Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
PUBLIC SERVANTS WHO hit retirement age before the new legislation comes into effect will result in those wishing to work beyond 65 being re-hired and placed on a minimum or lower pay scale.
Last week, it was announced that the mandatory retirement age for civil servants is to rise from 65 to 70 under new legislation to be finalised next year.
Under current rules, those working in the public service must retire from their job at age 65.
However, the new law will mean people can work up until 70 if they so choose.
The new compulsory retirement age will not come into effect until the necessary legislation is commenced.
Finance and Public Expenditure Minister Paschal Donohoe said last week that he wants to introduce the heads of the Bill in the new year and for the Bill to make a speedy passage through the Houses of the Oireachtas.
The Attorney General has been requested to prioritise the drafting of the necessary legislation for this purpose.
In the meantime, the minister announced that he had agreed with sectoral public service employers some limited interim arrangements to apply in the period between the government decision and the commencement of the necessary legislation.
Public servants who reach the age of 65 in that period and who wish to remain working will be allowed to do so by ministerial order.
Interim arrangements
The interim arrangements will allow pre 2004 public servants who reach the age of 65 in that period to remain in employment only until they reach the age of eligibility for the State contributory pension, which is currently 66.
The worker will have to retire, and will then be re-hired in order to work past 65.
However, under the interim arrangements, a person who works on will only be paid at the minimum point of the relevant pay scale.
This means if a public servant who is at principal officer level three will go back to level one under the interim measures – resulting in them earning a lower wage.
However, a statement from the department said that public servants availing of these arrangements will have received their pension and lump sum payment.
Sinn Féin spokesperson for employment affairs and Social Protection John Brady said he has been contacted by a number of public servants who are approaching the age of 65 and who would like to work on.
He said that the interim arrangements in place for public servants wishing to remain at work are “purposely unattractive”.
‘Grim reading’ for those approaching retirement
Brady said there is little or no point for those approaching retirement age to consider working on before the legislation is enacted, adding:
“The interim arrangements put in place by Minister Donohue and agreed with public service employers makes for grim reading.
“Employees will be allowed to remain at work beyond 65 but only under certain conditions. These conditions include 65 year olds retiring and being re-hired for the extra year, being paid at the minimum point of their relevant pay scale which will result in pay reductions, and no longer being able to accrue pension benefits for the year.
“This means that those wishing to remain at work to add to their PRSI contributions will be unable to do so. I would also question whether or not trade unions were consulted on these arrangements,” said the Wicklow TD.
Calling the interim measures “extremely disappointing”, Brady said:
“If these interim arrangements are anything to go by I would be cautious as to the actual text of this legislation to raise the mandatory retirement age to 70 and what it will actually look like.”
A statement from the Department said that only when the legislation was enacted would an employee be allowed to retain their current terms and conditions.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
No, but lots will. Apple could put their logo on a dog turd and people would be camping overnight to buy it.
The iShite, followed by the iShite S six months later that’s twice the price and twice as shite!
Stay classy Daisy….
@Daisy lol
Not a fan of apple products. Overhyped and over priced.
I wouldnt be a fan of any type of radio transmitter being strapped directly on your your body. Dont care how safe they reckon bluetooth is.
If youre that scared of day to day life, you really haven’t learned the right to use that name, Mr. Bourne.
Be an awful shame if you were exposed to radio waves on a near constant basis…
I think you’ll find we all are, John. Ryan Tubridy is flying through your head as we speak, and there’s nothing you can do about it!
Horrible thought, Tubs flying through my head is at least.
I’ll wait until the lucky lucky men are selling them for a tenner on the beach on the Costa. No one will know the difference!,,,,
Has he got the gormless look on he’s face tubs
That’s a horrible form of torture Neal, the man has the personality of a Rice Cake.
Great. Thanks for that LOL
of a rice cake. more like the personallaity of a dish cloth
Wireless devices cause less harm the further away from you they are. So a device 1FT away will cause less harm than a device thats resting on your skin (.5cm away). 2FT, even less and so on. So ya, I’d be concerned wearing a device that will be transmitting and rec’ing all day and night.
We dont hold mobile phones to our head 24/7, so why would you strap a wireless device to your wrist.
Your solution is here low IQ boy.
http://static5.businessinsider.com/image/51b8e89ceab8eaa87d000009-480/tinfoil-hat.jpg
Jason Bourne, please enlighten us as to how, in your opinion, radiowaves are harmful??
John Boy, I’ll say it just once more for you. Microwaves transmitted in very close proximity are not good for you. The FURTHER away you are from the source, the less harm they can cause. Google it and stop the ‘enlighten us’ $hit. G’lad.
Get that man a tin foil hat!
Excellent response!!!! So microwave radiation from a cellurer device that is non-ionising is somehow now harmful (ionising radiation is the type that can rip electrons from cells and is harmful to our DNA, e.g x-rays & gamma rays, non-ionising does not, it’s impossible). Microwaves transmitted by a cellular device are very very weak, the only risk is the very small amount of heat generated by cellular devices which may release proteins that may be linked with Glioma, a rare type of brain cancer.
However, Glioma is extremely rare so if there was a link with cellular devices it would be pretty obvious, however, studies have found absolutely no link between cellular devices and instances in Glioma.
Non-Ionising Radiation is not harmful, this is a fact and easily researched by reading anything about the electromagnetic spectrum. If microwaves or radiowaves were ionising radiation then life would not exist on this planet as the sun would have ionised everything from the moment the planet even began to form.
Yes, Sony way better.
No until it’s waterproof. How can they sell a “Sport” model that isn’t?
How about the little problem of having to lug a phone around just for it to function?
Gear S is far superior.
sure then you have to lug around a samsung android phone…what’s the difference?
No you don’t. The Gear S has its own GPS, 3G and Wifi. It functions without being tethered to a phone at all. I can leave my phone at home and my phone calls and text messages go to my watch.
I can leave my phone at home when I go for a run and the GPS in the watch tracks my run and uploads it to the Nike+ web site.
The Apple Watch is 2 years out of date already.
Having to lug an iPhone around?? Cos most people leave theirs at home normally?
@Mark Byrne
The primary purpose of the phone is health. Unless you enjoy running with a giant iPhone 6 plus strapped to your arm, I’d suggest there is a market for a watch that alleviates the problem. This one doesn’t.
“The primary purpose of the phone is health.”
The primary purpose of the WATCH that is.
The gold ones are especially dumb. Electronic devices are disposable for a reason. They are replaced by improved models very quickly. What are you going to do with your 18ct gold smart watch when its electronics are 3 years out of date?
The primary purpose of any watch is to tell the bloody time, it may also offer other functions like the date and a stopwatch. I had a Citizen eco-drive watch for 15 years, a great watch and did all these things.
I recently got a new Seiko solar watch which is obviously solar powered, has a date function, measures seconds, 24 hours and has a stop watch function. It is luminous and clearly visible at night and waterproof to over 600 feet. It doesn’t have WiFi, 3G or GPS, can’t send texts, make calls, but then neither can the Apple watch without a phone nearby.
“The primary purpose of any watch is to tell the bloody time”
I’ve used my phone to tell the time for years and never bothered with a watch until I could get one that measures my running distance, speed, elevation and heart rate. Without those functions a smart watch doesn’t do anything that you can’t already do on your phone.
“It doesn’t have WiFi, 3G or GPS, can’t send texts, make calls, but then neither can the Apple watch without a phone nearby.”
The Gear S works fine without the phone.
As I said the primary purpose of any watch is to tell the time, it’s what they were invented to do. Your phone can tell the time too, but what’s it’s primary function? To communicate, by making and receiving phone calls and text messages, yes I know it can also do loads of other things as it’s probably a smart phone but being a phone, that’s it’s primary function.
Yes I know the Gear S works without a phone, others have already mentioned that if I didn’t. However this article and I referred specifically to the Apple Watch.
You seem to be comfortable using your phone as a sports watch, health monitor, and GPS, but if you did want a watch you wouldn’t choose the Apple Watch you’d choose the Gear S.
You’re obviously healthier than me so I’m not going to argue with you. There’s pro’s and con’s with every option, I’ve had a watch on my left wrist since I was 7 years old so at this stage it’s become a part of me. I like wearing a good watch and being able to glance at my wrist to be able to tell the time instead of having to reach for my phone. While I’ve never broken a screen on a phone, yet, I know my watch is also a lot tougher, and waterproof. I imagine each of us adapts our phones, and watches, to our own particular needs. As you’re a runner you may be interested in a watch with a heart monitor, you’ve indicated this, whereas this would be useless for me, I’d be dead if I ran across the road. Each to their own.
Fools and their money. You can get the time from your mobile phone.
Your a fool for thinking its just for telling the time. If you have to criticize make it meaningful
Yeah Mark. It also allows you to check text messages and answer calls without taking the phone out of your pocket. However, it won’t work if the phone isn’t within bluetooth range (about 20 ft).
Stephen. All the Apple Apps on the watch will also be available on your Apple mobile phone – which isn’t just for making phone calls.
No, some apps will be dedicated to the watch
But won’t work without the phone. So it’s all BS really. They aren’t really watch specific apps if you need the phone for them to funtion.
IPhone users get a lot of unfair critism, but anybody who shells out for this watch is only doing it to try and be cool.
no. i have a watch. and i have a phone.
the watch i have cost 50euro and the battery is going for over 3 years.
I found a watch on ebay for €3 and that inc delivery. Three years later its still working beautifully. Remember though the apple watch isnt a watch its a mini ipod, iphone etc. my €3 watch cant do that
If you don’t have your iphone in close proximity the apple watch won’t do anything more than your €3 watch.
Do we have to ask iPhone Joan first if we are allowed to buy one??
If you don’t have the current iPhone, i believe, it doesn’t function
Nope. One watch is enough. I’ve a suunto ambit 2. Great fun water proof and all I need.
Clever way by the Journal of advertising for Apple. Say it isn’t so.
Probably no – I want to buy Fitbit charge HR or Fitbit surge soon (think 150 and 250 eur respectively) – almost perfect fit/smart watch – one big letdown is also not being waterproof though. How fitness watch is not made waterproof is beyond me, anyway it’s still great choice.
You should have a look at xiomai’s products – cheaper
Xiomai band? I know it’s cheap but comparing it with Fitbit is misunderstanding… Much worse compatibility with everything and software support, no HR sensor…
Fitbit actually gathers real data – no more or less random steps count and useless sleep patterns.
Did I hear right that it only has an 18hour battery life or that you will definitely have to charge it at night?? what the f*ck do you need a watch that cant even get past 24hrs I bought a kinetic watch (runs on my body movements) for a lot less and it will last years, I would rather update my iphone than buy an iwatch
This gadget should be classed for the simpleton populous who feel in order to fit into society and be accepted they will need to purchase another pointless apple product and keep the fake economy ticking over at the same time. lol!!
That’s what they said about the TV……
And look how much that has benefited society.
It’s the biggest form of brainwashing and propaganda and when you tell people the truth they can’t handle it because the man with a suite and tie on TV didn’t say it was so.
I like Apple and I wanted to want this more, but I think the price for early adoption is too high this time around. €400 for the one with the rubber band is excessive. And as mentioned above that one is not even water proof.
I would if id nothing better to do with my life.
It’s a niche product, probably being used as a test bed for future advancements and miniaturisation of technology.
Its a sight to see in ireland that there are still some people out the with more money then sense!!
If it’s anything like other Apple products, whenever it goes off time you’d have to bring it into the Apple Authorised Retailer™ to have them reset it with their proprietary software.
No thanks.
Crap
Updated my iPhone last night to iOS 8.2 and it put a stupid app to do with the watch on it. Something that I did not and never will want. ugh..
Life is so hard.
If you bury the app in a folder you’ll never be bothered by it again. Just satin’
No. 1 Silicone G2 is a fine smart watch for €50 – from http://www.tinydeal.com
Its got everything – heart monitor, video and good enough camera.
Why pay more?
What sort of a weirdo wants a hidden camera in their wearable devices?
They stopped putting cameras in the Samsung watches because gyms were banning them due to the cameras.
This poll and the many drip feed related stories was sponsored by Apple.
If Apple was a government it would be a Fascist one.
Dumb comment
Eh no?
Not a hope in hell of me ever owning one of these (or any “smart watch” for that matter). The diarrhea coming out of Tim Cook when he was on about this watch was nauseating. It is a hugely overpriced gimmick.
This device is so incredibly unnecessary
I’ve always liked watches….so I have a few. But I wouldn’t be interested in an Apple watch, the battery life would do my head in…18 hrs! Plus the fact that my eyesight is not as good as it was, so trying to read anything on the watch would involve carrying my reading glasses everywhere.
In the mid 90′s I bought a Citizen Skyhawk Eco-drive(pricey at the time)…it’s waterproof too, tells the time in any part of the world and with it you can work out how much fuel your plane needs to get to the next airport(sad to say I have never used that function), wear it everyday, never needs a battery and apparently it never will…must leave it to one of my children in my will.
A new shiny thing skangers can rob, no thanks.
Also, my €150 G-Shock waterproof 5 year battery watch does me perfectly.
18 hour battery life . I have citizen eco drive which charges itself. I don’t need another device which has to be plugged in ever night
The second model starts at $499 for the watch alone, then another $500 for a wrist strap. FOR A STRAP?!
How does USD $349 equate to 400 euro???
Euro price is tax inclusive. The yanks show price before tax on everything
I’ll stick to my timex
Of course not! I wouldn’t buy this hideous watch, I have class so you know. I am fond of the old classy look of the double ticker.
No I won’t buy one but if someone wanted to give me one Id like that.
Questions aren’t phrased right!
I fear that my fingers are too cumbersome
have your say