Stark alternative for ‘bank time’ devotees

YOUR editorial on public sector reform (October 30) makes perfect sense of this obvious nonsense.

There still appears to be little acceptance on the part of the public/civil services of the dire condition this country’s finances are in. As you say, if they won’t accept a minor change of this type — the elimination of ‘bank time’ — what will they accept? The only credibility I can see on the CPSU side is that it is a silly change in the first instance.

The purpose of the changes we need now is to reduce our budget deficit. This implies an equitable, fair and, unfortunately, severe combination of increased income (tax) and reduced cost (public sector cuts).

The proposal to ask these civil ‘servants’ to work an additional 30 minutes per fortnight does neither. The civil service is already bloated and does not need an additional 30 minutes, which would most likely be spent complaining about their plight and not increasing productivity. This particular ‘cut’ could be improved with added value to the economy by offering an alternative to the 30 minutes bank time loss of 34.5 hours dole time weekly. Maybe then the CPSU and its like would reconsider the contempt they show to the country’s needs and to the private sector which has already taken more than its fair share of cuts and redundancies.

Liam McLaughlin

Clogheen

Co Cork