But why two agencies ?

The first thing I’d respond to is the point about public servants being on the defensive. Public servants have been vilified by the media, the government and employers since the start of the recession. Public servants are on the defensive because there has been a tendency to distort and twist figures regarding the pay and conditions in the public sector. When people constantly attack the pay and conditions of those in the public sector, it is only natural that public servants will seek to defend the work they do. I would imagine it is the same in any sector. The second point I would make is in relation to your call for performance related increments. As a general concept, I would agree with you. However, the devil is in the detail. How do you assess the performance and thus the eligibility for incremental rise of a nurse, teacher, guard, fireman, paramedic? In a system where increments would only be given on the basis of performance, I would be genuinely interested in your opinions on how you would award increments on the basis of performance in areas where no tangible results of performance or productivity are attainable. Finally, on the point you make about “if they were doing their jobs i.e. performing, they would have nothing to worry about”. Unfortunately, in education alone, 2,500 teachers have lost their jobs with another 800 jobs to be lost next September. None of these people who lost their jobs were dismissed or let go on the basis that they had done their jobs insufficiently or that they has performed poorly. In fact, 17,000 job losses have occurred in the public sector. Few have been on the basis of performance. Thus, public servants have a lot to worry about, as no matter how well the 40% of those employed in the public sector who aren’t permanent perform, their jobs will still be on the line. The sense of entitlement and lack of performance is the preserve of a minority in the public sector, as is also the case in the private sector. Entitlement, arrogance, lack of productivity and other such characteristics are not to be found exclusively in any particular sector.

Enough courage to go after Croke Park? Indeed. It would indeed be a courageous person who would look to cut further the 50% of those in the public sector who earn less than 40k a year. Perhaps the 17% who earn over 100k a year should be looked at. However, by “going after Croke Park”, you are merely targetting already lower and middle income earners who.have taken on average a 17% cut in pay.

Matt, as a public servant for the past 11 years, I done my entrance exam and an interview and got the job. Not a very well paid job, just getting on and no more. You too had the same opportunity as I. Why did you not go for a job in the public service? Understand that we are all not on €100,000 a year or near that….

Can we please stop this bullshit of public/private sector divide.We all know it will have to be scrapped but we all as workers should stop this fighting amongst ourselves this just plays into the hands of government.”Divide and Conquer”.BTW i work in the private sector but took cuts also.

Sorry I meant to hit the green thumb, I’m with you

One will be the main body and the other the appeals body Eileen. That’s the plan anyway according to Bruton’s proposals.

Hope that clarifies.

Thanks Sinead .