Civil Servants on Less than 60K!!

nw1dqsv7amx026

Anybody see the Impact union rep on Saturday stating that ""despite the public perception most civil servants aren't well paid and are on less than €60K"".

That to me shows the bubble they are living in when they think a salary of 60K is not well paid.

One of my colleagues who was laid off last week (along with 300 others in the company) mentioned in passing that with his degree in computer science and 10 years experience he was on €43K.

I have not been laid off yet but with my Engineering Degree and my almost 20 years experience in the private sector I too am on less than 60K, but I consider myself well paid.

Another key difference is that I have no job security.

Incidentally my family has also taken a pay cut with my wife being laid off. She too has an IT degree and was also paid much less than 60K.

yoshytoshy

The unions will be the final straw for the economy. How did these people get these jobs ?

The Corinthian

I vaguely remember one of the teachers unions complaining around 2000 that IT workers were getting paid vast amounts of money in comparison to teachers. When the dotcom bubble burst and all the IT workers lost their jobs, these complaints went strangely silent.

Unfortunately, this is one of the fundamental differences between the private and public sectors, in that one has security and the other does not (this is before one considers how this, in turn, affects productivity or civil service pensions). As a result, the argument has long been that the price for this security is a lower salary, however, when things were good, the government was all to happy to bump up public sector pay to a point where there really is very little advantage to being a private sector worker - outside of sanity, from what I hear.

A readjustment is inevitable, especially in light of private sector job losses. The public sector unions may kick up, but they will find that their arguments will likely fall of deaf ears amongst the larger population; who are at the end of the day, paying their salaries.

thehamo

I hate everyone lumping teachers in as civil servants! They are not, they are public service not civil servants. Teachers salary start on in the early thirties and takes at least ten years of employment to reach the 40k mark.

I know a serious amount of civil servants on less than 35k too. 60k is not a representative figure for all the lower paid civil servants and I think it is a very bad use of language for Impact to use.

IM not saying that these are bad salaries, especially in times like this. However they are not half as extortionate as they are made out to be in a lot of cases.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

Terrance Zealous Snowmobile wrote: »

Anybody see the Impact union rep on Saturday stating that ""despite the public perception most civil servants aren't well paid and are on less than €60K"".

Jeez! He was saying that despite the public perception, and figures being quoted in the media and on messageboards, most civil servants earn less than €60k. He was not lamenting that they are on €59k!
I know civil servants who have 20 years in the job and are well below €40k. I know others with 30 years on €80k. Then again I know private sector workers on €36k and on €120k. What's the point in such comparisons?

The Corinthian

Giovanna Prehistoric Crane wrote: »

What's the point in such comparisons?

There's not much point with anecdotal evidence.

However, this thread was based upon a claim by a Impact union representative that "most civil servants aren't well paid and are on less than €60K".

'Most' can mean 99%, but when it is given to us by someone who is attempting to put forward the idea that "civil servants aren't well paid", we would be forgiven for thinking that it is closer to 51%. Of course this could have been a poor choice of words by the union representative in question (not unknown to happen).

Salary levels of both private and public sector workers should probably be judged dispassionately, ignoring both the top and bottom 5% percentiles for both. Once that happens we can see if the public sector is paid a similar amount to the private sector, or if less, whether this gap is commensurate to the value of a secure job and pension.

Schuhart

thehamo wrote: »

I hate everyone lumping teachers in as civil servants! They are not, they are public service not civil servants. Teachers salary start on in the early thirties and takes at least ten years of employment to reach the 40k mark.

That may be so, but according to the Central Statistics Office, average weekly earnings of teachers as a group are actually higher than average weekly earnings of administrative civil servants.

Now, I'm not particularly saying this is right or wrong. Just that this seems to be the case.

The best paid public servants seem to be Prison Officers and Gardaí. Tbh, in the case of Prison Officers especially, I'd say that's understandable.

Average weekly earnings of a public servant was €921 in 2007, which would presumably be about €48,000 p.a.

thehamo wrote: »

IM not saying that these are bad salaries, especially in times like this. However they are not half as extortionate as they are made out to be in a lot of cases.

I think this is a fair point. I mean, I don't expect there's anyone in the public sector pulling in Brian Goggin's salary.

That said, the ESRI did a study which tried to compare public sector salaries to private sector salaries for jobs occupied by people with a similar level of qualifications and experience. The overall finding was that public sector salaries were higher by a factor of 10% at senior levels and 30% at junior levels. That said, clearly those public sector jobs have been there for the last ten years for people to apply for if they wanted them.

At the same time, I'd agree that even a premium of 30% is not extortionate, merely 'attractive' (to borrow the language of job adverts).

In any event, isn't the key point about public sector pay really just that the Government is currently borrowing about one third of the money it spends. So, regardless of whether public sector pay is high or low, the present situation is unsustainable.

jim o doom

I am a civil servant - I earn 26k, which is VERY average & nearly everyone I know in the service earns around that much. 26k is a MASSIVE amount less than "60 k". Factor that into your ideas about what we should be earning and what we should therefore have to pay.

Lightning McQue

Folks

Why dont you look up circular 18/2008 on the Dept of Finances website. Starting point for a Clerical Officer is €24397. It takes about 18 years to get to €39558. It is the Principal Officers and above who are on the big money starting at approximately €90000. It is linked to the TD's salary. I heard that the TD's etc are getting or have got a 1.1% pay increase recently.

Lightning McQueen

ixoy

jim o doom wrote: »

I am a civil servant - I earn 26k, which is VERY average & nearly everyone I know in the service earns around that much. 26k is a MASSIVE amount less than "60 k". Factor that into your ideas about what we should be earning and what we should therefore have to pay.

Well then your unions are mis-representing you - why not get on to them because these are the sort of words and phrases that appear in press releases, in the paper, and on the news. They're doing you no favours if they're persisting this image of civil servants being well paid, especially given how the divide has broadened.
Also, I believe APs can reach that salary and HEOs, after years of service, wouldn't be too far off.

nw1dqsv7amx026

"Starting point for a Clerical Officer is €24397"

I do not intend to be dismissive of people on the CO grade and entry requirements but how can you consider the two (Clerical Officer and IT degree) to be equal.

Starting point in my company (not relevant anymore) for somebody with an Engineering/It Degree is €30K.
That is after at least 4 years study, good leaving cert etc.

That is also without a salary scale increments, National wage agreement, good pension, job security etc.

I do believe there is a perception in the public sector/services that people in the private sector are making huge money.

I have seen (of course it may have been disinformation from the HSE) figures quoted for nurses pay and also guards pay which is close to 60K.

Of course everybody wants to protect what they have and hence the protests over the pension levy.
But, to my colleagues who are losing their jobs and have no hope of getting a new one, these protests/comments are extremly irritating to say the least.

nesf

Terrance Zealous Snowmobile wrote: »

I have seen (of course it may have been disinformation from the HSE) figures quoted for nurses pay and also guards pay which is close to 60K.

The problem with both jobs is accounting for the value of overtime. The base salary for both is substantially below 60K but they get time and a half (I think, I could be wrong) on overtime which is very much available and this bumps up their take home pay considerably.

The problem then comes when you start looking at salaried workers in the private sector whose basic pay looks very generous until you realise that they don't get any extra money for overtime. I've friends who were bringing in 50-60K in the financial sector but who could easily have been putting in 80 hour weeks close to deadlines. This is a major disparity with the public sector which for most jobs pays well for overtime that is readily available, the exception being junior doctors who have been known to be paid half their basic hourly rate for overtime worked and up to a few years ago didn't get anything for it if I remember correctly.



Edit: I also find the official's choice of words bizarre. They imply 50K a year isn't well paid when bluntly in the real world that's a very decent wage to be bringing home.

Lightning McQue

There are plenty of CO's who have degrees in various disciplines even Masters yet they are quite prepared to work in the Civil/Public Sector. There is nothing preventing you from joining the Civil/Public Sector, pass an exam/interview and you might even get a job at various levels from CO to AP in Mr. McCreevys very expensive decentralisation programme. You could start as a Junior (30K) or a Senior System Analyst (46K.)

jim o doom

ixoy wrote: »

Well then your unions are mis-representing you - why not get on to them because these are the sort of words and phrases that appear in press releases, in the paper, and on the news. They're doing you no favours if they're persisting this image of civil servants being well paid, especially given how the divide has broadened.
Also, I believe APs can reach that salary and HEOs, after years of service, wouldn't be too far off.

It's not the unions mis-representing us; the wages I earn are exactly the reason we are going on strike - because removing over a grand and a half from my already low wage is just plain WRONG.

It's the government & the papers that are misrepresenting what a lot of us earn.

otwb

thehamo wrote: »

I hate everyone lumping teachers in as civil servants! They are not, they are public service not civil servants. Teachers salary start on in the early thirties and takes at least ten years of employment to reach the 40k mark.

Are these the same teachers that get a €5k allowance for having a degree and can earn over 60k for the same job they were paid a 35k starting salary for just for hanging on in there for 20 years or so?

...35k starting salary for nine months work a year ain't that bad...

Schuhart

jim o doom wrote: »

It's not the unions mis-representing us; the wages I earn are exactly the reason we are going on strike - because removing over a grand and a half from my already low wage is just plain WRONG.

In fairness, its not. Regardless of whether this wage is particularly low for what you do, the State just cannot afford the salaries currently paid to staff.

The Corinthian

jim o doom wrote: »

It's not the unions mis-representing us; the wages I earn are exactly the reason we are going on strike - because removing over a grand and a half from my already low wage is just plain WRONG.

It's the government & the papers that are misrepresenting what a lot of us earn.

What are your hours?
Do you get overtime? What rate? How much generally?
How many holidays do you get?
How's the pension plan?
Can you lose your job?

I ask these things because you would then need to compare this against someone in the private sector. I have never gotten overtime, unless I negotiated (blackmailed) it. My hours have consistently been over 40 per week, probably averaging out at around 44 during a non-deadline period. Other than public holidays, I have always gotten no more than 21 days per year. I have only ever received once any kind of pension contribution from any employer - I get no pension from work. And I've been made redundant on one occasion.

Let me know how you compare.

ParkRunner

It seems like harmony won't be achieved until public sector workers are getting low pay, minimum holidays, no job security and poor pensions.

Raskolnikov

I heard Pat Rabbitte making similar comments on public sector pay.

Apparently €50k is a "modest" salary, and €30k is "very low paid".

I think it was that moment that any thought of voting Labour disappeared in my mind.

yoshytoshy

Raskolnikov wrote: »

I heard Pat Rabbitte making similar comments on public sector pay.

Apparently €50k is a "modest" salary, and €30k is "very low paid".

I think it was that moment that any thought of voting Labour disappeared in my mind.

These would be gross salaries though ,30k is probably about 450 euro/week.

Mr. Presentable

The Corinthian wrote: »

There's not much point with anecdotal evidence.

However, this thread was based upon a claim by a Impact union representative that "most civil servants aren't well paid and are on less than €60K".

'Most' can mean 99%, but when it is given to us by someone who is attempting to put forward the idea that "civil servants aren't well paid", we would be forgiven for thinking that it is closer to 51%. Of course this could have been a poor choice of words by the union representative in question (not unknown to happen).

Salary levels of both private and public sector workers should probably be judged dispassionately, ignoring both the top and bottom 5% percentiles for both. Once that happens we can see if the public sector is paid a similar amount to the private sector, or if less, whether this gap is commensurate to the value of a secure job and pension.

You seem to have taken the 60k figure and run with it, without seeing the rest of what you posted. Nowhere does it say €60k is not well paid. It makes two statements.

1 Most civil servants are not well paid

2 Most civil servants earn under 60k.

nesf

nipplenuts wrote: »

It makes two statements.

1 Most civil servants are not well paid

2 Most civil servants earn under 60k.

It doesn't. The second statement is presented as a justification or support for the first statement implying that the definition of "not well paid" is earning under 60K a year. Ignoring the linkage in the statement is fallacious.

Raskolnikov wrote: »

I heard Pat Rabbitte making similar comments on public sector pay.

Apparently €50k is a "modest" salary, and €30k is "very low paid".

I think it was that moment that any thought of voting Labour disappeared in my mind.

And people wonder why we've competitiveness problems when we consider €30K as very low pay.

Schuhart

yoshytoshy wrote: »

These would be gross salaries though ,30k is probably about 450 euro/week.

Indeed, but just to give some context, the current minimum wage seems to be €1,462 a month, which I take it is about €17,500 p.a.. The average industrial wage in 2006 was €624 for men and €451 for women, which is about €32,000 and €23,452. (And I take it that 'average' means there is a spread around those amounts.)

In this context, it would seem strange to be talking about €30k as "very low paid". Or, if it is, it won't be for long.

Is it also fair to say that the concept of "low pay" depends on personal circumstances. A school-leaver being paid €20,000 is a different proposition people earning €30,000 but with family commitments.

dvpower

thehamo wrote: »

Teachers salary start on in the early thirties and takes at least ten years of employment to reach the 40k mark.

Not bad for a part time job:D

dvpower

EF wrote: »

It seems like harmony won't be achieved until public sector workers are getting low pay, minimum holidays, no job security and poor pensions.

Or until they realise that their good pay, generous holidays, job security and fantastic pensions are not available to most people.

Nermal

EF wrote: »

It seems like harmony won't be achieved until public sector workers are getting low pay, minimum holidays, no job security and poor pensions.

Harmony will be achieved when we're not borrowing over fifty million euro a day to pay for the PS.

NewDubliner

Nermal wrote: »

Harmony will be achieved when we're not borrowing over fifty million euro a day to pay for the PS.

And bankers and property speculators..

thomasj

dvpower wrote: »

Or until they realise that their good pay, generous holidays, job security and fantastic pensions are not available to most people.

its amazing that up to a few years ago private sector workers wouldnt dare go into the public sector because of the low pay and now after being out of the job they finally realise 25-30 better than nothing. Sour grapes i tell ya.

Its amazing that for all the whining out there that probably half of private sector employees didnt even apply to contribute to a pension and now they are giving out because the public sector have been paying a pension contribution

i dont know where you got the idea that the job is permanent i know mine is not and i am post 1995

and lets not talk about the paid christmas parties bonuses paid for in some cases health contributions and nights out

ParkRunner

dvpower wrote: »

Or until they realise that their good pay, generous holidays, job security and fantastic pensions are not available to most people.

Public service jobs are filled through open competitions so they are available to quite a lot of people. 21 days holidays for me is about average. If I work more than my agreed hours I get flexi time off, max 1.5 days a month. Paid over-time is a very rare event. My pension will be well funded by me once the levy kicks in. I got bonuses in the private sector, never in the public sector.
What public sector worker would risk taking out a mortgage now with the focus of cuts to be on public sector pay? There must be enough potential tax revenue and jobs locked up in the empty properties around the country to get this economy back on its feet.

K-9

yoshytoshy wrote: »

These would be gross salaries though ,30k is probably about 450 euro/week.

It would be about €500 for a single person.

Schuhart wrote: »

Indeed, but just to give some context, the current minimum wage seems to be €1,462 a month, which I take it is about €17,500 p.a.. The average industrial wage in 2006 was €624 for men and €451 for women, which is about €32,000 and €23,452. (And I take it that 'average' means there is a spread around those amounts.)

In this context, it would seem strange to be talking about €30k as "very low paid". Or, if it is, it won't be for long.

Is it also fair to say that the concept of "low pay" depends on personal circumstances. A school-leaver being paid €20,000 is a different proposition people earning €30,000 but with family commitments.

The average industrial wage isn't a fair comparison anymore really.

I think the average public sector wage is now about €50,000, the average services wage is about €46,000 from memory.

http://www.finfacts.ie/irelandbusinessnews/publish/article_10006397.shtml

A Dub in Glasgo

What is the median wage?