WTF Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 when we vote the fuckers out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blade Runner Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 I dont think they are paid enough, not enough to attract some really good ones but in this climate a small reduction in salary, just a token amount of say 5% would be enough to show that we are all in it together. They could not have handled the pension contribution thing any worse and I feel if that was revisited just before an election and not when they have a full term ahead of them they might of done the decent thing. As someone else said a lot of them have other incomes so they would not miss 5%. Any more of a reduction and the ones with commitments could be it financial trouble. Come Mr Bell, do the right thing, you know it makes sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 the excuse that the quality had to be rewarded or it would jump ship etc. etc. was endemic apparently...doubtless Tynwald will wheel this one out if push comes to shove... Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha. Nooo. They wouldn't. Would they? Except for one or three they couldn't possibly say that. It would be really extracting the michael if they did. Some of them can't even form a coherent sentence. There may be excuses for not taking a pay cut but this surely isn't one of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Jefferson Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 This thread is nothing but a red herring to distract us from the people who really need to have a pay cut: the CIVIL SERVANTS. MHK's are not only few in number but they get paid sod all compared to civil servants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blade Runner Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 This thread is nothing but a red herring to distract us from the people who really need to have a pay cut: the CIVIL SERVANTS. MHK's are not only few in number but they get paid sod all compared to civil servants. The civil servants dont set their own pay though, cutting their pay may well be a far bigger saving but we are talking about gestures, you know the MHKs showing that they are taking the pain along with the rest of the island. Cutting civil servants pay by a similar amount to what I suggested was practical for MHKs would be a good thing but it would not make anything like the same statement as if the MHKs did it off their own backs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Jefferson Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 The civil servants dont set their own pay though Yes, they F ing do! They're also the c*nts who decided to pay temps less. They are scum of the earth. cutting their pay may well be a far bigger saving but we are talking about gestures, you know the MHKs showing that they are taking the pain along with the rest of the island. Cutting civil servants pay by a similar amount to what I suggested was practical for MHKs would be a good thing but it would not make anything like the same statement as if the MHKs did it off their own backs. Gestures? I don't recall civil servants doing a "gesture" when temps were paid less or when blue collar workers took pay freezes. As usual, there's a double standard. Cutting civil servants pay by a similar amount to what I suggested was practical for MHKs would be a good thing but it would not make anything like the same statement as if the MHKs did it off their own backs. Cutting MHK's pay is not going to some how magically give civil servants a conscience. They are out for themselves and only themselves; they don't give a f-ck about anyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 This thread is nothing but a red herring to distract us from the people who really need to have a pay cut: the CIVIL SERVANTS. MHK's are not only few in number but they get paid sod all compared to civil servants. The civil servants dont set their own pay though, cutting their pay may well be a far bigger saving but we are talking about gestures, you know the MHKs showing that they are taking the pain along with the rest of the island. Cutting civil servants pay by a similar amount to what I suggested was practical for MHKs would be a good thing but it would not make anything like the same statement as if the MHKs did it off their own backs. You're both having a row about nothing (no change there). Not only can you cut MHK and Civil Service pay at the same time - you have to. According to the Members of Tynwald (Annual Sums) Order 2008: [...]the annual sum payable to members of Tynwald is the amount payable from time to time in respect of the pay spine point that is mid way between the top spine point of the Higher Executive Officer Grade and the top spine point of the Executive Officer Grade of the Isle of Man Civil Service salary scale for those Grades as determined under section 3(1)(e) of the Civil Service Act 1990. So if you cut Civil Service pay the MHKs would automatically follow. Of course you would also need to make sure that those above HEO grade took similar or greater punishment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Jefferson Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 This thread is nothing but a red herring to distract us from the people who really need to have a pay cut: the CIVIL SERVANTS. MHK's are not only few in number but they get paid sod all compared to civil servants. The civil servants dont set their own pay though, cutting their pay may well be a far bigger saving but we are talking about gestures, you know the MHKs showing that they are taking the pain along with the rest of the island. Cutting civil servants pay by a similar amount to what I suggested was practical for MHKs would be a good thing but it would not make anything like the same statement as if the MHKs did it off their own backs. You're both having a row about nothing (no change there). Not only can you cut MHK and Civil Service pay at the same time - you have to. According to the Members of Tynwald (Annual Sums) Order 2008: >[...]the annual sum payable to members of Tynwald is the amount payable from time to time in respect of the pay spine point that is mid way between the top spine point of the Higher Executive Officer Grade and the top spine point of the Executive Officer Grade of the Isle of Man Civil Service salary scale for those Grades as determined under section 3(1)(e) of the Civil Service Act 1990. So if you cut Civil Service pay the MHKs would automatically follow. Of course you would also need to make sure that those above HEO grade took similar or greater punishment. And which asshole wrote the Civil Service Act? Oh that's right, a civil servant. Time to re-write it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blade Runner Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 Roger, why cant the MHKs just agree to cut their pay? I dont think it has to be tied to public sector pay if they suggested it themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 Roger, why cant the MHKs just agree to cut their pay? I dont think it has to be tied to public sector pay if they suggested it themselves. BR, I think you'll find that MHK's salaries are inextricably linked to the Civil Service pay spines. There have been many occasions in the past when there has been a furore about the fact that MHK's were to receive a hike in pay simply because CS were due one and the linking meant that the MHK's effectively had to receive it as well. To the best of my knowledge though, MHK's can decline a pay rise but it has to be a personal decision - I think Allan Bell and one or two others declined their last. Having said that, the majority of the greedy trough-lickers couldn't wait to accept (anybody remember John "I'm on £50k+ a year and some of us have mortgages to Pay" Shimmin refusing to entertain thoughts of a paycut in a debate only a few months ago? If applicable, please remember that at Voting Time...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shake me up Judy Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 They're never going to vote to take a paycut. Like everyone else, politicians don't vote against their own self-interest, and measure their value against those on even higher incomes. To take a paycut would be a sign of weakness and a devaluation of their perceived worth. It's never going to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 Roger, why cant the MHKs just agree to cut their pay? I dont think it has to be tied to public sector pay if they suggested it themselves. Well in theory they could, though they'd have to change the order above and possibly other things too. But what makes you think that they would use their freedom to reduce their salary instead of whacking it up while telling themselves "Because you're worth it"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonan3 Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 What a really stupid thread. Does anyone think that reducing MHKs salaries by a few quid is going to make things better. To be honest, if any MHK or MLC suggested it, I would immediately suggest that it was simply 'gesture politics' - designed to gather a few favourable headlines without actually achieving anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 Possibly ridiculous to expect it to happen but it is a pertinent question when many much lower paid in the electorate are being very tightly squeezed. I note that parliamentarians in the UK are looking at a big pay increase so are we more likely to see similar here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zarley Posted July 12, 2013 Share Posted July 12, 2013 To take a paycut would be a sign of weakness and a devaluation of their perceived worth. It's never going to happen. So what? Do people in other work sectors feel any differently after having paycuts FORCED upon them? Or having no payrise for years, all the while the costs of a weekly grocery shop, not to mention rent and other necessities, go up and up and up? My guess is that they fwould feel even worse - and find themselves falling into depression and hopelessness when they struggle to feed their families and keep a roof over their head. But oh no, we cannot have our MHKs feeling weak and devalued. Poor little diddums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.