Tell us the hourly rate of public servants.

noodler

AltAccount wrote: »

And has anything changed in the last 5 years?

6 years of increments will probably balance out the 2010 pay cuts.

Lumbo

noodler wrote: »

6 years of increments will probably balance out the 2010 pay cuts.

So it will balance them out in 2016.

AltAccount

noodler wrote: »

6 years of increments will probably balance out the 2010 pay cuts.

Probably?

noodler

AltAccount wrote: »

Probably?

Not everyone gets increments every year.

But yeah, on the balance, I'd say it is more likely than not.

AltAccount

noodler wrote: »

Not everyone gets increments every year.

But yeah, on the balance, I'd say it is more likely than not.

Is it not a published and established system that you could actually do the sums on?

twowheelsonly

noodler wrote: »

6 years of increments will probably balance out the 2010 pay cuts.

AltAccount wrote: »

Probably?

That's assuming that someone is still on the incremental pay scale. Anyone at their max has done nothing but lose, lose, lose between Pay Cut, USC and Pension Levy.

Also, I think that too much is made of the whole increment issue. You DON'T get an automatic pay rise for every year that you're in the job.


Take the Garda Scale as an example (quickest one I could find!!) which is fairly typical of PS scales and how they work.

http://www.gra.cc/payscales.shtml



Increments up to year 6* then nothing from 6-10. Another increment in year 11 then nothing again until year 17 and that's it then - no more increments.

There's very few in the lower brackets due to the moratorium on recruitment for the last few years and a copper that had 10 years service when the shwitt hit the fan has only had 1 increment since. (...and the Copper that had his yr 11 increment hasn't had any!!)

*(Up to year 6 includes raises in training wage and upon passing out so 4 increments are actually in the first 2 years.)


The devil is in the detail but I wouldn't expect any FG/Lab apologists to reveal the detail.

COYVB

Head The Wall wrote: »

Clerical officers are definitely worth the 20 an hour they get so.

Having been one, I can tell you Clerical Officers don't get anything close to 20 quid an hour. Was there for 3 years and took home about 405 a week

sarumite

Paulzx wrote: »

So you reckon comparing the hourly rate of a checkout operator with say, the head of the Dept of Finance is some sort of valid scientific study of wages?


I don't think so

It wouldn't be the first time someone used retail company e.g. Dunnes Stores in a thread about the PS. It seems warped logic exists on all sides of this discussion.

nice_guy80

what most people forget when they see public service salaries is how much is actually taken from the pay cheque of most workers by tax, pensions etc

nice_guy80

AltAccount wrote: »

Probably?

not likely.
you also have to factor in the USC and other rises in deductions

noodler

nice_guy80 wrote: »

not likely.
you also have to factor in the USC and other rises in deductions

We are talking about gross salary per hour ffs.

byhookorbycrook

You might as well ask "tell us about the hourly rate for private sector workers?"

noodler

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

You might as well ask "tell us about the hourly rate for private sector workers?"

Agreed.

twowheelsonly

noodler wrote: »

We are talking about gross salary per hour ffs.

But you still have to factor in taxes and deductions if you're trying to make a real world comparison.

Overpaid and Underworked Public Servant gets €23 an hour. (take home 12ish..)
Underpaid and Overworked Supermarket worker gets €10 an hour. (take home 8ish)

It's all fine and well to talk in Gross terms but the bottom line for everyone is the Nett figure.

antoobrien

twowheelsonly wrote: »

It's all fine and well to talk in Gross terms

The reason for use of gross is for direct comparison. You can't use nett for comparison because of the differing mandatory & voluntary deductions etc. E.g. if you were to compare my net to one of my colleagues, it could appear that (s)he is getting 5k more than me. But that would not be true because little things like pension contributions affect net pay. So what is in fact happening is that I am using the 5k in a different way, in the same way that if a PS worker leaves the PS before they retire they will get that 7% pension levy refunded.

Morrisseeee

According to the Gov representative on TV last night: 75% of the PS are on less than €65k, so maybe if we got the figures for both groups, ie. hourly rate for the 75% of workers and then the top 25%.
I suppose what also might be interesting is to see the benefits that both groups get, eg. pension, bonus etc.

itzme

antoobrien wrote: »

if a PS worker leaves the PS before they retire they will get that 7% pension levy refunded.

eh.... I would love to see a link to this, could you post something on this.
I'm not being smart but it's my understanding you cannot get any of your pension contributions or pension levy refunded for leaving the PS.

antoobrien

itzme wrote: »

eh.... I would love to see a link to this, could you post something on this.
I'm not being smart but it's my understanding you cannot get any of your pension contributions or pension levy refunded for leaving the PS.

It was in the original document, I'll dig it out if I can find it.

You get it back if you haven't "accrued any benefit" (pity this isn't available to private sector). If they rejoin the refund has to be repaid.

To me "accrued any benefit" means that the worker is eligible for a PS pension, but I'm open to correction on that.

Here's the text (q 17):

Q: What if I leave before completing the minimum period for accruing a pension benefit (or payment in lieu in some cases)? For example, if I leave before completing two years and I won't have a preserved benefit. Do I receive a refund?

A: If the person to whom the deduction has applied leaves (a) without a benefit or preserved benefit, or b) without a payment in lieu or preserved payment in lieu, and (c) without transferring the service, then a refund is provided. This means in effect that a person who receives any payment in lieu during the employment or on leaving will not be entitled to a refund.

itzme

antoobrien wrote: »

It was in the original document, I'll dig it out if I can find it.

Looks like you are spot on here, thanks very much for that. Could well be useful to some people I know.
http://www.nuigalway.ie/pensions_investment/frequentlyaskedquestions.html

antoobrien

itzme wrote: »

Looks like you are spot on here, thanks very much for that. Could well be useful to some people I know.
http://www.nuigalway.ie/pensions_investment/frequentlyaskedquestions.html

Be careful with it, my interpretation could be off, but good luck.

iba

Head The Wall wrote: »

I'm sure we will have people on here deriding the average but when you have clerical officers doing basic work on 35k a year which equates to 20 an hour there is something seriously wrong with the wage levels.

I know a few clerical officers at this level and the work they do does not warrant this wage, this is a role that doesn't even require a leaving cert ffs.

You are being extremely disingenuous to the hard work, dedication and commitment of thousands of Clerical Officers.

When you say a Clerical Officer receives €20 an hour who should make it clear that this is a gross wage and is after about 12 years of work. (€20 an hour after tax is probably only about €12 or €13) Perhaps you might like to add that they start on 23k

P.S. I think that you will find it few and far between to find a Clerical Officer without a Leaving Cert. Indeed, I would go as far to say that more than 50% of Clerical Officers have Degrees and some even Masters.

http://www.impact.ie/Your-Sector/Public-Sector/Civil-Service/Civil-service-salary-scales/Current-salary-scales--2010-/Clerical-officer--Full-PRSI-.htm

http://www.finance.gov.ie/documents/circulars/circular2009/circ282009.pdf

itzme

antoobrien wrote: »

It was in the original document, I'll dig it out if I can find it.

You get it back if you haven't "accrued any benefit" (pity this isn't available to private sector). If they rejoin the refund has to be repaid.

To me "accrued any benefit" means that the worker is eligible for a PS pension, but I'm open to correction on that.

Here's the text (q 17):

Unfortunately I think you may be wrong, the quote is "before completing the minimum period for accruing a pension benefit", this seems to be two years from everything I'm reading. So it seems you can claim it back only if you are within the first two years of your service. Thanks for the link was reading that one just before you added it.

Godge

itzme wrote: »

Unfortunately I think you may be wrong, the quote is "before completing the minimum period for accruing a pension benefit", this seems to be two years from everything I'm reading. So it seems you can claim it back only if you are within the first two years of your service. Thanks for the link was reading that one just before you added it.

You are correct, the other poster is wrong.

(1) If you leave before two years, you get no pension so your pension levy is refunded.

(2) If you leave with more than two years service, your pension is preserved and is payable at age 60/65/66 depending on when you joined.

The pension levy is only refunded in cases of (1) and only because you are getting no pension.

itzme

Godge wrote: »

You are correct, the other poster is wrong.

(1) If you leave before two years, you get no pension so your pension levy is refunded.

(2) If you leave with more than two years service, your pension is preserved and is payable at age 60/65/66 depending on when you joined.

The pension levy is only refunded in cases of (1) and only because you are getting no pension.

In case anyone in the future is reading this there is also Option (3)
(3) Transfer you pension to a new employer or recognised pension scheme.

purplecow1977

ManMade wrote: »

Anyone know how much teachers are paid per hour of work?

I'm a teacher.
I get paid €520 each week.
I work on average 35 hours per week, believe it or not. Other weeks more, other weeks less.
This works out at €14.85 per hour.
I have 31 in my class in a 10+ year old prefab.

I don't think I get 'good' wages. I don't think I get 'bad' wages. I have enough. I don't have children or a mortgage [at the moment] so I don't know how I'd genuinely survive if I had either, let alone both, of those things.

Teachers do not feature highly in the public's perception. Everyone thinks they can do the job better. I work hard and do my best each day that I go in. It's a job where I feel I'm never finished. Always better ways to do things, more interesting etc.I enjoy my job, and I put in a lot of effort. Each cut though is gradually having a negative effect on my attitude/work ethic.

Morrisseeee wrote: »

According to the Gov representative on TV last night: 75% of the PS are on less than €65k, so maybe if we got the figures for both groups, ie. hourly rate for the 75% of workers and then the top 25%.
I suppose what also might be interesting is to see the benefits that both groups get, eg. pension, bonus etc.

Where did you see this? That's interesting. The way some figures are dandied about, everyone assumes the majority of PS workers are minted.

AltAccount

purplecow1977 wrote: »

I get paid €520 each week.

Pre or post tax?

purplecow1977

AltAccount wrote: »

Pre or post tax?

Post tax.

AltAccount

purplecow1977 wrote: »

Post tax.

What's your pre-tax pay on the same hourly basis?

purplecow1977

AltAccount wrote: »

What's your pre-tax pay on the same hourly basis?

I have no idea.

Each fortnight, about 600 is gone on tax, I think.

Morrisseeee

purplecow1977 wrote: »

Where did you see this? That's interesting. The way some figures are dandied about, everyone assumes the majority of PS workers are minted.

It was on PrimeTime last night.

BTW how many years have you been teaching ?

purplecow1977

Morrisseeee wrote: »

It was on PrimeTime last night.

BTW how many years have you been teaching ?

I have been teaching 6 years.

AltAccount

520 + 300 = 820

820 / 35 = €23.43ph

820 * 52 = €42,640


That's not a bad rate of pay, where are you on the increments scale, or how experienced/qualified are you?

purplecow1977

AltAccount wrote: »

520 + 300 = 820

820 / 35 = €23.43ph

820 * 52 = €42,640


That's not a bad rate of pay, where are you on the increments scale, or how experienced/qualified are you?

I am teaching 6 years.

AltAccount

purplecow1977 wrote: »

I am teaching 6 years.

So, 27 years old teaching since college? Masters? Industry experience?

purplecow1977

AltAccount wrote: »

So, 27 years old teaching since college? Masters? Industry experience?

Did I say what age I was? Or that I came directly from college? No.

I worked for a phone company for a few years.

Why the interest in my qualifications? I'm qualified to be a teacher. Why does anything else matter?

FixdePitchmark

purplecow1977 wrote: »

Did I say what age I was? Or that I came directly from college? No.

I worked for a phone company for a few years.

Why the interest in my qualifications? I'm qualified to be a teacher. Why does anything else matter?

At 35 that is very very good money.

You are not that experienced.

You also have time off, Have you considered that in your hours/week ?

purplecow1977

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

At 27 that is very very good money.

You are not that experienced.

You also have time off, Have you considered that in your hours/week ?

Hold on - where did I say I was 27? I said I was teaching 6 years! That's all!

Yes I have time off. It's nice having somewhat 'flexi' time midweek as some days I can leave at 3 and take work home with me instead of staying on site, particularly if I've had 'one of those days!'

Have I considered WHAT in my hours/week? Different weeks bring different things and challenges and requirements.

The trouble with teachers is that the time spent off school campus is never recognised. I accounted for it in my 35 hours or so yes. As stated, some weeks are more, some weeks are less. I imagine on average it's about 35 hours.

FixdePitchmark

purplecow1977 wrote: »

Hold on - where did I say I was 27? I said I was teaching 6 years! That's all!

Yes I have time off. It's nice having somewhat 'flexi' time midweek as some days I can leave at 3 and take work home with me instead of staying on site, particularly if I've had 'one of those days!'

Have I considered WHAT in my hours/week? Different weeks bring different things and challenges and requirements.

The trouble with teachers is that the time spent off school campus is never recognised. I accounted for it in my 35 hours or so yes. As stated, some weeks are more, some weeks are less. I imagine on average it's about 35 hours.

But you have maybe 13 weeks off with no work a year.

Did you divide all hours worked per year by 52.

Ok you are about 35. But you are very inexperienced.

purplecow1977

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

But you have maybe 13 weeks off with no work a year.

Did you divide all hours worked per year by 52.

Ok you are about 35. But you are very inexperienced.

What experience do I need exactly? You have no idea of anything extra I may or may not have done, so please do not judge or make assumptions.

I divided my net pay each fortnight by 70 to get the net hourly figure, as asked.


I'm not claiming I'm living on pittance. But I'm certainly not rolling in it. I did say that I'm a single person - if I had a mortgage or children, which fingers crossed I will in a couple of years, then I would really have to reevaluate things. I have loans and bills just like everyone else that have to be paid. I have given up attempting to defend my job as those who view teachers in a negative light, will not have their opinions changed.

Just to mention - I'm well aware of how much time I get off - isn't everyone experts on teacher holidays! However, mentally I LIVE for that time off. Nobody understands until they're in that position themselves. Everyone assumes 'oh how hard can it be? You don't need those holidays at all', but we do. I can't explain, but if you taught for even 1 full month in my classroom, you would see that the time off is NEEDED, both for me AND them!

Look, I'm not belittling my job. I love it. I just don't think it's as fantastic as some make it out to be. [Usually those who have never taught a day in their life!]. If you've been there, and experienced it, then you are qualified to make such a judgement.

Every job, no matter what it is, has advantages and disadvantages. Nobody speaks about the disadvantages of teaching though - only teachers!

FixdePitchmark

purplecow1977 wrote: »

What experience do I need exactly? You have no idea of anything extra I may or may not have done, so please do not judge or make assumptions.

I divided my net pay each fortnight by 70 to get the net hourly figure, as asked.


I'm not claiming I'm living on pittance. But I'm certainly not rolling in it. I did say that I'm a single person - if I had a mortgage or children, which fingers crossed I will in a couple of years, then I would really have to reevaluate things. I have loans and bills just like everyone else that have to be paid. I have given up attempting to defend my job as those who view teachers in a negative light, will not have their opinions changed.

Well dividing your pay by at home work and putting up after tax rates is not doing your case or teaching any goood.

I respect teachers so much. But they have great pay and a great job. Call it out loud and be proud. We won't even get into conditions. 1/2 days etc.

Don't go on about the at home stuff, the holidays way outweigh that.

AltAccount

purplecow1977 wrote: »

Did I say what age I was? Or that I came directly from college? No.

I worked for a phone company for a few years.

Why the interest in my qualifications? I'm qualified to be a teacher. Why does anything else matter?

Jesus, I just asked you a question to get some context on your pay level.

Education/Qualification Experience all contribute to pay rate generally.

purplecow1977

AltAccount wrote: »

Jesus, I just asked you a question to get some context on your pay level.

Education/Qualification Experience all contribute to pay rate generally.

I get an honours qualification allowance. I've included that in my pay already. I believe it SHOULD be counted for my in core pay, and not seen as an 'extra'.

There are 3 1/2 days in the entire year - they are at end of term. Kids are hyper that day anyway.

I disagree that teachers have 'great' pay. As I said already, we're not badly paid but we're not on 'great' salaries. Newly Qualified Teachers have been completely raped by things.

I won't mention any of my OWN money that I spend on school related things either - but I don't know of any other job that does this. Believe me, each year I get wiser with this because of all of the cuts. But what else can you do when school funding just isn't there?

Anyway. I digress. I'm not worried about painting myself in a good/bad light. Teacher wages aren't a secret - all the information for public sector workers are available online.

FixdePitchmark

purplecow1977 wrote: »

What experience do I need exactly? You have no idea of anything extra I may or may not have done, so please do not judge or make assumptions.

I divided my net pay each fortnight by 70 to get the net hourly figure, as asked.


I'm not claiming I'm living on pittance. But I'm certainly not rolling in it. I did say that I'm a single person - if I had a mortgage or children, which fingers crossed I will in a couple of years, then I would really have to reevaluate things. I have loans and bills just like everyone else that have to be paid. I have given up attempting to defend my job as those who view teachers in a negative light, will not have their opinions changed.

Just to mention - I'm well aware of how much time I get off - isn't everyone experts on teacher holidays! However, mentally I LIVE for that time off. Nobody understands until they're in that position themselves. Everyone assumes 'oh how hard can it be? You don't need those holidays at all', but we do. I can't explain, but if you taught for even 1 full month in my classroom, you would see that the time off is NEEDED, both for me AND them!

Look, I'm not belittling my job. I love it. I just don't think it's as fantastic as some make it out to be. [Usually those who have never taught a day in their life!]. If you've been there, and experienced it, then you are qualified to make such a judgement.

Every job, no matter what it is, has advantages and disadvantages. Nobody speaks about the disadvantages of teaching though - only teachers!

Everybody lives for their holidays.

Some people do jobs with life and death on the line. Some people deal with murders.

They are on less.

Teachers work very little. Annualised it is maybe 25 to 30 hours a week? Every holiday , bank holiday and weekend off.

purplecow1977

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

Teachers work very little. Annualised it is maybe 25 to 30 hours a week? Every holiday , bank holiday and weekend off.

What an ignorant comment to make.
25 hours a week?
Are you joking?
I'm not getting into this.

Head The Wall

purplecow1977 wrote: »

Hold on - where did I say I was 27? I said I was teaching 6 years! That's all!

Yes I have time off. It's nice having somewhat 'flexi' time midweek as some days I can leave at 3 and take work home with me instead of staying on site, particularly if I've had 'one of those days!'

Have I considered WHAT in my hours/week? Different weeks bring different things and challenges and requirements.

The trouble with teachers is that the time spent off school campus is never recognised. I accounted for it in my 35 hours or so yes. As stated, some weeks are more, some weeks are less. I imagine on average it's about 35 hours.

From what you have posted it seems as if you have averaged 35 hours per week on the weeks you work. Considering there's a lot of weeks you don't work then you can't just divide the gross by 52. Dividing by 37 would give a more accurate representation of what you get paid weekly

purplecow1977

Head The Wall wrote: »

From what you have posted it seems as if you have averaged 35 hours per week on the weeks you work. Considering there's a lot of weeks you don't work then you can't just divide the gross by 52. Dividing by 37 would give a more accurate representation of what you get paid weekly

Not true. Time is spent before each term in devising long term plans for the next term.

Anyway - I'm paid a yearly salary. I'm not paid for days/weeks I work or don't work. So I'm entitled to divide my salary by the time I work.

AltAccount

purplecow1977 wrote: »

Not true. Time is spent before each term in devising long term plans for the next term.

Anyway - I'm paid a yearly salary. I'm not paid for days/weeks I work or don't work. So I'm entitled to divide my salary by the time I work.

What's your ore tax yearly salary then?

Bandana boy

@ Teacher dude
820*52 =42640
42640/37=1152
1152/30=38.40
1152/35=32.91
1152/25=46.08

So between 32 and 38 euro an hour would be a fairer rep of what you earn.
46 euro an hour if you dont count your prep time

I do not actually believe teachers are particularly overpaid, but it is a very fair salary and for that we should get a good return from our teachers and be able to weed out under performers.

Jogathon

Teachers are paid for 10 months of the year officially. Pay is then paid out over the 12 months on a fortnightly basis. So, on an official level, we are not paid for our summer holidays. I don't know what that might do to hourly calculations.

On a personal note, 35 hours seems to be about right for the amount of time I'd spend working every week. An hour or two after school most days keeps me organised and on top of my work. On the plus side, I can leave as soon as the bell goes if I have to and bring my corrections etc home with me. That flexitime is very useful for getting things done.

FixdePitchmark

Jogathon wrote: »

Teachers are paid for 10 months of the year officially. Pay is then paid out over the 12 months on a fortnightly basis. So, on an official level, we are not paid for our summer holidays. I don't know what that might do to hourly calculations.

On a personal note, 35 hours seems to be about right for the amount of time I'd spend working every week. An hour or two after school most days keeps me organised and on top of my work. On the plus side, I can leave as soon as the bell goes if I have to and bring my corrections etc home with me. That flexitime is very useful for getting things done.

Do you honestly - like honestly - have to do 1 to 2 hours a day after school every single day. Are there not times during the day that the work can be fit in and also - is there not repeatability year to year - this idea that summer holidays are spent devising the next years seems a bit far fetched ?

I'm lstening.

A teacher I had, spent - 2 to 3 hours a day reading the paper. Can a teacher be sacked - how many were sacked last year ?