, and they have a child to support, mortgage etc. They too are private sector.

On the other hand we have people for example teachers and nurses who seem to think that half days, paid summer holidays, huge pensions are somehow a reward for scoring mediocre points in the CAO system and half working their way through college. They are nothing but self serving money grabbers. They do not care about the state of the country, only how it will affect them. They do not care that there is no money in the pot, they still insist on stamping their feet like little children and whingeing "but I WANT more money". They need to grow up and face the reality of the current situation and stop being so selfish and greedy. They already get FAR TOO MUCH, and they are STILL not happy. Incidentally nobody has pointed out that this extra pension levy that they will be paying is simply more money that they are being requested to pay which will ultimately be RETURNED to them, alongside of course the big FAT 24% which the government already make up!

They may try to deflect attention away form themselves by talking about those privately employed who "made it big" in the celtic tiger years but these people (developers etc) are few and far between. For the majority of the private sector the only difference is that back then they were in a salaried job, and now they are faced with losing that job.

There is a huge, unfair divide here and the anger and resentment on both sides is only going to get worse.

"personal responsibility for our retirement" - is that what you call receiving 12% towards your pension, as opposed to the average 6% that private workers receive? Nobody is looking for "rolls royce retirement", but a few small steps towards equality would only be a good thing. The current system is 2 tiered, and NEEDS REFORM.

Lou, I'm a civil servant. My husband has recently been let go, not because of a lack of work but because the banks are holding small and medium businesses ransom by not giving them credit. I have a mortgage of 380k on a house that's not worth 380k and a one year old child. What on earth makes you think that I can afford to pay an additional 7.7% towards my pension, on top of the 6.5% I'm already paying??? Civil & Public Servants have been hit with the 1% income levy as well as everyone else. Unlike the people in the ESB or the Banks, we haven't received a pay increase. The TD's have also given themselves a 1% increase which seems to have totally escaped the media's attention.

It galls me to hear anyone bashing the public sector workers now. I joined the civil service in the height of the celtic tiger when people wouldn't get out of bed for the salaries we were being paid. But I chose to stay for the job security. I have never received a bonus, a staff day out, a company car, a company phone, free health insurance, paid lunches, Christmas parties etc. Why should I be penalised now for something that is out of my control and had nothing to do with me??? Can people not see what the Government are trying to do?? By pitting public sector worker against private sector worker they are deflecting responsibility from the people we should all be angry with - THEM!! Why are the builders and developers, the bankers, the politicians who ran this country into the ground not being held accountable?? Why is the ordinary low and middle class worker being asked to pay?

I have to support my family on one income, like a lot of people in the private and public sector. I am well aware that everyone must share the pain so that we can get things moving again and I have no problem with this as long as it is fair and just. There is no justification in making someone on 25k pay a 3% levy and someone on 300k pay 9.6%. There is nothing fair or balanced about this.

As regards the people who are going to lose their jobs in Dublin Bus, that's a disgrace. The Government have been pushing people to use public transport for years, now they're going to reduce the number of drivers and routes. This is just plain madness, a child can see there is no sense to this.

By introducing 'pension levies' and 'income tax levies' the government is eroding peoples standard of living.

You can all bash the public servants now or we can all unite and demand that the people responsible are held accountable and that whatever measures need to be taken are fair to all. Otherwise, don't be surprised when child benefit is means tested and tax rates are raised, more education cuts, more health cuts etc.

M apologies I realise now that my post was of a sweeping nature, of course I was not trying to tar everyone with the same brush, but there ARE those who have effectively been holding the government to ransom over the past few years with striking etc, obviously that does not apply to you and I am sorry to hear of the difficulties you are having. I think there is some truth in what you say re the government trying to divide us and deflect attention away from themselves. I think it is rich (no pun intended) that the government asks ANYONE to cough up to compensate for the cost of their greed and corruption. They tend to take on what they perceive to be "small fry" and "easy targets" - oap medical cards, reducing the national minimum wage, a 1% garnish on people's wages before they even see it etc etc it is the same old story that a small few mess up, and the majority are then left to cope with the fallout of that. Regards

There is a fundamental unfairness about how the government are trying to deal with the financial crisis.  Everyone who can contribute, should contribute. Not equally but according to means.  There is not enough emphasis on getting the better off, rich and super-rich to contribute more. But things appear to be more of the elite just looking after themselves. Time for a new government.

Lou,  I don't know where you got the idea that the government gives me 12% towards my pension.  The 12% I refer to is what I personally pay to a private fund in addition to my "normal" pension contributions, the government contributes nothing towards this.

What I would get from my "normal" pension contributions upon retirement is about 15% of my current salary - that's it.  I don't think any of us could afford to take that kind of cut in income, so if I want to have enough to live on, it's up to me to pay for it - the same as the private sector.  This levy will stop me doing that.

I think that everybody should have to pay the same rate % into a common state pension fund, and that the amount due is calculated from income tax returns rather than from salaries. The real big earners do not get their money in salary, it is paid in the way of bonuses, dividends and tax free dividends from Patent incomes.

The amount paid back in pension could then be linked to the mean (not the average) paid into the fund. This will prevent the hiking-up of last few years of salary as a means of increasing the pension.

Public servents got pay rises by benchmarking, but this was difficult to compare because their pension rights were not comparable to the private sector. It is time to get rid of this difference. Give public service people full pay and calculate their pension dues the same as the private sector, then rebenchmark public service salaries, downwards if requiered.

well said

Scapegoat can you clarify how much they give?

Well said Scapegoat. What puzzles me is all these people complaining about how well paid public servants are etc. For the majority of the celtic tiger there was huge difficulty in recruiting people to the public service because the pay and benefits were far better in the private sector. Benchmarking was introduced to keep public sector pay in line with private sector pay. The towards 2016 agreement has been shelved because of the situation in the private sector.

Let's take an average pension scenario. Assume that Jonathan is a private sector worker aged 65, who is about to retire on a final salary of €80,000 per year.His pension is worth just €21,473 and annual increases are linked to the consumer price index (CPI). (Assumptions include salary increases of 5 per cent per year and annual investment growth of 6 per cent.)Jonathan does not fare well against the civil servant who earns almost twice as much as him in retirement.The civil servant, who also retires on €80,000 per year, has a state-guaranteed retirement income of €40,000 per annum, or half his final salary.(Assume that he takes 1.5 times his final salary as a tax-free lump sum, which explains the difference between receiving a half and two-thirds of final salary as a retirement income.)In addition, the civil servant's pension is not linked to CPI, but rather the wage increases that his rank (at retirement) receives annually.With benchmarking increases boosting public sector incomes, this has led to big gains for public sector pensioners in recent years, vis-a-vis their private sector counterparts.This amounts to hundreds of millions extra per year that retired civil servants receive, compared to their private sector peers, who have to pay such increases via taxes.

Deloitte & Touche compared a private and public sector worker both earning €135,000 per year to see how they fared on retirement income.While it must be noted that the two cannot be compared exactly, it is worrying to discover that, despite both employees earning the same annual salary of €135,000 and maximum funding, the private sector employee will retire on a significantly lower income.The civil servant ended up on a retirement salary of €67,500, while his private sector equivalent ended up earning €57,349.The gap between the two is a substantial €10,151 per year.This gap will widen over the years, as public servant pensions are linked to the wage deals negotiated by government employee unions, not inflation. This makes the pension even more valuable.“Even including the state benefit, based on current age-based contribution limits, it would not be possible for them to build up a fund that would match the pension entitlements of the public servant,” said Maeve Corr, a director with Deloitte Pensions and Investments.The reason private and public sector pensions cannot be compared exactly is because private workers pay PRSI to fund their state or old-age pension.They also fund their pension from their untaxed income, whereas the public servant is provided with the pension in addition to his or her gross income.A further difference is each individual's entitlement to tax-free cash lump sums on retirement. A public servant on a defined benefit pension (percentage of final salary) can take 1.5 times their final salary as a tax-free cash lump sum.A defined contribution private sector pension holder may take 25 per cent of the final fund value or 1.5 times their final salary, depending on the scheme they belong to.The financially clued-in know that a public sector pension is almost worth its weight in gold.

OK, I'm in the private sector and this is the way it is for me.

I currently pay 5% of my salary with a further 5% from my employer into a defined contribution pension. They do not go any higher than 5%, so I make the odd AVC when I get a chance. Many private firms do not contribute to pension funds, so I am one of the lucky ones in the private sector.

I've paid into this fund for about the last 9 years and as of today it is in negative equity i.e. it is worth less than if I had kept the money in my pocket.

My understanding is that with civil servants it is a defined benefit pension i.e. gauranteed income when you retire. Thats a nice luxury.

In addition to this both my wife work in the private sector and our companies are going through a hard time, like most organisations. How safe are our jobs? I'm not sure ..... no job - no money - less pension.

Civil servants, as far as I know, if permanent, have secure jobs, no threat.

That said, if you are a civil servant you could me maxed out mortgage payments etc, so it is difficult.

But you do have the gaurantees and that is what you are being asked to pay for. As they say 'A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush'.

I think it is a scandal to ask anyone earning under €35,000 a year to suddenly have to pay extra in their pension - yes i understand "The Country" is in dire straits but who is at fault it is certainly not the ordinary worker be they private or public sector. A fairer (but not instant) remedy would be as follows from 1st March 2009 an increase of 1% on earnings up to €35,000 - 11/2% on earnings up to €100,000 and 2% after that and subsequent yearly increases until such time as pension payments are in line with everyone else. Also from the 1st March 2009 any new recruit pays pension contributiions at the full level

The whole situation is a mess, caused mainly by the banks and the Government.

Let the Gov. talk about taxes and levies After they deal with the excessive salaries they are paid, the jobs for the boys which are unnecessary, and after they introduce vouching for expenses, cut out the big Mercs for everybody and the govt. jet; there are several things that should be done before they get down to Joe citizen. Then we would all be much more willing to 'share the pain' -- the only pain they share is having to face their constituents. Incidentally, the pension levy also applies to those who were teachers before they became TDs, and who will still be entitled to those pensions in addition to their TDs pension and also the ones who are or have been Ministers, who will have three pensions.

It would not be a bad idea, either, to let the President stay at home, likewise Micheal Martin, instead of gadding about the Middle East. opening football clubs. Does anyone know how much their latest caper cost us?

Lou,

Not sure what you mean. For our "normal" (superannuation) pension, there's no separate fund that we and our employer each contribute a certain percentage to. The cost to me is 6.5% of gross salary. I don't know if the cost to the Civil Service's as our employer is quantified anywhere - it's certainly not in any of the pension documentation that we receive.

For my AVC's which is my private pension fund, they don't contribute anything.

In total I am currently paying 18% of my salary towards pension contributions - this levy would bring that up to 25%!

Lou,

In response to your question - I looked at the pensions board website and calculated how much I would have to contribute to a private pension fund to get a pension of 15% of my current salary, which is what my Civil Service pension will be worth to me. Their numbers came out at 10% of my current salary. So if I already pay 6.5% it means that the nett cost to the Government of my pension is about 3.5%.

As a public servant on a relatively high salary - after 32 years service and ongoing professional training (including college mostly at my own expense) - I am more than happy to pay my share. My fair share.

This levy is not fair. One of my colleagues is on an annual salary of €39k. Her workmate is on €40k, yet will pay less in levy payments. What's fair about that? And, as a proportion of both incomes, the levy is much harder on them than on someone on €150k+

And by the way, neither of them has ever had a bonus, shares, free trips, sponsored Christmas parties, car allowances, expense accounts or preferential loans. They have to pay this levy and their PAYE because they have no choice. They can't put money in to each others' bank accounts to fool their auditors (like something that Father Ted would do). Neither have they had payments for un-vouched expenses, pension payments while still employed, months off and the safety of the moral high ground when times are tough.

They didn’t cause the problem (and neither did ordinary private sector workers). They will have to find the money to pay their way and hope they can continue to do so. They haven’t spent their efforts in blaming other people and trying to drive a wedge with other groups of works in the same position.

Here’s an interesting quote:

"Owners of capital will stimulate the working class to buy more and more of expensive goods, houses and technology, pushing them to take more and more expensive credits, until their debt becomes unbearable. The unpaid debt will lead to bankruptcy of banks, which will have to be nationalised, and the State will have to take the road which will eventually lead to communism"

George Lee? David McWilliams? No, Karl Marx in 1867....

My point is that rather than descend to blaming each other, ordinary workers should unite to defend the rights of all people who work and want to pay their way and to protect those who need our care.

I agree with the levy that's been imposed although like other people I think the amount contributed by those less well paid should be lower and those at the top, e.g., TDs and top civil servants should have their pay cut by 50%. If benchmarking is to be used fairly, then while those in the private sector are losing their jobs and taking cuts in their wages, then it should be applied to the public sector.

These people pay themselves lucrative salaries, get driven around in big cars and then employ advisors to do their thinking for them - what a joke. The biggest insult is that they are now taking away funding for teachers of disabled children.

I don't agree that the government is trying to pit public vs private, the imbalance has been there for quite some time now and this has only been underlined by the media and political commentators. I'm glad that the public service (fat cat) unions have been faced down for once as they have been practically running the country and I feel disgusted that these unions are taking action - it's also so patronising that they are trying to make it look like they are demonstrating for the private sector also. They didn't want to know about the private sector before the levy came in.

I have been a worker in the private sector and was made redundant twice already in my career (yeah, i'm bitter!). It's just not possible for a contracting private sector to support a bloated public sector. It was too easy for Ahern to keep everyone happy by throwing money at problems and not getting any return but as we all know, it's much more difficult to take the money back.

The current public sector pension bill is funded from current revenue. When a public sector employee pays their pension contribution (6.5%) it is not invested to provide for future pension entitlements but absorbed into current revenue and spent as such. When an employee converts to become a pensioner they are paid from current revenue also. This method of funding the pensions has been referred to previously as being somewhat similar to a pyramid scheme!

The additional (so called) pension contribution will not improve the pension of any worker. It is simply a tax by another name. It is worth noting that the majority of public sector workers will not receive a full pension on retirement as this is based on 40 years service (there are a number of exceptions to this rule). As per some of the previous posts it is common for staff to already contribute to AVCs or similar in order to make up the difference.

If the government did want to take a greater % of salary contribution towards the pension bill this (in my view) should have been done by way of a fixed percentage of salary (regardless of income) as it is the final salary that the pension is based on. The higher earners could be targeted by increasing tax rates and by the introduction of a third high rate of tax. The only reason this wasn't done is because Brian Cowen didn't want to back track again and go with another mini budget. This approach would have been the more honest option and would have had the benefit of not pitting public against private sector!

Not on the less well paid in the Public Service, For example Clerical Officers.

Scapegoat, it has nothing to do with "what I mean" - my 2 most recent posts are not OPINIONS, they are properly sourced facts. Regards

I'm a public sector worker (HSE) and i think the levy is a good idea in principal once the government also look at the private sector for cost savings. for example a lot of bank employees have pension entitlement which they contribure very little towards and a levy should be introduced on this. Executive pay should be capped and more transparency should be seen across the board. I benefitted from Benchmarking however always felt that it wasn't transparent. I however did NOT make hay during the Celtic Tiger. I didn't get thousands in bonuses nor double digit increases and i felt compared to my friends in the private sector that it all passed me by however this was a price i was prepared to pay and am now thankful that i stayed where i did. I feel paying the additional pension levy on top of my current 6.5% will bring me up to around 14.5% and i feel that sort of contribution can stop the usual private sector bickering about free pensions etc.

The fact remains that there is still an huge difference between what public and private sector pensions pay out. One on a public sector pension will receive a retirement wage that is directly linked to the current pay of the position they were in when they left. That of a private sector employee is not.

Of COURSE they should be paying it. It's only what private sector workers have been doing for years and considerig themselves extremely lucky to be able to do so in companies where they could. The only surprising thing is that it wasn't brought in sooner. The public service has had so-called "bench-marking" when it suited them altho private sector workers were on pay freezes and had none of the public sector benefits. I have never had job security, a company car, a company phone, free lunches, long holidays, any paid overtime or paid Christmas parties in all my working life and I still have had to pay for my pension. Like Jack, my pension is worth less than the contributions but unlike the public sector, it is not garanteed. I agree that a system shoud be fair and just and bankers, developers and poiliticians should be made accountable but I do not see what is wrong with asking public sector workers to pay for their pensions like everyone else - and for something which they will be getting back at retirement anyway. I also think puzzle master has a good point - altho we are supposed to have a pension fund anyway - called the national pensions reserve, for state pensios which we all pay into - that is if the govt didn't raid it to bail out certain institutions. Nice suggestion but I altready pay into my pension and alwayts have done in any company where I could and I also have the 1% income levy, so the last thing I need is another levy at barely above 35k, thank you. Regards to all - Maura

Divide and conquer, the age old strategy of the power hungry who insist on ruling despite their blatant inability to do so.

Set the public and private sector workers against each other and BINGO you have the real working people, be they doctors or road sweepers or factory employees, scrapping amongst themselves whilest the smoke screen created hides the nimble fingered cute hoors who have caused the disaster in the first place.

Get real, you decent hardworking people of Ireland, remove the sniggering weasels from their bonus padded positions, force them and their affiliated politicos to face Justice, replace them with men and women of real calibre. It is then and only then, that we can start to rebuild what others have destroyed by each citizen contributing according to his/her means not according to where he/she works. In due course each should receive a pension according to their needs.

Make the winds of change blow away the smoke screens.

Patman,

As I mentioned in my earlier post, I worked in the private sector for 20 years before joining the Civil Service. I was also made redundant TWICE and let go from another job after less than a year because the owner of the company decided that my position was unnecessary. That's one of the reasons I took a pay cut to join the Civil Service. Having gone through this I'm beginning to get a bit bitter because the sacrifice I made financially 3 years ago to get stability has come back to bite me in the ass.

I don't mind paying something extra - my fair share - but this levy is not balanced and not fair.

I would like to point out the following information:

- The 2nd Benchmarking Report in 2008 resulted in 300,000 public servants and 100,000 retired public servants receiving a pay award of 0%.

This report stated “A discount of up to 12.5% was applied because of pension entitlement”.

- Because this was not highlighted by the Trade Union movement at the time, the way was left open for the savage attack on our take-home pay which is now being proposed by the Government.

- The failure by Trade Union leaders to state at every opportunity that public servants pay 6.5% of their salary for pension in addition to the 12.5% above, created the impression in the public mind that Public Servants did not pay anything for their pension.

- Benchmarking has been shamefully described as the “ATM for Public Servants”. The first Benchmarking Report in 2002 was welcomed by IBEC who said at the time “Benchmarking has brought reality into Public Service pay and has stopped leapfrogging and relativities”.

- This same Benchmarking process replaced our traditional pay review mechanism.

- The “Rolls Royce” Public Service pensions referred to by Turlough O’ Sullivan is as follows

Public Service retiree on pension of €500 per week after 40 year’s service does not get the State Pension of €230 per week. Thus the real additional benefit of the “Rolls Royce”, after working for 40 years, is €270 per week, NOT €500.

Out of this, the pensioner pays VHI, including the levy of €128, and the new 1% income levy (equivalent to €400 per annum).

- The separation of the link between Public Service pay and pensions, evident again in this proposed levy, must be stopped.

- We as public servants are prepared to take some of the pain of this recession, on an equitable basis, even though we did not receive the gain of the private sector during the Celtic Tiger- large bonuses, company cars, expenses.

- Many public servants are on temporary contracts. This is not secure employment.

- It is offensive to Public Servants that the private sector is referred to as “the real economy” by Turlough O’Sullivan. The public sector economy is very real to people who are in hospital, children in schools and people who are rescued by firefighters.

- Unlike a possible pay cut, the proposed pension levy will not be reversed when the economy picks up.

We must act quickly. Remember that ICTU entered the discussions with the Government on the basis that there will be tax increases. These will follow for ALL, and we will be hit again, to pay for a problem that we did not create.

Lou,

By the time i leave the Public Sector i will have paid in pension contributions for over 45 years. I will be entitled to 50% of my salary as a pension along with a lump sum payment of 1.5 times my salary. i won't be entitled to any state pension as i Class D PRSI. I also pay additional pension because i am "on call" and this is regarded as pensionable. The point about Benchmarking 2 taking into account pension entitlements up to and including 12.5% is also valid. I feel my pension entitlements are fair and as stated previously i have no issue paying a levy in difficult times however in my opinion the private sector kept their heads down when they were making hay and now because things have gone pear-shaped (because of world economic circumstances, greedy bankers and less because of public sector pay) the public sector is the blame. I along with a lot of my colleagues are aware that there is waste in the public sector and too many administrators in a lot of area's and i would welcome a root and branch approach to sorting out the waste and inefficiency however the private sector needs to wake up to its responsibility too.

Here are some more facts for you

Irish public service salaries rose 59% between 2001 and 2006 and the payroll expanded by 38,000 extra staff.

The increase in the average industrial wage for a male worker in the period 2001-2005, was 19%.

I am a Civil Servant of 30 years, encouraged to enter into this area of employment as a school leaver, and yes indeed, job security and pension plan were considered to be attractive to any new Civil Service recruits.

I can only speak for the area I am familiar with - ie. administration, where a variety of grades work hard to keep things in order for the benefit of a government office and all of the staff working there.

Now there is anger, morale has hit rock bottom, and everybody is blue in the face from discussing what a mess this country is in and HOW IS IT THAT WHEN ALL OF US HEARD ALARM BELLS RINGING LONG BEFORE HALF THE CABINET JETTED OFF IN 2008 TO VARIOUS DESTINATIONS TO CELEBRATE ST. PATRICK'S DAY (ALL TRIMMINGS INCLUDED), there was silence, not a hint of the financial tsunami that was heading our way, and here we are, 4 months after a failed mini budget wreaked more havoc, left feeling like we're in the middle of ANOTHER CIVIL WAR - PUBLIC SECTOR WORKERS V PRIVATE SECTOR WORKERS!

Small comfort I have in knowing that I did not assist in returning this government into office!

The content of the postings on this page are overall intelligent, well considered and several workable solutions have been put forward - is there some way these COULD REACH THE CABINET TABLE BY EXPRESS COURIER if at all possible, before someone decides we mightas well just take down the flag that's flying over the GPO in Dublin - Irish pride doesn't live here anymore.

What is obvious from the posts is that public sector workers are prepared to pay 'their fair share'. The question seems not to be is the pension levy right but has it been pitched at the right level and seen to be fair?

The answer to both questions appear to be 'No'. In the current economic climate, as  a public sector worker, I say it is ok for us to pay extra towards our pension. However there should be a single percentage applied to pensionable pay (why should people pay a pension contribution on elements of pay that are not used in the pension calculation on retirement?). The tax system can then be the means by which tax can be collected on the basis of ability to do so.

It is worth pointing out that the introduction of the pension contribution levy/tax will not create a single job. It will only cost jobs. For every Euro taken out of the system it will be one Euro less that can be spent. suppressing demand and activity in an economy that is already suffering.  

now I KNOW I have seen that 10:35 posting before now - word for word in fact :)

Dave please try to refrain from airing your assumptions that EVERYONE who is not public sector "made hay" in recent years. For some of us (myself included) the timing fell a little short. I was busy about the task of getting academic qualifications and schooling throughout the tiger years, and NOW when I join the workforce well..the place is in tatters really isnt it? Not ALL of us were lucky enough to be able to rake it in during the tiger years. It is very easy for you to assume that ALL private sector workers were making their weight in gold but you cannot possibly believe that they are ALL bankers, developers or entrepeneurs? If you do, you are seriously deluded. My father was self employed all his life, made enough money to provide a secure home for his family and a moderate standard of living. He was "private sector". (he is also now btw at the age of 61 too BET DOWN from a life of physical work to do any more and so he must wait out the next 4 years until he can avail of the very generous state pension of oooh what is it? Just over the e200 mark?) ALL I am saying is, DONT assume that all those who did not work in the public sector have gold stashed because for the vast majority of private sector workers (and I am sure a lot of public sector too) the reality is FAR from what you seem to think it is.

Mrs M from 13/2,

I think that Mrs M make a really good point about the benchmarking2 and the 12.5% premium being put on pensions and the trade unions not highlighting this sufficently. This on top of the current 6.5% actually being paid puts a new light on things. In effect the public sector is already paying 19% for their pensions. Not quite the free pension that the media and IBEC like to make out.

Everyone needs to tighten their belts that is what the Government said yet only two sectors were being hit that was the Public Service industry and foreign aid they've now recanted on the foreign aid. The state has a deficit of 7+billion euro and now the banks are getting a 7billon bail out. Why?? because they over lent to ppl. People form all walks of life form the high rollers to the ordinary Joe Soap. The bit that galls me is that everyone wanted bigger and better, houses, cars, lifestlyes, the celtic tiger was all about keeping ahead of the Jones. Yes I wanted it all too but I couldn't afford it even with the celtic tiger roaring away in my ear, but I knew I couldn't afford it all, so I settled for just having the car. I only recently joined the Public sector and I did it for the job security.

So you see we all played a part in the finical destruction of the state. Nobody wanted to believe in the old adage "put a bit by for a rainy day". So guess what folks that rainy day has arrived so stop blaming everyone else and making just one section of the workforce the scape goat.

WE ARE ALL TO BLAME and more importantly it is up to ALL of us to tighten our belts, yes I'm going to hit very hard in the pocket and I don't apreciate it and if I can I will fight it but only because it is fundamently wrong to expect just the Public sector to bail the whole country out.

Oh and Lou you say you were a student while the celtic tiger roared good on you for trying to better yourself but, bet you have student loans, see where I'm going with this. However unlike you I'm not blaming anyone I'm blaming everyone because we all hand a hand in this, however big or small.

"bet you have student loans, see where I'm going with this." - that is none of your business, and what exactly is your POINT?

"we all hand a hand in this" is the kind of ridiculous waffle the the government WANT us to be spewing. WAKE UP!

MRS.M posted 11/2/09 @13;25

Congrats and very well taught out post. I also work in the public service, HANDS OFF OUR PENSIONS. I would urge every one who feels hard done by to march Sarurday 21st

Thanks Alo. I will definately be at the march tomorrow.

The 'overpaid' cretins in the government are only trying to answer the 'imagined' voices in their mentally challenged heads! These 'voices' tell them there is great anger out there and....what does the government do??.

1. They assume/wish that this anger is directed at the civil/puplic servants in general.

2. They are also scrambling to get money from anywhere...having allowed the greedy at the top to fleece the Irish people. WRONG ON BOTH COUNTS:

The increasing anger out here is not directed at the public servants in general. There is however, a rage building over the 'friends' of the politicians who WILL NOT BE FEELING THE PAIN (the very top public servants)...like the rest of us....as the idiots in government like to say repeatedly!

Re 2. above....if the Irish people witnessed any equality at all in the governments approach to the crisis they caused....they might be met with a different reaction; however....let's not wait with bated breath for that....the history of politicians is that, above all....they will never give up their 'wealth'....and they will always, always protect their friends and relations!

I think the government should be forced to abolish every idiotic approach so far....get back to the drawing board...and I'd propose the following:

1. Rapidly bring laws into force to jail any greedy bastard who defrauded the Irish people + seize all their assets.

2. Take back any and all monies given to greedy incompetents that have walked away with a 'handshake' + seize all their assets.

3. Start any clawing back of funds by beginning at the very, very top of the wealthiest in society....for example....any one on, say, €500,000 pa + should give 75%....and there bonuses stopped, pensions defferred. Bit extreme? Surely some one on that kind of money could live on €125k ? No? Well what are they expecting the rest of us to live on with their inequitable design/solution ?

4. Demand all ex-pat's..( You know, the tax-dodging rock groups et al ) contribute a large (v/large) percentage of their millions to the exchequer; if they refuse....then totally shame and disown them and refuse to let them back into the country + seize all their assets !!

The above will never happen of course....but...hey, what a lovely thought....to see the rich brigade suffer, equally, for once!

Great ideas Brandy, I would like to see greedy ba*tards who defrauded the Irish people jailed and their assets seized. In fact, we already have laws in place for this as far as I know.

I'd love to have taken back the 'handshakes' given to the greedy incompetents but CAB cannot seize all their assets unless its at least suspect that the assets are the proceeds of crime.

In relation to your third point, nice and all as it would be, it is simply not viable to to bring a tax level at 75% - the 80's proved that. Companies just do not have the resources to pay people sufficiently for losing 80% of their income - nor can the government dictate what companies pay as bonuses. Nor can you legally defer pensions where people have signd a pension agreement. That would be legally null and void.

What are they expecting the rest of us to live on with their inequitable design solution? Well, I would simply love to know.

Trying to get ex-pat's to pay tax would be a nice idea but given that Irish law doesn't govern the whole world - thankfully; it's totally unenforceable.

1. Why is fraud legislation not enacted? I'd love to know. Tho' the fraud squad did go into Anglo yesterday.

2. CAB are the Criminal Assets Bureau. They are the ones with the power to seize assets in cases where they have been attained by fraudulent / criminal means. Yes, the job of the goiverment is to legislate but where that legislation means a change to the constitution, it requires a referendum.

3. It means that if you suddenly start taxing people at 75% + PRSI, those on such incomes would be losing 80% of that income. So their take home pay is vastly reduced and hence it is either no longer worth their while working for 500,000 or the company will be in the position of having to pay them even more to compensate for the higher tax rate and loss of take home pay. Anyone on 500,000 probably has plenty of arguments as to why they're not overpaid, crazy as that might seem.

True, it is our pensions and maybe even your children's pensions (if you're retired) which will pay for the bank bail-out.

All this talk about the banks is well and good and hopefully those who did wrong will be punished. I see it as yet another government failure as there was no regulation of our banks and yet in another example of the difference between the public and private sector, the regulator walks away with a golden handshake instead of a shoe imprint in his backside.

However, the banking crisis has not suddenly caused a lot of companies to go bust but it is as a result of the global downturn (as well as local factors as cost of energy, ESB-more fatcats!) and we need to find a way out. I haven't worked since the end of January as my company just ran out of money. My home has now become like a prison. I dare not go out as I feel I must be doing something all the time, whether it is doing up my CV, applying for jobs, etc., but I am distracted a lot, even with my family, and cannot relax as my mind feels it should be productive. I'm cracking up with anxiety about my future and the future of my kids. I've worked hard to get where I am with a degree and now I am funding a Master's degree out of my own money.

What really annoys me is listening to people who are so out of touch with reality. Give me the chance of making an extra contribution to my own pension anyday for a secure job and something to look forward to when I retire and I will grab it. At the moment, I have none of that.

All this talk of worker solidarity from the unions is nonsense. I don't believe a word of it. In fact, I find it quite patronising. There was no demonstration organised for workers before the pension levy was announced, not even talk of it. Do these people not realise that this country is going down the tubes? The money simply isn't there and we are borrowing at a frightening rate. I don't want to see any worker lose their job or face hardship but I think there could be a lot worse to come if people don't swallow their pill now and get on with it

Patman I totally agree with what you say in your post. My Father made the same point last night we were having a discussion about it. The self employed still pay PRSI yet they are not entitled to anything if they fall ill or have an injury then its just tough. The difference being that they pay 1% less with no employer contribution. He enquired to see if he could pay the same as everyone else, and have the same entitlements, naturally he was laughed at. Its ridiculously unfair and then they give out about the private sector who "made hay" during the tiger years. NEWSFLASH most of them DID NOT. Then again I suppose it suits a lot of people to convince themsleves otherwise.

Yes, they're still living on €100,000 p.a. (€1,923 ) per week but my point is Brandy that because no company has the resources to compensate them in salary for he loss of arnings, then the people suitable for those positions will simply not bother filling them - it wouldn't be worth their while if they lose 80% of their income. So it becomes an entirely pointless exercise. Surely the 80's proved that to you. ....!!

I know all about existing on around €200 per week- this is the level of unemployment benefit and also for a pension. I think ordinary people are finally realising that they've been taken for a ride for far too long.

I agree with a lot of what PATMAN and some other posters say and as stated previously I am prepared to pay the additional 8% pension levy as i feel it is probably merited overall.

I have an issue with some of the statistics as they are skewed and manipulated to suit certain opinions. The additional payroll in the public sector has indeed jumped, however for someone similar to me who has been in the sector since 1982 I've seen very gradual increases in pay and apart from Benchmarking where i received 7%, all other increases were in line with inflation and in some cases this was beneficial whilst in others not. Undoubtedly a lot of additional staff were taken on and in some cases these staff were probably not required and the funding could have been used elsewhere.

My argument is that the onus seems to be to hack into public sector workers' pay and conditions in isolation and don't tackle the other obvious area's of waste and abuse. It's obvious that in all probablity a lot of irate posters are lower paid private sector workers who didn't benefit during the boom years. However I don't accept that there are not a lot of private sector workers who did benefit. As stated previously, ~Istayed in the public sector for the security it offered and in my case I could have made more money in the private sector. However, I have bills to pay.

"It's obvious that in all probablity a lot of irate posters are lower paid private sector workers who didn't benefit during the boom years. However I don't accept that there are not a lot of private sector workers who did benefit. As stated previously, I stayed in the public sector for the security it offered and in my case I could have made more money in the private sector. "

The fact remains that there ARE a lot of private sector workers who did not make it big during the boom years, and your "not accepting" this fact really just proves my earlier point - that the public sector do not WANT to believe anything other than the fiction they propagate about ALL private sector workers making hay during the tiger years. For the MAJORITY it is simply, untrue. I admire your reasons for staying in the public sector "for the security it offered" however I find it difficult to believe EVERY person I hear saying this. Nobody could foresee the drop in the economy, so I would question such martyrdom that is associated with staying somewhere you get less money if you have the option of earning more. However noble your reasons are I am sorry I find it as difficult to buy into your image of thousands of public sector workers sacrificing jobs that they think would bring in more money, as you find it to believe that low paid private sector workers exist. Incidentally, unless you have actually tried running your own business, please do not pretent to know what is involved.

Lou,

I'm not talking about SME owners i'm talking about private sector workers. you seem to be confused about what i'm actually on about. In my case its not about martyrdom staying in the public sector, however its about making decisions based on supporting a family and choosing a career path. I'm trying to have a rational discussion however its always gets to a base level with a "them and us" argument which is not really progressive. As a matter of interest i would see the public sector pension levy as a good idea. I would also see a wage freeze of 3 years as a good idea across both the public and private sectors. I would think that increasing the top rate of tax by at least 5% would also target the bigger earners however i would stop before having a blood let on people who, in the main, provide very decent public services.