Public sector pay increase

bjork

Jawgap wrote: »

People seem to think the PS is some kind of monolith. It's not so describing it as an organisation is pointless.

It is a collection of organisations, agencies, authorities etc - some executive, some operational and some contemplative. And yes, some are wasteful and some are efficient, and effective and economical and some are wasteful some days and effective on others.

Also, the fact remains that any moves towards improving operational effectiveness or efficiency in certain PS organisations are universally met with vocal public objections - try closing a local, inefficient hospital or Garda station and see what happens. Likewise, propose a national fire service and see how far that gets, or the amalgamation of schools.......everyone is happy for a hospital to close or schools to be amalgamated as long as it's not their hospital or schools

You are correct with the bolded bit. How then can a unilateral payrise be given across the board with no questions asked?

Jawgap

bjork wrote: »

You are correct with the bolded bit. How then can a unilateral payrise be given across the board with no questions asked?

Because that's the way the PS works - come up with a better way and it will be implemented.

I think that's been explained repeatedly - the PS is not the private sector - there are certain business processes which are common (and which should be outsourced if they are not of strategic importance) but by-and-large the PS works on different problems to the private sector and generally does not employ a profit model

bjork

Jawgap wrote: »

Because that's the way the PS works - come up with a better way and it will be implemented.

I think that's been explained repeatedly - the PS is not the private sector - there are certain business processes which are common (and which should be outsourced if they are not of strategic importance) but by-and-large the PS works on different problems to the private sector and generally does not employ a profit model

But on one hand you are saying that they are all individual entities and can not be judged as as a group

On the other when it comes to pay they can, simply because that's the way it works

ThisRegard

Jawgap wrote: »

People seem to think the PS is some kind of monolith. It's not so describing it as an organisation is pointless.

It is a collection of organisations, agencies, authorities etc - some executive, some operational and some contemplative. And yes, some are wasteful and some are efficient, and effective and economical and some are wasteful some days and effective on others......

I fully understand that, but I have 5 family members working in one department or another. 2 as nurses which I wouldn't do for the life of me and they deserve everything they get in terms of rewards, and more. Another in education who has it pretty easy.

But the others are lifers and the things they do, or do not do, is ridiculous. The pay rises they get, and complain about when delayed, make no sense. There's no bearing on a persons performance within that job, and when you employ that across the public service as if each person was part of a monolith exceeding performance targets etc you can see what gets peoples hackles up.

Having said that, I put it down to the unions and weak management for the most part, perhaps they go hand in hand. One of the nurses became the de facto union person in their ward for a while. They were initially enthusiastic, particularly in the debates we had, but they soon tired of the hassle they themselves even got from the union when they made suggestions of extra things they could do to make life as a whole for themself and colleagues easier.

She ended up having a big row anyway and has nothing much to do with them these days.


And just to clarify for myself, I don't see the PS as inclusive as nurses, firemen, gardai etc. I think it's unfortunate that politicians use these as examples when talking about giving the public sector their "pay back". These people do, not all desk jockeys do.

Celticfire

bjork wrote: »

You are correct with the bolded bit. How then can a unilateral payrise be given across the board with no questions asked?

Much the same way as pay was unilaterally cut across the board without any consideration a unilateral restoration of pay can also be done.

bjork

Celticfire wrote: »

Much the same way as pay was unilaterally cut across the board without any consideration a unilateral restoration of pay can also be done.

They could also take this opportunity to just give it to those that deserve it. It was cut for a reason.

Celticfire

bjork wrote: »

They could also take this opportunity to just give it to those that deserve it. It was cut for a reason.

According to some people nobody deserves it. So how would you define "deserves it"? What criteria would you use?

Kermit.de.frog

Celticfire wrote: »

Much the same way as pay was unilaterally cut across the board without any consideration a unilateral restoration of pay can also be done.

And bust the country again? No.

Public sector pay restoration should ONLY be for those who actually work hard - on merit.

evolving_doors

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

And bust the country again? No.

Public sector pay restoration should ONLY be for those who actually work hard - on merit.

Ah, like merit pay which was introduced for Irish Water employees. That went down well with the public didn't it?

Roger Hassenforder

bjork wrote: »

You are correct with the bolded bit. How then can a unilateral payrise be given across the board with no questions asked?

It's a restoration of pay

awec

Jawgap wrote: »

Also, the fact remains that any moves towards improving operational effectiveness or efficiency in certain PS organisations are universally met with vocal public objections - try closing a local, inefficient hospital or Garda station and see what happens. Likewise, propose a national fire service and see how far that gets, or the amalgamation of schools.......everyone is happy for a hospital to close or schools to be amalgamated as long as it's not their hospital or schools

Of course.

But we wouldn't need to cut so many front line services if we could just cut a lot more of the briefcase carrying bureaucrats and pointless managers that exist in the public sector.

But as said earlier in the thread any attempt to properly fix the public sector and improve services will be blocked by public sector unions and their lapdogs. They have a vested interest in maintaining the current shambles.

bjork

Celticfire wrote: »

According to some people nobody deserves it. So how would you define "deserves it"? What criteria would you use?

You want me to define all the criteria for every role in the public service?




:pac::pac:

Jawgap

bjork wrote: »

But on one hand you are saying that they are all individual entities and can not be judged as as a group

On the other when it comes to pay they can, simply because that's the way it works

They are a group in the same way the 'IT sector' or 'social media companies' are a group - but they all do different things, and work on different problems.

And yes you can individualise pay and conditions, but then the cost and size of things like HR and Finance functions would explode exponentially. You would also lose the flexibility to move staff around.

At the moment you can negotiate pay with a group of unions, imagine trying to negotiate 250,000 separate pay and condition deals - or put it another way when I left the PS it came at the end of three weeks of negotiations with my new employer - if even 10% of the PS had individualised pay, how much time, effort and cost would have to go into negotiating their contracts of employment?

Jawgap

ThisRegard wrote: »

I fully understand that, but I have 5 family members working in one department or another. 2 as nurses which I wouldn't do for the life of me and they deserve everything they get in terms of rewards, and more. Another in education who has it pretty easy.

But the others are lifers and the things they do, or do not do, is ridiculous. The pay rises they get, and complain about when delayed, make no sense. There's no bearing on a persons performance within that job, and when you employ that across the public service as if each person was part of a monolith exceeding performance targets etc you can see what gets peoples hackles up.

Having said that, I put it down to the unions and weak management for the most part, perhaps they go hand in hand. One of the nurses became the de facto union person in their ward for a while. They were initially enthusiastic, particularly in the debates we had, but they soon tired of the hassle they themselves even got from the union when they made suggestions of extra things they could do to make life as a whole for themself and colleagues easier.

She ended up having a big row anyway and has nothing much to do with them these days.


And just to clarify for myself, I don't see the PS as inclusive as nurses, firemen, gardai etc. I think it's unfortunate that politicians use these as examples when talking about giving the public sector their "pay back". These people do, not all desk jockeys do.

I'm not getting into performance management again - my earlier posts covered it.

And while desk jockeying is not in the same league as the 'blue light services' someone has to make sure the lights come on, the comms gear works, people get paid etc Or would you prefer trained police officers to be doing routine admin?

Celticfire

bjork wrote: »

You want me to define all the criteria for every role in the public service?




:pac::pac:

You were the one using the wide but vague brushstroke "deserve it". I want you to define " deserve it". It should be simple, you're the one that said it.

ThisRegard

Jawgap wrote: »

And while desk jockeying is not in the same league as the 'blue light services' someone has to make sure the lights come on, the comms gear works, people get paid etc Or would you prefer trained police officers to be doing routine admin?

Again, I'm not referring to all desks jockeys (I'm one myself), particularly not those in any of the emergency services.

But we all know there is deadwood being dragged along by the current until retirement that reap all the benefits. I think that's general problem people have.

Tiger Mcilroy

Jawgap wrote: »

I'm not getting into performance management again - my earlier posts covered it.

And while desk jockeying is not in the same league as the 'blue light services' someone has to make sure the lights come on, the comms gear works, people get paid etc Or would you prefer trained police officers to be doing routine admin?

With all due respect nothing has been covered in regards performance management in the public sector.

The tiny amount of non-performing public servants that get below acceptable scores using the performance management system indicates that managers are either incapable of assessing their staff or simply do not bother.

The argument that the work being done is not quantifiable defies all logic and is simply an indicator of the inept and farcical system that is being protected by all involved.

bjork

Celticfire wrote: »

You were the one using the wide but vague brushstroke "deserve it". I want you to define " deserve it". It should be simple, you're the one that said it.

Do you think everyone in the PS deserves it?

Celticfire

bjork wrote: »

Do you think everyone in the PS deserves it?

So no definition of your cover all phrase " deserve it" then?

suicide_circus

Celticfire wrote: »

You were the one using the wide but vague brushstroke "deserve it". I want you to define " deserve it". It should be simple, you're the one that said it.

It really is irrelevant who deserves it. We cant afford it.

bjork

Celticfire wrote: »

So no definition of your cover all phrase " deserve it" then?

deserve
verb de·serve \di-ˈzərv\
de·servedde·serv·ing
Definition of DESERVE

transitive verb
: to be worthy of : merit <deserves another chance>
intransitive verb
: to be worthy, fit, or suitable for some reward or requital <have become recognized as they deserve — T. S. Eliot>
— de·serv·er noun
See deserve defined for English-language learners
See deserve defined for kids
Examples of DESERVE

<the team really deserved that victory after the way they played>

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/deserve

Celticfire

bjork wrote: »

deserve
verb de·serve \di-ˈzərv\
de·servedde·serv·ing
Definition of DESERVE

transitive verb
: to be worthy of : merit <deserves another chance>
intransitive verb
: to be worthy, fit, or suitable for some reward or requital <have become recognized as they deserve — T. S. Eliot>
— de·serv·er noun
See deserve defined for English-language learners
See deserve defined for kids
Examples of DESERVE

<the team really deserved that victory after the way they played>

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/deserve

Gotcha. I'll try to put it into a sentence.

The public Sector workers held up their side of the agreement and now deserve to have their pay restored in accordance with said agreement as was promised and written into legislation by the employer , The Government.

bjork

Celticfire wrote: »

Gotcha. I'll try to put it into a sentence.

The public Sector workers held up their side of the agreement and now deserve to have their pay restored in accordance with said agreement as was promised and written into legislation by the employer , The Government.

Oh, you got me :rolleyes:

Can you quote and link the legislation?

Public sector workers did not deserve the wages they were being paid as it was linked to an inflated economy. >>I prefer that sentence

Tiger Mcilroy

They deserve a portion of the money ireland has in surplus..

0% of 0,0000,00000

knock yourselves out lads.

Celticfire

bjork wrote: »

Oh, you got me :rolleyes:

Can you quote and link the legislation?

Public sector workers did not deserve the wages they were being paid as it was linked to an inflated economy. >>I prefer that sentence

Wasn't me making stupid catchphrases like " deserve it" and then couldn't answer a simple question without trying to be a smartass.

FEMPI, do your own research.

bjork

Celticfire wrote: »

Wasn't me making stupid catchphrases like " deserve it" and then couldn't answer a simple question without trying to be a smartass.

FEMPI, do your own research.

So you want me to provide you with a definition of what "deserve" means. But you can't link the legislation you're ranting on about.


Smacks of public sector laziness,I suppose you'd want a payrise for doing the research.

Can you not ask you union rep to email it to you?


I'll just believe it doesn't exist

Celticfire

bjork wrote: »

So you want me to provide you with a definition of what "deserve" means. But you can't link the legislation you're ranting on about.


Smacks of public sector laziness,I suppose you'd want a payrise for doing the research.

Can you not ask you union rep to email it to you?


I'll just believe it doesn't exist

Typical Private Sector.... Want me to provide a service (link to legislation) but don't actually want to pay the cost ( answer a simple question) first .

suicide_circus

suicide_circus wrote: »

It really is irrelevant who deserves it. We cant afford it.

Of course we can. Money is dirt cheap for governments now and on top of that the economy is improving fast.

Its grossly unfair for public servants not to start having their pay restored back in the direction of where it should be, that should include pay increases past where it was before the cuts as public servants have been treated terribly over the last few years having their salaries slashed for no reason (remember it wasnt the fault of public servants that there was a recession) and having crazy additional taxes like the pension levy added to the deductions from their salary.

omega man

Yara Old Backyard wrote: »

Of course we can. Money is dirt cheap for governments now and on top of that the economy is improving fast.

Its grossly unfair for public servants not to start having their pay restored back in the direction of where it should be, that should include pay increases past where it was before the cuts as public servants have been treated terribly over the last few years having their salaries slashed for no reason (remember it wasnt the fault of public servants that there was a recession) and having crazy additional taxes like the pension levy added to the deductions from their salary.

Surely the economic upturn is being driven by the private sector? Profitable companies in that sector can afford to start considering restoration of pay or pay increases. The rest, including the public sector, will need to sit it out for the time being.

To Elland Back

Sense of entitlement here is disgusting. Why do public servants (or anybody) feel that they have the right to enjoy a standing of living of their own choosing. A function has a defined rate of pay and it is not society's problem if the incumbent cannot afford the things they want for the money they get. Public Servants are employed by the Government, the Government has no money and if it had, what gives them first dibs on it???

Reduce the USC, that gives a boost to every worker who suffered in the recession and who continue to suffer today

omega man

omega man wrote: »

Surely the economic upturn is being driven by the private sector? Profitable companies in that sector can afford to start considering restoration of pay or pay increases. The rest, including the public sector, will need to sit it out for the time being.

The public sector should never have had their salaries cut in the first place so no way should they be waiting for anything now.

bjork

Celticfire wrote: »

Typical Private Sector.... Want me to provide a service (link to legislation) but don't actually want to pay the cost ( answer a simple question) first .

answer a simple question Like what is the definition of "deserve it" as if we're in high infants :rolleyes:

Which you were answered but you don't even believe enough in your own stance to be able to present it


I agree with you. There is no argument to increase pay across the board.

Celticfire

bjork wrote: »

They could also take this opportunity to just give it to those that deserve it. It was cut for a reason.

bjork wrote: »

answer a simple question Like what is the definition of "deserve it" as if we're in high infants :rolleyes:

Which you were answered but you don't even believe enough in your own stance to be able to present it

The childish answer?




You know full well in what context you were asked to define "deserve it". Which you haven't done . I still haven't seen your all encompassing definition of how someone is going to deserve their pay restored. If anyone is playing like they are in high infants its you.

bjork

Celticfire wrote: »

The childish answer?




You know full well in what context you were asked to define "deserve it". Which you haven't done . I still haven't see your all encompassin definition of how someone is going to deserve their pay restored. If anyone is playing like they are in high infants its you.

Don't worry if you can't defend the payrise, lucky you have unions to do that, because your right, most public sector workers wouldn't would be able to defend the payrise for the work they do.


Some would, but they have to carry the useless ones aswell, unfortunately

Sleepy

Yara Old Backyard wrote: »

The public sector should never have had their salaries cut in the first place so no way should they be waiting for anything now.

But they weren't cut. They were restored to pre-bench-marking levels!

bjork

bjork wrote: »

Don't worry if you can't defend the payrise,

Nobody is getting a pay rise and every public sector worker deserves to have their pay restored without question.

Scrapping the pension levy would be first on my list of ways to increase take home pay as its an abomination.

evolving_doors

bjork wrote: »

Don't worry if you can't defend the payrise, lucky you have unions to do that, because your right, most public sector workers wouldn't would be able to defend the payrise for the work they do.


Some would, but they have to carry the useless ones aswell, unfortunately

I thought this was about pay restoration after cutbacks!! Not a pay rise.

In any event, why should public sector have to justify everything single thing they do? Is it in order to justify a pay rise.

As i said earlier, this pay related performance system was introduced into Irish Water employees contracts (their 'pay rise' had to be justified).

So.... look what happened next

Controversial-irish-water-bonus-scheme-to-be-scrapped

Suddenly 'Pay related Performance' got replaced with the word 'Bonuses'...

Does that sit well with private sector folk on here.. to be paying people in the public sector bonuses?

Jawgap

Gebgbegb wrote: »

I thought this was about pay restoration after cutbacks!! Not a pay rise.

In any event, why should public sector have to justify everything single thing they do? Is it in order to justify a pay rise.

......

I would support pay restoration but I also think the PS must justify it's actions because it's the public's money. Also the fact it's the public's money means that public servants will only ever qualify for salaries as part of their reward and remuneration packages, because the PS will never be able to offer benefits comparable to the private sector (nor should they) - people often forget that unlike the private sector the 'perquisites' in the public sector are quite limited.

Sleepy

Yara Old Backyard wrote: »

Nobody is getting a pay rise and every public sector worker deserves to have their pay restored without question.

That type of rhetoric doesn't help. I'm sure you can think of PS workers you know who don't deserve half their current salary, never mind more than that.

I know people worth twice what they're being paid in the PS but the reality is, they'll never be able to paid that level while enjoying the job security and lack of accountability that the PS unions insist "every public sector worker deserves" regardless of work ethic, performance or other behaviour.

Tiger Mcilroy

Sleepy wrote: »

That type of rhetoric doesn't help. I'm sure you can think of PS workers you know who don't deserve half their current salary, never mind more than that.

I know people worth twice what they're being paid in the PS but the reality is, they'll never be able to paid that level while enjoying the job security and lack of accountability that the PS unions insist "every public sector worker deserves" regardless of work ethic, performance or other behaviour.

Nail on the head.

To Elland Back

Yara Old Backyard wrote: »

The public sector should never have had their salaries cut in the first place so no way should they be waiting for anything now.

Why not? There is no money to pay the current wage bill, let alone the previous one and nobody could be let go? Do you think it would be fair to keep public servants in their ivory tower and have the private sector taxed even further to pay for it

I blame Brendan Howlin for all of this. As Minister for Public Service Reform he should have given the journeymen wasters in the PS a swift kick up the hole and shown them the door. Then, I might have been agreeable to the remaining hard workers being given a break

blackcard

Gebgbegb wrote: »

I thought this was about pay restoration after cutbacks!! Not a pay rise.

In any event, why should public sector have to justify everything single thing they do? Is it in order to justify a pay rise.

As i said earlier, this pay related performance system was introduced into Irish Water employees contracts (their 'pay rise' had to be justified).

So.... look what happened next

Controversial-irish-water-bonus-scheme-to-be-scrapped

Suddenly 'Pay related Performance' got replaced with the word 'Bonuses'...

Does that sit well with private sector folk on here.. to be paying people in the public sector bonuses?

I got paid a bonus every year I worked in the Private Sector but have never been eligible for one in the Public Sector. There are useless employees in both sectors

luckyboy

The FE in FEMPI stands for "Financial Emergency". The pay cuts imposed on the PS were the MPI ("measures imposed in the public interest"). The legislation basically justified the cuts as being emergency measures, not permanent measures.

If I recall correctly, the Minister must certify every June 30th that there is a continuing financial emergency. If he can, the reduced pay scales for PS remain in force and lawful. This coming June 30th, he won't be able to do that (in my opinion) and hence needs to start discussions on an orderly unwinding of the FEMPI cuts.

If people feel the cuts should not be restored, blame the legislators who framed the cuts as emergency measures in the first place for an easier life. Industrial unrest would have been far greater in 08/09 if the cuts had been portrayed as permanent. You reap what you sow and the PS is entitled to look for restoration when the emergency - as defined - is over.

Just my two cents ...

evolving_doors

To Elland Back wrote: »

Why not? There is no money to pay the current wage bill, let alone the previous one and nobody could be let go? Do you think it would be fair to keep public servants in their ivory tower and have the private sector taxed even further to pay for it

If the Private sector are so concerned about the state of the finances and there being 'no money there' maybe those working in the Private SEctor should pony up a bit more! All I'm hearing is that the public sector need to give more when in fact they've taken a cut and agreed to increased 'productivity' but still it doesn't satiate the appetite.

To Elland Back wrote: »

I blame Brendan Howlin for all of this. As Minister for Public Service Reform he should have given the journeymen wasters in the PS a swift kick up the hole and shown them the door. Then, I might have been agreeable to the remaining hard workers being given a break

What about the Private Sector wasters who caused all this then!!!!

There's a bit of history re-writing going on here... a few days ago I heard Lucinda Creighton espousing the fact that the reason we're in this mess is because of public sector mismanagement!!! Ah hello ... bank debt!! Proberty bubble...

As far as I'm concerned it was paddy the plasterer who couldn't budget for the tough times and took out massive mortgages. If anything most public sector workers I know were prudent enough with their spending whereas my friends in the private sector wanted to go large.

We're privatising the profit making arm of the public sector (why the rush to privatise dublin bus... because it's making money!!! WTF!!)

And we've nationalised private sector debt...

Ya thanks a bunch free market economics.

jank

Why not take Public Sector pay rates out of the hands of the politicians and give it over to an independant body that will look at pay rates across the OECD and offer pay comparable to other countries. Pay rises should be index linked to inflation, like its done here in Australia. The again, here they can actually fire permanent PS here as well so we have a way to go on this.

SHOVELLER

I would wholeheartedly agree with this wage increase/restoration on the strict proviso that the whole "job for life contract" be scrapped.

Dont know about anyone else in the service but I am sick to **** of working with and for absolute wasters, the mentally ill, the stupidest humans ever and the plain incompetent.

Year after year, decade after decade this is tolerated by the cowards running departments: Human Remains.

Jawgap

jank wrote: »

Why not take Public Sector pay rates out of the hands of the politicians and give it over to an independant body that will look at pay rates across the OECD and offer pay comparable to other countries. Pay rises should be index linked to inflation, like its done here in Australia. The again, here they can actually fire permanent PS here as well so we have a way to go on this.

Excellent, as long as other OECD indices are also taken into account. Maybe public servants should be paid a wage that gives them a household disposable income at the OECD median?

Grayson

Gebgbegb wrote: »

In any event, why should public sector have to justify everything single thing they do? Is it in order to justify a pay rise.

Because we're paying for it?

I have no problem with public sector bonuses. Bring in a project under time and under cost? Sure, give that man a bonus.


I think a big problem with civil servants is that we have no idea what they do. Besides doctors, teachers etc... of course.

But your average civil servant on Grade Y, earning XX,000 per year, we really have no idea about. There's huge parts of departments that we don't even know exist.They might be doing vital work but we don't know that. All we know is that there are people in jobs for life who are on great money and that's pretty hard to accept by itself.

I'm a private sector employee and I've been made redundant three times (nearly 4 times if you include the time my contract wasn't made permanent and the company went belly up 4 months later). I've had loads of jobs.

So yeah, when I see someone with job security like a civil servant an I hear them bitching I do think it's a bit much. However if I knew what it was and why it was worth that much I might change my mind.

jank

Jawgap wrote: »

Excellent, as long as other OECD indices are also taken into account. Maybe public servants should be paid a wage that gives them a household disposable income at the OECD median?

Other OECD countries does not calcuate it thus. so sorry to burst your bubble. It is well known that Irish PS workers are some of the highest in the world. If anything doing it this way will mean a downward trend, or at least stagnation for some years until pay realigns.

Although, when reading this your point it moot, as Ireland ranks 18th out of 36, smack bang in the middle of disposable income.
http://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org/topics/income/
So given your terms, we should not increase PS wages, at least not yet.

Roger Hassenforder

Jawgap wrote: »

Excellent, as long as other OECD indices are also taken into account. Maybe public servants should be paid a wage that gives them a household disposable income at the OECD median?

they are.

http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/truth-about-public-sector-pay-fails-to-stack-up-1.615081

http://www.impact.ie/irish-public-service-pay-is-in-line-with-similar-eu-countries-says-impact/