Civil service salary negotiable?

ParkRunner

Hey,

Just wondering if anyone tried negotiating their starting salary on being offered a post with the civil service? I will be starting as an EO in Dublin in the next few weeks but I already have about 2 years experience as a CO and will be getting results for my masters course soon so thought I might see if I could start on a higher salary. Or is it the case that everyone starts on the first salary scale point regardless.

Cheers

Tails142

If your CO pay is higher than the first point on EO scale you will get moved up, but I dont think that's the case.

As far as I know they wont really take into consideration that you're soon to get a masters. Its pretty much a work to rule system.

Kimbot

Not a hope, as a CO your currently earning about 24,000 a year. Your promotion will bring you up to the 32,000 mark. You cannot negotiate your salary in the civil service at all.

ParkRunner

That's unfortunate! Im sure a lot of highly qualified people are turned off the civil service by the rigidity of it all. There are a lot of over qualified indians and under qualified chiefs in the civil service from my experience

inarut

EF wrote: »

That's unfortunate! Im sure a lot of highly qualified people are turned off the civil service by the rigidity of it all. There are a lot of over qualified indians and under qualified chiefs in the civil service from my experience

And from mine!

Ginger

You can only go up the scale if your existing position is on a higher point... PITA really!

billyhead

Thats not necessarily true about starting an EO scale not less then what your earned as a CO. I was a co computer programmer on €27000 and got the EO position through the open EO compeition. When I got the EO position I started on the bottom starting scale (€26000 or something) becasue it was the open comp even though I was on more as a programmer.

Petrolium Hat

billyhead wrote: »

Thats not necessarily true about starting an EO scale not less then what your earned as a CO. I was a co computer programmer on €27000 and got the EO position through the open EO compeition. When I got the EO position I started on the bottom starting scale (€26000 or something) becasue it was the open comp even though I was on more as a programmer.

If you had two years satisfactory service you shouldn't have dropped. Check with the union.

The_Conductor

Petrolium Hat wrote:

If you had two years satisfactory service you shouldn't have dropped. Check with the union.

Not necessarily- the CO Programmer role attracts an allowance that is "Personal to Job" rather than "Personal to Holder". The unions are discussing this at the moment- particularly in light of the massive recruitment ongoing at EO JSA level in 3 departments. The current incumbents (who do not want to decentralise) are fighting to have their allowances commuted to "Personal to Holder" status with the unions support- which actually puts the new starts in a bad position, as their effective payscale will be considerably lower than the previous holders.

Re: the example above- when promoted to the EO role from CO- you go on the reduced pre-95 payscale for the first 2 years, but make no superannuation contributions (though you are paying class A PRSI). At the end of the 2 years you jump onto point 3 of the post 95 scale- which gives you a massive jump in your gross earnings- but you commence superannuation contributions- so the difference in your net pay is minimal. The headline figures may look worrying- but the net figures are in the same ballpark.

Ps- if your qualifications are directly relevant to the job in question- its possible to be awarded incremental credit on joining the civil service in exceptional circumstances. This would normally be a maximum of 5 points, with 1 point for an honours degree, 2 for a Masters, 3 for a doctorate (not cumulative obviously) and up to a further 2 for relevant professional experience awarded on a 1 per 2 years experience basis. This is normally used to attract scientists/barristers/accountants etc to the service and would not apply to general administrative grades. There are several personnel circulars detailing these arrangements.

PPs- in response to someone who asked me elsewhere- this does not mean that your first two years don't count for pension purposes, simply that you make no contributions. You make no contributions for the period of your probation- but are awarded these years at the end of your probationary period. It means no difference to you- as your initial salary scale is a reduced scale in recognition of the fact that you're not making the contributions.

death1234567

If you are coming from a Job outside the civil service, ie private sector and your on lets say 35K a year is it possible to negotiate your starting salary in the civil service or are your just started at the bottom end of the pay scale for whatever grade the job is, eg. EO or AO?

Ginger

Cant negiotiate.. you are started at the lowest point on the scale..

The_Conductor

death1234567 wrote: »

If you are coming from a Job outside the civil service, ie private sector and your on lets say 35K a year is it possible to negotiate your starting salary in the civil service or are your just started at the bottom end of the pay scale for whatever grade the job is, eg. EO or AO?

No- its not possible to negotiate it.
The difference between EO/AO and 35k isn't massive though- you'd make up the difference in increments within 2-3 years.
Having a defined benefit pension is considered worth an additional 15% on your salary though- something that very very few companies in the private sector have these days......

death1234567

okay thanks for the info.

Hotblack Desiato

smccarrick wrote: »

No- its not possible to negotiate it.

It is, if you are entering as an AO and are coming from the private sector with a higher paying job than the starting point. At least, it was in 2001, but I don't think it's changed since.

The Personnel Officer told me very politely to shag off though, as I was a serving EO, take it or leave it! She more or less admitted at the time they had a policy of replacing HEOs with (cheaper) AO posts...

I wasn't a happy bunny replacing a HEO's post (not the policy work AOs are supposed to be doing) and for no pay increase whatsoever over my old EO job, and Health was a kip, Hawkins House a physical and mental health hazard and most of the PO's seemed away with the fairies. Seemed most people there were crusing towards seniority promotions, or retirement. Got offered the HEO Analyst in another dept. six months later and I was never so happy to leave a department. The pay rise was nice and the job was miles better.

Nolanger

EF wrote: »

There are a lot of over qualified indians and under qualified chiefs in the civil service

100% true.

stepbar

Why you would want to join the Civil Service when you have practically have a masters is beyond me TBH.

CathyMoran

Hey, I joined the service after getting a Masters. I wanted job security and flexi-time. I did not get any extra money for my qualification either.

Aglomerado

Same here; I have a Masters and I currently work as an EO. The money's not fantastic but the security is great and the respect I got from mortgage brokers was far more than it would have been had I remained in the private sector.

inarut

Me likewise. Joined the CS as a temp after getting my honours degree- then made permanent. Now doing my Masters pt and getting an imminent promotion!

stepbar

I bet you you'll never use said masters and if you do by the time you get to the job you want to do, you'll have forgotten how to apply said masters. What a waste. Shows a real lack of initiative TBH. Life it not all about job security and flexi time.

TBH the only job I would look at in the Civil Service would be Third Secretary (if I was in the position of a recent graduate).

inarut

stepbar wrote: »

I bet you you'll never use said masters and if you do by the time you get to the job you want to do, you'll have forgotten how to apply said masters. What a waste. Shows a real lack of initiative TBH. Life it not all about job security.

TBH the only job I would look at in the Civil Service would be Third Secretary (if I was in the position of a recent graduate).

Hey

Since when did doing a masters show a lack of initiative??? This masters is not just relevant to my job but to other areas outside my work aswell. Will take 2 years to complete- am enjoying it and I know I'll reap the benefits sooner rather than later. Job security has never come into this at any point btw.
From earlier threads I recall you as being a very disgruntled person after just 3 months as a temp in the cs.
Maybe you could show some initiative and complete the thesis you said you could complete on life as a civil servant? Thanks

stepbar

inarut wrote: »

Hey

Since when did doing a masters show a lack of initiative??? This masters is not just relevant to my job but to other areas outside my work aswell. Will take 2 years to complete- am enjoying it and I know I'll reap the benefits sooner rather than later. Job security has never come into this at any point btw.
From earlier threads I recall you as being a very disgruntled person after just 3 months as a temp in the cs.
Maybe you could show some initiative and complete the thesis you said you could complete on life as a civil servant? Thanks

So let me see. Why are you doing a Masters TBH? To say you have one? It certainly doesn't show a lack of initative by doing a Masters but it certainly shows a lack of initative if joining the Civil Service is the best you can do having completed said Masters. Seriously. Believe me 3 months was enough in the Civil Service. So damm backward it's unbelievable. Protectionism at it's finest.

Maybe you could show some initiative and complete the thesis you said you could complete on life as a civil servant?

I'm confused by this comment I completed my Masters 2 years ago and glad to say I'm working in the private sector with a better pension than the Civil Service, free shares / pay increases linked to yearly performance and other benefits. So much more out there TBH.

inarut

Maybe the section where you temped in was backward to the extent that I remember you saying that you could complete a thesis on its workings/backwardness/culture etc. Fair point then- i could actually do the same on one section I had the misfortune of working in for 6 months. But I could not say the same of the other dept. I worked in which was progressive, well-run and allowed for initiative-staff input/upward feedback etc.
Just depends on where you work- but in my area (unique to the public service) I can see a definite career path/structure where I can definitely prove myself.
Anyway good luck.

stepbar wrote: »

So let me see. Why are you doing a Masters TBH? To say you have one? It certainly doesn't show a lack of initative by doing a Masters but it certainly shows a lack of initative if joining the Civil Service is the best you can do having completed said Masters. Seriously. Believe me 3 months was enough in the Civil Service. So damm backward it's unbelievable. Protectionism at it's finest.



I'm confused by this comment I completed my Masters 2 years ago and glad to say I'm working in the private sector with a better pension than the Civil Service, free shares / pay increases linked to yearly performance and other benefits. So much more out there TBH.

The_Conductor

stepbar wrote: »

I bet you you'll never use said masters and if you do by the time you get to the job you want to do, you'll have forgotten how to apply said masters. What a waste. Shows a real lack of initiative TBH. Life it not all about job security and flexi time.

TBH the only job I would look at in the Civil Service would be Third Secretary (if I was in the position of a recent graduate).

I have 2 undergrad degrees, along with postgraduate qualifications above a Masters, but just below a doctorate level. I am an EO. I work in a policy area, and also with commissioned research in the area of one of my degrees. My job takes me around the country to the different universities and research establishments regularly- and I attend policy meetings on a number of trade aspects and commodities in the Commission in Brussels. You really have no idea what you are talking about to claim that being an EO or an AO with decent qualifications shows a lack of initiative. While we may have flexi-time, its a privilege not a right, and is only ever exercised when work loads dictates so. As for job security- previous positions I held in the private sector were off-shored to India and then back to HQ in the States. I am willing to put a price, a lower salary, on job security and a reasonable pension- which is why I accept a lower salary. I do however travel a lot with my work and really enjoy what I do. I have decent colleagues who also view their work with pride. There is far more to life than money- job satisfaction and the ability to avail of family friendly policies become more and more important to you, the older you get. No- I don't have an 08 car, nor do I want one. Its a matter of priorities. You attach a very high value to the pure cash compensation aspect of a job. If you look at the bigger picture- there are far more important things than just the money. You may not have as good a salary in the civil service as you do in the private sector- but you do tend to have a far better work/life balance. Perhaps when you are 34 like I am- this will mean something more to you, than it does now.

mikemac

stepbar wrote: »

I'm confused by this comment I completed my Masters 2 years ago and glad to say I'm working in the private sector with a better pension than the Civil Service, free shares / pay increases linked to yearly performance and other benefits. So much more out there TBH.

You did the graduate scheme in BOI?
Tbh, bank shares aren't a good investment at the current time plus I know you have to pay Benefit in Kind tax on the discounted shares AIB give staff. Not sure about BOI, maybe it's better

I thought ye were losing your Defined Benefit pensions? There was a talk of a strike maybe a year back. Well done if you kept it.

You've a great job but maybe not as good as your post shows it to be

Bobby04

Getting back to the title of the thread, why do so many people continue to insist that starting salaries for civil servants are not negotiable? :mad: WRONG.

If the job advert includes the following;

"entry above the minimum may be possible depending on the qualifications and or experience provided these are accepted as being of special value for the position"

then the starting salary IS negotiable. Fact.

The_Conductor

Bobby04 wrote: »

Getting back to the title of the thread, why do so many people continue to insist that starting salaries for civil servants are not negotiable? :mad: WRONG.

If the job advert includes the following;

"entry above the minimum may be possible depending on the qualifications and or experience provided these are accepted as being of special value for the position"

then the starting salary IS negotiable. Fact.

The vast majority (in excess of 95% of opening positions) in the civil service do not have the statement above or its equivalence in them. Most of us here claimed that it was limited for the most part to professional qualifications (such as barristers, accountants etc)- and I provided details of the maximum increments that could be provided, along with the manner in which these increments are calculated.

Starting salaries are *not* negotiable for admin and management positions in the civil service- with the above caveat.

There are some technical postions (inspectorates, legal services, IT etc) where increments or allowances do apply- they are however the exception, rather than the norm.

Ginger

I did a stint in the public service in a senior IT role (grade 7) and I couldnt negiotiate my salary. It was the bottom of the scale for me and that was it. I was coming from the private sector and was told as such

ParkRunner

stepbar wrote: »

Why you would want to join the Civil Service when you have practically have a masters is beyond me TBH.

I have tried my hand in the private sector and have never found any position yet which has matched the civil service in terms of opportunities to do all sorts of courses, flexible hours, variety of opportunities to work in different Departments and gain all sorts of experience. The hours I was expected to work in the private sector were, I think, unreasonable. Maybe I just have been unfortunate with the jobs I took in the private sector, but once I got my foot in the door with the civil service I was much happier with the overall job.

I did my masters (funded and with study leave) on a subject directly relevant to the area I work in currently and that in itself, I believe, has lead to my promotion. There are many slackers in the civil service I wont dispute that, but I am sure you find them everywhere.

Nolanger

stepbar wrote: »

TBH the only job I would look at in the Civil Service would be Third Secretary (if I was in the position of a recent graduate).

You might not even pass the aptitude test.

The_Conductor

Nolanger wrote: »

You might not even pass the aptitude test.

Very true- between the aptitude tests and the competitive interviews- applicants have almost a 97% fail rate.......

stepbar

smccarrick wrote: »

I have 2 undergrad degrees, along with postgraduate qualifications above a Masters, but just below a doctorate level. I am an EO. I work in a policy area, and also with commissioned research in the area of one of my degrees. My job takes me around the country to the different universities and research establishments regularly- and I attend policy meetings on a number of trade aspects and commodities in the Commission in Brussels. You really have no idea what you are talking about to claim that being an EO or an AO with decent qualifications shows a lack of initiative. While we may have flexi-time, its a privilege not a right, and is only ever exercised when work loads dictates so. As for job security- previous positions I held in the private sector were off-shored to India and then back to HQ in the States. I am willing to put a price, a lower salary, on job security and a reasonable pension- which is why I accept a lower salary. I do however travel a lot with my work and really enjoy what I do. I have decent colleagues who also view their work with pride. There is far more to life than money- job satisfaction and the ability to avail of family friendly policies become more and more important to you, the older you get. No- I don't have an 08 car, nor do I want one. Its a matter of priorities. You attach a very high value to the pure cash compensation aspect of a job. If you look at the bigger picture- there are far more important things than just the money. You may not have as good a salary in the civil service as you do in the private sector- but you do tend to have a far better work/life balance. Perhaps when you are 34 like I am- this will mean something more to you, than it does now.

With 2 undergrad degrees and a postgraduate you should be aiming a bit higher TBH. AFAIK the highest payscale at EO level is just shy of 50k. Not great TBH considering your age. To give an example there's a chap who joined my branch 3 years ago at entry level and is now on at least 50k through promotion and pay increases etc. Job security is one thing but at the end of the day you should be adequately paid for the contibution you make to your organisation.

I'm guessing by the sort of job you are doing you would probably get a lot more that you are getting at the moment. As for job satisfaction, well that's your own prerogative. I'm very satisfied with the job I'm doing at the moment and there are lots of avenues for progression.

micmclo wrote: »

You did the graduate scheme in BOI?
Tbh, bank shares aren't a good investment at the current time plus I know you have to pay Benefit in Kind tax on the discounted shares AIB give staff. Not sure about BOI, maybe it's better

I thought ye were losing your Defined Benefit pensions? There was a talk of a strike maybe a year back. Well done if you kept it.

You've a great job but maybe not as good as your post shows it to be

I get the shares for free based on my performance in the year. I also get the opportunity to save a sum per month to buy share options in the future (Save As You Earn) and forgo a months salary to purchase shares. I can do this every year and TBH you would be mad not to considering the dividend rate at the moment. I'm also one of the lucky ones to have got a DB pension before they closed off same. This guarentees a pension of 2/3 of your final salary (assuming full years service). In addition, I have full access to preferential loans / interest rates, interest free loans for car insurance / holidays and a contribution towards club subscriptions every year. Not too shabby TBH and I think you would be hard pressed to get half the benefits in the Civil Service. So yes there's better out there.

Nolanger wrote: »

You might not even pass the aptitude test.

Not sure what you mean by that......

parsi

stepbar wrote: »

I'm very satisfied with the job I'm doing at the moment and there are lots of avenues for progression.

I suppose the banks are perceived by many people as being not far off the Public Service.

Those avenues may be lined with empty houses but who ever heard of a banker getting fired for money-related misdemeanours which lined the banks pockets - think of NIB, AIB and their exchange rate scandals and whatever else subprime stuff is bubbling under the surface.

(note: I said lined the banks pockets. Obviously if they lose the banks money they get the chop)