Statistics and Public v Private wages

sfakiaman

Much is being bandied around about the difference between public and private sector wage rates, but is it all as it seems. If we take a hypothetical public sector dept with a boss earning €250,000 and ten workers at €30,000 we have an mean wage of 50,000. In the private sector the boss (self-employed) doesn't count in the average (mean) wage so mean industrial wage in this sector is €30,000. There are many ways of making statistics say what you want them to say, when was the last time you heard the mode or the median quoted?

ei.sdraob

sfakiaman wrote: »

Much is being bandied around about the difference between public and private sector wage rates, but is it all as it seems. If we take a hypothetical public sector dept with a boss earning €250,000 and ten workers at €30,000 we have an mean wage of 50,000. In the private sector the boss (self-employed) doesn't count in the average (mean) wage so mean industrial wage in this sector is €30,000. There are many ways of making statistics say what you want them to say, when was the last time you heard the mode or the median quoted?

and what is the median between the 2

figures please

Time Magazine

sfakiaman wrote: »

Much is being bandied around about the difference between public and private sector wage rates, but is it all as it seems. If we take a hypothetical public sector dept with a boss earning €250,000 and ten workers at €30,000 we have an mean wage of 50,000. In the private sector the boss (self-employed) doesn't count in the average (mean) wage so mean industrial wage in this sector is €30,000. There are many ways of making statistics say what you want them to say, when was the last time you heard the mode or the median quoted?

Means on their own (e.g. the 48% quoted) are almost useless.

Multivariate regressions do what you want them to, i.e. estimate how much near-identical jobs (e.g. a male engineer, with a masters, with 6 years experience, working 38 hours a week) differ in terms of pay.

The answer is about 30% for crap jobs, and about 10% for top jobs. So an average of about 20%.

meglome

Without starting another argument...

The people I work with from the civil service are all getting 50k plus, and they're not even management. The people I work with in the private sector very few of them indeed are getting that kind of money, even the managers. Obviously this is purely anecdotal and not very representative but the strong impression I'm getting is there's a sizeable pay differential. The average figures it seems don't tell us anything, although they don't look good.

So is there any way to really tell?

solice

meglome wrote: »

So is there any way to really tell?

Benchmarking 3!!!

Followed by Benchmarking 4 two years later and Benchmarking 5 two years after that!

Drumpot

Why is it that benchmarking appears to be only discussed (by those who benefit from it) as a fair way of determining what a person should earn, when they gain something from this action?

If this report shows that public service cuts in salarys need to be implemented, what exactly are unions saying is their reason for striking?

newname

This 48% talk is rubbish, nothing more than a good headline for the papers. It tells us nothing. Take 48% of a clerical officer or a recently qualified nurse and you are below the min wage.

After the pension levy, anymore attack on PS income will not be taken lightly.

Drumpot

newname wrote: »

This 48% talk is rubbish, nothing more than a good headline for the papers. It tells us nothing. Take 48% of a clerical officer or a recently qualified nurse and you are below the min wage.

After the pension levy, anymore attack on PS income will not be taken lightly.

The pensions levy didnt go far enough . . Everybody outside of a PS job knows this .

Bottom line is that there will be more chops, whatever the unions try to wreck . .

toiletduck

newname wrote: »

After the pension levy, anymore attack on PS income will not be taken lightly.

What would you propose?

In all honesty it's amazing that people see this as being unfair. If the boss can't pay, some employees get the chop.

solice

Drumpot wrote: »

Why is it that benchmarking appears to be only discussed (by those who benefit from it) as a fair way of determining what a person should earn, when they gain something from this action?

If this report shows that public service cuts in salarys need to be implemented, what exactly are unions saying is their reason for striking?

I would challenge you to find anyone who says that they will not accept a benchmarking report that indicates there should be a reduction in salary! I imagine you have just completly made that comment up? But if you can, I will thank you and give out to them.

newname wrote: »

After the pension levy, anymore attack on PS income will not be taken lightly.

The greath myth of the pension levy, people didnt take a 10% or more cut in pay. The vast majority of people took an effective rate of 5% to 8%. It was calculated on 3% of the first 15k, 6% of the next 5k and 10% of everything over 20k. So if you were earning 50k you took an effective pay cut of 7.5% or €3,750.

I know people in the private sector that have taken 10% right up to 25% pay cut. I dont know anyone who has taken less than 10% in the private sector. Your hardline unionised attitude is disgraceful!

Drumpot

solice wrote: »

I would challenge you to find anyone who says that they will not accept a benchmarking report that indicates there should be a reduction in salary! I imagine you have just completly made that comment up? But if you can, I will thank you and give out to them.

Didnt Siptu say they would oppose any attempt to reduce public service pay ?

Whether its an independent report or a specified benchmarking report it would be opposed. Public servants on permament contracts arent afraid of losing their jobs like those in the private sector, so they have nothing to lose by throwing their toys out of their prams, irrespective of what a report says.

If, as you say, you think people would accept a benchmarking report without any fight, why dont the government just do one ? Or are you suggesting that the public service pay is fair and in line ?

More to the point, on what basis do you get your belief that people will accept a report that says they should take less money? Considering some of the strikes that have happed recently (with some professions looking for pay increases!) there is more evidence to suggest that the general public are delusional, rather then educated and open to fair debates regarding their salaries.

solice

You said this:

Drumpot wrote: »

Why is it that benchmarking appears to be only discussed (by those who benefit from it) as a fair way of determining what a person should earn, when they gain something from this action?

If this report shows that public service cuts in salarys need to be implemented, what exactly are unions saying is their reason for striking?

Then you said this

Drumpot wrote: »

Didnt Siptu say they would oppose any attempt to reduce public service pay ?

Siptu and Impacts comments were in relation to Bord Snip. The Bord Snip report is not a benchmarking report!

Your first comment is completly wrong, no union has stated their opinions on a 3rd benchmarking report because it is not being discussed (yet). But it would be much more difficult for the unions to act against a benchmarking report considering they benefited so much from the last one.

Drumpot

solice wrote: »

Siptu and Impacts comments were in relation to Bord Snip. The Bord Snip report is not a benchmarking report!

Your first comment is completly wrong, no union has stated their opinions on a 3rd benchmarking report because it is not being discussed (yet). But it would be much more difficult for the unions to act against a benchmarking report considering they benefited so much from the last one.

So why dont the government just setup another Benchmark report ?

You are working off the pretence that unions deserve the benefit of the doubt (for being reasonable) when they shown anything but reason in the past !!

solice

Drumpot wrote: »

So why dont the government just setup another Benchmark report ?

You are working off the pretence that unions deserve the benefit of the doubt (for being reasonable) when they shown anything but reason in the past !!

And you are working off false truths...

Apologies to the OP and mods for dragging this off topic.

Drumpot

solice wrote: »

And you are working off false truths...

Apologies to the OP and mods for dragging this off topic.

False truths ? ? Please explain . .

I said that "It appears that benchmarking" . .

Where have I stated that my comments are fact ?

Did Siptu say that "We wont accept any reduction in public service pay . . Unless its from a benchmarking report!" ?

If you are going to question my opinion in the manner you have, at least have some sort of credible information to back it up . .

Again, if its a simple as saying that the unions and Public servants would happily accept a Benchmarking report, no questions asked, why dont the government simply get one done ? As it would make their job a whole lot easier & we all know how easy this government like their job to be . . .

solice

Drumpot wrote: »

False truths ? ? Please explain . .

I said that "It appears that benchmarking" . .

Where have I stated that my comments are fact ?

Did Siptu say that "We wont accept any reduction in public service pay . . Unless its from a benchmarking report!" ?

If you are going to question my opinion in the manner you have, at least have some sort of credible information to back it up . .

Again, if its a simple as saying that the unions and Public servants would happily accept a Benchmarking report, no questions asked, why dont the government simply get one done ? As it would make their job a whole lot easier & we all know how easy this government like their job to be . . .

There has been no public discussion on another benchmarking report so for you to say that Unions wouldnt accept it is a load of rubbish considering the proposal has not been given to them!

I dont know why the govt wont do another benchmarking report, im not in govt so I cannot answer for them so stop insisting that I do!

By the way, if you read my 2nd post on this thread properly you would see that I am on your side and I believe that there should be further reductions in salaries and the pension levy wasnt enough.

solice

And by the way, this is what you actually said:

Drumpot wrote: »

Why is it that benchmarking appears to be only discussed (by those who benefit from it) as a fair way of determining what a person should earn, when they gain something from this action?

And I have pointed out that Benchmarking hasnt been discussed, Unions havent given an opinion on it so what you said is wrong!

Drumpot

solice wrote: »

There has been no public discussion on another benchmarking report so for you to say that Unions wouldnt accept it is a load of rubbish considering the proposal has not been given to them!

I dont know why the govt wont do another benchmarking report, im not in govt so I cannot answer for them so stop insisting that I do!

By the way, if you read my 2nd post on this thread properly you would see that I am on your side and I believe that there should be further reductions in salaries and the pension levy wasnt enough.

Thats fair enough . . .

Ive never really heard anybody discuss a reverse benchmark report. I just cant understand it. Are they afraid that it might show the public servants as being underpaid ? ?

Drumpot

solice wrote: »

And I have pointed out that Benchmarking hasnt been discussed, Unions havent given an opinion on it so what you said is wrong!

I stand by that comment (said as an opinion not a fact).

You would of thought if the unions & its members had nothing to hide or nothing to lose they would suggest Benchmarking themselves in the interest of the fairness they always look for for their members . .

Suppose its like asking a chicken whats the best ingredients to cook it in. .

Claregirl

meglome wrote: »

The people I work with from the civil service are all getting 50k plus, and they're not even management. The people I work with in the private sector very few of them indeed are getting that kind of money, even the managers. Obviously this is purely anecdotal and not very representative but the strong impression I'm getting is there's a sizeable pay differential. The average figures it seems don't tell us anything, although they don't look good.

So is there any way to really tell?

I'm a civil servant on €46K a year. That's after 11 years and two promotions. I worked extremely hard to get where I am now (and still am). The Dept of finance and the CSO all have stats on what grades / pay rates the Public & Civil service is paid. It would be easy for them to show the breakdown of this magical €50k per year that everyone is on! The only problem with showing that information though is that it will highlight how top heavy the Service is with the high earners. They can't exactly put themselves out of a job can they?:rolleyes:

newname

I know people in the private sector that have taken 10% right up to 25% pay cut. I dont know anyone who has taken less than 10% in the private sector. Your hardline unionised attitude is disgraceful!

Its not a hardline unionised attitude. Its simply that I can't afford a pay cut.

Looking forward over the next 5 years all I can see is raised taxes, lower wages, property tax, government increasing charges for this, increasing charges for that. On top of all this interest rates will rise again.

The medium range looks pretty grim I just want to protect my basic livelihood.

ParkRunner

solice wrote: »

I know people in the private sector that have taken 10% right up to 25% pay cut. I dont know anyone who has taken less than 10% in the private sector. Your hardline unionised attitude is disgraceful!

And I know people in the private sector who have taken 0% paycut. When you average it all out, the pension levy is a more than fair contribution. Not to mention the public sector workers have also taken on board the other levies that have been introduced and will be left with less disposable income once further tax increases are brought in. It is all money coming out of the economy and away from private sector enterprise.

irish_bob

EF wrote: »

And I know people in the private sector who have taken 0% paycut. When you average it all out, the pension levy is a more than fair contribution. Not to mention the public sector workers have also taken on board the other levies that have been introduced and will be left with less disposable income once further tax increases are brought in. It is all money coming out of the economy and away from private sector enterprise.

those in the private sector are not paid out of taxation , they are not paid with money the country does not have and is borrowing , you and your fellow public sector workers will take pay cuts in the coming months , years , either this goverment or some outside power will see to this

tedstriker

What price is security of a job for life? Anyway, for what it's worth:



http://www.statusireland.com/statistics/finacial-statistics-for-ireland/19/Ireland-Public-Sector-Average-Weekly-Earnings.html

johnathan woss

irish_bob wrote: »

those in the private sector are not paid out of taxation , they are not paid with money the country does not have and is borrowing , you and your fellow public sector workers will take pay cuts in the coming months , years , either this goverment or some outside power will see to this

How are the bank employees' wages (and bonuses) getting paid ?

This country is f*cked, but it's laughable that you are spending hours on end on here blaming it all on the public service.

gurramok

johnathan woss wrote: »

How are the bank employees' wages (and bonuses) getting paid ?

This country is f*cked, but it's laughable that you are spending hours on end on here blaming it all on the public service.

Thats an insult to bank employees. They largely did not share any boom in their wages over the years, their bosses aka CEO's did.

Hookey

newname wrote: »

Its not a hardline unionised attitude. Its simply that I can't afford a pay cut.

Looking forward over the next 5 years all I can see is raised taxes, lower wages, property tax, government increasing charges for this, increasing charges for that. On top of all this interest rates will rise again.

The medium range looks pretty grim I just want to protect my basic livelihood.

But that's not the complete picture is it? The cost of living has already devalued by 5% in the last six months and is expected to go a lot further (at least another 5% and probably a lot more with the implosion in house prices). People have to start looking at the bigger picture, and the public sector is part of that; the private sector employees who've already taken pay cuts (like me, 9%), need the public sector to pull its weight in order to deflate the whole economy.

binga

i am a clerical officer. i earn around 26000 a year. it works out about minimum wage. and i work very hard for it. it really annoys me when people go on about the great public sector pay. it was open for anyone to join but people would have turned their noses up at the wages during the boom years.

Drumpot

binga wrote: »

i am a clerical officer. i earn around 26000 a year. it works out about minimum wage. and i work very hard for it. it really annoys me when people go on about the great public sector pay. it was open for anyone to join but people would have turned their noses up at the wages during the boom years.

It really annoys me when people talk of private sector workers as if they were all riding a wave of cream in the boom years.

A large majority of us were not and never got a piece of the pie that those in the higher end of the private sector milked. Most of the people I worked with in the bank or in a large insurance company owned by another bank, didnt even make the average industrial wage, let alone these crazy figures being thrown about. That was in differant departments spread across a couple of huge companies.

Part of my problem was that I refused to screw other people over to get a raise or a promotion (and there were many like me). In the public service you have benchmarking, so all you have to worry about is simply not getting fired. Im not saying that it means nobody works, but it means one less thing for your to worry about.

After 8 years in an industry, with a degree, a diploma and professional qualifications , just when I left a company I was barely on €26,000. I worked very hard for that and had been applying for Public service jobs , but competition for places made it very difficult to even get an interview (which anecodatally for me rubishes the myth that private sector employees wouldnt take public service jobs).

solice

EF wrote: »

And I know people in the private sector who have taken 0% paycut. When you average it all out, the pension levy is a more than fair contribution. Not to mention the public sector workers have also taken on board the other levies that have been introduced and will be left with less disposable income once further tax increases are brought in. It is all money coming out of the economy and away from private sector enterprise.

Everyone, privte and public has been affected by the "other" levies. The only pay decrease for public sector workers so far was the pension levy and as I said, 7.5% reduction for a salary of 50k is not enough!

Johanathan Woss wrote:

How are the bank employees' wages (and bonuses) getting paid ?

Interesting point, only adding it because it relates to some ideas that are floating about on statistics. On Matt Cooper last week, think it was Matt Cooper anyway, there was a guy on saying that the average salary in AIB was 70k. But we all know that the people behind the counter would be on no more than 35k and there are alot more of those than there are managers. Goes to show how big the managers salaries are in order to drag the average up to 70k.

gurramok

And 26k is no where near min wage which is about 18k. About 40% of the workforce paid no tax before the recession, they earned less than 26k.

Doubt there are many min wagers in the public sector!