Politicians Dont even have to leave home to get overnight expenses :)



cricket

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 7, 2009
Messages
13,786
I've said it here before , is there another employment where you get more money if you show up at your workplace ?
 

Casillas

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2010
Messages
991
I'm sure there are many others like myself, that cannot understand this system. Without leaving the house they can claim money for travel and accommodation?! Surely they need to actually leave the house first, this nation is rotten.
 

bgolden

Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2010
Messages
40
We need an organised refusal to pay taxes now! Demand real change from politicians; demand meaningful wage reductions of politicians; demand immediate public service reforms (not this long finger union impeded masquerade). Put your money instead directly into product development, exports and tourism.
 

Casillas

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2010
Messages
991
They will all turn up for the vote tomorrow but may well be snowed in on wednesday. :roll:
 

TommyO'Brien

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 14, 2009
Messages
12,132
Totally untrue. A deliberately misleading article. Politicians do not get expenses for staying at home. All that happens is that like in all other jobs where expenses over a set period, whether by week, month or year, require certain requirements be fulfilled, and for reasons beyond their control (weather conditions, an accident, a family illness, etc) someone cannot physically get to work, their absence is recognised as beyond their control and not because they took a day off. That exists throughout the private sector. It does NOT mean someone is getting expenses on days they are absent, just that if they are one day below a threshold, an unavoidable absence does not keep them below the threshold. That was the rule in other jobs I did in the private sector.

I was in a job once where to qualify for my bonus I had to achieve certain requirements - I was out for one day because I had been in A&E for eighteen hours and was in no physical state after it to go to work. The company counted that day as a work day for fulfilling the bonus requirements. That is standard.

If a politician is unable to get to Leinster House for circumstances beyond their control (one was stuck in a rural area on roads completely impassible - they got one mile down the road and physically could not get further. Even farmers on tractors couldn't get down the roads, none of which were gritted by the local authority. The locals in the area were cut off for three days) that is simply marked at present so they don't fail to hit a threshold by one day. It does not earn them one penny in expenses on that day.

In reality it is unlikely to make one iota to most TDs and all usually far exceed the threshold but it covers cases where someone might just be under it marginally for some reason - for example, Sean Ardagh has battled cancer in the last year and for medical reasons was out for a number of months. It would be ludicrous if he got no expenses earned later in the year because he had been battling cancer earlier in the year. Jim McDaid, in comparison, just went awol for months on end, and couldn't could that to meet his threshold because it wasn't a genuine reason, just a lazy son of a b*tch who couldn't be arsed turning up. So is damn right he got no expenses. He was a disgrace.

Politicians who are absent for a legitimate reason beyond their control are simply asked by the one-stop-shop (the people who calculate the numbers) to record the reason so that later in the year when the numbers are being crunched they can take into account legitimate absences and treat periods when someone was AWOL as awol days. Of course the media misrepresents it either because they haven't done the research or for mischevious reasons, knowing readers won't know the facts. Similarly, if a TD is abroad on parliamentary business, that should not be counted as AWOL given that their job requires international knowledge. It would be farce, for example, if members of the Foreign Affairs committee who went to Gaza, for example, to research what Israel is doing there, were treated as being AWOL when they were there for work. Ditto with politicians working for emigrants in the US who go to Congress to lobby. Should they be regarded as AWOL and lose a year's expenses if that work kept them just below the annual threshold?
 

Bobert

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 28, 2008
Messages
1,071
Jesus Tommy, Bertie's goodbye wasn't as long as yours.
 

TommyO'Brien

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 14, 2009
Messages
12,132
Jesus Tommy, Bertie's goodbye wasn't as long as yours.
A lot of people here are genuinely concerned about the issue but don't realise the reality, and are being sold a pup by a newspaper. I think genuine posters here deserve to know the facts. If it takes a long post to give the facts, so be it.

It is better than a one-line collection of clichés and inaccuracies, which is what some posters post.
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top