Public service pay cut?

Geuze

addaword wrote: »

No: the link clearly says "Public Sector Average Weekly Earnings"

I do not fully trust a 13 year old webpage.

I am somewhat familiar with that website, and feel it is not impartial.

Instead I go to the raw data.



Clearly, there was a PS pay premium, yes.

After the two pay cuts, and since 2008, the PS pay premium has been eroded.

https://www.cso.ie/en/statistics/earnings/publicprivatesectorpaydifferential/


For example, see Table 5 here, and look at the change in average earnings over 2013-2018:
https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/er/elca/earningsandlabourcostsannualdata2018/


Note that the PS pay increases have been low:

O = 3.0%
P = 3.6%
Q = 4.2%


Seven sectors have seen 10%+ increases over the same period.

Dr. Bre

You can’t clap the front line workers then say your taking a pay cut

enricoh

enricoh wrote: »

Is that the best you can come up with?!
Okey dokey as bill would say!

Well I'm still trying to fathom what your point was.

People trained in one area wouldn't generally do well in another. Is that it?

Mind......blown

SouthWesterly

addaword wrote: »

Wrong. The Public service includes the civil service. Some people in the CS are on more than the public sector average of close to €50,000. I do not want to cut anybodies pay, but think it is inevitable and will be the right thing for the government given the position the country will find itself in by the time of the next budget.

So now civil servants are public servants. You said they weren't earlier.

So how about most is these being clerical officers on 24-39k after 16 years. Which of them is on 50k?

DM1983

Pensions are the elephant in the room. Don't cut PS salaries. Cut pensions. They are completely out of touch with reality. Someone finishing their career on a modest enough €70k requires a pension pot that would cost >€1m in the private sector. Garda earn it after only 30 years service. Even with all levy's, the contribution a PS employee makes towards that is pathetic. It's genuinely frightening. Massive reform needed.

Geuze

The post 2013 PS Single Pension Scheme is already less generous then the previous schemes.

EE contributions to the older schemes are at 6.5% + 10% of wages over 32k.

Geuze

The post 2013 PS Single Pension Scheme is already less generous then the previous schemes.

EE contributions to the older schemes are at 6.5% + 10% of wages over 32k.

DM1983

Geuze wrote: »

The post 2013 PS Single Pension Scheme is already less generous then the previous schemes.

EE contributions to the older schemes are at 6.5% + 10% of wages over 32k.

Like I said, a pathetic contribution. There are plenty of pension calculators available online. Put in those EE contributions and see what predicted pension payment results. I actually think that many PS workers don't appreciate the value of this benefit so it would be much easier for government to go after this rather than hit salaries.

smelly sock

DM1983 wrote: »

Pensions are the elephant in the room. Don't cut PS salaries. Cut pensions. They are completely out of touch with reality. Someone finishing their career on a modest enough €70k requires a pension pot that would cost >€1m in the private sector. Garda earn it after only 30 years service. Even with all levy's, the contribution a PS employee makes towards that is pathetic. It's genuinely frightening. Massive reform needed.

Private sector worker I take it? If the pension is that good sign up mate. You'll soon see different.

cal naughton

smelly sock wrote: »

Private sector worker I take it? If the pension is that good sign up mate. You'll soon see different.

Surprised you didn't provide a link to public jobs.ie which is usually par for the course.

It's not fair and equitable that a retired teacher gets more in a pension per fortnight than a newly qualified teacher.

Source. Mother and sister both teachers.

addaword

SouthWesterly wrote: »

So now civil servants are public servants. You said they weren't earlier.

I never said they were not. I explained that civil servants were and are part of the public sector, whose average salary is just under 50k according to the CSO.

Geuze

DM1983 wrote: »

Like I said, a pathetic contribution. There are plenty of pension calculators available online. Put in those EE contributions and see what predicted pension payment results. I actually think that many PS workers don't appreciate the value of this benefit so it would be much easier for government to go after this rather than hit salaries.

Note that both the EE and the ER are expected to contribute to any pension.

The PS pension is unfunded, so the ER contribution is notional.

So the 6.5% plus 10% over 32k can't be compared to the total contribution to a private-sector occupational pension.


I would agree with the unfunded PS pension being switched to a funded pension, with contributions from both ER and EE.

I suspect it would require ER cont = 15%.

smelly sock

addaword wrote: »

I never said they were not. I explained that civil servants were and are part of the public sector, whose average salary is just under 50k according to the CSO.

Which is huvely inflated by lumping sec gens etc in with Clerical staff.

DM1983

smelly sock wrote: »

Private sector worker I take it? If the pension is that good sign up mate. You'll soon see different.

If I had my time over again, I would strongly consider it. Unfortunately, people just don't think of pensions first job straight out of college. I'm 36 now and wouldn't rack up the service years required before retirement to make it worthwhile. I would recommend it to anyone just starting out in their careers though! Gravy train.

smelly sock

DM1983 wrote: »

If I had my time over again, I would strongly consider it. Unfortunately, people just don't think of pensions first job straight out of college. I'm 36 now and wouldn't rack up the service years required before retirement to make it worthwhile. I would recommend it to anyone just starting out in their careers though! Gravy train.

I'm 36 and have 16 years done in the Civil Service. Currently earning 52k per annum. My pension isn't by any means massive. It's a little more than the OAP. By the time I am 65 I will have nearly 46 years service. I will have contributed to that pension massively also. That's not where the issues lie.

HartsHat

smelly sock wrote: »

Which is huvely inflated by lumping sec gens etc in with Clerical staff.

There's only 15 SGs and tens of thousands of clerical officers. Why are you focusing on the SGs?

HartsHat

DM1983 wrote: »

If I had my time over again, I would strongly consider it. Unfortunately, people just don't think of pensions first job straight out of college. I'm 36 now and wouldn't rack up the service years required before retirement to make it worthwhile. I would recommend it to anyone just starting out in their careers though! Gravy train.

You made bad choices. Live with it.

Also, at 36, you could easily do 34 years of service.

blanch152

DM1983 wrote: »

Pensions are the elephant in the room. Don't cut PS salaries. Cut pensions. They are completely out of touch with reality. Someone finishing their career on a modest enough €70k requires a pension pot that would cost >€1m in the private sector. Garda earn it after only 30 years service. Even with all levy's, the contribution a PS employee makes towards that is pathetic. It's genuinely frightening. Massive reform needed.

DM1983 wrote: »

Like I said, a pathetic contribution. There are plenty of pension calculators available online. Put in those EE contributions and see what predicted pension payment results. I actually think that many PS workers don't appreciate the value of this benefit so it would be much easier for government to go after this rather than hit salaries.

This has been answered and addressed many times, not just in this thread.

Apples and oranges.

In decent private sector companies, the level of employer contribution to pensions is two to three times the employee contribution. For your example, you assume a level of employer contribution of zero. It makes your comparison disingenuous at best.

The problem isn't the public service pension, it is the failure of many private sector employers to continue to provide decent pensions to their employees.

blanch152

HartsHat wrote: »

You made bad choices. Live with it.

Also, at 36, you could easily do 34 years of service.

Not only did he make bad choices, but he wants to penalise those who made better choices.

HartsHat

blanch152 wrote: »

Not only did he make bad choices, but he wants to penalise those who made better choices.

It's also the cowardice to make big life changes. I had a (very well paid) career in the private sector before moving to the public sector.

All the same people who (literally) gasped at the size of the paycut I was taking now all have (very suddenly) strarted banging on about my pension (which is no better than my private sector pension as my salary allowed me to make large tax efficent contributions).

There's a certain class of person when times are good that sneers at people in the public sector and their low salaries but as soon as a crash comes start squealing about "cushy" numbers.

All competitions are now open. If it's so good, you know what to do (if you can get in, of course).

AndrewJRenko

enricoh wrote: »

My missus manages a team of Frontline workers. The usual suspects went out sick and left the decent ones snowed under.
!

Sounds like she's a very poor line manager - has she not been managing the 'usual suspects' through the clearly defined processes for under performance?

DM1983

blanch152 wrote: »

Not only did he make bad choices, but he wants to penalise those who made better choices.

My choices worked out fine thanks but I've been very lucky. It doesn't mean that the system isn't completely broken.

And private sector ER pension contributions are typically matched up to 5%. There are better schemes out there and there are worse schemes obviously. 10k pension contribution per year (assume 100k salary) won't get you anywhere near the average PS pension.

PS salaries are ok, if anything they are too low at the junior end, but PS pensions are just ridiculous.

AndrewJRenko

noodler wrote: »

The public service is just that good, eh?

You've jumped the shark a bit theremin fairness. I've never heard anybody try and defend the near 100% acceptability ratings in the PMDS by claiming the public sector is simply better than the private.





Funny definition.

So we get our employment protected despite the fact huge swaths of the service are being underutilized, and the private sector, which we depend on for tax revenue, on gets its heart ripped out.

No, solidarity, if the will or capacity to borrow our way out of this isn't there, means adjustments need to be made across the board. In such a scenario, a €20bn paybill would be difficult to protect.

What's a typical percentage in the private sector for the number of employees that you screwed up so badly on recruitment and performance management that they needed firing?

And where specifically are these huge swathes of underutilised resources please?

blanch152

DM1983 wrote: »

My choices worked out fine thanks but I've been very lucky. It doesn't mean that the system isn't completely broken.

And private sector ER pension contributions are typically matched up to 5%. There are better schemes out there and there are worse schemes obviously. 10k pension contribution per year (assume 100k salary) won't get you anywhere near the average PS pension.

PS salaries are ok, if anything they are too low at the junior end, but PS pensions are just ridiculous.

Shows how little you know about public sector comparisons. All of the research, without exception shows that public sector salaries are the junior end are comparable to the private sector, but that senior public sector salaries are way behind the private sector.

AndrewJRenko

addaword wrote: »

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?

You can assume whatever you like. Your assumptions are your problem, not mine.

If you're going to quote specific numbers, it is not unreasonable in any mature discussion to ask you to quote your sources. Your refusal to do so speaks volumes.

fly_agaric

DM1983 wrote: »

Gravy train.

It's not really. Unless you are very lucky you can't advance as far or as fast as in the private sector. If you have some very marketable skills that private sector want, you will be paid less, sometimes much less for taking up a job using them in the public sector.

In exchange you get that job security, more flexibility if you have family, pension (although I have my doubts state will honour its committments here in future + money people are paying in now may just go poof when exegencies of the national budget require it!).

You also have the feeling (not always but sometimes!) you are doing something useful in your job + not just working like a slave to earn either yourself or more usually your bosses a big pot of money.

It's different. It has to be but alot of people who work in private sector & make angry posts on threads like this see all the differences as flaws or else ways the public sector + unions have cooked up to retain a "cushy number", are ripping them off etc.

Inconspicuous

cal naughton wrote: »

Surprised you didn't provide a link to public jobs.ie which is usually par for the course.

It's not fair and equitable that a retired teacher gets more in a pension per fortnight than a newly qualified teacher.

Source. Mother and sister both teachers.

Official Dept. Education Circular would suggest otherwise:


https://www.education.ie/en/Circulars-and-Forms/Active-Circulars/cl0041_2019.pdf


Starting point for new teacher entering service after 1 Jan. 2011: €36,953


End point for teachers entering service before 1 Jan 2011: €64,302


Using the department's pension modeller with a DOB of may 1955, and 40 years service retiring last week; a teacher on the endpoint of the scale would have a gross annual pension of €32,142.88


https://penmod.education.ie/index

DM1983

DM1983 wrote: »

If I had my time over again, I would strongly consider it. Unfortunately, people just don't think of pensions first job straight out of college. I'm 36 now and wouldn't rack up the service years required before retirement to make it worthwhile. I would recommend it to anyone just starting out in their careers though! Gravy train.

You can buy service for starters out just accept a smaller pension so your argument is flawed.

If you applied now for an Garda siochana you could realistically be working by 40. You would need to buy 10 years service or you could accept a lower pension after 20 years service.

However that would be topped up by your private pension which you have presumable being paying into for a few years now anyway.

Or you can continue your private pension and at 68 get your private pension and the state pension which adds 10k to your pension pot per year.

So you have options at 36 still. I was just under 30 joining so will just manage to get in the full 30 but there's plenty joining now that need to buy service. It's manageable if you tackle it at the start.

Other than that, you have to acknowledge that your lack of foresight and long term planning is not the problem of those that did. You chose the higher salary in the pocket now and failed to consider the value of the pension at the end.

That decision is 100% on you. No one else. So please explain, why is it you seem to erode my pension but I bet wouldn't be happy to see your public sector colleague get a raise to match your income?

HartsHat

HartsHat wrote: »

It's also the cowardice to make big life changes. I had a (very well paid) career in the private sector before moving to the public sector.

All the same people who (literally) gasped at the size of the paycut I was taking now all have (very suddenly) strarted banging on about my pension (which is no better than my private sector pension as my salary allowed me to make large tax efficent contributions).

There's a certain class of person when times are good that sneers at people in the public sector and their low salaries but as soon as a crash comes start squealing about "cushy" numbers.

All competitions are now open. If it's so good, you know what to do (if you can get in, of course).

Nail on the head

smelly sock

Not applicable to everyone or reflective of society either but it did happen.

When I was a Clerical Officer earning 350 per week a few of my builders mates told me they wouldn't get out of bed for less then 300 a day. They were the first ones to emigrate to OZ when the sh*t hit the fan. I had little sympathy. They were the first one to whinge about my job security also and pension etc. From this thread we can see that the attitude is still in existence.

Why lads went back to construction in their droves after the crash is beyond me. Some people never learn I suppose and want other like low paid PS workers to bail them out when things get tough.