Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Public sector pay increase

Options
12467…57

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    Halloween Jack wrote: »
    Those senior teachers were junior teachers too at one stage. I would have thought salary scales were pretty common across all manner of employment types. I certainly know many, many people in the private sector who get incremental salary increases based on length of service and performance reviews.

    What exactly are you suggesting, that all teachers be paid an identical wage, ie their starting wage and never receive an increase?
    No. I'm suggesting we cap teacher's wages at a sensible level. 45-50k base seems fair to me with 30k starting salary.

    Of course the Unions would threaten havoc but I would be in favor of de-unionising the sector.


  • Options
    #93
    Letree
    Registered Users Posts: 1,005 ✭✭✭Letree


    Public sector unions should get to work now, looking for a reduction of the pension levy, a reduction of the USC, a return of the extra hours worked and a return of the annual reductions brought in through FEMPI. Public servants weren't found wanting during the recession. Now they are owed something back.


  • Options
    #94
    as_mo_bhosca
    Registered Users Posts: 217 ✭✭as_mo_bhosca


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    No. I'm suggesting we cap teacher's wages at a sensible level. 45-50k base seems fair to me with 30k starting salary.

    Of course the Unions would threaten havoc but I would be in favor of de-unionising the sector.

    Yeah, 'cause that's a way to attract people to the profession!


  • Options
    #95
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    as_mo_bhosca wrote: »
    Yeah, 'cause that's a way to attract people to the profession!
    There is an over supply of teachers atm. We don't need to attract more people to that sector.
    Letree wrote: »
    Public sector unions should get to work now, looking for a reduction of the pension levy, a reduction of the USC, a return of the extra hours worked and a return of the annual reductions brought in through FEMPI. Public servants weren't found wanting during the recession. Now they are owed something back.
    lol, I admire your honesty. Most public sector employees try to hide their greed.


  • Options
    #96
    smurgen
    Registered Users Posts: 6,933 ✭✭✭smurgen


    Cee-Jay-Cee wrote: »
    What utter horse sh*t! Can you name the private sector counterpart for the following jobs:

    Nurses
    Gardai
    Teachers
    Army
    Fire service
    Prison officers

    There is no private sector counterpart for them and they make up a huge percentage of the public sector.

    What profession are you in and what are the wage differentials between yours and public service equivalent? Why didn't you join the public service if your own job is so poorly paid? Why did you chose that job? Were you not qualified enough to join the public service???

    There are plenty of ps teachers.also as regards job security. I live with a group of teachers.they have a teacher on their staff who has turned up to school drunk on numerous occasions.any time he has been pulled on it he plays the depression card.anytime there is a strike he's the first one two the picket like.it makes my blood boil.he also has left comments re drug use on his own Facebook profile.if he was a private sector worker he'd have been fired 10 times over.he doesn't look to be getting fired anytime soon I'm hearing the same stories about him the last 5 years or so.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    Larbre34
    Registered Users Posts: 23,843 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    No. I'm suggesting we cap teacher's wages at a sensible level. 45-50k base seems fair to me with 30k starting salary.

    Of course the Unions would threaten havoc but I would be in favor of de-unionising the sector.

    So would the current Minister for Education, ironically. However it wont happen. The unions are as much active on protecting standards from a race to the bottom as they are about pay.


  • Options
    #98
    mikemac1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,395 ✭✭✭✭mikemac1


    Public sector unions are pretty useless if they are bargaining for a 2% pay rise.

    Members have paid vastly more than that in subs in the past several years and for what?


  • Options
    #99
    Letree
    Registered Users Posts: 1,005 ✭✭✭Letree


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    lol, I admire your honesty. Most public sector employees try to hide their greed.

    Hardy greed when the end result would mean we would still be relatively worse off than we were in 2007. We are only looking to get back some of the things taken off us during the downturn. Circumstances are improving and look like continuing to improve so what is wrong with looking for ours terms and conditions to improve too.

    There are plenty of people out there like yourself who would be happy for the PS to remain on the same pay levels for another 20 years and would complain if we got 1% increase then.


  • Options
    #100
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    Larbre34 wrote: »
    So would the current Minister for Education, ironically. However it wont happen. The unions are as much active on protecting standards from a race to the bottom as they are about pay.
    Unfortunately not, the government will never stand up to the unions and people / services will suffer as a result.


  • Options
    #101
    Halloween Jack
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,658 ✭✭✭Halloween Jack


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    No. I'm suggesting we cap teacher's wages at a sensible level. 45-50k base seems fair to me with 30k starting salary.

    Of course the Unions would threaten havoc but I would be in favor of de-unionising the sector.

    So 45-50k is a sensible level on what grounds? Or did you pluck it out of thin air?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    Letree wrote: »
    Hardy greed when the end result would mean we would still be relatively worse off than we were in 2007. We are only looking to get back some of the things taken off us during the downturn. Circumstances are improving and look like continuing to improve so what is wrong with looking for ours terms and conditions to improve too.

    There are plenty of people out there like yourself who would be happy for the PS to remain on the same pay levels for another 20 years and would complain if we got 1% increase then.
    The perks taken off you during the boom were normalization, public sector workers should never have been paid so lavishly in the first place.

    Those who believe they can get better pay in the private sector are of course welcome to leave but few ever do.
    Halloween Jack wrote: »
    So 45-50k is a sensible level on what grounds? Or did you pluck it out of thin air?
    For the level of education the job requires, the hours put in, the stress of the job and the working conditions, 45k is being generous.


  • Options
    #103
    scary
    Registered Users Posts: 416 ✭✭scary


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    Public sector workers don't deserve a pay increase, yes their wages have been on a freeze since 2007 for very good reasons but public sector wages are still higher than their private sector counterparts.
    tell that to the nurse who might not have the time straight away to get to clean the sh@t off one of your sick parents because of all the cut backs.


  • Options
    #104
    twinytwo
    Registered Users Posts: 5,166 ✭✭✭twinytwo


    Jawgap wrote: »
    Why not?

    Their pay was unilaterally cut - the justification for the cut was the financial emergency - the financial emergency is winding down.


    Not really, the only difference between then and now is that we couldnt borrow money because no one would give it to us.

    We are still borrowing huge amounts of money just to run the country.


  • Options
    #105
    Letree
    Registered Users Posts: 1,005 ✭✭✭Letree


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    The perks taken off you during the boom were normalization, public sector workers should never have been paid so lavishly in the first place.
    .

    Race to the bottom you mean, unchecked the private sector leaders would have us with american style working conditions. 2 weeks holidays a year, ever longer working week and sackable at the drop of a hat. The public service doesn't need to follow suit.

    BTW i think the 2% payrise is fine, i'm not looking for any more than that as its not appropriate at the min. I'm more interested in getting our working day back to 9 to 5 and getting our annual leave reinstated. I see no reason for a working day to be longer than that.


  • Options
    #106
    garra
    Registered Users Posts: 2,949 ✭✭✭garra


    If that goes ahead I am not voting for Fine Gael again, end of story. Buying votes with my taxes leaves me no choice but to consider other options.


  • Options
    #107
    Halloween Jack
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,658 ✭✭✭Halloween Jack


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    The perks taken off you during the boom were normalization, public sector workers should never have been paid so lavishly in the first place.

    Those who believe they can get better pay in the private sector are of course welcome to leave but few ever do.


    For the level of education the job requires, the hours put in, the stress of the job and the working conditions, 45k is being generous.

    So you did pluck it out of thin air


  • Options
    #108
    barneystinson
    Registered Users Posts: 4,683 ✭✭✭barneystinson


    twinytwo wrote: »
    Not really, the only difference between then and now is that we couldnt borrow money because no one would give it to us.

    We are still borrowing huge amounts of money just to run the country.

    Doesn't make a whit of difference, the country has routinely run budget deficits, just like lots of other countries - that doesn't mean there's an emergency or half the developed would be in a constant emergency.

    The emergency is over, the only sensible thing to do now is negotiate what happens next.


  • Options
    #109
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    Letree wrote: »
    Race to the bottom you mean, unchecked the private sector leaders would have us with american style working conditions. 2 weeks holidays a year, ever longer working week and sackable at the drop of a hat. The public service doesn't need to follow suit.

    BTW i think the 2% payrise is fine, i'm not looking for any more than that as its not appropriate at the min. I'm more interested in getting our working day back to 9 to 5 and getting our annual leave reinstated. I see no reason for a working day to be longer than that.
    American conditions would be a big improvement from your suggestions.

    Private sector workers regularly work past 5, I see no reason why public sector workers shouldn't.
    Halloween Jack wrote: »
    So you did pluck it out of thin air
    No. For the level of education the job requires, the hours put in, the stress of the job and the working conditions, 45k is being generous.


  • Options
    #110
    RobertKK
    Registered Users Posts: 33,730 ✭✭✭✭RobertKK


    I think they should get pay increases, but we can't afford the pensions going into the future, so increase their take home pay but let them use their extra money for a private pension.

    It could start with the politicians...their contributions don't cover the cost of their pensions.


  • Options
    #111
    smurgen
    Registered Users Posts: 6,933 ✭✭✭smurgen


    Letree wrote: »
    Race to the bottom you mean, unchecked the private sector leaders would have us with american style working conditions. 2 weeks holidays a year, ever longer working week and sackable at the drop of a hat. The public service doesn't need to follow suit.

    BTW i think the 2% payrise is fine, i'm not looking for any more than that as its not appropriate at the min. I'm more interested in getting our working day back to 9 to 5 and getting our annual leave reinstated. I see no reason for a working day to be longer than that.


    What world are you living in?I'm working in the funds industry and we are working like that.i regularly work 60+ hour weeks in the hope of an end of year bonus.no overtime or time in lieu.just a base salary.last year it didn't happen because our company made a loss and I just had to suck it up.if I'm good enough I'll be promoted in my position next year.this will mean money responsibility and flexibility.most of the public sector workers I know would have thrown in the towel had they been in my shoes.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    smurgen wrote: »
    What world are you living in?I'm working in the funds industry and we are working like that.i regularly work 60+ hour weeks in the hope of an end of year bonus.no overtime or time in lieu.just a base salary.last year it didn't happen because our company made a loss and I just had to suck it up.if I'm good enough I'll be promoted in my position next year.this will mean money responsibility and flexibility.most of the public sector workers I know would have thrown in the towel had they been in my shoes.
    Public sector worker are protected at our expense by public sector unions. When a politician approaches me for my vote I'm going to enquire what his party is going to do to break union stranglehold over the government. If he/she doesn't give a satisfying answer he/she can forget about my vote.


  • Options
    #113
    Letree
    Registered Users Posts: 1,005 ✭✭✭Letree


    smurgen wrote: »
    What world are you living in?I'm working in the funds industry and we are working like that.i regularly work 60+ hour weeks in the hope of an end of year bonus.no overtime or time in lieu.just a base salary.last year it didn't happen because our company made a loss and I just had to suck it up.if I'm good enough I'll be promoted in my position next year.this will mean money responsibility and flexibility.most of the public sector workers I know would have thrown in the towel had they been in my shoes.

    You are absolutely right i would not work a 60 week for anyone. Certainly not for no pay and nothing more than a 'hope' of a promotion.


  • Options
    #114
    scary
    Registered Users Posts: 416 ✭✭scary


    Letree wrote: »
    You are absolutely right i would not work a 60 week for anyone. Certainly not for no pay and nothing more than a 'hope' of a promotion.

    This is why alot of them are angry at the PS, their private sector bosses are riding them over a barrel for a promise.


  • Options
    #115
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    Letree wrote: »
    You are absolutely right i would not work a 60 week for anyone. Certainly not for no pay and nothing more than a 'hope' of a promotion.
    You wouldn't have a choice.


  • Options
    #116
    scary
    Registered Users Posts: 416 ✭✭scary


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    You wouldn't have a choice.
    you always have a choice.


  • Options
    #117
    arybvtcw0eolkf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 24,878 ✭✭✭✭arybvtcw0eolkf


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    An overall fact doesn't have to be true in every case. I'm not saying every civil servant would earn less money in private sector but over all for the level of education, training and pressure required civil servants, despite the pay freeze, still get paid more than their private sector counter parts.

    Rubbish.

    My department is suffering from a 'brain drain' to the better paying private sector.

    I've worked two jobs to put my children through college, my son is now earning more than I am (he's in the private sector) and my daughter although still in college is working part time chef'ing, her hourly pay rate is equal to mine ~ as a trainee!.

    As for redundancies, well we haven't had any however since Christmas we've had eleven whose contracts weren't renewed, some were happy enough about it because they were qualified to go to better paying private sector jobs, some went onto the social.

    Personally I could leave and go to a better paying private sector job but I love my job, I rarely have a bad day here in 30 years.


  • Options
    #118
    evolving_doors
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,812 ✭✭✭✭evolving_doors


    stimpson wrote: »
    My pay was unilaterally cut by a lot more when I was made redundant. How many PS workers were made redundant?

    But thats the thing, I presume you were made redundant as the demand wasnt there. Its not as if the demand in hospitals or other public services has gone down during the recession. Would you be happier if some nurses lost their jobs.

    Im just using nurses as its a 'more visible public sector job. I think the assumption from a lot of those in the private sector is that the unseen 'back office' staff do sweet f.a., but are then outraged when paperwork from a govt. dept. goes missing or takes ages.


  • Options
    #119
    stefanovich
    Registered Users Posts: 5,490 ✭✭✭stefanovich


    Just a crazy thought... How about giving a pay rise based on performance rather than across the board. Might encourage some of them to pull the finger out. And in all fairness 2% is crap. Give 5/6 % to those few doing a good job.


  • Options
    #120
    SaveOurLyric
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,138 ✭✭✭SaveOurLyric


    I am all for pay restoration for the public sector - back to the level before benchmarking - the last time it was in the ballpark of being correct.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    yellow hen
    Registered Users Posts: 4,030 ✭✭✭yellow hen


    stefanovich wrote: »
    Just a crazy thought... How about giving a pay rise based on performance rather than across the board. Might encourage some of them to pull the finger out. And in all fairness 2% is crap. Give 5/6 % to those few doing a good job.

    I think it's that's the right approach but it requires a huge culture shift. In my sector, a lot of middle and senior managers are quite weak and I think could not objectively review performance.


Advertisement