15,278 public sector workers earn more than €100,000

muboop1

realcam wrote: »

No, I wouldn't. But say if someone started on that or had it at a very early stage in their career I'm not sure I'd call it low income though. I mean you make it sound like as if - for arguments sake - 450 on the hand were crap money.

We mustn't get hung up on the fact that people here get 205 for doing nothing. That's very wrong too you know?

yeh but at the same time, is it not right that harder jobs with higher responsibility should be paid higher?

By your logic a doctor would work for 40k a year or whatever, same as a person working in Carphone Warehouse ffs...

Hardly fair way to work it!

One requires education, stress etc...

Diarmuid

pvt.joker wrote: »

Sorry but you're wrong. Would you call high income getting 400 odd euro a week after tax ?

Not especially. Would you call €1207.24 a week high? No offence but generally the CSO figures are more accurate than some punter on the interwebs called pvt.joker.

Diarmuid

muboop1 wrote: »

yeh but at the same time, is it not right that harder jobs with higher responsibility should be paid higher?

well that's generally not how it works. Usually it's people who provide a skill that is in short demand that gets the big money. I'm sure you'll agree that someone driving 40 kids around in a bus has a lot of responsibility on his hands. He's not on 100k. Probably less than average industrial wage in reality. Not because of the responsibility but because almost any joe soap can be trained to drive a bus. There probably is a small risk premium but it's not as big as you would think

NewDubliner

meditraitor wrote: »

I notice the usual suspects are trying to muddy the waters with nonsense just to cover up the real point, 15 THOUSAND PEOPLE ARE BEING PAID OVER 100,000 YOYO'S BY THE TAXPAYER?????

What source does he give the source for this statistic and does he give any information on what these people do?

ceret

The Muppet wrote: »

If one third of paye workers earning over 100k work in the public sector does this not mean that there are twice as many priver sector workers than ps workers earning over 100k?

They must be raking it in too, no?

It's important to look at percetages.

According to the CSO there are 2.1million people in employement (source), and 370k in the public sector (source).

Ergo 4.1% of the public sector get over €100k (15,278 / 370,000)

There are 1,730,000 private sector workers (2,100,000 total - 370,000 public sector), if there are 30,000 of them getting over €100k, then it's only 1.7% of the private sector that get over €100k.

This means that public sector workers are two and a half times as likely to get over €100k per year.

irish_bob

pvt.joker wrote: »

Sorry but you're wrong. Would you call high income getting 400 odd euro a week after tax ?

the average guard , nurse and teacher earns on average a grand a week so they bring in alot more than 400 a week after tax and besides you dont list your net pay , you list your gross pay

NewDubliner

ceret wrote: »

Ergo 4.1% of the public sector get over €100k (15,278 / 370,000) This means that public sector workers are two and a half times as likely to get over €100k per year.

Where does this figure of 15,278 come from?

ei.sdraob

NewDubliner wrote: »

Where does this figure of 15,278 come from?

OP

ceret

NewDubliner wrote: »

Where does this figure of 15,278 come from?

From the Minister for Finance. http://www.kildarestreet.com/wrans/?id=2009-10-21.751.0

ParkRunner

ceret wrote: »

From the Minister for Finance. http://www.kildarestreet.com/wrans/?id=2009-10-21.751.0

In addition, the number of all PAYE workers earning less than the average industrial wage of €32,730 in 2007 was 1,267,865, of which 201,727 were public sector employees.

Interesting statistic. About 50% of public sector workers therefore are earning less than the average industrial wage of 32,730 and they have already taken close to a 10% cut this year.

Boskowski

muboop1 wrote: »

yeh but at the same time, is it not right that harder jobs with higher responsibility should be paid higher?

By your logic a doctor would work for 40k a year or whatever, same as a person working in Carphone Warehouse ffs...

Hardly fair way to work it!

One requires education, stress etc...

That's right. But where did you get from that I suggested a doctor should work for 40k?

Between the 40k that you somehow found in my arguments and the 200k that seems to be the minimum for a 'hospital consultant' these days there is quite a bit of room, don't you think?

eoinbn

EF wrote: »

Interesting statistic. About 50% of both public sector workers therefore are earning less than the average industrial wage of 32,730 and they have already taken close to a 10% cut this year.

If you believe those figures then we had 414k public sector workers in 2007...

c montgomery

gpf101 wrote: »

And your point is? This figure includes world renowned doctors, consultants, researchers, people in positions of authority, senior law enforcement etc etc. Yet again with the witch hunt for people that earn over 100,000. Ridiculous thread.

The Muppet wrote: »

If one third of paye workers earning over 100k work in the public sector does this not mean that there are twice as many priver sector workers than ps workers earning over 100k?

They must be raking it in too, no?

His point is 1/3 of the people who earned over 100,000 were public sector workers. Public sector only make up 1/7 of the working population in Ireland.


The other 2/3s are also doctors, soliciters, etc, etc.

Your response was ridiculous!!!!!!

ceret

EF wrote: »

Interesting statistic. About 50% of both public sector workers therefore are earning less than the average industrial wage of 32,730

Not too surprising that half the people are below the average, and half are above the average.

TBH I'm a bit surprised that the average is so high at €32k.

ParkRunner

eoinbn wrote: »

If you believe those figures then we had 414k public sector workers in 2007...

All I can use is the figures available, but if they are wrong then this whole thread is based on false figures.

muboop1

realcam wrote: »

That's right. But where did you get from that I suggested a doctor should work for 40k?

Between the 40k that you somehow found in my arguments and the 200k that seems to be the minimum for a 'hospital consultant' these days there is quite a bit of room, don't you think?

maybe i was looking for a meaning where there wasn't one or something? sorry if i mistook the meaning

First for record, i'm a student, but ill be entering private sector probably starting on a high enough wage, so my defense of public sector isn't for my own benefit or whatever. I just disagree with a lot of what people say about them.

i suppose 200k is a lot. But bare in mind, many those hospital consultants pull maybe 60+ hours a week.

In one of the most stressful jobs i could imagine. Peoples life and death hang on their memory etc, and if they mess up they are liable to be sued for everything they are worth, never mind funding for university for 5 years minimum(non eu students pay over 20k a year tuition not taking living costs into accounts, im including these as a great portion of our doctors aren't irish it seems).

I personally believe they if working the usual 35-40 hours a week deserve 100k a year min. That they work so much over, yeh i suppose 200k seems accurate!

I know in an economy it depends on money available etc... so if there is none then pay could be lowered. But realistically i don't see it as right!

I'm a big believer in if you work years educating yourself in a very hard profession with responsibility especially over life, and lets face it its a risky job, then i believe they deserve the pay.

ParkRunner

ceret wrote: »

Not too surprising that half the people are below the average, and half are above the average.

TBH I'm a bit surprised that the average is so high at €32k.

It puts doubt into the claim however that public sector workers earn a 26% premium over their private sector counterpart does it not?

thebman

muboop1 wrote: »

yeh but at the same time, is it not right that harder jobs with higher responsibility should be paid higher?

By your logic a doctor would work for 40k a year or whatever, same as a person working in Carphone Warehouse ffs...

Hardly fair way to work it!

One requires education, stress etc...

I doubt someone working in Carphone Warehouse earns 40K. If they are, I'm in the wrong job.

Boskowski

muboop1 wrote: »

In one of the most stressful jobs i could imagine. Peoples life and death hang on their memory etc, and if they mess up they are liable to be sued for everything they are worth, never mind funding for university for 5 years minimum(non eu students pay over 20k a year tuition not taking living costs into accounts, im including these as a great portion of our doctors aren't irish it seems).

I personally believe they if working the usual 35-40 hours a week deserve 100k a year min. That they work so much over, yeh i suppose 200k seems accurate!

I'm not totally opposed to what you're saying, but...

We're all small country with a small underdeveloped economy. It just doesn't seem to make sense to me that we pay almost double the money to a lot of people compared to other countries in Europe. And these other countries are countries that could actually afford to pay what we pay (unlike ourselves I might add) but they don't.

How come a hospital doctor in Germany for example (a country where payee workers pay roughly 12% of their annual gross into the health system by the way - so hugely funded health system) is on say 120k and thinks he's privileged and is happy to work for that and our people would be insulted by that kind of money? I think here in Ireland we really lost the perspective for money.

irish_bob

muboop1 wrote: »

maybe i was looking for a meaning where there wasn't one or something? sorry if i mistook the meaning

First for record, i'm a student, but ill be entering private sector probably starting on a high enough wage, so my defense of public sector isn't for my own benefit or whatever. I just disagree with a lot of what people say about them.

i suppose 200k is a lot. But bare in mind, many those hospital consultants pull maybe 60+ hours a week.

In one of the most stressful jobs i could imagine. Peoples life and death hang on their memory etc, and if they mess up they are liable to be sued for everything they are worth, never mind funding for university for 5 years minimum(non eu students pay over 20k a year tuition not taking living costs into accounts, im including these as a great portion of our doctors aren't irish it seems).

I personally believe they if working the usual 35-40 hours a week deserve 100k a year min. That they work so much over, yeh i suppose 200k seems accurate!

I know in an economy it depends on money available etc... so if there is none then pay could be lowered. But realistically i don't see it as right!

I'm a big believer in if you work years educating yourself in a very hard profession with responsibility especially over life, and lets face it its a risky job, then i believe they deserve the pay.

ive never once heard of a doctor or consultants being sued for malpractive , that guy in drogheda who was removing womens wombs , far as i know he got to hold on to his pension

very few consultants put in the hours your speak of

Diarmuid

EF wrote: »

It puts doubt into the claim however that public sector workers earn a 26% premium over their private sector counterpart does it not?

From the Minister of Finance:
Employee|Number earning less than ave ind wage|Total employed in sector|Percentage earning less than ave ind wage
Private Sector PAYE|1066138|1515648|70%
Public Sector PAYE|201727|414623|48%
Total|1267865|1930271|65%

Is this an accurate representation of what is in the link above? I think so.

dresden8

Diarmuid wrote: »

From the Minister of Finance:
Employee|Number earning less than ave ind wage|Total employed in sector|Percentage earning less than ave ind wage
Private Sector PAYE|1066138|1515648|70%
Public Sector PAYE|201727|414623|48%
Total|1267865|1930271|65%

Is this an accurate representation of what is in the link above? I think so.

Next time you need surgery we'll get a minimum wage waitress to do it for you.

ei.sdraob

dresden8 wrote: »

Next time you need surgery we'll get a minimum wage waitress to do it for you.

there are private hospitals

and guess what they offer better services than the public ones...

Diarmuid

dresden8 wrote: »

Next time you need surgery we'll get a minimum wage waitress to do it for you.

I didn't make a single comment in that post apart from tabulating some figures from the Minister of Finance. But you are so blinded by bias that you couldn't help but post a knee jerk cliché. Sad

dresden8

Diarmuid wrote: »

I didn't make a single comment in that post apart from tabulating some figures from the Minister of Finance.

Well what was your point?

Or did you just decide to put up some random table for no reason at all?

hk

Diarmuid wrote: »

From the Minister of Finance:
Employee|Number earning less than ave ind wage|Total employed in sector|Percentage earning less than ave ind wage
Private Sector PAYE|1066138|1515648|70%
Public Sector PAYE|201727|414623|48%
Total|1267865|1930271|65%

Is this an accurate representation of what is in the link above? I think so.

Apples and oranges. There are more third level graduates in the public service as a percentage of the work force. Health requires nurses and doctors, education needs people who hold degrees, finance needs people with economics degrees etc, in fact almost all areas of the PS require people who are educated to at least degree level. Within the private sector the requirement for third level educated workforce is much smaller as a percentage of the workforce, ie retail assistants, waitresses, bank tellers, cleaners, mc donalds workers, workers on a factory line, labours etc do not need to be educated to such a high standard. No matter what way you look at it pay is based on these skills. If Doctors, engineers etc in the PS get payed less than their private counterparts they will leave and go to the private sector, this will result in a loss of expertise and a degrading of public services. Benchmarking looked at this it compared like with like, it was not an exercise to increase public service pay and did not in all cases, ie it looked at what an engineer in the PS and private sector earned and made sure they were roughly the same. Simply the PS relies on a higher standard of education in its employees than is often required in the private sector. This means that they are paid accordingly!

Diarmuid

dresden8 wrote: »

Well what was your point?

I was putting the figures in context

dresden8 wrote: »

Or did you just decide to put up some random table for no reason at all?

If by "random" you mean "the numbers that were under discussion", then yes, I was putting up random figures for no reason :rolleyes:

Diarmuid

hk wrote: »

Apples and oranges.

They are not meant as comparison, they are the figures from the Minister of Finance tabulated. If you want to compare jobs in the public and private just look at the ESRI report which already did that.

murphaph

The Muppet wrote: »

If one third of paye workers earning over 100k work in the public sector does this not mean that there are twice as many priver sector workers than ps workers earning over 100k?

Yes, but the public sector 'only' comprises 300k odd of the total workforce. It means that proportionally many more people in the public sector are on 100k+

These figures are interesting, regardless of the breakdown.

dresden8

ei.sdraob wrote: »

there are private hospitals

and guess what they offer better services than the public ones...

Off you go so.