Public sector pay threatens economic viability - ISME

Champ

http://breakingnews.iol.ie/news/story_business_island.asp?j=247086393&p=z47x87z56&n=247087336

Nice informative article.
Very tempting to transfer to the public sector.:)

"This is completely unacceptable that our hard earned money is constantly going to a sector that is not accountable to anyone including their own employer, the Government, and whose representatives continuously threaten to withdraw those services as is the case with the current nurses’ dispute.

Very well put i thought. I for one am tired of the continual: Unions want X, Y, Z and if they don't get it (even if the Labour court rules against them) they go on strike.
No one forces them to work any particular job, if they don't like the job just pack up and go find another one. Given the pay difference between the two sectors, striking on the grounds of entitlement to more pay is hardly a winning point. Even if it was the fact that they regularly use the service as a hostage to their demands is something that drastically needs to be fixed.

TempestSabre

The Govt is spending about a billion (approx because no one incl the Govt knows) to further disimprove the civil service by moving it all over the place with very little logic at all. Selling buildings and then renting space instead.

D'Peoples Voice

TempestSabre wrote:

The Govt is spending about a billion (approx because no one incl the Govt knows) to further disimprove the civil service by moving it all over the place with very little logic at all. Selling buildings and then renting space instead.

To coin a phrase from Monty Pontin's Life of Brian,
Making it worse, how could it possibly be worse!
The civil service doesn't work now, for god's sake man. I'm STILL waiting on my credit card sized driving licence almost 3 years after the civil service were to send it out to me!
Then take the elctoral register, the government have thrown another EUR 12 million at the civil service to get it right. I have a unique number & address on my (recent)passport, I have a unique PPS number and address on any tax related document, likewise with my motor taxation cert, and what happens the civil service send me a form to fill in stating where I live! I ask you! So the two of us fill in the form, guess what, the civil service leaves one of us off the register. There were only two names on the form!
Therefore IMO there is almost nothing the government can do to make the situation worse. Sack them all and out source the work to competent people.
The good news is that the EU will continuously push for greater privatisation, and hence we can only hope many of these scumbags will be sacked!
All that and I never even had to mention An Post!
Oh TempestSabre another thing, you need to say that the 1 billion cost is gross of ANY sale price they achieve from selling the Government buildings in Dublin & and the present value of any cost savings made from cheaper annual rent of their buildings into the future- it's cheaper to rent a premises in Kanturk than St. Stephens Green!

gazzer

Ive worked in the civil service since 1992, have had 3 promotions in that time.. the most recent of these was to an IT area where I am a Sytems Analyst(for the last 3 years) and my salary is nowhere near this 'average salary of 46,000 euro), in fact my salary is 10,000 below this.

kluivert

I spent two hours on the phone to the revenue today looking for a simple bit of information to be confirmed. I already know the answer just wanted someone to confirm it.

Anyway I spoke to seven different people in seven different offices and after demanding to speak to a supervisor I got my confrimation.

Two things typical with the civil service.

1. Pass the buck at every opportunity.
2. Never make a decision, as you will be held responsible, See 1. above in order to avoid this problem.

Anything else, they get paid way too much in my opinion.

Trade Union reck the economy.

This country is coming to the edge, enjoy this christmas because next year after the government get re elected from briding the good people of this country for their votes with a huge give away budget this year, they will sit in their office for another term and do feck all.

I wonder why you never hear on the news about the manufacturing companies closing down in this country any more, you certainly dont hear of any manufacturing companies setting up here any more.

Harvest while the sun shines.

RainyDay

Champ wrote:

Very tempting to transfer to the public sector.:)

So what's stopping you? I made the transfer to a public sector role last year, after 20+ years in the private sector. It's really not all that different. Most people care about their work. Most people work hard. There are a few slackers, just like there were slackers in the private sector. I'm paid about 30% less than I was last year, but I'm working about 30% less hours, so I'm getting to spend more time with my daughter.

D'Peoples Voice wrote:

To coin a phrase from Monty Pontin's Life of Brian,
Making it worse, how could it possibly be worse!
The civil service doesn't work now, for god's sake man. I'm STILL waiting on my credit card sized driving licence almost 3 years after the civil service were to send it out to me!
Then take the elctoral register, the government have thrown another EUR 12 million at the civil service to get it right. I have a unique number & address on my (recent)passport, I have a unique PPS number and address on any tax related document, likewise with my motor taxation cert, and what happens the civil service send me a form to fill in stating where I live! I ask you! So the two of us fill in the form, guess what, the civil service leaves one of us off the register. There were only two names on the form!
Therefore IMO there is almost nothing the government can do to make the situation worse. Sack them all and out source the work to competent people.
The good news is that the EU will continuously push for greater privatisation, and hence we can only hope many of these scumbags will be sacked!
All that and I never even had to mention An Post!
Oh TempestSabre another thing, you need to say that the 1 billion cost is gross of ANY sale price they achieve from selling the Government buildings in Dublin & and the present value of any cost savings made from cheaper annual rent of their buildings into the future- it's cheaper to rent a premises in Kanturk than St. Stephens Green!

Get down off that high horse and come back to the real world. It's a bit rich for you to go on the attack when it is clear from your post that have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. You don't understand the difference between Government/political responsibilities, civil service responsibilities and local authority responsibilities.

You also seem to have swallowed the PD spin on decentralisation without any true understanding of what is happening on the ground. There won't be any cost savings if they are paying for BOTH decentralised staff in the new locations and the old staff to sit in Dublin doing nothing (as is the current plan). The state will slide back between 10-20 years as agencies turnover 70%-90% of the staff. One specialist agency that I'm aware of have requests from 2 out of 40 staff to move to the new decentralised location, so it will be training in 38 new staff. You really need to start looking beyond the press releases and see the reality.

TempestSabre

D'Peoples Voice wrote:

....TempestSabre another thing, you need to say that the 1 billion cost is gross of ANY sale price they achieve from selling the Government buildings in Dublin & and the present value of any cost savings made from cheaper annual rent of their buildings into the future- it's cheaper to rent a premises in Kanturk than St. Stephens Green!

I can't say if its 1 billion or 2 billion gross or net. No one has any idea what it will cost. What magic hat are you pulling your figures from?

Or you could so what Enterprise Ireland has done. Take a 25-year lease office blocks in Dublin to accommodate 600 staff, and also move to Shannon?

Or outsource like the PPARS or Pulse?

TempestSabre

D'Peoples Voice wrote:

...
The civil service doesn't work now, for god's sake man. I'm STILL waiting on my credit card sized driving licence almost 3 years after the civil service were to send it out to me! ...

Can you get credit card sized licenses yet? I thought they were still the folding paper type? I renewed mine about 2 yrs ago and I got the old style one, and it only took a couple of weeks. Though I had to send it back and get it corrected. Why would you wait 3 yrs? That doesn't make any sense.

TempestSabre

D'Peoples Voice wrote:

...
The good news is that the EU will continuously push for greater privatisation, and hence we can only hope many of these scumbags will be sacked!....

Scumbags? Did someone kick your puppy or something?

TempestSabre

http://www.unison.ie/breakingnews/index.php3?ca=35&si=101870

There were 1,054 days lost because of industrial disputes in the third quarter of 2006.

This compares with over 2,300 for the same period last year.

During the first nine months of 2006, the Construction Sector accounted for two thirds of total days lost, while almost a 20% were lost in the manufacturing sector.

Champ

So what's stopping you? I made the transfer to a public sector role last year, after 20+ years in the private sector.

They don't have many public sector jobs to my liking down here in the South West, but i am keeping an open eye.;)

Moving to Dublin would help the prospects, but i'm on a decent income and happy with my family and friends and my current company treats me fairly.:)

D'Peoples Voice

RainyDay wrote:

You don't understand the difference between Government/political responsibilities, civil service responsibilities and local authority responsibilities.

if the truth be known, neither do many of the state agencies, you only have to look at the headcount of foreign immigrants, no-one can give an accurate count- it's always someone else's responsibility- their department only look after x, someone else looks after y! that in my book is the fault of the General Secretaries in each department.

RainyDay wrote:

You also seem to have swallowed the PD spin on decentralisation without any true understanding of what is happening on the ground. There won't be any cost savings if they are paying for BOTH decentralised staff in the new locations and the old staff to sit in Dublin doing nothing (as is the current plan).

If you read my post again, you will see that I never in fact said it would be cheaper or more cost effective overall, if it were, the government would have published the cost benefit analysis. I merely questioned the figure of 1 billion, as to whether it was gross or net. I think that's fair enough to ask. As you know the cost of someone buying a big house down the country, is a lot less for them if they are trading up, rather than a first time buyer. That's merely what I'm saying- give us the net figure - although I know that's difficult becos the Government are not disclosing it.

TempestSabre wrote:

Can you get credit card sized licenses yet? I thought they were still the folding paper type?

you need to know the right people in the civil service to get one!

Minister for Transport (Mr. S. Brennan): "We are progressing the plastic card licence and I am determined that in 2004 we will move to a credit card size licence."

therefore thats all of 2004, 2005 & 2006 and I have still to receive mine!
http://historical-debates.oireachtas.ie/S/0174/S.0174.200311270009.html
clearly our civil service don't have the know how of those in Namibia
http://www.grnnet.gov.na/News/Archive/2002/June/Week3/credit.htm
tempestSabre, you are spot on, there are strikes in the private sector also, BOI for example, but if you look at those same strikes, the same staff do not go on strike almost on a yearly basis. Usually but not always, it's the result of YEARS of neglect of workers rights or serious changes to workers welfare.

TempestSabre

So your complaint is that people only know their own area, and not what everyone else is doing across the civil, public service? Get real.

Whats the point your making. The 1 billion is a estimated cost, its not accurate as was already stated when it was mentioned. If its net or gross is nitpicking over nothing. The cost could be 2 billion. The lack of information on the cost is the fault of the govt, not the civil service or anyone else.

So your complaining about licenses that aren't generally available? Seriously?

Its ordinary people vote to have a dispute. They just don't happen. The reason it happens more in civil and public service is that govt often use them to play politics, regardless that its playing with people lives. Decentralization lunacy being a case in point.

D'Peoples Voice

TempestSabre wrote:

So your complaint is that people only know their own area, and not what everyone else is doing across the civil, public service? Get real.

thank you, you've just explained why we never get joined up thinking in the civil service.
All this time, I was thinking it was this incompetent government's fault for not coordinating between departments, but you've clearly outlined the situation, it's not "real" to expect civil servants in one department to know what another is doing.

It explains why Gardai were given hand held IT devices to record penalty points for drivers, but couldn't tell how many penalty points the driver already had. To listen to the speeches by M Cullen on this, followed the next day by McDowell contradicting Cullen, it was hilarious.
I understand it all now. The civil service only wish to know about their own area, not what may be happening in another department, reagrdless if it's related.
I think we can end the debate at this point!
The public sector deserve their pay increase.

super_furry

Sssssh everyone. We wouldn't rat you out.....

TempestSabre

D'Peoples Voice wrote:

thank you, you've just explained why we never get joined up thinking in the civil service.
All this time, I was thinking it was this incompetent government's fault for not coordinating between departments, but you've clearly outlined the situation, it's not "real" to expect civil servants in one department to know what another is doing.

Do you ring your sales dept to get your PC fixed, and do you ring the IT dept to place orders? Or HR to run a marketing campaign? As RainyDay said you don't understand the system, and you don't know what you are talking about.

D'Peoples Voice wrote:

It explains why Gardai were given hand held IT devices to record penalty points for drivers, but couldn't tell how many penalty points the driver already had. To listen to the speeches by M Cullen on this, followed the next day by McDowell contradicting Cullen, it was hilarious. I understand it all now. The civil service only wish to know about their own area, not what may be happening in another department, reagrdless if it's related. I think we can end the debate at this point! The public sector deserve their pay increase.

That would be the Pulse system which was outsourced and is largely maintained by big name private sector companies and consultants. That and politicians playing politics is nothing to do with the Public sector.

Ironically that point your proving is that private sector and/or outsourcing is expensive, inefficient and poor value for money and the public sector is run at the whim of politicians for short sighted political gains.

RainyDay

D'Peoples Voice wrote:

you need to know the right people in the civil service to get one!

therefore thats all of 2004, 2005 & 2006 and I have still to receive mine!
http://historical-debates.oireachtas.ie/S/0174/S.0174.200311270009.html

So take it up with Minnie Brennan, not the officials who are left waiting for him to allocate some funding for the project.

randomname2005

RainyDay wrote:

You also seem to have swallowed the PD spin on decentralisation without any true understanding of what is happening on the ground. There won't be any cost savings if they are paying for BOTH decentralised staff in the new locations and the old staff to sit in Dublin doing nothing (as is the current plan). The state will slide back between 10-20 years as agencies turnover 70%-90% of the staff. One specialist agency that I'm aware of have requests from 2 out of 40 staff to move to the new decentralised location, so it will be training in 38 new staff. You really need to start looking beyond the press releases and see the reality.

Just a quick question for those of us who 'dont understand the system', will the 38 people who get left behind be still employed by the same department, even though the department is now located in a different part of the country?

Edit: What Im really trying to see is whether people who dont want to move will be left sitting at a desk doing nothing because their life long employment means they cant be fired/let go. In the private sector, if a company decides to relocate the workers have two choices, to move or be let go, (obviously existing contracts must be honoured). Is it the case in the civil service that the decentralisation will leave lots of people in dublin because they have a job for life?

R

kluivert

Talk about going off the point just a tat.

Not sure what way the re allocation would be for those who didnt opt to move. One would assume that they would still be employed on the basis that they a have employment contract. If not they will would get some type of compensation.

Never mind where civil servants are moving to the important issue here is whether or not they deserve the rate of pay in which they are getting.

Personally I would rather impose a pay cut for pencil pushers and give it to Nurses and Garda who are on the beat (not the pencil pushers)

Has anyone considered the cycle of money in this country, when you look at it, its very scary. The main industry in this country is Construction.

Banks lend money to developers and provide mortgages to customers. This is the start of the cycle. And if you think it through its the end of the cycle as well. Basicly there is very little sources of income from other countries through exporting, thats why the economy is not as good as it appears and when the crap hits the fan, the civil servants will be sitting pretty as they know that the government will not sack them, that the government will probably borrow to keep them employed.

TempestSabre

randomname2005 wrote:

Just a quick question for those of us who 'dont understand the system', will the 38 people who get left behind be still employed by the same department, even though the department is now located in a different part of the country?

The problem no one really knows because the Govt haven't planned that far ahead. Amazing while the govt manages to waste billions of everyones tax payers money, on alsorts of mismanaged projects and schemes. People are more concerned with the cost of the public sector pay instead of focusing on the origin of all these problems, the Govt.

Edit: What Im really trying to see is whether people who dont want to move will be left sitting at a desk doing nothing because their life long employment means they cant be fired/let go. In the private sector, if a company decides to relocate the workers have two choices, to move or be let go, (obviously existing contracts must be honoured). Is it the case in the civil service that the decentralisation will leave lots of people in dublin because they have a job for life?R

The problem no one really knows because the Govt haven't planned that far ahead. People seem to think working in the public sector is a life of roses, without having any experience of it. Try it if you think its that great. You shouldn't take what you read in the media at face value.

TempestSabre

kluivert wrote:

...
Never mind where civil servants are moving to the important issue here is whether or not they deserve the rate of pay in which they are getting.

Personally I would rather impose a pay cut for pencil pushers and give it to Nurses and Garda who are on the beat (not the pencil pushers) ...

Its the same in any organisation, public or private, the rewards should be performance related. Funny you should mention nurses. My personal experience of nursing in particular is that its become a paper pushing exercise rather than a vocational career. The paper work might say the work is being done, but the patients and relatives of patients see the reality is something else. Health service is in tatters, the country is more crime ridden than its ever been, yet you want to reward them? Why?

randomname2005

TempestSabre wrote:

The problem no one really knows because the Govt haven't planned that far ahead. Amazing while the govt manages to waste billions of everyones tax payers money, on alsorts of mismanaged projects and schemes. People are more concerned with the cost of the public sector pay instead of focusing on the origin of all these problems, the Govt.

Surely the cost of public sector pay is down to the unions ensuring that their members get guaranteed pay increases irrespective of productivity? Should people not be concerned that public sector wages are increasing when they cant see any basis for the increase?

Forgive my ignorance here, but are the civil service departments not also responsible for implementing some of these schemes and projects?

TempestSabre wrote:

The problem no one really knows because the Govt haven't planned that far ahead. People seem to think working in the public sector is a life of roses, without having any experience of it. Try it if you think its that great. You shouldn't take what you read in the media at face value.

No,my opinions are based on conversations with people who work there!

TempestSabre

randomname2005 wrote:

Surely the cost of public sector pay is down to the unions ensuring that their members get guaranteed pay increases irrespective of productivity? Should people not be concerned that public sector wages are increasing when they cant see any basis for the increase?

Shirley?

http://www.finance.gov.ie/ViewDoc.asp?DocId=-1&CatID=31&m=c

AFAIK it was meant to an exercise in parity of payment between public and private sectors.

Forgive my ignorance here, but are the civil service departments not also responsible for implementing some of these schemes and projects?

Some yes. Other no, so you'd have to be specfic. Sweeping generalisations aren't informative.

No,my opinions are based on conversations with people who work there!

Like I said no experience of it.

D'Peoples Voice

TempestSabre wrote:

Do you ring your sales dept to get your PC fixed, and do you ring the IT dept to place orders? Or HR to run a marketing campaign?

Me lad, If I get a pay increase from my manager in our department, I expect HR to know about it; why? because there is communication between my manager and the HR department. That is a concept that the civil service seem to not practise, and that is something you agree with you say.
I'll give you yet another example of how the civil service do not communicate between one another. Nursing homes fees, one department agreed to medical cards for over 70's in the budget, yet another department was still charging people nursing home fees to over 70's two years later. There are so many examples of lack of non-cooperation between departments, and to us in the private sector, it smacks of incompetence, which is why we hate to see such practices rewarded. But as you say, it's something you're pleased about. I guess the private sector will never understand the public sector.

TempestSabre wrote:

That would be the Pulse system which was outsourced and is largely maintained by big name private sector companies and consultants. That is nothing to do with the Public sector.

Apologies, being from the rpoivate sector I would have understood that members from the civil service would have agreed certain specifications with the developers before the project began.
Such parameters would have included efficiency and value for money. Clearly you are stating publicly that the civil service did not state any such specifications, and clearly gave the private company a blank spec on which to work from. That would explain how the private company, asked to come up with PPARS was such a disaster.
In the private sector, if we outosource, project specs are agreed with members from our company, and then developed externally before being returned to the company for testing. You seem to be suggetsing that the civil service leave everything up to private companies, and do no specing, testing themselves. So now we understand how the public sector WASTES our taxes, they launch software they are not even familiar with.Although having said that, I must admit Revenue On-line Service(ROS) is a great bit of software, was that developed in-house or outsourced?

TempestSabre

If you are going to quote me, quote me as is written. Editing the text out of context and putting quote tags around it isn't quoting, especially if you are doing it to change the meaning. For example...

D'Peoples Voice wrote:

...the private sector, smacks of incompetence, which is why we 're pleased. I guess the private sector will never understand.

I don't know how that project was run, you were mocking how it works, and I'm just pointing out that it was built by the private sector. So its ironic you picked that example. Projects go bad in the private sector, the public sector doesn't have a monopoly on that either.

Your manage approves pay increases but he doesn't action them. Which is why he has to contact other departments. Does he tell everyone in marketing, everyone in support? Does he tell everyone in other branches around the country? Even in the private sector, in large companies you often get one department not knowing what other departments are doing. Its the nature of very large organisations. No one wants it to happen but the reality is it happens from time to time.

RainyDay

randomname2005 wrote:

Just a quick question for those of us who 'dont understand the system', will the 38 people who get left behind be still employed by the same department, even though the department is now located in a different part of the country?

Edit: What Im really trying to see is whether people who dont want to move will be left sitting at a desk doing nothing because their life long employment means they cant be fired/let go. In the private sector, if a company decides to relocate the workers have two choices, to move or be let go, (obviously existing contracts must be honoured). Is it the case in the civil service that the decentralisation will leave lots of people in dublin because they have a job for life?

You're showing more & more about how little you know with every post. The example that I mentioned is for an agency (as I explained) and not a department. So those left in Dublin are still employees of that agency, and have job contracts with that agency. They have no rights to transfer to any other public service role, as their contract is solely with that agency.

How come that for private sector workers, you are quick to slip in that 'existing contracts must be honoured', but you don't apply the same standard to public sector workers?

vesp

Everyone knows the public service are way overpaid and mostly - but not always - underworked, especially when you consider their job security , perks, pension etc

RainyDay

vesp wrote:

Everyone knows the public service are way overpaid and mostly - but not always - underworked, especially when you consider their job security , perks, pension etc

When you have something substantive to add to the debate beyond 'everybody knows' pub-talk, you might find that people will engage in serious discussion with you. If you continue with the wild trolling, you will be ignored.

vesp

RainyDay wrote:

When you have something substantive to add to the debate beyond 'everybody knows' pub-talk, you might find that people will engage in serious discussion with you. If you continue with the wild trolling, you will be ignored.

As well as everyone knows, its statistics. Even Eddie Hobbs mentioned it on his programme on the telly there about a month ago, how public sector workers are paid more than private sector workers, despite the differences in job security, pensions etc etc

TempestSabre

vesp wrote:

As well as everyone knows, its statistics. Even Eddie Hobbs mentioned it on his programme on the telly there about a month ago, how public sector workers are paid more than private sector workers, despite the differences in job security, pensions etc etc

In the private sector you have all sorts of other perks, bonuses, fast promotions and potential for making more than your basic salary that don't exist in the public sector.

vesp

TempestSabre wrote:

....potential for making more than your basic salary that don't exist in the public sector.

.......potential does not put food on the table. the hundreds of thousands of people in the private sector who earn much less than those supported by their taxes in the public sector will tell you that.

TempestSabre

vesp wrote:

.......potential does not put food on the table. the hundreds of thousands of people in the private sector who earn much less than those supported by their taxes in the public sector will tell you that.

Potential means you have to work for it. The opportunity is there, celtic tiger and all that. Apparently the country is awash with money, especially the private sector.

Theres also big numbers of people in the public sector who earn less than their equivilents in the private sector. The public sector pays the same taxes.

I guess because you hear of people with a couple of houses and big company cars, we should assume that everyone in the private sector lives that way?

RainyDay

vesp wrote:

As well as everyone knows, its statistics. Even Eddie Hobbs mentioned it on his programme on the telly there about a month ago, how public sector workers are paid more than private sector workers, despite the differences in job security, pensions etc etc

You really don't want to blindly believe everything you watch on telly? Eddie needs to start comparing like with like? Did he happen to mention the proportion of public sector workers who have 3rd level qualifications by comparison to the private sector? No, I thought not.

SimpleSam06

TempestSabre wrote:

Potential means you have to work for it. The opportunity is there, celtic tiger and all that. Apparently the country is awash with money, especially the private sector.

I have to say here, bollocks, in fairness. The country is awash with DEBT not money, and where do you think all of these swarms of immigrants are getting employed? The public sector? Where have they been learning the gaeilge so? Or maybe they are flooding the PRIVATE SECTOR and keeping wages artificially depressed?

Bah I honestly think sometimes we'll have half the country pushing pencils around an office in Dublin and the other half on the dole living off the taxes of immigrants here on a rotating door basis... Public sector wages are out of control, and have only gotten so because they do not have to be competitive with any other sector, and they are not jobs that immigrants can apply for.

The only thing paying for the civil service is the insane amount of money the government has gained from the recent property boom, and when that falls apart, as it is in the process of doing, you will be left with the government increasing taxes on everyone else to pay for it. Public sector wages are so high that getting a loan to cover them is laughable at best.

Of course when you do that, a lot of people will just up stakes and leave the country, as they did only 20 years ago.

Then the civil service might find their jobs are not so permanent after all, and economic rules apply to countries just as much as corporations.

TempestSabre

Not a fan of sweeping generalisations then?

Consider then that the average salary does not mean that the everyone, or even the majoirty in the public sector are paid more then the private. I know one guy who left the public sector and jumped over 10k by moving to the same position in the private sector.

In one dept I'm familar with heres quite a few non nationals and their numbers are steadily increasing. For some recent positions the majoirty of applications were non nationals and in general they had great qualifications. The lack of Irish applicants would seem to because the salary wasn't attractive, and there was little interest in moving to the decentralisation location. There were no applicants from the decentralised location.

vesp

TempestSabre wrote:

Not a fan of sweeping generalisations then?

Consider then that the average salary does not mean that the everyone, or even the majoirty in the public sector are paid more then the private.

It means that the average salary in the public sector is way more than in the private, despite the perks like security, pensions etc.

TempestSabre wrote:

I know one guy who left the public sector and jumped over 10k by moving to the same position in the private sector.

Big deal. One exception does not make the rule. For that one person there are dozens of people overpaid and underworked compared with their private industry colleagues.

SimpleSam06

TempestSabre wrote:

Consider then that the average salary does not mean that the everyone, or even the majoirty in the public sector are paid more then the private.

Actually thats exactly what it means. Public sector pay has been growing on average THREE TIMES FASTER than private sector pay for the last five or six years.

TempestSabre wrote:

I know one guy who left the public sector and jumped over 10k by moving to the same position in the private sector.

Ah the joys of personal, unsupported anecdotes. Get him posting up here and we'll see.

TempestSabre wrote:

In one dept I'm familar with heres quite a few non nationals and their numbers are steadily increasing. For some recent positions the majoirty of applications were non nationals and in general they had great qualifications.

What department was that? Bus drivers? thats the only one I can immediately think of with a high immigrant population. I'm a big fan of details by the way, the more the merrier.

TempestSabre

Actually its an IT department. But I've seen the same in a few areas. I know quite a few who've left the public sector and are better paid.

SimpleSam06

TempestSabre wrote:

Actually its an IT department. But I've seen the same in a few areas. I know quite a few who've left the public sector and are better paid.

I worked in an IT department in a branch of the civil service back in 2000, and I was getting paid better than my contemporaries in the private sector back then. With a 3x faster rate of pay growth since that (remember benchmarking?), I guarantee you the public sector is a better place to be.

I've never met a civil servant or government employee that didn't have plenty of time to complain about the misery of their position and the meagreness of their pay, however. The entire beaurocracy should be gone over with a fine tooth comb, to be honest, and the dead wood weeded out.

TempestSabre

SimpleSam06 wrote:

I worked in an IT department in a branch of the civil service back in 2000, and I was getting paid better than my contemporaries in the private sector back then. With a 3x faster rate of pay growth since that (remember benchmarking?), I guarantee you the public sector is a better place to be....

Ah the joys of personal, unsupported anecdotes, and sweeping generalisations I'm temporarily in a public IT dept now not 6 yrs ago, and I could easily earn more in the private sector. Many of my colleagues have already left to better money elsewhere. Our dept is understaffed by about 40-50% (according to an external 3rd party review) and so because we can't get staff we outsource the work, or have contractors in. We expect the majority of the work will eventually be outsourced. Most of us have come from the private sector we don't have any problems with returning to it.

SimpleSam06

TempestSabre wrote:

Ah the joys of personal, unsupported anecdotes, and sweeping generalisations

Every bit as valid as your own!

TempestSabre wrote:

I'm temporarily in a public IT dept now not 6 yrs ago, and I could easily earn more in the private sector. Many of my colleagues have already left to better money elsewhere. Our dept is understaffed by about 40-50% (according to an external 3rd party review) and so because we can't get staff we outsource the work, or have contractors in. We expect the majority of the work will eventually be outsourced. Most of us have come from the private sector we don't have any problems with returning to it.

I have never heard of anyone being "temporarily" in a place for 6 years, to be honest. If the grass is so much greener in the private sector, why haven't you moved already? I left it because the civil service isn't a meritocracy, its a brown nosery, and theres more to life than that... There are a lot of claims being made here, none of which are being substantiated. So here are a few to back up my point...

separating out the costs of 38,000 additional workers on the public payroll since 2001, public service salaries have increased by 38%. The comparable rise in the average industrial wage was 19%...In addition, 900,000 workers in the private sector, have no occupational pension.

Property related taxes and levies may amount to €9 billion this year - almost 19% of total Government spending in 2006. We are building a record number of new housing units and approximately 1 in 8 people (12.6%) are employed in Ireland, in work in construction. This compares with an EU average of less than 8%.

Irish public service salaries have risen by 59% in the past five years and the payroll has expanded by 38,000 extra staff... The increase in the average industrial wage for a male worker in the period 2001-2005, was 19%.

Tell me again how hard life is in the civil service, so...

I hate to say it but what we need in this country in some ways is a Margaret Thatcher, she at least had the stones to face down the civil service in the UK. I can't see our own Dear Leader in the same light!

RainyDay

vesp wrote:

It means that the average salary in the public sector is way more than in the private, despite the perks like security, pensions etc.

SimpleSam06 wrote:

Irish public service salaries have risen by 59% in the past five years and the payroll has expanded by 38,000 extra staff... The increase in the average industrial wage for a male worker in the period 2001-2005, was 19%.

Tell me again how hard life is in the civil service, so...

As pointed out above (and apparently ignored by you), comparisons like this are meaningless, unless you include (amongst other things) the average level of qualifications - If I recall correctly, more thant 60% of public sector staff have 3rd level degrees, compared to less than 25% in the private sector.

Sonnenblumen

RainyDay wrote:

more than 60% of public sector staff have 3rd level degrees

Unbelieveable and was wondering if you have any stats on:

- where are these people?
- what % had a degree at entry?
- what are the most popular qualifications?
- what percentage have positions relevant to his/her 3rd level qualification?

But what puzzles me most, is why so many bothered with 3rd level!

SimpleSam06

RainyDay wrote:

As pointed out above (and apparently ignored by you), comparisons like this are meaningless, unless you include (amongst other things) the average level of qualifications - If I recall correctly, more thant 60% of public sector staff have 3rd level degrees, compared to less than 25% in the private sector.

That was ignored because it was inane in a sector that includes health services (41%), for which a third level qualification is required for entry (Edit: although now that I think of it, its not really for a lot of the health services). Note that many of the statistics already given exclude the health services. And even with that in mind, here ya go...

The Irish Examiner reports that graduate workers in the public sector are earning as much as 30% more than their counterparts in private industry.

It also emerged, in the report, that those working in the public sector worked fewer hours.

And here is yet more exciting public sector information...

A private sector worker can provide for the equivalent of a public service pension for a maximum of two-thirds of final salary for retirement. However, 28% of salary would have to be put aside every year for 40 years to do so. Not many people can afford to save this amount.

The average weekly earnings for the total public sector (ex Health) was €848.87 - €44,000 annually. The average in the Semi-State sector was €901.53.

The average weekly earnings for all employees in the Industrial Sector including Managerial staff in December, was €693.95 - €36,000 annually.

A particularly striking finding was that the estimate of the public sector premium for Ireland was more than twice as large as the available estimates for other countries.

There are no performance targets and there are jobs for life.

The gas part about all this is that nothing on this earth will ever convince civil servants that they are not deserving of more than the productive workforce. I could sit here and wave facts in their faces until my arm falls off, to no avail.

The straggling private sector is already totally uncompetitive globally, which means Eddie has it right.

Then you've got a public sector service that is medieval in its productivity. In the last six years, we've had 260,000 new jobs created of which 100,000 were in the public sector. But there is no productivity increase.

SimpleSam06

And one more thing, any posts disputing mine had better have links to reliable sources included in them if they expect a response. Theres far too much unsubstantiated guff coming from the public service apologists around here. That means both RainyDay and TempestSabre.

Edit: I will say, however that I am always open to other points of view, and if they are adequately well supported, I'll even change my own, although I'd have to say thats unlikely in this case.

TempestSabre

SimpleSam06 wrote:

Every bit as valid as your own!

Yes that was my point, thanks for repeating it

SimpleSam06 wrote:

I have never heard of anyone being "temporarily" in a place for 6 years, to be honest.

You worked in 2000 which is 6 years ago.... I never said how long my own "temporarily" was.

SimpleSam06 wrote:

If the grass is so much greener in the private sector, why haven't you moved already? I left it because the civil service isn't a meritocracy, its a brown nosery, and theres more to life than that... ....

Well it must be greener because people including yourself have moved to it.

I'm not long in the public sector and don't intend staying in it. But meritocracy isn't exclusive to the public sector. As a I said quite a few posts back, sweeping generalisations aren't that informative, especially when they are based on a small sector and very limited personal experience. For instance my department is very progressive, but that doesn't mean that I think all departments are the same. Likewise when I worked in a sweat shop in the private sector, or a in very progressive company, I don't assume they are all that like.

I've never had much interest in it before. But the context of those pay increase which you fail to mention, as you well know are the Various Social Partnerships and agreements that have come into effect over that time. I never really paid that much attention to them before...

Partnership 2000 1997 to 2000
Programme for Prosperity and Fairness (PPF) 2000 to 2003
Sustaining Progress 2003 to 2005

But it would seem to me, and perhaps I'm wrong, they are the cause of the increases. My understanding is that were/are intended to bring public sector pay in line with the private, and make it competitive. Were the pay levels equal across both sectors to begin with? Isolating the figures to % increases seems to me to be deliberately telling half the facts.

Measuring performance is a tough nut. As its easy (in both public and private sectors) to set low standards, or vague standards which are easy to satisfy. That said to those that do measure such things, Ireland Public Sectors performance seems on a par with other countries, perhaps even better than average.

http://www.scp.nl/english/publications/books/9037701841.shtml
http://www.forfas.ie/ncc/reports/ncc_productivity_1980-2005/ncc_productivity_1980-2005.pdf

I don't entirely trust such reports. But there you go.

When you see that private companies are making millions, and even billions in profit, and reducing their staffs benefits, and pensions. Why is that a call to reduce the conditions of the public sector. Why do you want to see pensions and other working conditions reduced for everyone?

TempestSabre

SimpleSam06 wrote:

Th....I could sit here and wave facts in their faces until my arm falls off, to no avail...

If it does fall off, you might be better going privately so...;)

SimpleSam06

TempestSabre wrote:

You worked in 2000 which is 6 years ago.... I never said how long my own "temporarily" was.

Apologies, might I advise the use of a bit more punctuation so..."I'm temporarily in a public IT dept now, not 6 yrs ago".

TempestSabre wrote:

Well it must be greener because people including yourself have moved to it.

Yes, I think I already explained why I left the public sector, and it wasn't because of the pay.

TempestSabre wrote:

But meritocracy isn't exclusive to the public sector.

The public sector is about as far from a meritocracy as you are likely to find outside of the court of King Louis back in his day.

TempestSabre wrote:

As a I said quite a few posts back, sweeping generalisations aren't that informative, especially when they are based on a small sector and very limited personal experience.

Which is why I quoted a variety of research papers and newspaper reports, with some very very specific information in them indeed. If you have an issue with the factual information given above, feel free to rebut it any time...

TempestSabre wrote:

Were the pay levels equal across both sectors to begin with? Isolating the figures to % increases seems to me to be deliberately telling half the facts.

Did you even read the posts above? What part of

The average weekly earnings for the total public sector (ex Health) was €848.87 - €44,000 annually. The average in the Semi-State sector was €901.53.

The average weekly earnings for all employees in the Industrial Sector including Managerial staff in December, was €693.95 - €36,000 annually.

didn't make sense? Even better when you factor in Health service pay, the average public sector wage goes UP, and removing managerial wages from the equation puts private down somewhere around €32,000. And thats just in terms of hard cash, excluding other items like the aforementioned pensions.

TempestSabre wrote:

Measuring performance is a tough nut.

Not really. You'd better let Eddie Hobbs know you he was wrong in his analysis of the public sector perfomance so, I'm sure it will be a great weight off his mind.

TempestSabre wrote:

When you see that private companies are making millions, and even billions in profit, and reducing their staffs benefits, and pensions.

Ah the perennial battle cry of the poor civil servant, sure isn't the country awash with money, don't I read about the celtic tiger in the papers? Where's my slice? :rolleyes:

The country is not awash with money, its awash with debt, which I already mentioned, and as for these phenomenal billions these magic corporations are making, that concerns Irish workers not at all. Unlike the public sector, the private sector needs to remain competitive, or said corporations will just haul off to Poland or somewhere. The only reason they are still here even now is because they get massive tax breaks, which other governments (like the US from where we get something like 80% of our manufacturing and export industry) are working towards removing. Not to mention other countries saw what we did there and are doing the same thing themselves. Which means no jobs for anyone, welcome back to the 1980s.

TempestSabre wrote:

Why is that a call to reduce the conditions of the public sector. Why do you want to see pensions and other working conditions reduced for everyone?

Because when the massive cash bonanza the government is reaping from the housing bubble collapses, there will be no way to pay for the massively bloated civil service, without raising the taxes for everyone else to pay for these unaccountable lifers. That money should have been invested in infrastructure, home grown industry, entrepreneurs here in Ireland, not petty empire building to increase their own power base.

Its a millstone around the neck of the country.

TempestSabre

SimpleSam06 wrote:

Apologies, might I advise the use of a bit more punctuation so..."I'm temporarily in a public IT dept now, not 6 yrs ago".

I thought the maths might have given it away.

SimpleSam06 wrote:

Yes, I think I already explained why I left the public sector, and it wasn't because of the pay.

I just said greener. Theres more reasons than money to move to any job, regardless of sector.

SimpleSam06 wrote:

The public sector is about as far from a meritocracy as you are likely to find outside of the court of King Louis back in his day.

Yes an all those family business'es and corporate politics are a model of meritocracy

SimpleSam06 wrote:

Which is why I quoted a variety of research papers and newspaper reports, with some very very specific information in them indeed. If you have an issue with the factual information given above, feel free to rebut it any time...

SimpleSam06 wrote:

Did you even read the posts above? What part of

didn't make sense? Even better when you factor in Health service pay, the average public sector wage goes UP, and removing managerial wages from the equation puts private down somewhere around €32,000. And thats just in terms of hard cash, excluding other items like the aforementioned pensions.

What part of the benchmarking and pay agreements did you not understand? Did you expect it to reduce public sector pay and make harder to attract staff and retain them? Because I thought it was intended to do the opposite.

SimpleSam06 wrote:

Not really. You'd better let Eddie Hobbs know you he was wrong in his analysis of the public sector perfomance so, I'm sure it will be a great weight off his mind.

I gave you research papers. But if you prefer TV personalities....:)

SimpleSam06 wrote:

Ah the perennial battle cry of the poor civil servant, sure isn't the country awash with money, don't I read about the celtic tiger in the papers? Where's my slice? :rolleyes:

Actually my point was that your argument will drive down the conditions of everyone. My point was not that the public sector needs to get some. :cool:

SimpleSam06 wrote:

The country is not awash with money, its awash with debt, which I already mentioned, and as for these phenomenal billions these magic corporations are making, that concerns Irish workers not at all. Unlike the public sector, the private sector needs to remain competitive, or said corporations will just haul off to Poland or somewhere....

Because when the massive cash bonanza the government is reaping from the housing bubble collapses, there will be no way to pay for the massively bloated civil service, without raising the taxes for everyone else to pay for these unaccountable lifers. That money should have been invested in infrastructure, home grown industry, entrepreneurs here in Ireland, not petty empire building to increase their own power base.

Its a millstone around the neck of the country.

I must be living in a different economy. So basically to ensure that the big corporations stay here, and continue to make billions in profit which they don't pass back to the workers, you reckon the public sector should go back to its pre benchmarking state. I don't see how that helps the average joe at all. The debt bubble is being created and fuelled by the banks, and property developers. Yes the public sector has done well out of benchmarking, and that will likely be addressed in the next round of pay agreements.

SimpleSam06

TempestSabre wrote:

I thought the maths might have given it away.

wut.

TempestSabre wrote:

Yes an all those family business'es and corporate politics are a model of meritocracy

Well first of all, if a business was owned by a family, they own it. Equal ownership is not an issue there. This point is so simple I'm stunned I have to make it. And in order for a business to remain competitive, the best must rise to the top, or else another business with better people will cream them. Hence, a meritocracy. This is a concept you seem to have great difficulty wrapping your mind around, I'd imagine because you are in the civil service.

TempestSabre wrote:

What part of the benchmarking and pay agreements did you not understand? Did you expect it to reduce public sector pay and make harder to attract staff and retain them? Because I thought it was intended to do the opposite.

Hahahahah, if you're holding up benchmarking as your gold standard, for, well, anything, I've a bridge you might be interested in taking off my hands.

What you are saying here, and lets be very clear on this, is that you feel civil servants deserve it.

TempestSabre wrote:

I gave you research papers. But if you prefer TV personalities....:)

You gave me about 15 seconds of googling. I gave you someone who has studied the situation in a great deal more depth than you or I combined, and who speaks about it on national television, where anyone who has a problem with his points can rebut them. If you feel you are being somehow wronged here, feel free to email Eddie...

TempestSabre wrote:

Actually my point was that your argument will drive down the conditions of everyone. My point was not that the public sector needs to get some. :cool:

Errr, why would it drive down the conditions for everyone? Reining in the civil service doesn't mean business are going to be able to drop their wages. This comment just made no sense, like quite a bit of your post.

TempestSabre wrote:

I must be living in a different economy. So basically to ensure that the big corporations stay here, and continue to make billions in profit which they don't pass back to the workers, you reckon the public sector should go back to its pre benchmarking state. I don't see how that helps the average joe at all. The debt bubble is being created and fuelled by the banks, and property developers. Yes the public sector has done well out of benchmarking, and that will likely be addressed in the next round of pay agreements.

Did you completely miss what I was saying? Changing public sector conditions isn't going to change private sector conditions! I mean, what? While you're slapping yourself on the back and buying a round of drinks for having "done well out of it", the iceberg is looming off the port bow.

And of course any mention of competitiveness I make is roundly ignored. Thats what I am talking about.

The number of people employed in the public sector needs to be reduced, and the pay increases need to be stopped dead in their tracks. Accountability, efficiency and an end to this "jobs for life" malarky need to take precedent. If all of these things come to pass, I'll pipe down.

Edit: Oh yes, you got a response last time for making at least some sort of an effort to back up your points. If you can't maintain that effort, I'll just assume you don't want to discuss the topic any more, for whatever reasons.

TempestSabre

2006-2000 = 6

nepotism

I'm not. Public sector. Temporarily.

Not all private sector companies rise to the top, and not all of them fail because of it. Not everyone in the Public sector sits around all day doing nothing, and there is work being done, which is why the system functions. If everyone did nothing, the system would simply stop. Its the sweeping generalisations of everyone that I have great difficulty with. I might as well say everyone in the private sector owns a couple of houses and has a 4x4.

By being clear you mean lets make stuff up? Actually I'm giving the context in which those increases occurred. There's a relevant point to be made that benchmarking hasn't just kept pace with the private sector but actually exceeded it. But that's not the point you are making. I feel wronged that you demand stats, facts then ignore them.

I was saying that conditions don't improve for people in the private sector just because a company like a bank makes huge profits and are highly competitive. In fact they've got worse in some cases. I don't see how dis improving the conditions for the public sector will get those bank workers better conditions. The banks have never had it so good or been so competitive. So the argument for increasing competitiveness seems to be an argument for more profits for big business. IMO.

Yes I don't get it at all. What Ice berg? Its not the economy and distribution of wealth is lopsided in one or two sectors like building or anything. Isn't the govt taking the long term view with all the careful managing of public funds? Or do you feel that the lowly clerical officer, the public servant, is squandering the countries wealth by living in the lap of luxury, driving around in their flash new mercs. They are the ones really to blame. I assumed you meant competitiveness against other public sectors in other countries. Hence the links to the reports. If you meant vs the private sector I dunno how you'd compare something like social security to the private sector.

There's been recruitment embargo's for a long time now. Perhaps they'll out source work to more efficient private sector consultants and computer systems. Its seems to have worked in the past. If you reduce the wages, (back to pre 2000) levels and take away job security, how will you get people into the public sector. People won't have a problem finding new work since there's "zero" unemployment.

The response I got wasn't worth the effort since you never bothered to comment on what you asked for. Maybe if I can find some TV celebs quotes that might be of interest. Ummmm.