Only 3,200 graduates apply for €30,000 state jobs

x43r0 · 21-02-2012 6:49pm

Skopzz wrote: »

EUR30,000 is a GREAT salary.

I'm applying for one of these jobs. Anyone who expects more than 30,000 EUR is living in a fantasy world.

Typical of Irish people: greedy and unrealistic.

What about those who aspire for more than that?

You're worth as much as someone will pay you

gerryo777 · 21-02-2012 6:51pm

JohnMearsheimer wrote: »

Ya I noticed...what does it have to do with my comment? All public sector jobs have to be advertised, many require you to sit competitive examinations, interviews etc. If I was a business owner in the private sector I could hire my son, daughter, wife, niece, nephew without a problem. I wouldn't have to advertise the jobs or hold interviews. I can think of at least 5 people I went to college with working in family businesses. You can't do that in the public sector.[/QU

And that's fair enough in the private sector, after all if they hire someone who can't do their job properly it's their own lookout and it'll cost them money. Their money.
In the public sector it's public money their using so nepotism should never be tolerated, but all you have to do is look at the ministers after the garda drivers were taken away from them, nearly all took on family members as their new drivers.
From the top down, public life in Ireland is corrupt.

gerryo777 · 21-02-2012 6:56pm

Skopzz wrote: »

EUR30,000 is a GREAT salary.

I'm applying for one of these jobs. Anyone who expects more than 30,000 EUR is living in a fantasy world.

Typical of Irish people: greedy and unrealistic.

Are you single and living at home with the parents?
If you had a mortgage, a wife and a couple of kids and maybe a car to run
€30,000, before tax wouldn't be much use to you. After tax it's around €500 a week.

JohnMearsheimer · 21-02-2012 7:20pm

x43r0 wrote: »

What about those who aspire for more than that?

You're worth as much as someone will pay you

I think €30,000 is fine for someone just starting out. If you aspire for more, look for a job that pays more.

gerryo777 wrote: »

And that's fair enough in the private sector, after all if they hire someone who can't do their job properly it's their own lookout and it'll cost them money. Their money.
In the public sector it's public money their using so nepotism should never be tolerated, but all you have to do is look at the ministers after the garda drivers were taken away from them, nearly all took on family members as their new drivers.
From the top down, public life in Ireland is corrupt.

I agree, if Ministers are doing this it should be stopped. I was talking about more traditional jobs in government departments and public sector organisations. I never once came across lobbying in the courts.

Farmer Pudsey · 21-02-2012 7:25pm

Skopzz wrote: »

EUR30,000 is a GREAT salary.

I'm applying for one of these jobs. Anyone who expects more than 30,000 EUR is living in a fantasy world.

Typical of Irish people: greedy and unrealistic.

Have you a honours degree in Law/ Economics or Accountancy

Godge · 21-02-2012 7:49pm

n97 mini wrote: »

For what reason(s) do you think they wouldn't last 2 days?.

I have worked in both the public sector and private sector. The bureaucracy involved in the civil service would be very difficult for most private sector workers to handle. But that bureaucracy is needed because rules have to be followed, records have to be kept accurately, decisions have to be referred upwards, procedures are there to ensure that all of the above happens. I am not criticising these - 95% of them are actually needed.

Not at all like any private sector job.

n97 mini wrote: »

You can't have a family run business by definition without hiring family members. But private enterprise are entitled to hire whoever they like as they are accountable only to their owners. The state as a whole owns the public sector.

So we agree that the private sector has lower standards with regard to nepotism than the public sector and that the private sector is rife with nepotism. Let us hope that the public sector doesn't follow the private sector.

n97 mini wrote: »

I went for a job interview a long time ago in a prominent university. I was told unofficially that the position was already filled internally, but to be seen to be doing the right thing they had to interview external candidates.

My quote which you are referring to stated "the civil service". Universities are not part of the civil service.

Godge · 21-02-2012 7:52pm

n97 mini wrote: »

Do these particular people not clock in and clock out?

No they don't, you will find that most of them work well beyond the 40 hours a week most weeks.

The ones who cream it on the overtime are mostly front-line grades - gardai, prison officers, nurses, firemen, etc.

If you go up a couple of other grades higher to the likes of Assistant Secretaries you will find that they don't have a life at all - the pay for them does start above €120,000 though.

gerryo777 · 21-02-2012 8:04pm

Godge wrote: »

I have worked in both the public sector and private sector. The bureaucracy involved in the civil service would be very difficult for most private sector workers to handle. But that bureaucracy is needed because rules have to be followed, records have to be kept accurately, decisions have to be referred upwards, procedures are there to ensure that all of the above happens. I am not criticising these - 95% of them are actually needed.

Not at all like any private sector job.

So we agree that the private sector has lower standards with regard to nepotism than the public sector and that the private sector is rife with nepotism. Let us hope that the public sector doesn't follow the private sector.

The private sector pays for the public sector.

donalg1 · 21-02-2012 8:32pm

gerryo777 wrote: »

Godge wrote: »

I have worked in both the public sector and private sector. The bureaucracy involved in the civil service would be very difficult for most private sector workers to handle. But that bureaucracy is needed because rules have to be followed, records have to be kept accurately, decisions have to be referred upwards, procedures are there to ensure that all of the above happens. I am not criticising these - 95% of them are actually needed.

Not at all like any private sector job.

So we agree that the private sector has lower standards with regard to nepotism than the public sector and that the private sector is rife with nepotism. Let us hope that the public sector doesn't follow the private sector.

The private sector pays for the public sector.

And without it the private sector and everyone else in the country would be screwed.

Gumbo · 21-02-2012 8:55pm

gerryo777 wrote: »

The private sector pays for the public sector.

And wthout the Public Sector, the Private Sector cannot exist.

Dr Galen · 21-02-2012 11:46pm

Lets not start this Public/Private - Chicken/Egg nonsense again please

Stick to the OP topic

Cheers

DrG

Sleepy · 22-02-2012 1:13am

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

Have you a honours degree in Law/ Economics or Accountancy

For someone with an honours degree in almost any degree I can think of (medicine or actuary being the two obvious exceptions) that's in their first 2/3 years out of university 30k is a fantastic salary and, as pointed out by those with direct experience of the civil service, it's a starting salary that will go up with service.

Lumbo · 22-02-2012 11:11am

Sleepy wrote: »

For someone with an honours degree in almost any degree I can think of (medicine or actuary being the two obvious exceptions) that's in their first 2/3 years out of university 30k is a fantastic salary and, as pointed out by those with direct experience of the civil service, it's a starting salary that will go up with service.

Do these Graduates actually receive increments?

We pay our Graduates (mainly Engineers) a scale that depends on their degree results. They don't receive increments.

x43r0 · 22-02-2012 12:29pm

Lumbo wrote: »

Do these Graduates actually receive increments?

We pay our Graduates (mainly Engineers) a scale that depends on their degree results. They don't receive increments.

What increments are you referring to? Yearly raises?

In my company, all graduates start on the same salary regardless of degree grade. They all get bonuses & raises which differ in value depending on performance reviews

Finneen · 22-02-2012 6:47pm

They'll get an annual increment if they receive a good PMDS rating.

gerryo777 · 22-02-2012 7:17pm

Finneen wrote: »

They'll get an annual increment if they receive a good PMDS rating.

Last year in the PS/CS only 9 people out of over 300,000 didn't.

donalg1 · 22-02-2012 8:46pm

gerryo777 wrote: »

Finneen wrote: »

They'll get an annual increment if they receive a good PMDS rating.

Last year in the PS/CS only 9 people out of over 300,000 didn't.

Obviously good at their jobs and meeting targets then

barneystinson · 22-02-2012 11:53pm

donalg1 wrote: »

Obviously good at their jobs and meeting targets then

:rolleyes:

Muppetry. Cop on man will ya. It's stupid throwaway comments like that that throw fuel onto the whole Public / Private sector feud on here.

I don't know if the 9 out of 300k figure is correct, but the simple reality that's plain as the hand in front of your face to anyone working in the PS/CS (I'm in the CS by the way), is that the performance management system isn't working as it's supposed to - people who break their arses every day get a 3, and people who swing the lead get ...... a 3 as well, and from the same manager in plenty of cases. Lunacy. Never mind the fact that a2 is enough to get your increment anyway...

(And that's not me speaking as someone with an axe to grind - I'm happy with my manager, my colleagues, and my own PMDS score.)

n97 mini · 23-02-2012 12:59am

barneystinson wrote: »

I'm happy with my manager, my colleagues, and my own PMDS score.)

The HR manager (also the union rep) on induction day told us that a refusal to operate the PMDS was the only thing the union and management agreed on, as "it showed up shite staff and shite managers".

donalg1 · 23-02-2012 1:03am

barneystinson wrote: »

donalg1 wrote: »

Obviously good at their jobs and meeting targets then

:rolleyes:

Muppetry. Cop on man will ya. It's stupid throwaway comments like that that throw fuel onto the whole Public / Private sector feud on here.

I don't know if the 9 out of 300k figure is correct, but the simple reality that's plain as the hand in front of your face to anyone working in the PS/CS (I'm in the CS by the way), is that the performance management system isn't working as it's supposed to - people who break their arses every day get a 3, and people who swing the lead get ...... a 3 as well, and from the same manager in plenty of cases. Lunacy. Never mind the fact that a2 is enough to get your increment anyway...

(And that's not me speaking as someone with an axe to grind - I'm happy with my manager, my colleagues, and my own PMDS score.)

It was sarcasm sorry hard to get across in text. I know pmds is a load of crap

Lumbo · 23-02-2012 1:27pm

gerryo777 wrote: »

Last year in the PS/CS only 9 people out of over 300,000 didn't.

Wrong.

gerryo777 · 23-02-2012 1:31pm

Lumbo wrote: »

Wrong.

Show me the figures then.

A Primal Nut · 23-02-2012 1:43pm

Graduates with qualifications in human resources, law, accountancy, economics, finance/banking and tax policy were invited to apply.

These are jobs for skilled professionals. Things are not so bad for people with these kinds of qualifications as you might think.

The worst hit areas for unemployment are tradesmen, people in the building sector, and unskilled jobs.

Lumbo · 23-02-2012 1:54pm

gerryo777 wrote: »

Show me the figures then.

You made the statment. You show me where you got it from. You'll need to prove that you just didn't pluck them from the air.

Riskymove · 23-02-2012 1:59pm

gerryo777 wrote: »

Show me the figures then.

PMDS does not apply to the entire PS

Not everyone in the PS is on salary scales

Of those that are on scales, note everyone gets an increment every year - there is a max point after which you don't get any increments.......and also the last couple of points are usually an increment every 3 years rather than 1

therefore far less than 300,000 are due an increment in any one year

colly10 · 23-02-2012 2:02pm

Paulzx wrote: »

Why have so few people applied when we're told day after day that jobs are like hens teeth and public service jobs are cushy, gold plated, sit around all day and scratch your arse etc. etc.

I left college with a 2.1 in computer science and started on alot less that that. I was offered a few grand more and turned it down, I wanted whatever job offered me the best chance to gain experience.
If you offered me another 5 grand now to take a job where I sit on my hole surrounded by clueless management I wouldn't be interested

relax carry on · 23-02-2012 6:12pm

gerryo777 wrote: »

Finneen wrote: »

They'll get an annual increment if they receive a good PMDS rating.

Last year in the PS/CS only 9 people out of over 300,000 didn't.

I would be interested as to where those figures came from. Could you please provide a link to the PMDS ratings for the entire public sector for 2011? If you can't find 2011, don't worry, any year will do. Thanks.

Head The Wall · 24-02-2012 8:29am

Riskymove wrote: »

PMDS does not apply to the entire PS

Not everyone in the PS is on salary scales

Of those that are on scales, note everyone gets an increment every year - there is a max point after which you don't get any increments.......and also the last couple of points are usually an increment every 3 years rather than 1

therefore far less than 300,000 are due an increment in any one year

It still costs the govt a quarter of a billion every year for increments which is a large sum of money which considering the effectiveness of the PMDS system is pretty much given away for just turning up to work.

250 million divided between 300,000 is €833 on average. Not everyone gets an increment every year so the average is probably higher than that figure.

barneystinson · 24-02-2012 9:11am

Head The Wall wrote: »

It still costs the govt a quarter of a billion every year for increments which is a large sum of money which considering the effectiveness of the PMDS system is pretty much given away for just turning up to work.

250 million divided between 300,000 is €833 on average. Not everyone gets an increment every year so the average is probably higher than that figure.

Ahhhhhhhhh! It had to be only a matter of time before a thread about anything PS related would be hijacked by someone who just can't resist a rant about increments and/or lump sums... :rolleyes:

This thread is about the number of people who've applied for AO positions with a starting salary of just under €30k.

These roles are the PS equivalent of the Graduate recruitment programmes of large private sector organisations, and if you look at the job specs you'll see professional qualifications are the standard. These people are hoped / expected to be the future senior managers in the PS.

So, the question is, if you don't propose to pay an incremental payscale (subject to performance), how do you suggest the public sector can attract & retain talented people?

I'd suggest that there'd be a lot less than 3,200 applicants for these positions if the salary was a flat 30k with no prospect of any increase... and the calibre of candidate willing to apply would be much lower. Ever heard of a false economy...

barneystinson · 24-02-2012 9:16am

Head The Wall wrote: »

250 million divided between 300,000 is €833 on average. Not everyone gets an increment every year so the average is probably higher than that figure.

Wow, amazing powers of deduction and mathematical prowess there. The salary scales are all published AFAIK, so there's no secret about how much any increment is.

Head The Wall · 24-02-2012 10:23am

It wasn't me that brought up the PMDS system and increments, I was just rebutting the assertion that very few people receive them. I have nothing wrong with people getting pay raises as long as they are deserved and justified. This doesn't seem to be the case with the PMDS system.

Riskymove · 24-02-2012 11:10am

Head The Wall wrote: »

, I was just rebutting the assertion that very few people receive them.

nobody made that assertion

I have nothing wrong with people getting pay raises as long as they are deserved and justified. This doesn't seem to be the case with the PMDS system.

unfortunately the usual argument made on this basis is that no one deserves one

It still costs the govt a quarter of a billion every year for increments

well it doesn't really as that is the gross figure

over half would likely be recouped immediately

Head The Wall · 24-02-2012 1:57pm

Your post read as a defence of the increments system for the "few" that receive them. I think that until they implement a proper working system and considering the financial position of the country they should be put on hold.

We can only work with the figures we are given by the govt which is €250 million. We also hear one reason not to get rid of increments is because it would be unfair to the lower paid staff, they would not be losing 50% of their pay raise to tax.

Riskymove · 24-02-2012 2:11pm

Head The Wall wrote: »

Your post read as a defence of the increments system for the "few" that receive them.

I don't see how it could be

I simply set out that far less than the entire 300,000 would get an increment

I said nothing about whether or not they are deserved

I think that until they implement a proper working system and considering the financial position of the country they should be put on hold.

I wonder what you would consider a 'proper working system'? Is this simply based on an assumption that a large amount of people dont deserve one?

We can only work with the figures we are given by the govt which is €250 million

.

because it suits your position? of course I understand why you would do that

its simply reality that tax, prsi, pension levies etc are applied to PS wages

surely you would accept that there is a gross and net cost here?

We also hear one reason not to get rid of increments is because it would be unfair to the lower paid staff, they would not be losing 50% of their pay raise to tax.

That position is based on the fact that most of the lower paid are on longer scales than those on higher pay and therefore most of the number of increments are paid to lower paid

However, the smaller number of higher paid people can skew the overall amount

Lower paid may not lose 50% to PAYE maybe, but other things are paid as I said above

also the lower paid would be getting lower increments

Paulzx · 24-02-2012 3:06pm

colly10 wrote: »

I left college with a 2.1 in computer science and started on alot less that that. I was offered a few grand more and turned it down, I wanted whatever job offered me the best chance to gain experience.
If you offered me another 5 grand now to take a job where I sit on my hole surrounded by clueless management I wouldn't be interested

You have a job.

If you didn't would you rather sit on the scratcher and not apply for these jobs?

Your comment about doing nothing and having clueless management just because its the public service is the usual broad brush stroke nonsense.

Not everybody or every dept. conforms to your rubbish stereotype

colly10 · 24-02-2012 8:56pm

Paulzx wrote: »

You have a job.

If you didn't would you rather sit on the scratcher and not apply for these jobs?

Where exactly have I implied that?
I would image the vast majority of people on the dole are under qualified for these jobs.

I don't really see the point of this thread, 3200 people is alot of applicants.
I do think 30k is too much for a graduate though, your not really worth a whole lot till you build up experience.
The only thing that this thread highlights to me is that the public service are offering too much to graduates, especially when you take the security of the job into account

Paulzx wrote: »

Not everybody or every dept. conforms to your rubbish stereotype

True, I would just say that a higher than average number conform to it. I'm basing my opinion on what I have been told by family members and friends who have worked in the public service

barneystinson · 25-02-2012 5:47pm

colly10 wrote: »

I do think 30k is too much for a graduate though, your not really worth a whole lot till you build up experience.
The only thing that this thread highlights to me is that the public service are offering too much to graduates, especially when you take the security of the job into account

Did you actually read the job spec for these roles? The minimum requirement was an honours degree, but for the accounting roles it clearly stated professional accounting qualifications would be an advantage - in other words they only want qualified accountants. Ditto the law roles, they want qualified solicitors. Ditto HR roles, they want people who have CIPD qualifications.

Also, the interview stage is a competency based interview, meaning candidates have to be able to demonstrate proficiency in particular competencies from their work experience to date.

So in other words, they have no intention of hiring graduates, if it's anything like the competition I came in on, the successful candidates will be in their mid to late 20's, with degrees, masters and professional qualifications, as well as real world experience in the relevant profession. IMHO 30k is a bargain for that level of personnel, and the only reason they have as many as 3,200 applicants is because of the shortage of work in the professions presently, along with the job security and the incremental salary.

johnnyskeleton · 26-02-2012 1:08pm

A Primal Nut wrote: »

Graduates with qualifications in human resources, law, accountancy, economics, finance/banking and tax policy were invited to apply.

These are jobs for skilled professionals. Things are not so bad for people with these kinds of qualifications as you might think.

The worst hit areas for unemployment are tradesmen, people in the building sector, and unskilled jobs.

Also, for law anyways, they usually insist on x number of years pqe, typically 4 or more. Not surprising therefore that grads wouldn't apply for a job they don't have the experience for.

Did we ever get an answer to how many jobs they were actually applying for?

Finneen · 26-02-2012 6:38pm

It depends on the department. Some have more positions for AO than others do.

sock puppet · 27-02-2012 8:15pm

Skopzz wrote: »

EUR30,000 is a GREAT salary.

I'm applying for one of these jobs. Anyone who expects more than 30,000 EUR is living in a fantasy world.

Typical of Irish people: greedy and unrealistic.

I'm graduating in 2013 and expect less than €30,000. However starting salary isn't everything and a lot of people would have the perception that the civil service isn't great in terms of career opportunities. Plus if you want to work there at some point in the future you can always work in the private sector and then apply to the civil service at a higher grade.

Also I don't get the relevance of your last comment. Most of the graduate positions I've been looking at offer lower pay in Ireland than in the UK.

edit: from looking at the above comments it also seems that ideally they want someone a bit more experienced than a graduate

Godge · 27-02-2012 11:46pm

Head The Wall wrote: »

It still costs the govt a quarter of a billion every year for increments which is a large sum of money which considering the effectiveness of the PMDS system is pretty much given away for just turning up to work.

250 million divided between 300,000 is €833 on average. Not everyone gets an increment every year so the average is probably higher than that figure.

Source for the 250 million?

Head The Wall · 28-02-2012 12:04am

On the phone at the moment, the minister gave that figure in response to a question in the Dail in the last year.

barneystinson · 06-03-2012 12:38am

littlemizz99 wrote: »

Wow cheers for the SEVERLY depressing statistic for all those undertaking the assesment this week....great boost to all to know we have a lovely 1% chance of getting a job we probably so desperatly need-cheers!

Just because only 1% of the people applying will be hired doesn't mean everyone has a 1% chance... some people in the 3,200 have a less than 1% chance, and some are practically shoo-ins... Anyone who can't figure that out probably won't do great in the aptitude test!

barneystinson · 06-03-2012 4:22pm

littlemizz99 wrote: »

Was that really necessary? Very easy for you to comment from your cushy chair in the public sector- currently working 3 jobs so taking a day off to fill in some apptitude tests to not get a job is depressing enough without having someone like yourself, who clearly has too much time on their hands and not enough work to do, providing useless comments to further depress the situation!!!

Good one - I replied to you at 11:38 p.m. last night, so I was in my cushy chair at home :rolleyes: If that's your attitude towards the public sector I kinda hope you don't get a job there TBH.

Considering you decided to join the thread to have a mope for yourself rather than actually contribute anything, it's a bit rich for you to say my post was useless - I corrected a logical error in the previous two posts.

Back on topic though; I'd be surprised if they don't hire as many as a couple of hundred AOs through this competition, so even with a wonky understanding of probability, the odds may be better than you thought!

K-9 · 06-03-2012 7:49pm

Mod

Could we have less of the personal swiping please and more discussion on the actual OP and points raised.

puffin24 · 07-03-2012 8:37pm

I guess Im one of the few(?) to have applied for this job. Have an assessment tomorrow in Croke park along with what Ive heard is 2,500 others spread over today, Thurs and Fri. To me that seems like a lot for what I think are quite a few positions. Almost everyone in my course applied for this job and I know of at least 10 others that are heading up tomorrow for the exam. Anyway, from my perspective, I wish there were far fewer applicants to bulk up my odds a wee bit!

BornToKill · 08-03-2012 12:04am

A little bit of information on the campaign on the DPER website:

"It is envisaged that the [new Government Economic and Evaluation Service] will initially recruit 20-30 staff, both internally and on the open market.
Postgraduate staff with economic qualifications will be targeted through an Administrative Officer competition already underway through the Public Appointments Commission. It is expected that staff will be brought in from May onwards this year and will spend a training period in the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform before being seconded to other Departments with identified needs."

Only 3,200 graduates apply for €30,000 state jobs

Comments