Public service pay cut?

august12

gmisk wrote: »

most people do not get a promotion? What are you basing that on? I would think a lot of people who knuckle down get promotions.
For context I started as a CO I am now an AP

It depends on whick part of Public Service one is in, Civil Service seems to have way more opportunities for promotion, I would agree with the other person's comment here, a lot of people do not get promoted and get a modest pension on retirement.
The civil service appears to have a very strong union representation, how it managed to promote a certain grade across the board is beyond me, went very much under the radar and was never extended to the wider public sector,

ParkRunner

addaword wrote: »

Enjoy your youth. You joined the wrong part of the public service, gardai get it after 30 years work.

Great piece in the Irish examiner yesterday, looking at the situation of 1.2 million people in the private sector who lost their jobs, had large pay reductions or are on some form of state support, versus the 330,000 people in the public sector, some of whom looking for pay increases.
And the new 30 billion hole in the state finances.
It calls for fairness.

In fairness, the economy is going to fluctuate quite a lot over the coming years and is after suffering a sudden unprecedented shock. We’re all hoping for a quick recovery and the best way to achieve that is to get the private sector back functioning and everyone back spending

FluffPiece

Sleety_Rain wrote: »

A 20% cut with immediate effect is needed and would be a great sacrifice for our nation

If our public servants think so greatly of our nation succeeding and getting through this crisis they will surely allow this

This, absolutely this. I can't find a valid argument against it. Feck it I'll take a 80% paycut to just help speed the recovery...

On second thoughts, I'll work for free and consider paying them to let me work there! Why haven't we thought of this idea before....

FluffPiece

FluffPiece wrote: »

This, absolutely this. I can't find a valid argument against it. Feck it I'll take a 80% paycut to just help speed the recovery...

Yeah right

addaword

If those at the top, say those on over 200,000 took a 20% cut it would be a nice gesture, as would those who have a public service pension in excess of 100,000. A 20% drop would not hurt those people.

ParkRunner

addaword wrote: »

If those at the top, say those on over 200,000 took a 20% cut it would be a nice gesture, as would those who have a public service pension in excess of 100,000. A 20% drop would not hurt those people.

Nice gesture but supported by no figures as to the impact..

addaword

ParkRunner wrote: »

In fairness, the economy is going to fluctuate quite a lot over the coming years

Fluctuate means rise and fall. It has fallen from pre-covit levels, and is forecast to remain fallen for years. There are 1.2 million out of work or on reduced pay or state support. The hospitality, tourism, restaurant, pub, aviation , retail etc sectors are not going to rise from pre-covit levels anytime soon. There is also the matter of government borrowing, tax increases etc. Its a recession if not a depression we are in for, not a fluctuation.

addaword

ParkRunner wrote: »

Nice gesture but supported by no figures as to the impact..

In yesterday's Irish Examiner the figure for just a 2 per cent (not 20%) rise or drop across the p.s. is € 264,000,000.

Sultan of Bling

addaword wrote:

Fluctuate means rise and fall. It has fallen from pre-covit levels, and is forecast to remain fallen for years. There are 1.2 million out of work or on reduced pay or state support. The hospitality, tourism, restaurant, pub, aviation , retail etc sectors are not going to rise from pre-covit levels anytime soon. There is also the matter of government borrowing, tax increases etc. Its a recession if not a depression we are in for, not a fluctuation.

I imagine cutting 330000 workers pay simultaneously would have an even more averse impact on these industries.

addaword

addaword wrote: »

In yesterday's Irish Examiner the figure for just a 2 per cent (not 20%) rise or drop across the p.s. is € 264,000,000.

What sacrifices are you going to make for the good of the country? Or is it just others, including your children who should carry the can.

addaword

Sultan of Bling wrote: »

I imagine cutting 330000 workers pay simultaneously would have an even more averse impact on these industries.

Would make no difference, they are spending it on amazon.co.uk and foreign websites now anyway, not in the local pub or hotel. The billions the country is borrowing all has to be repaired sometime. And wait until interest rates rise again, as they inevitably will.

Take someone like our President on over 250,000 per year, does he really need that, considering he has done so little this year ? And our ex-presidents on pensions of well over 100,000 each?

ParkRunner

addaword wrote: »

Would make no difference, they are spending it on amazon.co.uk and foreign websites now anyway, not in the local pub or hotel. The billions the country is borrowing all has to be repaired sometime. And wait until interest rates rise again, as they inevitably will.

In a few weeks time the majority of the private sector will be in a much better place than it currently is. Short term borrowing is the plan for now and let’s see where we are in October when the budget comes around. Confidence, positivity and stability is the way to go, not austerity

addaword

ParkRunner wrote: »

In a few weeks time the majority of the private sector will be in a much better place than it ...

There will still be over a million out of work or on reduced pay or state support.

addaword

ParkRunner wrote: »

Short term borrowing is the plan for now

Rubbish. The 30 billion the government is adding to the already very high national debt cannot and will not be paid back any time soon.

addaword

addaword wrote: »

The ECB commissioned a report titled “The Public Sector Pay Gap in a selection of EU countries”, dated Dec 2011, Working Paper Series 1406, by Giordano et al. They found that in PIIGS countries, where the Troika had been very busy, typically Public Sector employees enjoyed a pay premium of approx 30%, after adjustment for the agreed variables eg education, where in contrast in Germany and France, average Public Sector pay was actually less than average Private Sector pay!

This is why you didn't see it in France or Germany when you there, Dublinmeath!

The report was in Dec 2011. Do not forget the public sector pay increases scheduled under the terms of the National Wage Agreement, ‘Towards 2016’, due in 2009 were not paid. Furthermore, public sector pay was effectively cut in 2009 via the introduction of the public service pension levy, a pension-related deduction. There was a further formal cut in public sector pay on a tiered basis in 2010, as part of the 2010 Budget.

So public sector workers pay was cut, while some people like myself in the private sector continued to get pay increases and bonuses during the same period.

Knew that I made the right decision not to join the civil service.

addaword

DubInMeath wrote: »

So public sector workers pay was cut, while some people like myself in the private sector continued to get pay increases and bonuses during the same period.

.

In those years following the crash, not everyone in the private sector got pay increases - many more people lost their jobs, had pay cuts, went bankrupt, had to emigrate etc Very few people could continue to even pay in to a pension. A lot of businesses closed.

ParkRunner

addaword wrote: »

There will still be over a million out of work or on reduced pay or state support.

addaword wrote: »

Rubbish. The 30 billion the government is adding to the already very high national debt cannot and will not be paid back any time soon.

None of us know what’s ahead especially with a new government yet to be formed and uncertainty how Covid will evolve but we’re on the road to reopening so let’s pick it up again in a few months.

addaword

addaword wrote: »

In those years following the crash, not everyone in the private sector got pay increases - many more people lost their jobs, had pay cuts, went bankrupt, had to emigrate etc Very few people could continue to even pay in to a pension. A lot of businesses closed.

True but those like myself got pay rises and bonuses.
So people in the civil service lost money effectively taking a pay cut the same as people in the private sector.

Business closing are due to a number of factors, the majority in the last few years due actions from other private sector companies such as insurance.
What civil/public service departments do you want closed down?
Assume that it's not going to be the ones your kids work in, but if not why not surely they should take the pain for your ideals.

Blondini

addaword wrote: »

Well, the national papers reported last year that average public sector pay was 50, 320, and average private sector pay was 37,291. A 20% cut in p.s. pay would leave it at just over €40,000. Cleary a small premium is needed in the public sector. They deserve it, look how talented and hard working they are. If there was a 30% cut you may start to see people leave the public sector for the private sector. Doubtful, considering sick days, pension etc are greater in the public service, but you could start to see it happen. I did not advocate a 20% pay drop across the board, but listening to an economist on the radio recently I think that was the argument, given the country is borrowing so much now and we cannot afford high ps wages.

A 20% cut would still leave our president with over 200, 000 per year, plenty considering he has done so little all year.

Genuine question, why don't you enter the public service then. Sounds absolutely dreamy.

Publicjobs.ie

Really, what's stopping you? Please answer. Please.

onrail

Blondini wrote: »

Genuine question, why don't you enter the public service then. Sounds absolutely dreamy.

Publicjobs.ie

Really, what's stopping you? Please answer. Please.

Just to chime in, not everybody has the skillset or experience to be considered for the Public Service. Personally, I'd jump ship to the PS in a heartbeat if they'd have me.

addaword

DubInMeath wrote: »

What civil/public service departments do you want closed down?

None. Although there are probably some quangos that need looking at, in an effort to save the government from borrowing 30 billion to keep the lights on. In 2006, there were 832 quangos in Ireland - 482 at national and 350 at local level - with a total of 5,784 individual appointees and a combined annual budget of €13 billion. Fine Gael promised to eliminate 145 quangos should they be the governing party in the 2016 election, but very little was done when they got in to power.

Blondini wrote: »

Genuine question, why don't you enter the public service then..

I done the next best thing. I made sure my kids got jobs there. If they want to they can always leave and join the private sector, but the public sector has too many advantages for them to want to do that.

AndrewJRenko

addaword wrote: »

Enjoy your youth. You joined the wrong part of the public service, gardai get it after 30 years work.

Great piece in the Irish examiner yesterday, looking at the situation of 1.2 million people in the private sector who lost their jobs, had large pay reductions or are on some form of state support, versus the 330,000 people in the public sector, some of whom looking for pay increases.
And the new 30 billion hole in the state finances.
It calls for fairness.

Fairness? Great idea - tax is fair, it effects everyone equally, based on income. So you'd be favour of adjusting tax levels to meet the state needs, right?

august12 wrote: »

The civil service appears to have a very strong union representation, how it managed to promote a certain grade across the board is beyond me, went very much under the radar and was never extended to the wider public sector,

Would you care to expand on this?

addaword wrote: »

If those at the top, say those on over 200,000 took a 20% cut it would be a nice gesture, as would those who have a public service pension in excess of 100,000. A 20% drop would not hurt those people.

Why would you limit this gesture to public servants? Wouldn't an increased tax level on those with incomes over €200k or pensions over €100k be a great idea?

addaword wrote: »

Would make no difference, they are spending it on amazon.co.uk and foreign websites now anyway, not in the local pub or hotel. The billions the country is borrowing all has to be repaired sometime. And wait until interest rates rise again, as they inevitably will.

Speak for yourself. Most public servants are very conscious of the importance of spending locally and keeping money in Ireland. Don't judge others by your standard.

Or let me guess, in your weekly reports from your family of their salaries and work activities, they also report their spending habits to you too?

addaword wrote: »

Take someone like our President on over 250,000 per year, does he really need that, considering he has done so little this year ? And our ex-presidents on pensions of well over 100,000 each?

There's a little problem of constitutional property rights in going after people's pensions. Maybe you have some insight on how that could be done legally?

addaword wrote: »

In those years following the crash, not everyone in the private sector got pay increases - many more people lost their jobs, had pay cuts, went bankrupt, had to emigrate etc Very few people could continue to even pay in to a pension. A lot of businesses closed.

Just like the public sector then - huge cuts to staff on fixed term contracts, substantial pay cuts which have still not been restored, large numbers emigrating etc etc.

addaword wrote: »

None. Although there are probably some quangos that need looking at, in an effort to save the government from borrowing 30 billion to keep the lights on. In 2006, there were 832 quangos in Ireland - 482 at national and 350 at local level - with a total of 5,784 individual appointees and a combined annual budget of €13 billion. Fine Gael promised to eliminate 145 quangos should they be the governing party in the 2016 election, but very little was done when they got in to power.

Which quangoes? Please be specific about which ones should be cut?

The ones that enforce health and safety laws? Or the ones that provide health services? Or the ones that set the standards for nursing homes?

Tell us which ones you want to cut please.

addaword wrote: »

I done the next best thing. I made sure my kids got jobs there. If they want to they can always leave and join the private sector, but the public sector has too many advantages for them to want to do that.

And you will be telling them when they come round to the garden over the weekend that they're overpaid and their salaries and pensions should be cut, right? Because if you don't, you're just a bit of a keyboard warrior.

addaword wrote: »

There will still be over a million out of work or on reduced pay or state support.

There'll be a lot more than that out of work if you cut spending power for 330k staff.

addaword wrote: »

Fluctuate means rise and fall. It has fallen from pre-covit levels, and is forecast to remain fallen for years. There are 1.2 million out of work or on reduced pay or state support. The hospitality, tourism, restaurant, pub, aviation , retail etc sectors are not going to rise from pre-covit levels anytime soon. There is also the matter of government borrowing, tax increases etc. Its a recession if not a depression we are in for, not a fluctuation.

They're not going to rise to pre-covit levels at all if you cut spending power for 330k staff.

addaword wrote: »

The report was in Dec 2011. Do not forget the public sector pay increases scheduled under the terms of the National Wage Agreement, ‘Towards 2016’, due in 2009 were not paid. Furthermore, public sector pay was effectively cut in 2009 via the introduction of the public service pension levy, a pension-related deduction. There was a further formal cut in public sector pay on a tiered basis in 2010, as part of the 2010 Budget.

It's good of you to point out the punitive hits to public sector staff from 2011, especially the ones that have still not been restored.

Geuze wrote: »

62% of PS have a degree, vs 39% of private sector
PS has way more workers in professional occupations
and so on.......

So the higher average earnings is explained.

It's more than just qualifications. None of these comparisons actually compare job functions - the kind of comparison that a Compensation and Benefits expert would do in the private sector when engaging staff.

They are simplistic comparisons based on job title, which don't reflect the very different structures of public and private sectors.

addaword wrote: »

Well, the national papers reported last year that average public sector pay was 50, 320, and average private sector pay was 37,291. A 20% cut in p.s. pay would leave it at just over €40,000. Cleary a small premium is needed in the public sector. They deserve it, look how talented and hard working they are. If there was a 30% cut you may start to see people leave the public sector for the private sector. Doubtful, considering sick days, pension etc are greater in the public service, but you could start to see it happen. I did not advocate a 20% pay drop across the board, but listening to an economist on the radio recently I think that was the argument, given the country is borrowing so much now and we cannot afford high ps wages.

I see you didn't do that reading up on averages, means and medians that I suggested. Pity that.

addaword wrote: »

A 20% cut would still leave our president with over 200, 000 per year, plenty considering he has done so little all year.

A 20% cut would leave anyone on over €200k with plenty, so presumably you'd be in favour of tax increases to implement this?

KaneToad

onrail wrote: »

Just to chime in, not everybody has the skillset or experience to be considered for the Public Service. Personally, I'd jump ship to the PS in a heartbeat if they'd have me.

There is a huge variation of jobs in the public service. There is definitely one suitable for you.

onrail

KaneToad wrote: »

There is a huge variation of jobs in the public service. There is definitely one suitable for you.

Sadly not. Firstly, I’m in an industry which the conditions in the public sector generally outweigh private sector - so competition for places is extremely high.

Secondly, I’m in a niche within the industry (maybe 50-70 in the country) in which it makes more sense to contract out my service rather than employ directly.

Plenty more like me in the country.

KaneToad

onrail wrote: »

Sadly not. Firstly, I’m in an industry which the conditions in the public sector generally outweigh private sector - so competition for places is extremely high.

Secondly, I’m in a niche within the industry (maybe 50-70 in the country) in which it makes more sense to contract out my service rather than employ directly.

Plenty more like me in the country.

Well if you're only willing to work within a specific niche/industry, you'll be limiting yourself no matter what sector you look at!

onrail

KaneToad wrote: »

Well if you're only willing to work within a specific niche/industry, you'll be limiting yourself no matter what sector you look at!

Yeah, but it’s all I have experience in, leaving me under qualified for any role that’s even vaguely related to my field.

Believe me, I’ve been looking.

Mad_maxx

while both public and private live in the same economy and thus compete for housing ,services etc , the reality is the main driver of public sector pay is union influence over politicians , if government decide to raise public sector wages , its largely because they view it as electorally profitable , preventing defection to the private sector is a very small consideration

addaword

addaword wrote: »

I done the next best thing. I made sure my kids got jobs there. If they want to they can always leave and join the private sector, but the public sector has too many advantages for them to want to do that.

You said this earlier, but you can still join if you want. Unlike the private sector the public sector don't discriminate on age and as a new entrant, you will have the option to work until your 70.

AndrewJRenko

onrail wrote: »

Sadly not. Firstly, I’m in an industry which the conditions in the public sector generally outweigh private sector - so competition for places is extremely high.

Secondly, I’m in a niche within the industry (maybe 50-70 in the country) in which it makes more sense to contract out my service rather than employ directly.

Plenty more like me in the country.

Competition for most roles above CO in the public service is extremely high, nothing unusual about that.

But if there are people in the public sector managing the contracting of your service, then there is are roles for you. Not everyone can make the grade of course.

Mad_maxx wrote: »

while both public and private live in the same economy and thus compete for housing ,services etc , the reality is the main driver of public sector pay is union influence over politicians , if government decide to raise public sector wages , its largely because they view it as electorally profitable , preventing defection to the private sector is a very small consideration

There is some truth in this in relation to electoral popularity, but any politician who's been round for a couple of recessions knows how hard it is to run a health service without consultants or senior nurses, and how hard it is to manage crime when your top Gardai keep leaving for security jobs with insurance companies, or how hard it is to keep tax revenues coming in when your best inspectors turn poacher and go working as tax consultants on double their salary.. Retention of qualified and experienced staff is a big issue in the public service, and most half-sensible politicians know this.

Dr. Kenneth Noisewater

I've been in the civil service for 13 years, had 3 promotions and took a career break to travel. I'm now in a financial admin job in New Zealand and I started on about €50 less than what my middle management job back home pays me. But yeah, we are paid mental money in the civil service.