Public service pay cut?

AndrewJRenko

JJJackal wrote: »

This comment was referring to giving extra money to people rather than reductions.

I dont think pay rises for the whole public sector is the way to got this year

There is no plan for pay rises for the whole public sector.

The plan is for restoration of some of the previous public sector cuts for those grades who haven't been restored yet.

And it's worth noting that the significant across the board cut of the PRD is still in place, without any discussion of how/when it's going to be restored.

addaword

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

If you want to take a hit in solidarity, you adjust the tax rates. That's solidarity - applying to everyone according to their means.

Not when public sector pay went up 59% between 2001 and 2006, a period when average industrial earnings only went up 20%.

AndrewJRenko

addaword wrote: »

Not when public sector pay went up 59% between 2001 and 2006, a period when average industrial earnings only went up 20%.

Why would you compare public servants against average industrial earnings? Public servants aren't industrial - they are largely professional. How did average professional earnings work out over that period? And what happens when you take a ten year or twenty year view of earnings growth, to reflect the long stagnation before the benchmarking process kicked in?

addaword

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Why would you compare public servants against average industrial earnings? Public servants aren't industrial - they are largely professional. ?

You think Gardai, soldiers, firemen, hospital porters, secretaries etc are more professional than the average employee in the pharmaceutical industry for example? And they deserved a 59% increase, as well as golden pensions and job security, when everyone else just got a 20% increase?

Bobtheman

Wheety wrote: »

I think there will be reductions. Certainly, I imagine, the pay restoration due in October, will not go ahead.

It will baby. It will ! Try telling the nurses they ain't getting an increase. Anyway they ain't gonna listen to some annoymous posters on boards when they make up their minds that's for sure

tayto lover

Bobtheman wrote: »

It will baby. It will ! Try telling the nurses they ain't getting an increase. Anyway they ain't gonna listen to some annoymous posters on boards when they make up their minds that's for sure

And the public will be behind them too.

thomasdylan

Bobtheman wrote: »

It will baby. It will ! Try telling the nurses they ain't getting an increase. Anyway they ain't gonna listen to some annoymous posters on boards when they make up their minds that's for sure

Not all PS workers are nurses. It suits the non-frontliners to be lumped in with nurses even though the demands on them both are very different.

JJJackal

thomasdylan wrote: »

Not all PS workers are nurses. It suits the non-frontliners to be lumped in with nurses even though the demands on them both are very different.

I think only frontliners deserve October increase this year

Rodin

I wouldn't be increasing any wages this year beyond what's already been agreed.

I wouldn't be on for new increases in the next public pay agreement

addaword

addaword wrote: »

Rubbish. I know lots of public servants like lecturers in third level who privately admit they were way overpaid when the last downturn happened in 2007, having had pay increases of a whopping 59% between 2001 and 2006.

you sure know an awful lot of public servants who agree with you 100%

im not sure youve contributed a single relevant fact or contextually worthwhile point in this entire thread

salonfire

Bobtheman wrote: »

It will baby. It will ! Try telling the nurses they ain't getting an increase. Anyway they ain't gonna listen to some annoymous posters on boards when they make up their minds that's for sure

That's easy. If they don't like not getting an increase, tell them they can go work somewhere else.

Just like in 2008 when nurses pay was reduced, many of the nurses settled with families here stayed in their jobs.

JJJackal

JJJackal wrote: »

I think only frontliners deserve October increase this year

And how do you determine who exactly they are? Many admin staff working in hospitals hit hard with the virus and test centres are much more exposed than some nurses and other professionals who have not been on frontline roles recently.

seefin

seefin wrote: »

I really wish! Have big mortgage, my partner's business is gone belly up(as did I'm last recession) . I just know there's a massive recession coming and rather than see the government borrowing to pay us or cutting health services, I think it's only fair we take a hit in solidarity with rest of country. I'm principled, most people only think of themselves

as I recall, 1 in 3 public servants voted for the pay deal back in the day when it went to our union

and of the other 2/3, many were against it because it introduced a two-tier system grossly unjust to our new entrant colleagues.

fine to have that opinion but in my own opinion you might stop trashing every other public servant while congratulating yourself

smelly sock

JJJackal wrote: »

I think only frontliners deserve October increase this year

Plenty of nurses done ****all during this crisis too. This Florence Nightingale ****e is a joke. Sure some went above and beyond. Not all though.

addaword

addaword wrote: »

Not when public sector pay went up 59% between 2001 and 2006, a period when average industrial earnings only went up 20%.

youve been asked about ten times to compare relevant figures and still are unable to do so

Rodin

Rodin wrote: »

I wouldn't be increasing any wages this year beyond what's already been agreed.

I wouldn't be on for new increases in the next public pay agreement

id have no issue with this, as a civil servant. if the greater environment doesnt lend itself to pay rises in the predicted recession then so be it.

thomasdylan

smelly sock wrote: »

Plenty of nurses done ****all during this crisis too. This Florence Nightingale ****e is a joke. Sure some went above and beyond. Not all though.

This crisis is going to go on until next year anyway. There's a big difference between a nurse going into work and someone sitting on their arse working from home. Nurses have the highest rates of coronavirus infection in the country.

addaword

[Deleted User] wrote: »

youve been asked about ten times to compare relevant figures and still are unable to do so

I have given figures, which is more than you did. You probably even think the public sector deserved their 59% increase between 2001 and 2006, when others only got a 20% increase. No wonder public sector wages had to be cut a few years later.

If the government has a 30 billion euro deficit this year, cuts in public sector pay are inevitable again. If they want to leave and join the private sector, feel free to do so.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

id have no issue with this, as a civil servant. if the greater environment doesnt lend itself to pay rises in the predicted recession then so be it.

id be for this if it came to it or defer the agreement to next year...but im a clerical officer and only get 420 and change a week and cant really afford a cut, living at home paying rent saving for a mortgage...

addaword

Kyleigh Damp Schoolteacher wrote: »

id be for this if it came to it or defer the agreement to next year...but im a clerical officer and only get 420 and change a week and cant really afford a cut, living at home paying rent saving for a mortgage...

People on low incomes can be protected. Do not forget average public sector salary is close to 50k, according to the statistics. Google it.

mehico

addaword wrote: »

I have given figures, which is more than you did. You probably even think the public sector deserved their 59% increase between 2001 and 2006, when others only got a 20% increase. No wonder public sector wages had to be cut a few years laer.

I worked in a public sector role during this period and from memory the pay increase for the vast majority in the organisation at the time was approximately 4%.

addaword

addaword wrote: »

People on low incomes can be protected. Do not forget average public sector salary is close to 50k, according to the statistics. Google it.

hopefully, im just sick of the perception its a gravy train for all!

addaword

mehico wrote: »

I worked in a public sector role during this period and from memory the pay increase for the vast majority in the organisation at the time was approximately 4%.

It was 8% in 2005 alone. Between 2001 and 2006 it was 59%.
The education sector saw the biggest increase with pay costs rising by 65%. Health sector pay surged by 63% in the period, civil service salaries rose 48% and in the security sector they rose by 34.8%.

AndrewJRenko

salonfire wrote: »

That's easy. If they don't like not getting an increase, tell them they can go work somewhere else.

You might want to think about the impact of what happens when they do go work somewhere else. What happens to the running of hospitals, schools, police service and more when the best and brightest leave, and can't be replaced due to embargoes or unattractive rates.

addaword wrote: »

It was 8% in 2005 alone. Between 2001 and 2006 it was 59%.
The education sector saw the biggest increase with pay costs rising by 65%. Health sector pay surged by 63% in the period, civil service salaries rose 48% and in the security sector they rose by 34.8%.

For the umpteenth time, can you please quote your sources for this? And what happens when you take a broader view, looking at say a 20 year period rather than cherrypicking the one slot that suits you?

Have you something to hide by not showing your sources?

addaword wrote: »

You think Gardai, soldiers, firemen, hospital porters, secretaries etc are more professional than the average employee in the pharmaceutical industry for example? And they deserved a 59% increase, as well as golden pensions and job security, when everyone else just got a 20% increase?

Fireman, hospital porters and secretaries make up tiny numbers. Outside of the big cities, fireman is a part-time on-call job and paid accordingly. I haven't come across a secretary in about ten years - it's a bit of an anachronism really.

The majority of public sector staff are health staff, doctors, nurses, physios, OTs, radiographers and more. The majority of civil service are professional staff, experts in their own field, whether that be transport or health or economics.

So yeah, that is a bit of a different league to pharmaceutical plant.

salonfire

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

You might want to think about the impact of what happens when they do go work somewhere else. What happens to the running of hospitals, schools, police service and more when the best and brightest leave, and can't be replaced due to embargoes or unattractive rates.

That's my point. Guards, teachers nurses bluff and bluster but not many who have established roots and families actually have the balls to leave despite previous cuts.

They point to the nurses standing outside the Syndey Opera House, but they are all in their 20s and will eventually return. In fact many came scurrying home when they were realised travel was restricted.

addaword

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

For the umpteenth time, can you please quote your sources for this?

I assume you did not live through those times so do not remember.
However, if you want to find out "public sector salary increases 2001 to 2006" did you never think of googling it?

AndrewJRenko

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Why would you compare public servants against average industrial earnings? Public servants aren't industrial - they are largely professional. How did average professional earnings work out over that period? And what happens when you take a ten year or twenty year view of earnings growth, to reflect the long stagnation before the benchmarking process kicked in?

How many times had he been asked that and continues to refuse to answer?

addaword

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

So yeah, that is a bit of a different league to pharmaceutical plant.

You would be surprised. In some multinational pharmaceutical plants, the majority of employees are graduates. I suppose you will tell me most Gardai and soldiers are graduates now.

addaword

addaword wrote: »

I have given figures, which is more than you did. You probably even think the public sector deserved their 59% increase between 2001 and 2006, when others only got a 20% increase. No wonder public sector wages had to be cut a few years later.

If the government has a 30 billion euro deficit this year, cuts in public sector pay are inevitable again. If they want to leave and join the private sector, feel free to do so.

Wow! Wow wow wow wow wow.

The irony of that post. The complete double standard that this guy applies.

addaword

addaword wrote: »

You would be surprised. In some multinational pharmaceutical plants, the majority of employees are graduates. I suppose you will tell me most Gardai and soldiers are graduates now.

Yes