Public Pay Talks - see mod warning post 4293

Unless they do something about the pay at CO level, the grade they'll end up having to get rid of is CO - as no one will want to enter on 25k and spend years getting to a living wage (or at least one that allows them to rent in Dublin).

There is no guarantee of promotion, and if the future follows the same pattern as the past, and we go into recession, pay freezes and embargos will follow, so people could see themselves stuck at those pay levels for years.

We've already had COs resign because they can't live on the money.

A scale that takes 20 years to get from 25k to 41K.

There are plenty of COs who are more useful than newbie HEOs / AOs who enter with nice shiny degrees but no civil service experience, whatsoever.

So yeah, maybe restructuring the grades is the way to go.

Actually, thats not what I'm getting from the last couple of posts.

What I'm getting from the last couple of posts, is a strong attitude that some civil servants think the work done by COs isn't worth paying more for.

None of that is what I said.

But as for this crap - "plenty of diligent, ambitious COs dont' stay at that grade for long" - plenty of diligent, ambitious COs got stuck at that grade for years during past embargos and promotion freezes. The departments they were assigned to were also another factor.

Plenty of COs have degrees too.

loueze you keep going back to points which dont really address the point made imo

CO and EO living in cavan are probably doing very well relative to HEOs in Dublin, for a start

you cant keep referencing the starting point on the scale and then claim that people are stuck there for years- Ive already pointed out these are long scales. that they take a long time to get to the top is a feature not a bug, theres a lot of increments- more than all the other grades.

If you want to talk about recruitment freezes then many HEOs and APs have worked through those as lower grades and should not be sold down the river to pay the government's bill now. thats the nature of a long career in the service.

in fact starting at lower terms and working your way up is the nature of most jobs everywhere.

all that is being argued is that there is no strong argument for going back AGAIN and making managerial grades take the hit for the necessary pay rises.

no case based on the responsibilities of the respective roles generally

no case based on market rates for the respective roles generally

no case based on being kept at pt 1 of the scale

no case based on a lack of progression, especially if that case is that they might live in a county with a much smaller cost of living.

the govt needs to address affordability as a govt, it doesnt need to put the burden on that on a particular set of grades as an employer and i dont think ive read anything in the thread to change my mind on that

id note again im not having a hack at CO or EO grades here and they need their pay rise and fingers crossed its a nice fat one. but an argument that is based on "a CO on point 1 should enjoy everything a HEO has" is a long long way from pay talks, its heading towards "everyone paid the same" which is a thread for another day imo

There are multiple entry levels now, right up to AP. Not always a good thing in my real life experience.

Half of the newbies coming in now as HEOs / AOs with their shiny new degrees need bucket loads of practical training usually delivered on the job by - you guessed it - the COs and EOs whose years of experience and knowledge of civil service policy and practice it will literally take years for these people to learn to the same level.

You know, those who apparently don't deserve an equal pay rise (in cash terms).

its impossible to argue against anecdotal stories like this which do seem more based on issues with progression/recruitment paths than anything else- again thats imo another thread.

the core duties of CO/EO vs AO/HEO and above should be treated within the range of expected norms and not edge cases that support any one side of an argument for a given purpose.

the entry level requirements and processes for grades are as the are and yes of course in any given instance people will be performing better or worse (I think its pretty telling you keep coming back to pick on inexperienced AOs who in my experience start underpaid relative to their qualifications and the recruitment process they go through and their responsibilities but then tend to rise quicker from a relatively low salary).

again you do seem to default to every grade should be paid the same and pick out a few mighty COs and a few useless AOs but you must know this isnt a strong argument.

nobody here is arguing for undervaluing COs - but you are at this stage arguing for undervaluing everyone else imo.