Public sector pay increase

dub_skav

Yara Old Backyard wrote: »

People on welfare are not working or earning money so why should they get an increase.

It wouldn't be an increase, it would be a restoration, one not based on any performance indicators

dub_skav

dub_skav wrote: »

It wouldn't be an increase, it would be a restoration, one not based on any performance indicators

They don't work, they are given money to survive. Social welfare shouldn't be in this debate at all. Public servants do work for their money and they don't need their performance measured to deserve their pay restored to what it should be.

Tiger Mcilroy

Yara Old Backyard wrote: »

They don't work, they are given money to survive. Social welfare shouldn't be in this debate at all. Public servants do work for their money and they don't need their performance measured to deserve their pay restored to what it should be.

Yes they do need the performance measured, currently increments are paid out irrespective of performance which has created the scenario where people are on a certain point of the scale unjustly and all increases are tied to this number and there is no desire to change this even though it was a major selling point of croke park and haddington.

This is conveniently ignored by the public servants arguing to justify the proposed increases.

To say that the work done within the public service is not accurately measurable is complete horse****.

Tiger Mcilroy

Tiger Mcilroy wrote: »

Yes they do need the performance measured, currently increments are paid out irrespective of performance which has created the scenario where people are on a certain point of the scale unjustly and all increases are tied to this number and there is no desire to change this even though it was a major selling point of croke park and haddington.

This is conveniently ignored by the public servants arguing to justify the proposed increases.

To say that the work done within the public service is not accurately measurable is complete horse****.

Performance is not measurable in many areas of the public service that's a fact. Increments are 100% justifiable and fair, you are in the job a year longer and have a years more experience which results in more responsibility etc. Public servants will never have the opportunities available to those in the private sector for big pay increases, promotion, bonuses, health care etc etc, increments are the very least they should be getting to make up for that.

Thankfully increments will never be done away with.

Others have made the point here that in the private sector pay increases regardless of performance or work load also, being more experienced is a justifiable reason for increased pay.

PeteFalk78

Yara Old Backyard wrote: »

Thankfully increments will never be done away with.

I'm due my last increment in Jan 2016. It will be horrendous to think it will be my last

PeteFalk78

PeteFalk78 wrote: »

I'm due my last increment in Jan 2016. It will be horrendous to think it will be my last

I'm due my first in July (provided my contract is renewed/I decide to stay on in the role).

Riskymove

Tiger Mcilroy wrote: »

This is conveniently ignored by the public servants arguing to justify the proposed increases.

It is also overlooked that many PS haven't been in line for an increment since the cuts

Tiger Mcilroy

Yara Old Backyard wrote: »

Performance is not measurable in many areas of the public service that's a fact. Increments are 100% justifiable and fair, you are in the job a year longer and have a years more experience which results in more responsibility etc. Public servants will never have the opportunities available to those in the private sector for big pay increases, promotion, bonuses, health care etc etc, increments are the very least they should be getting to make up for that.

Thankfully increments will never be done away with.

Others have made the point here that in the private sector pay increases regardless of performance or work load also, being more experienced is a justifiable reason for increased pay.

This is simply not true, you know it, everybody reading this knows it.

The reality is the can of worms that would be opened by a functioning well managed performance management system in the public would cause ructions from the top to the bottom.

There is no defence for the current setup and claiming the work being carried out cant be measured is false.

Tiger Mcilroy

Tiger Mcilroy wrote: »

This is simply not true, you know it, everybody reading this knows it.

The reality is the can of worms that would be opened by a functioning well managed performance management system in the public would cause ructions from the top to the bottom.

There is no defence for the current setup and claiming the work being carried out cant be measured is false.

You obviously lack an understanding of how many areas of the public sector work if you think its possible to implement a fair way of measuring performance. In fact an attempted to measure performance in many areas would lead to a much worse service being provided, interference various public service departments in their area's is already having this effect to some degree.

Tiger Mcilroy

Yara Old Backyard wrote: »

You obviously lack an understanding of how many areas of the public sector work if you think its possible to implement a fair way of measuring performance. In fact an attempted to measure performance in many areas would lead to a much worse service being provided, interference various public service departments in their area's is already having this effect to some degree.

Yeah the whole accountability and being responsible for your work thing is just awful.

Tiger Mcilroy

Tiger Mcilroy wrote: »

Yeah the whole accountability and being responsible for your work thing is just awful.

When it negatively interferes with the job you are trying to do then yes it is awful.

Geuze

KomradeBishop wrote: »

It's the 'interest payments vs GDP' that determines debt sustainability, not the overall level of public debt - and you don't reduce 'public debt vs GDP' by focusing monomaniacally on paying down the debt, you do it by growing GDP to its maximum growth potential first - which restores the private sector to full economic capacity in the process, helping to pay off all debts (public and private) faster once GDP is at its maximum growth potential.

What you are getting at here is the public debt sustainability equation.

See here:

http://www.irisheconomy.ie/index.php/2012/05/02/some-budgetary-arithmetic-for-fiscal-rules/

and here:

http://www.fiscalcouncil.ie/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/DEW_121012.pdf


The change in the debt/GDP ratio is given by a simple formula:

Δd = [(i – g)/(1 + g)]d-1 – ps,

where d is the debt/GDP ratio (in percent of GDP), i is the average nominal interest rate on outstanding debt, g is the nominal growth rate, d-1 is the previous year’s debt/GDP ratio, and ps is the primary surplus (in percent of GDP).

bjork

Tiger Mcilroy wrote: »

Yeah the whole accountability and being responsible for your work thing is just awful.

I'd strike if they tried to make accountable for my work

jank

Yara Old Backyard wrote: »

You do realise those in the public service spend a large portion of their money in the private sector thus keeping people in jobs and generating company profits which in turn feed back into the government. Pay them more and they will spend more, despite their salary's being drastically (and wrongly) cut its the public servants that worked hard through the recession and basically kept the country afloat.

As I said, Great, double or triple everyone's wage in the Public Sector, if you follow that logic. You can of course see the simple fundamental problem with that ploy.

BoatMad

Yara Old Backyard wrote: »

You do realise those in the public service spend a large portion of their money in the private sector thus keeping people in jobs and generating company profits which in turn feed back into the government. Pay them more and they will spend more, despite their salary's being drastically (and wrongly) cut its the public servants that worked hard through the recession and basically kept the country afloat.

how did the PS " keep the country afloat",I bet this will be a good one

BoatMad

Riskymove wrote: »

It is also overlooked that many PS haven't been in line for an increment since the cuts

never understood the ideas of " increments "

Santa Cruz

Incompetent wasters in the private sector can be got rid of. Incompetent wasters in public service get promoted or put somewhere to limit their ability to **** up.

seamus

BoatMad wrote: »

never understood the ideas of " increments "

Weasel word invented by unions so that they can claim that increases in pay are not discretionary windfalls for better performance, but in fact are entitlements of someone regardless of quality or capability.

Unions have made an absolute mess of the public sector, resulting in poorer conditions for good public sector workers, not better conditions.

BoatMad

BoatMad wrote: »

how did the PS " keep the country afloat",I bet this will be a good one

By spending their (much reduced) salary in businesses around the country.

crusier

Santa Cruz wrote: »

Incompetent wasters in the private sector can be got rid of. Incompetent wasters in public service get promoted or put somewhere to limit their ability to **** up.

That's a big brush you have there!

BoatMad

Yara Old Backyard wrote: »

By spending their (much reduced) salary in businesses around the country.

so did everyone, and also we had to scrape together more tax, such that the PS salaries could be paid in the first place.

Celticfire

seamus wrote: »

Weasel word invented by unions so that they can claim that increases in pay are not discretionary windfalls for better performance, but in fact are entitlements of someone regardless of quality or capability.

Unions have made an absolute mess of the public sector, resulting in poorer conditions for good public sector workers, not better conditions.

There's a thread over in the Irish Economic forum asking for alternatives to pay scales in the public sector. Considering the amount of people that continually deride the concept of incremental pay scales there's a surprising lack of any actual proposals or alternatives put forward.

Santa Cruz

Santa Cruz wrote: »

Incompetent wasters in the private sector can be got rid of. Incompetent wasters in public service get promoted or put somewhere to limit their ability to **** up.

Is this your own imagination or is it being driven by some mind altering substance?

Kelly06

SantaCruz wrote: »

Incompetent wasters in public service get promoted or put somewhere to limit their ability to **** up.

This isn't really true. When a job is put up you can apply for it depending on the qualifications and experience required. If there are too many applicants you will be subject to a shortlisting process where your application form is reviewed and points are rewarded under set criteria. If you are selected for interview you will be given a set number of points for educational attainment up to a max for a masters. After that it's all down to your performance in that 30 minute interview. Doesn't matter if you are an absolutely amazing worker or a lazy fecker who makes your colleagues working environment hell its all down to whether or not you have the gift of the gab and can answer all the completely left field questions that are thrown at you after hours and hours of studying. And trust me some of the interview questions (in my sector anyways) are hilarious you just couldn't prepare for them.the whole selection process is weighted towards extroverted confident people.

I have seen amazing workers who will miss breaks, stay late and be generally indispensable not even given the opportunity to interview for a role after 10 years service because of shortlisting criteria. In the private sector they probably wouldn't even have to interview for the role they would just be selected and promoted because they are the right person for the job. The grass is not always greener on the other side

darkpagandeath

Kelly06 wrote: »

This isn't really true. When a job is put up you can apply for it depending on the qualifications and experience required. If there are too many applicants you will be subject to a shortlisting process where your application form is reviewed and points are rewarded under set criteria. If you are selected for interview you will be given a set number of points for educational attainment up to a max for a masters. After that it's all down to your performance in that 30 minute interview. Doesn't matter if you are an absolutely amazing worker or a lazy fecker who makes your colleagues working environment hell its all down to whether or not you have the gift of the gab and can answer all the completely left field questions that are thrown at you after hours and hours of studying. And trust me some of the interview questions (in my sector anyways) are hilarious you just couldn't prepare for them.the whole selection process is weighted towards extroverted confident people.

I have seen amazing workers who will miss breaks, stay late and be generally indispensable not even given the opportunity to interview for a role after 10 years service because of shortlisting criteria. In the private sector they probably wouldn't even have to interview for the role they would just be selected and promoted because they are the right person for the job. The grass is not always greener on the other side

When did they introduce enforced performance related pay ?

darkpagandeath

Dozen Wicked Words wrote: »

So you want less nurses but higher quality ones? How do you quantify the quality of the nurse?

Performance like any other job, Are you denying Ireland's hospitals have some of the highest staff levels in the EU ? Yet the system is falling apart.

Dan_Solo

Santa Cruz wrote: »

Incompetent wasters in the private sector can be got rid of. Incompetent wasters in public service get promoted or put somewhere to limit their ability to **** up.

Tell that to Irish bank execs and developers!

Kelly06

darkpagandeath wrote: »

When did they introduce enforced performance related pay ?

My post wasn't about performance related pay it was about the difficulties excellent staff encounter trying to get a promotion. Sorry now if I'm missing something ?

Jawgap

Santa Cruz wrote: »

Incompetent wasters in the private sector can be got rid of. Incompetent wasters in public service get promoted or put somewhere to limit their ability to **** up.

This isn't generally true, but in my own experience I've seen it happen three times in about 12 years - you also get examples of political hacks appointed to boards who have zero experience in the sector in which an agency operates.

Dozen Wicked Words

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Performance like any other job, Are you denying Ireland's hospitals have some of the highest staff levels in the EU ? Yet the system is falling apart.

What performance indicators would you use to judge the quality or otherwise of a nurse?

omega man

Dozen Wicked Words wrote: »

What performance indicators would you use to judge the quality or otherwise of a nurse?

You could start with the basics of attendance, punctuality and their overall ability to provide an acceptable level of service to their customers.

Where I work in the private sector a number of technical, safety related roles are easily assessed with regard to performance. Knowledge and technical abilities should be a given. It's the rest that can be the difference between an average nurse and a high performing nurse.

skittles8710

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Tell that to Irish bank execs and developers!

Please give an example of a Bank Exec remaining their position from the boom to date.. They were quietly moved on (albeit with nice packages ) due to their noted failures.

Dozen Wicked Words

omega man wrote: »

You could start with the basics of attendance, punctuality and their overall ability to provide an acceptable level of service to their customers.

Where I work in the private sector a number of technical, safety related roles are easily assessed with regard to performance. Knowledge and technical abilities should be a given. It's the rest that can be the difference between an average nurse and a high performing nurse.

I agree with your basics absolutely but empathy, compassion, communication skills, caring etc, are all very hard to quantify and you could be all of the things you've listed and none that I suggest and a dreadful nurse, or vice versa.

omega man

Dozen Wicked Words wrote: »

I agree with your basics absolutely but empathy, compassion, communication skills, caring etc, are all very hard to quantify and you could be all of the things you've listed and none that I suggest and a dreadful nurse, or vice versa.

I guess so unless hospitals introduced some type of patient feedback surveys. I know patients aren't exactly high street customers but they are customers all the same.

In the private sector I would expect my front line staff to represent their organisation/employer and provide a high quality service to the customer. This could apply to anyone from a customer service agent to an airline pilot. With that in mind I think you'd find certain individual nurses performance with regard to the items you mentioned (empathy, compassion etc) could easily be assessed over time.

Jawgap

omega man wrote: »

I guess so unless hospitals introduced some type of patient feedback surveys. I know patients aren't exactly high street customers but they are customers all the same.

In the private sector I would expect my front line staff to represent their organisation/employer and provide a high quality service to the customer. This could apply to anyone from a customer service agent to an airline pilot. With that in mind I think you'd find certain individual nurses performance with regard to the items you mentioned (empathy, compassion etc) could easily be assessed over time.

Seriously?

Go in to your local ED tonight after pub closing time..........

omega man

Jawgap wrote: »

Seriously?

Go in to your local ED tonight after pub closing time..........

What's your suggestion then? I just tried to give some insight into how I think it could be done......

omega man

omega man wrote: »

What's your suggestion then? I just tried to give some insight into how I think it could be done......

It can't be done is the simple answer, certainly not in a fair manner nor in a way that assesses the important things when it comes to health care (or teaching for that matter).

Jawgap

omega man wrote: »

What's your suggestion then? I just tried to give some insight into how I think it could be done......

The metrics of a 'good' nurse, Garda or teacher cannot be much specified beyond the superficial. Plus there seems to be confusion between measures that indicate someone is a good employee and measures that indicate someone is a good nurse..... for example, would providing a 'good service' include whistleblowing?

How, for example, would you compare a hospice or oncology nurse to an ED one or a theatre one? And if you could how would you rate their expertise.

What is an expert nurse? The one who has good technical skills or the one who is excellent at spotting small problems and preventing them from becoming major ones.

Certainly their should be frequent registration / re-registration, mandatory participation in peer review exercises etc

omega man

Jawgap wrote: »

The metrics of a 'good' nurse, Garda or teacher cannot be much specified beyond the superficial. Plus there seems to be confusion between measures that indicate someone is a good employee and measures that indicate someone is a good nurse..... for example, would providing a 'good service' include whistleblowing?

How, for example, would you compare a hospice or oncology nurse to an ED one or a theatre one? And if you could how would you rate their expertise.

What is an expert nurse? The one who has good technical skills or the one who is excellent at spotting small problems and preventing them from becoming major ones.

Certainly their should be frequent registration / re-registration, mandatory participation in peer review exercises etc

But yet in my industry a pilot or an engineer can be performance assessed. What's the big difference here?

Jawgap

omega man wrote: »

But yet in my industry a pilot or an engineer can be performance assessed. What's the big difference here?

The big difference is that nursing, policing and teaching are not aviating.

I've asked this before......but who is the better nurse, the one who catches an NHCD making a mistake or the one who helps resuscitate a patient after the doctor has nearly killed him?

omega man

Jawgap wrote: »

The big difference is that nursing, policing and teaching are not aviating.

I've asked this before......but who is the better nurse, the one who catches an NHCD making a mistake or the one who helps resuscitate a patient after the doctor has nearly killed him?

Why is nursing any different to certain aviation roles? Safety critical functions in a high pressure environment. A co pilot captain relationship could easily apply to the nurse doctor example you provided above.

Teaching roles are different but I could again compare to pilot instructors whom again are easily assessed performance wise.

Basically I'm not seeing why some PS roles can't be performance reviewed.

darkpagandeath

Dozen Wicked Words wrote: »

What performance indicators would you use to judge the quality or otherwise of a nurse?

It's amazing as soon as job is in the public sector all work becomes intangible and unquantifiable. Amazing that is.

Jawgap

omega man wrote: »

Why is nursing any different to certain aviation roles? Safety critical functions in a high pressure environment. A co pilot captain relationship could easily apply to the nurse doctor example you provided above.

Teaching roles are different but I could again compare to pilot instructors whom again are easily assessed performance wise.

Basically I'm not seeing why some PS roles can't be performance reviewed.

For a start - it couldn't and the fact you think it could probably demonstrates something of lack of understanding of the difference between a nurse and a doctor - I'd imagine any nurse reading this would be somewhat aggrieved that they would be perceived as 'co-pilots' to the doctor's PIC!

Certain roles can be performance reviewed, but only up to a point - again as an example, who is the better the teacher, the one whose students get As or the teacher who turns the failing student into a solid C student?

....and if you want to think in aviation terms, who are better - fixed or rotary wing pilots? a pilot with hours of instrument time or one with none? the one who can land in marginal conditions or the one who can calm a crippingly anxious passenger?

darkpagandeath

Jawgap wrote: »

For a start - it couldn't and the fact you think it could probably demonstrates something of lack of understanding of the difference between a nurse and a doctor - I'd imagine any nurse reading this would be somewhat aggrieved that they would be perceived as 'co-pilots' to the doctor's PIC!

Certain roles can be performance reviewed, but only up to a point - again as an example, who is the better the teacher, the one whose students get As or the teacher who turns the failing student into a solid C student?

....and if you want to think in aviation terms, who are better - fixed or rotary wing pilots? a pilot with hours of instrument time or one with none? the one who can land in marginal conditions or the one who can calm a crippingly anxious passenger?

That's the problem, People are thinking in that way. It's not about who is better it's about are you meeting a certain level of criteria. Performance related pay does not only mean how much better you are at the job than the next person. It's are you meeting the requirements as well.

omega man

Jawgap wrote: »

For a start - it couldn't and the fact you think it could probably demonstrates something of lack of understanding of the difference between a nurse and a doctor - I'd imagine any nurse reading this would be somewhat aggrieved that they would be perceived as 'co-pilots' to the doctor's PIC!

Certain roles can be performance reviewed, but only up to a point - again as an example, who is the better the teacher, the one whose students get As or the teacher who turns the failing student into a solid C student?

....and if you want to think in aviation terms, who are better - fixed or rotary wing pilots? a pilot with hours of instrument time or one with none? the one who can land in marginal conditions or the one who can calm a crippingly anxious passenger?

I wasn't even comparing them to co pilots! It was the example you provided so I used the co pilot captain relationship to demonstrate the importance of being able to question a captains decision. It's what co pilots are trained to do. I think comparing nurses to co pilots would be very kind to nurses if I'm honest!

bjork

Jawgap wrote: »

..........
Certain roles can be performance reviewed, but only up to a point - again as an example, who is the better the teacher, the one whose students get As or the teacher who turns the failing student into a solid C student?.............

The ones who's students show individual progress.

Nothing to do with whether they get As, Bs or C's

mickydoomsux

bjork wrote: »

The ones who's students show individual progress.

Nothing to do with whether they get As, Bs or C's

What if the students are unteachable thickos ?

Should we still cut the teachers pay?

darkpagandeath

mickydoomsux wrote: »

What if the students are unteachable thickos ?

Should we still cut the teachers pay?

How did they get the points to get on the course then ? Lazy can be very easily spotted and removed from metrics.

mickydoomsux

darkpagandeath wrote: »

How did they get the points to get on the course then ? Lazy can be very easily spotted and removed from metrics.

You need points to get into primary/secondary school now?

The Zec

The only fair way to give pay rises is by scrapping (the supposedly temporary) USC. But that wouldn't create this public/private sector animosity, distracting people from where their money is really going.