New national pay deal: 27% raise?

mikemac

Only last Friday the Civil Public and Services Union annual conference voted for calls for a 27pc pay increase.

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/tom-mcenaney/public-sector-reform-must-be-cowens-first-priority-1340283.html

27% :eek:

Wow, only a few months back there was no benchmarking raise except a few minor departments. I viewed this a sign of things to come but I was obviously wrong.
As expected, one the justifications was the well publicised pay rise for TD's but seems like a childish arguement

So, will they get 27%?
Is this a standard tactic and ask for 27% but accept maybe 10%? Aim high to allow loads of room for negoitation so both the unions and the government came claim victory when a decision is agreed upon?

If this raise is given, I'd imagine a recruitment freeze would have to follow to save on payroll costs. But the HSE claimed when this was tried it put lives at risk so maybe it won't be done

Any opinions? Are you getting a 27% raise?

Kimbot

TBH for the work I do as a civil servant (7 years in the service now) I feel I don't get paid enough. 27% is prob only a start off point and they will accept 10 - 15% if offered which I wouldn't mind. As a civil servant your yearly pay rise is under €1000.

I do the following in work:

Build servers,
maintain PC's,
build images for all the machines.
Test new software and harware.
Purchasing.
Cleaning (yes cleaning stores etc)
A bit of development.
Transporting equipment to sites.

Thats a lot of work for a lowly civy don't you think??

Colonel Sanders

jonny24ie wrote: »

TBH for the work I do as a civil servant (7 years in the service now) I feel I don't get paid enough. 27% is prob only a start off point and they will accept 10 - 15% if offered which I wouldn't mind. As a civil servant your yearly pay rise is under €1000.

I do the following in work:

Build servers,
maintain PC's,
build images for all the machines.
Test new software and harware.
Purchasing.
Cleaning (yes cleaning stores etc)
A bit of development.
Transporting equipment to sites.

Thats a lot of work for a lowly civy don't you think??

the civil service is a strange beast as there seems to be very little reward for hard work and very little negativity to wasters. I personally know a guy who works in IT in his local authority and works his arse off. On the other hand I personally know guys who do the very minimum they get away with (and some of the hard working public sector workers give out about these types all the time).

Surely performance based pay and bonuses are the way forward but I'm sure those lovely unions would hardly allow that, would they?

ninty9er

jonny24ie wrote: »

TBH for the work I do as a civil servant (7 years in the service now) I feel I don't get paid enough. 27% is prob only a start off point and they will accept 10 - 15% if offered which I wouldn't mind. As a civil servant your yearly pay rise is under €1000.

I do the following in work:

Build servers,
maintain PC's,
build images for all the machines.
Test new software and harware.
Purchasing.
Cleaning (yes cleaning stores etc)
A bit of development.
Transporting equipment to sites.

Thats a lot of work for a lowly civy don't you think??

Not meaning to demean all civil servants, but most people's main interaction is with Revenue. It has to be one of the most awkward places to contact. Hours are 9:30-17:00 as opposed to the extra hour in the private sector. Breaks go on as long as weekend trips to Paris and I know of someone in the HSE who was taken aside and warned by the shop steward that 25 minutes was too short a tea break to be taking even though the prescribed is 15.

There needs to be some accountability. Considering accountants begin on a payscale of €14,000 plus exam and study fees, consider what the average school leaver in Revenue is earning?

The civil service needs to be reduced by 1/3 and a pay freeze needs to be imposed until the turkeys vote for Christmas and accept that.

fly_agaric

ninty9er wrote: »

The civil service needs to be reduced by 1/3 and a pay freeze needs to be imposed until the turkeys vote for Christmas and accept that.

I thought there was a cap on staffing in the civil service at present (not the public sector!!). Am I wrong about this??

anyways my 2c

27% is nuts but this is the CPSU.
They seem to be somewhat p-ed off after watching fat private-sector style wage differentials open up between the top level management & "minion":) grades (i.e. their members) over the past few years. They are getting angry over this.
I wonder though, is the civil service really like the private sector in many other respects (apart from this big difference in pay between the top level staff and the rest)? Is it f... IMO!

gurramok

Where is the money coming from for this 27%?

We are probably in the midst of a recession, money is extremely tight on the govt finances front, the opposite should be happening for the section of overpaid civil/public servants, how about a pay decrease for these?

ninty9er wrote:

The civil service needs to be reduced by 1/3 and a pay freeze needs to be imposed until the turkeys vote for Christmas and accept that.

Will FF shed the overstaffed and overpaid civil service?

Thats the billion dollar question, they have not done it so far since 1997.

DadaKopf

Surely it's 27% over a period of time. At present, the 20% over 27 months doesn't keep up with general inflation and rapid increases in basic consumer goods. Real incomes, therefore, deteriorate.

It's a strange, strange article. So uninformative it's nearly meaningless. But you can glean one nugget of information: that 'reform' means massive lay-offs.

We currently spend less on education and health than most of the EU-15. Denmark and Finland each spend 45% more than us, and the State commands more of the gross national product than us.

Cowen is right to tackle the problem of quangos - there are over 1,000 semi-states in Ireland. Nearly double the number in the 1990s. They cost more and they let Ministers off the hook. The enormous pay-rises they received by senior quango staff were in practice by Ministerial decree, being appointed by the Taoiseach in the first place. This incredibly wasteful bureaucratic layer is the creation of Fianna Fáil patronage.

If quangos are 'reformed', then the skilled staff have to go back under the authority of the most appropriate Department. I think this should be done in tandem with local government reform so that certain services would be delivered much closer to the beneficiaries. I'd say with restored local democracy, and real local decision-making power over funding (97% of funding decisions are taken by Dublin), you'd find people demanding value-for-money attuned to local priorities. Maybe we'd have had those school-places in Meath afterall.

It's not lay-offs we need, it's greater spending on core public services with better systems and a permanent, skilled cohort of public servants and services to provide the stability necessary to ride the economic storms. Well-designed spending won't undermine 'competitiveness', it'll strengthen it.

El Stuntman

There is great political opportunity for Taoiseach Cowen here:

first act on May 7th should be to announce that the recent benchmarking increases given to the cabinet are being rejected 'in the interests of providing leadership in these difficult times yada yada'. In one fell swoop a lot of the noise being generated by public sector unions would disappear.

leadership demonstrated, line in the sand drawn etc

I won't be holding my breath though

edit: good post DadaKopf

ballooba

|1998|1999|2000|2001|2002|2003|2004|2005|2006|
A - Manufacturing|357.09|375.605|401.225|429.85|451.78|479.34|497.875|520.07|537.785|
B - Distribution and Bus Serv||442.36|446.2|505.01|545.41|563.58|589.45|619.41|644.7|
C - Banking and Finance|539.61|558.74|593.31|658.1|686.91|698.16|737.52|775.55|829.25|
D - Public Sector (excl Health) ||578.34|611.54|671.78|704.28|734.86|797.09|844.16|882.02|
||||||||||
A - Increase||5.2%|6.8%|7.1%|5.1%|6.1%|3.9%|4.5%|3.4%|
B - Increase|||0.9%|13.2%|8.0%|3.3%|4.6%|5.1%|4.1%|
C - Increase||3.5%|6.2%|10.9%|4.4%|1.6%|5.6%|5.2%|6.9%|
D - Increase|||5.7%|9.9%|4.8%|4.3%|8.5%|5.9%|4.5%|
||||||||||
Inflation (CPI)|2.4%|1.6%|5.6%|4.9%|4.6%|3.5%|2.2%|2.5%|4.0%|
||||||||||
A - Effective Increase||3.6%|1.2%|2.2%|0.5%|2.6%|1.7%|2.0%|-0.6%|
B - Effective Increase|||-4.7%|8.3%|3.4%|-0.2%|2.4%|2.6%|0.1%|
C - Effective Increase||1.9%|0.6%|6.0%|-0.2%|-1.9%|3.4%|2.7%|2.9%|
D - Effective Increase|||0.1%|5.0%|0.2%|0.8%|6.3%|3.4%|0.5%

ballooba

The public sector on average is doing more than alright. Any inequalities within the public sector are an internal matter. The public sector needs to stop freeloading.

Chakar

The public service in general is a bit big for the size of our population and I think we have to specifically look at the administration staff in the HSE and they are looking into that situation at the moment with a possible voluntary redundancy programme of 1000 staff within certain pay grades assessed to be not needed.

ballooba

1,000 VRs would save about €45 million p.a. at current pay rates. I think it's the tip of the iceberg though.

DadaKopf

ballooba wrote:

The public sector on average is doing more than alright. Any inequalities within the public sector are an internal matter. The public sector needs to stop freeloading.

Private sector honchos should stop "freeloading". They've been running off with a much larger share of the wealth created by their employees' hard work over the past decade.

I don't see how a teacher working in an overcrowded classroom with mouldy walls expecting a pay increase to keep their standard of living is freeloading. Shouldn't the private sector also at the very least index income to inflation?

If anything, the highest earners should pay more in taxes and wages.

Chakar wrote:

The public sector on average is doing more than alright. Any inequalities within the public sector are an internal matter. The public sector needs to stop freeloading.

I read today that the HSE is employing 2,000 fewer people this year than last year.

El Stuntman

DadaKopf wrote: »

I read today that the HSE is employing 2,000 fewer people this year than last year.

yes but how many public sector staff were added over the lifetime of the last government? something like 50k afair

ballooba

DadaKopf wrote: »

Private sector honchos should stop "freeloading". They've been running off with a much larger share of the wealth created by their employees' hard work over the past decade.

I don't see how a teacher working in an overcrowded classroom with mouldy walls expecting a pay increase to keep their standard of living is freeloading. Shouldn't the private sector also at the very least index income to inflation?

Look at the table I posted. It's the public sector worker who has been creaming it for the last ten years. Regardless of how the economy is doing the public sector gets a pay rise above inflation. Entrepreneurs and investors deserve to be reewarded for their entrpreneurial risk. Public sector workers hould have their wages reduced to take into account the fact that they are effectively insured by the private sector against any adverse economic conditions.

Time Magazine

DadaKopf wrote: »

Surely it's 27% over a period of time. At present, the 20% over 27 months doesn't keep up with general inflation and rapid increases in basic consumer goods. Real incomes, therefore, deteriorate.

Bollix.

ballooba

Ibid wrote: »

Bollix.

Indeed. What does that work out at? 9% inflation?

gandalf

DadaKopf wrote: »

I read today that the HSE is employing 2,000 fewer people this year than last year.

That is probably nurses and part time or temporary staff. I heard the other day a frightening number. Apparently there are 14 admin staff to every nurse in the greater Dublin area of the HSE. How this can be justified is beyond me. Until the wastage and duplication is sorted out in the Civil Service/Public Sector pay deals should be frozen. The time has come to reward those that do the work properly and FIRE those that don't.

The days of a job from life have gone, and this should be reflected in the Public Sector as well. They are there to serve the citizens of this state something that the unions and some of the staff have forgotten years ago.

DadaKopf

ballooba wrote:

Public sector workers hould have their wages reduced to take into account the fact that they are effectively insured by the private sector against any

Or you could say the state should ensure a similar level of protection to private sector workers going through tough times. For entrepreneurs/business-owners (who are experiencing tough times), I would argue that they are victims of our regressive system of taxation and tax reliefs.

Compared to the EU average, our welfare spending record is apalling. We spend less on health and welfare as a percentage of income than many Eastern European countries poorer than us.

You could take a look at this report by NESF - it summarises research by Dani Rodrik who says that it is critical for small, globalised states to spend more on public services and welfare if they are to sustain development.

It stands to reason that the public sector must offer private sector wages to attract civil servants. I'm treating health and education are separate issues. If wages between public and private sectors are to equalise, we have to start looking at more redistribution.

This must go in tandem with public sector reform at national and local levels.

ballooba

The reduction in HSE staff is brought about by natural shrinkage. once a person leaves they are not replaced. It's a clumsy brute force instrument that is doing a lot of harm.

Kimbot

ballooba wrote: »

Look at the table I posted. It's the public sector worker who has been creaming it for the last ten years. Regardless of how the economy is doing the public sector gets a pay rise above inflation. Entrepreneurs and investors deserve to be reewarded for their entrpreneurial risk. Public sector workers hould have their wages reduced to take into account the fact that they are effectively insured by the private sector against any adverse economic conditions.

I understand how alot of people get into this debate but look at the payscales of those that do the work in the civil service... CO's and So's.

A CO start off salary is 22,609 a year.

http://www.finance.gov.ie/documents/circulars/circulars2008/Circ5of2008.pdf

They do most of the work in the service yet get little in terms of pay for it.

I have seen alot of lazy people in the service during my time and they never get caught out but all that is starting to come to light now and HR are going to start reprimanding these people.

CPSU have always gotten the raw end of the deal when it comes to pay deals and higher grades always came away with more money so I think they are right looking for so much, although they won't get it.

ballooba

DadaKopf wrote: »

Or you could say the state should ensure a similar level of protection to private sector workers going through tough times. For entrepreneurs/business-owners (who are experiencing tough times), I would argue that they are victims of our regressive system of taxation and tax reliefs.

Have a look at France to see what happens when the protections afforde to public sector workers are afforded to private sector workers. Young people cannot get jobs because employers cannot afford to take them on.

DadaKopf wrote: »

It stands to reason that the public sector must offer private sector wages to attract civil servants. I'm treating health and education are separate issues. If wages between public and private sectors are to equalise, we have to start looking at more redistribution.

Public sector workers earn far more than private sector workers!

I certainly agree that their must be a redistribution. Perhaps we could start with negotiating these clowns down to a 2.5% cut.

ballooba

jonny24ie wrote: »

I understand how alot of people get into this debate but look at the payscales of those that do the work in the civil service... CO's and So's.

A CO start off salary is 22,609 a year.

http://www.finance.gov.ie/documents/circulars/circulars2008/Circ5of2008.pdf

They do most of the work in the service yet get little in terms of pay for it.

I have seen alot of lazy people in the service during my time and they never get caught out but all that is starting to come to light now and HR are going to start reprimanding these people.

CPSU have always gotten the raw end of the deal when it comes to pay deals and higher grades always came away with more money so I think they are right looking for so much, although they won't get it.

Read what I said above. The public sector is on average better paid than the private sector. Inequalities within the public sector are an internal matter and should be addressed internally.

Time Magazine

DadaKopf wrote: »

We spend less on health and welfare as a percentage of income than many Eastern European countries poorer than us.

Percentage of income is the thing here. The profitability of Intel has very, very little to do with how many nurses we need. About three years ago (these are c. 2005 figures) we spent €3000 per head on health (this is actual figure, not purely governmental) while the EU-25 average was €1700.

Simply adding more money does not mean you get better results. Nor does it mean you get a more equitable system. It's entirely possible, with a staff exceeding 100,000, that certain sectors within the HSE are over-staffed and that their wages could achieve better results elsewhere.

You could take a look at this report by NESF - it summarises research by Dani Rodrik who says that it is critical for small, globalised states to spend more on public services and welfare if they are to sustain development.

Good as he is, I don't think the mod of AH is that good .

daithicarr

So while the government is saying we need to reign in wages increases to maintain our competitiveness, the government gave them self massive pay rises and now the civil service are looking for huge wage increases. A job in the civil service already has a huge number of perks. I don’t feel we are getting value for money. The services provided are fairly bad across the board. There are many people who join the civil service because its cushy, not because they have any desire to serve the public.

As for our spending on health and education, its fairly low compared to some European country’s, as out tax rate is fairly low. Many country’s collect far higher rates of tax , to spend more we have to pay more, and the way our public services are run, we don’t always get value for money

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Income_Taxes_By_Country.svg

Time Magazine

Oh and for what's it's worth, as someone who has accepted a job in a state agency, the wages are ridiculously high.

DadaKopf

Ibid wrote:

Percentage of income is the thing here. The profitability of Intel has very, very little to do with how many nurses we need. About three years ago (these are c. 2005 figures) we spent €3000 per head on health (this is actual figure, not purely governmental) while the EU-25 average was €1700.

Have you a source for that? It's not what I've been reading.

Time Magazine

The source is a public policy lecturer: a former government apointee to the NESC and member of the Brennan Commission on Financial Management of the Health Service.

I'll see if I can make it ever so more veritable by linking to Wikipedia or some such source later.

DadaKopf

Ibid wrote:

Oh and for what's it's worth, as someone who has accepted a job in a state agency, the wages are ridiculously high.

I forgot in the post before the last one to mention the cost of agencies. 17% of 'public employees' are working in commercial and non-commecial state agencies. Contrast that to 11.6% of civil servants. There isn't even any public information on how much these quangos cost us because the Finance Minister decides which are subject to freedom of information. I think FF has let the agencification of the state go way too far.

jmayo

jonny24ie wrote: »

TBH for the work I do as a civil servant (7 years in the service now) I feel I don't get paid enough. 27% is prob only a start off point and they will accept 10 - 15% if offered which I wouldn't mind. As a civil servant your yearly pay rise is under €1000.

I do the following in work:

Build servers,
maintain PC's,
build images for all the machines.
Test new software and harware.
Purchasing.
Cleaning (yes cleaning stores etc)
A bit of development.
Transporting equipment to sites.

Thats a lot of work for a lowly civy don't you think??

I have done all that work and a hell of a lot more (including being on call, working weekends etc), but for private sector companies.

But I bet there were a few differences between your situation and mine, apart from my supposed better private sector salary.

One of those private sector companies I worked for went bust and so I lost my job. I did not get any fancy redundancy package, just the statury amount.
I'll bet you don't have that problem ?
Did you have to wait to be two years in a company before you were illegible for lowest company pension scheme and not a fancy one that others pay for ?
Do you get to take year out and still have a job to come back to ?
Do you only get 21 days holidays a year or do you work in your anuual sick days like most in the HSE ?

If you are so unhappy and want more money then go work elsewhere, otherwise just take a look at some of the perks you have that some of your private sector colleagues can only dream about.

DadaKopf wrote: »

Or you could say the state should ensure a similar level of protection to private sector workers going through tough times. For entrepreneurs/business-owners (who are experiencing tough times), I would argue that they are victims of our regressive system of taxation and tax reliefs.
....
....
It stands to reason that the public sector must offer private sector wages to attract civil servants. I'm treating health and education are separate issues. If wages between public and private sectors are to equalise, we have to start looking at more redistribution.

This must go in tandem with public sector reform at national and local levels.

Dear God how many companies would stay in business, never mind start up here, if they had to give their employees the same unfirable positions that public sector/civil servants appear to enjoy ?

Public sector/civil servants workers always come out that they should enjoy the same wages as comparable private sector workers, but they never mention the other benefits they enjoy such as pensions, security of tenure and other fringe benefits.
These have to be worked into the equation.

Everytime someone mentions reform the unions demand more money and yet there is no discernible difference in the service offered to the end users.
If anything the services have been getting poorer.

DadaKopf

Listen, dude, the heads who are keeping back better employment conditions for private sector workers are IBEC - YOUR BOSSES, effectively. Take it up with them. Or form a union. There's no reason why private sector workers shouldn't have better security in or out of work.

The reason is because the powerful employers setting the rules of the game are blocking any progessive effort to improve employment conditions. Obviously one has to accept the volatile nature of the private employment sector versus public (and there are perfectly legitimate reasons why this should be the case). So let's not touch that old chestnut. Let's just agree that workers in the private sector (who aren't emploters) feel a strong sense of injustice about the insane conditions they are expected to put up with to line the pockets of the top 10% of Ireland's rich list who are happily engorging themselves on a bigger slice of our incomes.

So, like, what are YOU gonna do about it?