Nurses

Conor Bourke

Boombastic wrote: »

What did you think they did?

Hey, d'ya know what? You're right. I'm only talking out me hole, it's a piece of piss. Everybody should do nursing! Hands down the easiest €26,000 you'll ever make.

EDIT: Salary adjusted to take into account those allowances you seem to be so hung up on

Boombastic

Alaskimo-cake wrote: »

Hey, d'ya know what? You're right. I'm only talking out me hole, it's a piece of piss. Everybody should do nursing! Hands down the easiest €22,000 you'll ever make.

1. It's not 22,000
2. It's no revelation to most of the public what the jobs entails-maybe if the nurses had of researched what the job entails before training they wouldn't have found it such a shock


Edit: 26,000 for a new graduate is not buttons...Is this what the unions have brainwashed you to believe?

Boombastic

Boombastic wrote: »

How much after allowances are added in? Anyway, it seems like a lot of 2011 and 2010 graduates are considering these positions now. I hope they get them.

I have yet to see a quote saying allowances are paid in addition to the 22k but if they are they are allowances for working long shifts, weekends etc. Its not like the allowances are just handed out for the craic. Plenty of graduates will be on as much or more than your figure of 26k working a normal weeks work. Not saying the other grads are getting easy money by the way.

Conor Bourke

Boombastic wrote: »

1. It's not 22,000
2. It's no revelation to most of the public what the jobs entails-maybe if the nurses had of researched what the job entails before training they wouldn't have found it such a shock


Edit: 26,000 for a new graduate is not buttons...Is this what the unions have brainwashed you to believe?

It's a difficult job with enormous responsibility. Other graduates with that kind of responsibility get paid accordingly. Nurses don't.

Boombastic

Luka Handsome Fingertip wrote: »

I don't understand people's inability to acknowledge that some jobs will have higher starting salaries and higher salaries in general than others. Thats the way the world works.

Just because a graduate in "x" industry starts on 22k is not a reason for a nurse to start on 22k. There are loads of graduates out there who start on plenty more than 22k also why not compare this with nursing? You wont have many Engineering, Physics or Pharma jobs etc with starting salaires less than 27 to 30k for instance and some are higher again.

and yet

Luka Handsome Fingertip wrote: »

I have yet to see a quote saying allowances are paid in addition to the 22k but if they are they are allowances for working long shifts, weekends etc. Its not like the allowances are just handed out for the craic. Plenty of graduates will be on as much or more than your figure of 26k working a normal weeks work.

:pac::pac:

FTA69

Luka Handsome Fingertip wrote: »

I have yet to see a quote saying allowances are paid in addition to the 22k but if they are they are allowances for working long shifts, weekends etc. Its not like the allowances are just handed out for the craic. Plenty if graduates will be on as much or more than your figure of 26k (which has no backing) working a normal weeks work.

Errah stop your excuses. It's clear that ye're all on the gravy train and have an overinflated sense of importance. Sure it's only the sick you're dealing with, nothing else like. Plenty out there want the jobs. Sure did ye not know the craic? If you go into any A and E on a Saturday night all you see is nurses standing around chatting about what they'll buy with their massive wages. God forbid they were in the real world as opposed to a cushy number dealing with drug-addicts, abuse and the dying.

Boombastic

Boombastic wrote: »

and yet




:pac::pac:

Whats your point?

not yet

Alaskimo-cake wrote: »

Hey, d'ya know what? You're right. I'm only talking out me hole, it's a piece of piss. Everybody should do nursing! Hands down the easiest €26,000 you'll ever make.

EDIT: Salary adjusted to take into account those allowances you seem to be so hung up on

To be honest you are wasting your time with clowns who argue nurses should be paid the same as a dunnes stores employee. My take on it is this.................

During the boom the fat kid had a huge cake and the small kid had a cake that was just enough.....The recession hit: Fat kids cake falls on the floor and is not edible, he then looks at the small kid's cake and with incredible nasty envy says: I think his cake is to big I want some of it or cut it in half.

Boombastic

Luka Handsome Fingertip wrote: »

Whats your point?

What's yours because you are saying one thing in the first post and the opposite in the second?

Stepping Stone

Just because a graduate in "x" industry starts on 22k is not a reason for a nurse to start on 22k. There are loads of graduates out there who start on plenty more than 22k also why not compare this with nursing? You wont have many Engineering, Physics or Pharma jobs etc with starting salaires less than 27 to 30k for instance and some are higher again.[/QUOTE]

For the record, with engineering you would be lucky to start at €22k, if you could find work. Pharma normally requires a masters or PhD to get a job and then you do start on a good wage (but how many do start work in this industry?). Physics I have no real experience of, only people that I know working in it have PhDs and are abroad. You really aren't comparing like with like. Plenty of graduates do start on more money, but they generally have more/ better/ niche qualifications. Law graduates start on nothing or a small sum. Accounting graduates would do well to get €19k. One of the very valid reasons for a nurse to start on €22k + allowances, etc is that we as a country cannot afford to pay them more. Previously teachers started on €40k, now it is €27k. A friend who is a teacher told me that she could not imagine surviving on less than €40k a year. You cannot imagine surviving on €26k a year because your salary is higher, but if you have to you easily will. I think that it is unfair for the Unions to essentially emotionally blackmail people into not taking it. I cannot imagine how I would feel in the position of the new graduates. They really have my sympathy. They can take the jobs, at lower money and be guaranteed a steady income for two years, but I suspect face hostility from their fellow nurses or emigrate/ try agency work (know one nurse who got so little work from the agency that she now works in a shop but would never dream of taking one of these jobs cos she is better than that:rolleyes:). It seems unfair nurses listening to the unions, but realistically only the individual (graduate nurse) should make the decision, based on their personal circumstances, not the herd (nursing profession as a whole).

Boombastic

Boombastic wrote: »

What's yours because you are saying one thing in the first post and the opposite in the second?

No I'm not, Im questioning your figure if 26k for a start. I have not seen it anywhere.

The point in the second post is that even if it is the case they after allowances the figure is 26k its not a fair comparison with another grad job on 26k as this is allowances for working unsocial hours, longer shifts etc its not base pay.

Same as any overtime, bonuses or additional time off for working extra hours is not included in the 26k for another graduate job.

Boombastic

Luka Handsome Fingertip wrote: »

No I'm not, Im questioning your figure if 26k for a start. I have not seen it anywhere.

The point in the second post is that even if it is the case they after allowances the figure is 26k its not a fair comparison with another grad job on 26k as this is allowances for working unsocial hours, longer shifts etc its not base pay.

Same as any overtime, bonuses or additional time off for working extra hours is not included in the 26k for another graduate job.

What percentage of nurses would not be working shifts?


You points in the last point
1st post - Don't compare salaries with other professions

2nd post - people in other professions earn x, it's not fair

Why do you need a quote?-Did you not read the conditions of employment?


Salary €22,000
Nurse management sub-structures – special allowance for weekends/public holidays €2976
Employed on duties in the following locations: Accident & Emergency Depts.... €1858


Total €26,834....so where are these nurses working in A&E on a Saturday night for €22,000?

Stepping Stone

Stepping Stone wrote: »

For the record, with engineering you would be lucky to start at €22k, if you could find work. Pharma normally requires a masters or PhD to get a job and then you do start on a good wage (but how many do start work in this industry?). Physics I have no real experience of, only people that I know working in it have PhDs and are abroad. You really aren't comparing like with like. Plenty of graduates do start on more money, but they generally have more/ better/ niche qualifications. Law graduates start on nothing or a small sum. Accounting graduates would do well to get €19k. One of the very valid reasons for a nurse to start on €22k + allowances, etc is that we as a country cannot afford to pay them more. Previously teachers started on €40k, now it is €27k. A friend who is a teacher told me that she could not imagine surviving on less than €40k a year. You cannot imagine surviving on €26k a year because your salary is higher, but if you have to you easily will. I think that it is unfair for the Unions to essentially emotionally blackmail people into not taking it. I cannot imagine how I would feel in the position of the new graduates. They really have my sympathy. They can take the jobs, at lower money and be guaranteed a steady income for two years, but I suspect face hostility from their fellow nurses or emigrate/ try agency work (know one nurse who got so little work from the agency that she now works in a shop but would never dream of taking one of these jobs cos she is better than that:rolleyes:). It seems unfair nurses listening to the unions, but realistically only the individual (graduate nurse) should make the decision, based on their personal circumstances, not the herd (nursing profession as a whole).

I was referring to electronic engineers etc or physicists working in similar roles. You wont find many jobs in the likes of Intel, Analog devices etc starting on less than 27 or 28k for instance. I'm not saying there are not grads starting on 22k or less but there are also plenty starting on a lot more. In my opinion the starting salary for a grad nurse should be up on 30k before allowances and thats being fair about it they probably deserve more.

For the record I am not a nurse and I am not on more than 26k. I am actually doing a PhD in Physics and my funding leaves me about 18k per year (less in earlier years) and frankly it is a pittance if you want to have a decent standard of living (I've used saving and help from parents on a number of occasions to get through a month), if there wasn't a chance of reasonable money waiting for me after I finish I wouldn't have kept it up.

Kirby

I can think of easier jobs to do for the same money.

However just like any other profession, the good nurses aren't paid enough and the bad nurses are paid too much.

speedboatchase

not yet wrote: »

To be honest you are wasting your time with clowns who argue nurses should be paid the same as a dunnes stores employee. My take on it is this.................

During the boom the fat kid had a huge cake and the small kid had a cake that was just enough.....The recession hit: Fat kids cake falls on the floor and is not edible, he then looks at the small kid's cake and with incredible nasty envy says: I think his cake is to big I want some of it or cut it in half.

I'd like to focus on this for a second because it's a viewpoint I've heard quite a lot and it has gained a lot of traction.

The analogy doesn't make sense because the idea that the fat kid (private sector worker) wants some of the small kid's (public sector worker) cake implies that the private sector wants some of the public sector's wages, which is obviously not what anyone is thinking about. It also implies that the private sector is jealous of the public sector's wages, which I'm sure is true for some.

However, the fact is that people who work in the private sector understand that if their employer is broke, cuts or job losses are a painful but necessary consequence. In the case of the public sector, your employer - the government - is broke. It has deigned what the wage should be for nursing graduates, just as a company on the skids may decide that starting salaries will be less than they were for employees who joined previously. For example, a sales job I had in 2008 cut its starting salary by a third six months after I joined - we weren't supposed to tell new people who joined.

That's how I look at things from a logical sense. Nobody will tell you that a nurse's job is more valuable in society than someone working at Dunnes (an example you used) but it is a false comparison. Dunnes is not broke and is free to pay people what they want, the government does not have that luxury in its current state.

Finally, this idea that during the boom everyone had it so good and now the embattled private sector are twisting the knife becomes more outdated every day because there are plenty of people like me - who graduated in 2008 - who only started full-time employment when things went to pot. I never took advantage of the Celtic Tiger because I was in school or college during it all.

There are plenty of people who approach this situation from a post-Celtic Tiger perspective, because that's what their experiences stem from.

As I've said before, my view is that 22k is on the low side for the work that nurses do BUT if you are a nursing graduate and think you deserve more, the world - and I'm sure some better paid opportunities in the Irish private sector - are your oyster. You don't have to settle for what the govt is offering and likewise, no-one should ever expect the govt to owe them a living.

Derekmcauley7

mountai wrote: »

Welcome to the real world. The practice of hiring in staff at rates below existing workers has been going on in the private sector for years. Yes it is a way of driving down costs and when your employer is bankrupt, whats wrong with that?. IMHO you have been offered a mighty deal , Two years contract . In the private sector, the average time is 6 months. Go on the dole if you dont like it , or emigrate.When the Croke Park agreement runs out just watch the disgraceful pay rates tumble, that is assuming of course the negotiators (on behalf of Us -- the hard pressed private sector workers} show some moral courage and backbone . Remember , the world does NOT owe you a living so get on with it and stop whinging.[/QUOTE


What you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in here is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

Stepping Stone

Luka Handsome Fingertip wrote: »

I was referring to electronic engineers etc or physicists working in similar roles. You wont find many jobs in the likes of Intel, Analog devices etc starting on less than 27 or 28k for instance. I'm not saying there are not grads starting on 22k or less but there are also plenty starting on a lot more. In my opinion the starting salary for a grad nurse should be up on 30k before allowances and thats being fair about it they probably deserve more.

For the record I am not a nurse and I am not on more than 26k. I am actually doing a PhD in Physics and my funding leaves me about 18k per year (less in earlier years) and frankly it is a pittance (I've used saving and help from parents on a number of occasions to get through a month), if there wasn't a chance of reasonable money waiting for me after I finish I wouldn't have kept it up.

I don't doubt that there are graduates starting on more.The vast majority will start on less though, and be grateful for it too, because jobs in Ireland are not plentiful at the moment and there is stiff competition for them. You only have to look at Jobs Bridge to realise that they have graduates in most sectors over a barrel.

Wages are directly linked to the company that you work for, profits, margins, etc. The HSE is in serious financial trouble. They realistically cannot afford to pay their staff what you, or anyone else feels that they deserve. They cannot touch current salaries (Croke Park) so they are targeting new entrants, across the board. There is a massive deficit, so they can increase wages or continue with the current ones and cut spending elsewhere. There is very little left to give elsewhere though, wages account for the largest section spending. Something has to give and unfortunately it is starting with the graduate nurses, but I have no doubt that it will continue. Should they cut the jobs and wages of certain other sections and share the money a little? Of course, but they cannot, and so they have to start cutting something somewhere.

As I said before, my sympathy is with the graduates who have to make tough decisions. I know that they are being told to go abroad, but depending on personal circumstances, that may not be an option and this graduate programme might be something positive. I know it won't be for everyone, the vast majority in fact but I like to think of the underdog with few options at times (cos I have been there and sometimes something like this is better than nothing).

For the record, I do not condone the discrimination against the soon to be/ newly qualified. I just feel that this is possibly one of the few options open to the HSE and that the Union taking such a stand will alienate the few who do go for it. I do understand that agency nurses will lose hours too and that isn't fair.

seven_eleven

If only the general public were aware of just how stretched these services are. Its absolutely appalling to be honest. I know its a bit unrelated but I'm sure all of you saw the new article on thejournal today about junior doctors working 70+ hour weeks, sometimes 36 hours straight.
Similar with the ambulance service, if only the general public knew just how many ambulances are available for your county, I think they would be frightened. (hint: Its around 2 for most places on weekends)

Galwayguy35

Luka Handsome Fingertip wrote: »

On the other had I know a number of people doing very well for themselves in the private sector, getting pay increases, increased benefits recently etc (with less deductions from their pay than a public sector worker). A few in their mid 20's earning money that a nurse at management level with 30 years service wouldn't be on.

I'm sure you do, I never said there weren't well paid people in the Private Sector, however job security counts for a lot which is something Private Sector workers don't have as much of.

Also it works both ways, an employer can up the wages if things are going well and also cut them in times like this if the company is not doing too well.
You won't hear about it though because worker have no choice, it's either a pay cut or no job if the company goes under.

mountai

Derekmcauley7 wrote: »

mountai wrote: »

Welcome to the real world. The practice of hiring in staff at rates below existing workers has been going on in the private sector for years. Yes it is a way of driving down costs and when your employer is bankrupt, whats wrong with that?. IMHO you have been offered a mighty deal , Two years contract . In the private sector, the average time is 6 months. Go on the dole if you dont like it , or emigrate.When the Croke Park agreement runs out just watch the disgraceful pay rates tumble, that is assuming of course the negotiators (on behalf of Us -- the hard pressed private sector workers} show some moral courage and backbone . Remember , the world does NOT owe you a living so get on with it and stop whinging.[/QUOTE


What you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in here is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

Well lets look at what I said. --- In the 80s AIB were the first that I know of to bring a two tier system for hiring staff Fact . The country IS bankrupt Fact. Some people who are nurses presently working in the System have stated they support the deal and have advised graduates to take up the offer Fact. Short time contracts in the private sector seldom exceed six months, Fact. The choice to go on the Dole or emigrate is still there and others have also voiced support for this option Fact. The Troika have instructed the Government to drive down rates in the PS in this round of negotiations on Croke Park, and signs are they are going to, Fact. The world owes nobody a living, Fact .Now instead of calling me incoherent and awarding me 0 points , lets see some constructive points from YOU instead of the drivel you come out with.

Pappa Charlie

I know plenty of people in the private sector who have escaped relatively unscathed from the recession, many in multi nationals have has no cuts other than the USC which everyone including public sector got. There were many private sector workers who were on great money in businesses that came about during the boom as a result of the off loading of mad money from the banks, I know developers housewifes who opened clothes shops with designer clothing during the boom times who will now tell you they are private sector workers who have lost their businesses, of course they lost them as they were not sustainable! They wouldnt survive in average times not alone bad times! I'm sick of this private sector bull**** begrudgery against people who carry out frontline services that they demand. We're told how good the private sector model is but any daily transaction with the private sector is in my experience often as fustrating as any in the public sector, there are good and bad in both and bad can survive in both sectors. We need nurses and even on their current pay they are not paid enough imo, Just because decent people take up the profession because they are caring people and want it as a career does not allow us to rip them off!

road_high

Pappa Charlie wrote: »

I know plenty of people in the private sector who have escaped relatively unscathed from the recession, many in multi nationals have has no cuts other than the USC which everyone including public sector got.

So? Their employer is not bankrupt unlike the Govt of Ireland. They are thus perfectly entitled to "escape unscathed"! You read like they should feel guilty or something that they work in the real world where their company has to make a profit/break even to pay their wages.

Cian92

For the record, with engineering you would be lucky to start at €22k

I have 3 friends that just graduated last October from Chemical Engineering that are all on between €40,000 and €55,000.

Pharma normally requires a masters or PhD to get a job and then you do start on a good wage (but how many do start work in this industry?).

I don't know much about this industry.

Physics I have no real experience of, only people that I know working in it have PhDs and are abroad. You really aren't comparing like with like.

A friend is should qualify this year with a degree physics and maths and has signed a contract for €32,000

Accounting graduates would do well to get €19k.

This is my own area. I'm currently on work placement for 6 months, if you were to double my wage to make it an annual wage it would be 3K above what you quoted.

Also the reason that accountants are paid less is that they aren't actually qualified after their degree unlike nurses. Accountants have to train for another 3.5 years after College. An accountants package includes pay of about €22,500 but they also pay for your expensive exams. When you qualify as an accountant you will be on close to €45,000.

Also accountants work 9 to 5 and the work is easier than that of a nurse.

Pappa Charlie

mfitzy wrote: »

So? Their employer is not bankrupt unlike the Govt of Ireland. They are thus perfectly entitled to "escape unscathed"! You read like they should feel guilty or something that they work in the real world where their company has to make a profit/break even to pay their wages.

If I was paying 15% tax as multinationals do I'd be fairly profitable as well!
But dont tell me that all the private sector are hurting and that hense the public sector must add to the 20% cut we've already taken in core pay! Spare me the bull****!

Stepping Stone

Cian92 wrote: »

I have 3 friends that just graduated last October from Chemical Engineering that are all on between €40,000 and €55,000.


A friend is should qualify this year with a degree physics and maths and has signed a contract for €32,000


This is my own area. I'm currently on work placement for 6 months, if you were to double my wage to make it an annual wage it would be 3K above what you quoted.

Also the reason that accountants are paid less is that they aren't actually qualified after their degree unlike nurses. Accountants have to train for another 3.5 years after College. An accountants package includes pay of about €22,500 but they also pay for your expensive exams. When you qualify as an accountant you will be on close to €45,000.

Also accountants work 9 to 5 and the work is easier than that of a nurse.

Your reality and mine seem to be very different. My friend is an accounting graduate in Dublin. She gets €19k a year, four years ago her sister got €15k.

Your friend must be exceptional if they have signed a contract for €32k approx 6 months from the end of college. I have never heard of anything like this happening to anyone with an unproven record in science.

Chemical engineering is well paid, but generally it is high pressure shift work for large, profitable multinationals. I know electronic and electrical engineers who couldn't get work and have to emigrate, I know countless civil engineers who either lost their jobs, couldn't get any jobs after graduating or kept their jobs but get paid very little. The simple fact is, if your employer can afford to pay you well, they will. If they can't, your wages, hours or job is cut.

The HSE is not able to support the wages of the current staff, so what other option do they have but to target new staff? Seriously? It isn't fair, but nobody has suggested anything else. I haven't heard a single sensible suggestion from anyone; union, boards user, analyst. So, instead of debating how much different graduates get paid, why not apply some time to thinking about alternatives?

road_high

Pappa Charlie wrote: »

If I was paying 15% tax as multinationals do I'd be fairly profitable as well!
But dont tell me that all the private sector are hurting and that hense the public sector must add to the 20% cut we've already taken in core pay! Spare me the bull****!

Would be nice if you'd practice what you preach then.

They have to make a profit though before the even get to the tax paying stage.
Why should the Private sector suffer if their employer is not bankrupt? Seems almost as non sensical as a bankrupt employer paying increases via increments...oh wait

tayto lover

Boombastic wrote: »

1. It's not 22,000
2. It's no revelation to most of the public what the jobs entails-maybe if the nurses had of researched what the job entails before training they wouldn't have found it such a shock


Edit: 26,000 for a new graduate is not buttons...Is this what the unions have brainwashed you to believe?

They should take some of the large grants of the farming sector and give it to the nurses. At least they work.

tayto lover

mfitzy wrote: »

Would be nice if you'd practice what you preach then.

They have to make a profit though before the even get to the tax paying stage.
Why should the Private sector suffer if their employer is not bankrupt? Seems almost as non sensical as a bankrupt employer paying increases via increments...oh wait

Pay peanuts, get monkeys. Would you transfer. Would you re-train to do the nurses work. Not a chance.

road_high

tayto lover wrote: »

They should take some of the large grants of the farming sector and give it to the nurses. At least they work.

ROFL

Lets transfer subsidies from a productive sector that accounts for most of our exports (€9 billion plus) to a non productive sector that exports nothing and produces no wealth. Any more genius ideas there?

Pappa Charlie

mfitzy wrote: »

Would be nice if you'd practice what you preach then.

They have to make a profit though before the even get to the tax paying stage.
Why should the Private sector suffer if their employer is not bankrupt? Seems almost as non sensical as a bankrupt employer paying increases via increments...oh wait

So the general operative for a multinational is more deserving than a nurse at the moment!