Ministerial and senior civil servant 10% pay cut (Merged threads)

Unshelved

They are taking a 10% cut in their MINISTERIAL ALLOWANCES while their basic TD salaries of €88k and those of Every Other TD, remains completely untouched .

Nice :mad:

BlaasForRafa

Have you got a source for that. Not being rude or anything I'd just like to read up on that as it would rather dent their credibility (not that ruining the economy hasn't dented their credibility)

seamus

Yes, a quote or a source please?

Gandalf23

... anxiously awaiting a reference for this story ...

flogen

I had the same suspicion myself but going by the minister's speech it's their total pay and not just their ministerial allowance:

Brian Lenihan wrote:

Today, I wish to tell the House that members of the Government and Ministers of State will surrender 10% of their current total pay.

I don't think it can be much clearer than that to be honest, at least not until something more formal is put into writing or even legislation (which I don't think will happen).

The thing to watch is the expenses sheet for 2009; although the ministerial one is a bit more difficult to track than an individual TD's.

Unshelved

That was the rumour doing the rounds last night - but hands up - looks like I was wrong. The transcript of his speech gives him very little wriggle room -

In July, the Government announced that Ministers and other senior public servants would forego pending pay increases recommended by the Review Body on Higher Remuneration. Today, I wish to tell the House that members of the Government and Ministers of State will surrender 10% of their current total pay. Officers at Secretary General level in Government Departments have volunteered to make a corresponding surrender in respect of their pay.

jon1981

Senior civil servants have also been ordered to take a 10% wage cut in the harshest Budget Ireland has seen for a generation

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/mhidkfsnsnkf/

out of interest what is considered a senior in the civil service? im curious to know what sort of numbers we are talking here.

Overheal

anyone above 65?

jaqian

I would assume that would be AP's & PO's, not sure if they would count HEO's in that.

Kimbot

AFAIK its only Ministers that have to take that cut!!

enda1

SGs and AS's I would imagine only.

jaqian

enda1 wrote: »

SGs and AS's I would imagine only.

Woops forgot about them.

podge79

think the Dept of Finance confirmed last night it is their actual pay been reduced... but they will still continue to get pension entitlements for the amount before they took the cut.... so its all just for show really.... at least Mary is taking a 10% cut too.. though why the president gets paid over €300k is beyond me

ednwireland

still liars their pension payements are on the rate before the cut anyone who thinks they will lose a cent is in dreamland - dont forget they still have a deferred 14% pay rise to take.
linky
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/budget-2009/news/pensions-not-affected-by-ministers-10pc-pay-cut-1498918.html

see mcaleese is taking one now should impose a 50% one on her

irish_bob

a 10% forced redundancy across the public service would have been more in line , plus a pay freeze for the next 2 yrs for the rest of them

Kimbot

irish_bob wrote: »

a 10% forced redundancy across the public service would have been more in line , plus a pay freeze for the next 2 yrs for the rest of them

Why on earth should civil servants be put on a pay freeze for the next 2 years?

MadsL

Why on earth should civil servants be put on a pay freeze for the next 2 years?

benchmarking goes both ways you know.

Kimbot

MadsL wrote: »

benchmarking goes both ways you know.

Yeah and Civil Servants are still catching up to people in the private sector in terms of pay, yet they are the ones that have to take a pay freeze!

Overheal

jonny24ie wrote: »

Yeah and Civil Servants are still catching up to people in the private sector in terms of pay, yet they are the ones that have to take a pay freeze!

Too right. Not a great idea to try and fix the economy by giving civil servants more incentive to strike. Again.

nesf

Well in fairness they, the Ministers, are only in a position to cut their own pay. They can't force the rest of the TDs to cut their own pay.

Pay cuts across most of the public service would be ideal, but I can't see it happening any time soon.

Cyrus

jonny24ie wrote: »

Yeah and Civil Servants are still catching up to people in the private sector in terms of pay, yet they are the ones that have to take a pay freeze!

well they arent even trying to catch up in terms of productivity

nesf

Threads merged.

mike65

El Presidente is taking that 10% cut.

Mike

podge79

mike65 wrote: »

El Presidente is taking that 10% cut.

Mike

not that shes going to have to start burning the carpets and the books from the aras to keep warm during the winter.... 325k a year, pension, mansion to live in, cars and drivers paid for by the state, free travel round the world paid for by the state... free tickets to any match/concert she wants (surely thats bik!!) ... all in return for smiling waving shaking a few hands... not bad if you can get it

jaqian

Cyrus wrote: »

well they arent even trying to catch up in terms of productivity

What information do you base this on?

Cyrus

any dealings i have had with civil servants,

i think eveyone knows productivity is low and there are far too many staff doing sweet fa

care to educate me otherwise

podge79

2 big problems with civil service are
a) too many people are allowed work on either job share, three day week or week on week off
and
b) its not performance based. jack and tom can be sitting beside each other and one does nothing and one works their ass off but both get same percentage increase... doesnt motivate one to push onself....

Kimbot

Cyrus wrote: »

any dealings i have had with civil servants,

i think eveyone knows productivity is low and there are far too many staff doing sweet fa

care to educate me otherwise

Yes I would care to educate you otherwise:

Currently there is talk of staff getting sacked in the Public Sector and as a result I have been lumped with jobs 2/3 grades higher than me have been doing, I get no extra for it and this is ontop of my already flatout job. I work my a$$ off while higher up PS's do feck all and then I listen to people saying well all their pay should be frozen etc. Only those that aren't working should have increases and pay freezes in my opinion.

There are a decent amount that don't bother there a$$ but there are loads that do and until someone cops on and starts cleaning up then waste will always be there but look at our government as a prime example of waste. PS's/CS's are suppose to look upto the Ministers etc but you would be stupid to because they do feck all work. All the lower down grades are the ones that work hard yet the higher grades just get their staff to do their work!

podge79 wrote: »

2 big problems with civil service are
a) too many people are allowed work on either job share, three day week or week on week off
and
b) its not performance based. jack and tom can be sitting beside each other and one does nothing and one works their ass off but both get same percentage increase... doesnt motivate one to push onself....

In response:

A) Have you got figures to back up that "TOO MANY" are allowed to do this? In my dept I only know 1 person out of nearly 200 on any of the above.

It actually is performance based, take a look for PMDS (Performance Management Development System).
If you don't perform for the year you don't get your increase, simple as!

enda1

jonny24ie wrote: »

snip...the Ministers etc but you would be stupid to because they do feck all work. All the lower down grades are the ones that work hard yet the higher grades just get their staff to do their work!



In response...snip...

Have you got figures to prove your point?

If you are so concerned about people making generalisations about the PS/CS then why do you do it?

Tara45

They should get the average living wage for the country. That'd be realy motivation for them to do their job properly ...

ninty9er

Why the fupp does our auspicious Uachtarán get paid more than the Taoiseach?? I think it was £100,000 when she took the job:eek:

Cyrus

jonny24ie wrote: »

Yes I would care to educate you otherwise:

Currently there is talk of staff getting sacked in the Public Sector and as a result I have been lumped with jobs 2/3 grades higher than me have been doing, I get no extra for it and this is ontop of my already flatout job. I work my a$$ off while higher up PS's do feck all and then I listen to people saying well all their pay should be frozen etc. Only those that aren't working should have increases and pay freezes in my opinion.

There are a decent amount that don't bother there a$$ but there are loads that do and until someone cops on and starts cleaning up then waste will always be there but look at our government as a prime example of waste. PS's/CS's are suppose to look upto the Ministers etc but you would be stupid to because they do feck all work. All the lower down grades are the ones that work hard yet the higher grades just get their staff to do their work!



In response:

A) Have you got figures to back up that "TOO MANY" are allowed to do this? In my dept I only know 1 person out of nearly 200 on any of the above.

It actually is performance based, take a look for PMDS (Performance Management Development System).
If you don't perform for the year you don't get your increase, simple as!

talk of staff getting sacked? and now people are making you work harder, does that not prove my point?

and you say your job is flat out, how much over time do you work, are you paid for it, do you often have to work weekends?

seamus

jonny24ie wrote: »

Yeah and Civil Servants are still catching up to people in the private sector in terms of pay, yet they are the ones that have to take a pay freeze!

The civil service get a far better deal than the private sector when you take into account holidays, pension provision, working hours and expenses.

jon1981

im actually against them getting a 10% pay cut. but what im highly annoyed about is the pension entitlement. They need to start contributing to it, the country cannot afford it any more. even if they are asked to contribute 10% they are still better off than people in the private sector!

gandalf

jonny24ie wrote: »

It actually is performance based, take a look for PMDS (Performance Management Development System).
If you don't perform for the year you don't get your increase, simple as!

I work in the private sector as do a majority of the people that pay the wages of the civil service. If we do not perform in our jobs over a year we LOSE our jobs.

That is the reality for us and tbh that's the reality that needs to be infused into the Civil Service/Public Service and Semi State. Jobs for life are no longer a reality for a lot of the work force and the public service has to reflect this now.

The_Minister

ednwireland wrote: »

still liars their pension payements are on the rate before the cut anyone who thinks they will lose a cent is in dreamland - dont forget they still have a deferred 14% pay rise to take.
linky
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/budget-2009/news/pensions-not-affected-by-ministers-10pc-pay-cut-1498918.html

......When they retire (some of them in twenty years time) they will get their full pensions alright, but they do lose money - alot more then a cent. They lose the money that they would have been paid if they hadn't cut their pay by 10%. Which is alot of money.

ednwireland

dont think so according to the article their pensions will still be payed on the amount they were earning before the pay cut

also i know people 5 years after retireing from the public sector who are now on more than their take home when they retired - try that on any other pension scheme and see how far you get

for public sector apologists out there i dont have a pension - cant afford one i get 20 days holiday a year i have no right to a job ai could be sacked tomorrow or the company could go bust (already happened once i went in to work in the morning to be told the company was closed get my personal belongings and get out ) and i actually get paid well for the area i live in

as to the person who said he was working his a$$ off and doing jobs grades above him wkelcome to my world i have had to do that in every job i've been in i only got pay rises afetr working for years at a higher level seeing new people come in on more money just deal with it the rest ofus have to and we cant go crying to the unions - whats a national pay award btw never had one ofthose either

bunch of f***ing whiners

my company is putting soeme staff on short time not that we havent got work cant afford the wages whose gonna take up the workload - the rest of us, its the real world guys you do what you have to to allow the company to survive. 2 guys have been in the uk got up at 3am on mon finished work in the late evening mon long days tues and wed back in the office this morn. no overtime no travel time
do you do that ?

Kimbot

Cyrus wrote: »

talk of staff getting sacked? and now people are making you work harder, does that not prove my point?

and you say your job is flat out, how much over time do you work, are you paid for it, do you often have to work weekends?

I do a lot of work outside the standard 9-5! I get no extra money. I have worked Saturdays without getting overtime.

seamus wrote: »

The civil service get a far better deal than the private sector when you take into account holidays, pension provision, working hours and expenses.

Yes but its funny how the private sector view it:

When things are going good for the country and the Private sector are earning alot more than the PS/CS they laugh about it being a crummy job.
Yet when that massive load of dung hits the fan everyone in the private sector give out that the PS/CS have a job for life!!
When I worked in the private sector I knew I could be sacked at any time so I chose a lower payer job for the job security.

ALso what about companies that pay for luxeries for staff in the office etc. They are benifits in the Private sector but both have their flaws!!

gandalf wrote: »

I work in the private sector as do a majority of the people that pay the wages of the civil service. If we do not perform in our jobs over a year we LOSE our jobs.

That is the reality for us and tbh that's the reality that needs to be infused into the Civil Service/Public Service and Semi State. Jobs for life are no longer a reality for a lot of the work force and the public service has to reflect this now.

The bold statement is one area in which your being a bit petty about. At the end of the day I pay taxes aswell so in effect I pay my own wage but remember when I deal with shops/companies etc I pay their wages but do you see me going on about how they run their place of business?? Just because you pay tax doesn't mean you have a right to say.


I know people that have been sacked in the PS/CS long before this recession and that will continue its just taking alot longer than it should because of all the policies!!

The_Minister

ednwireland wrote: »

dont think so according to the article their pensions will still be payed on the amount they were earning before the pay cut

Yeah, they get the same pension, but they are giving up money from their wages. Tens of thousands in fact.

So they are losing more than a cent.

irish_bob

ednwireland wrote: »

dont think so according to the article their pensions will still be payed on the amount they were earning before the pay cut

also i know people 5 years after retireing from the public sector who are now on more than their take home when they retired - try that on any other pension scheme and see how far you get

for public sector apologists out there i dont have a pension - cant afford one i get 20 days holiday a year i have no right to a job ai could be sacked tomorrow or the company could go bust (already happened once i went in to work in the morning to be told the company was closed get my personal belongings and get out ) and i actually get paid well for the area i live in

as to the person who said he was working his a$$ off and doing jobs grades above him wkelcome to my world i have had to do that in every job i've been in i only got pay rises afetr working for years at a higher level seeing new people come in on more money just deal with it the rest ofus have to and we cant go crying to the unions - whats a national pay award btw never had one ofthose either

bunch of f***ing whiners

my company is putting soeme staff on short time not that we havent got work cant afford the wages whose gonna take up the workload - the rest of us, its the real world guys you do what you have to to allow the company to survive. 2 guys have been in the uk got up at 3am on mon finished work in the late evening mon long days tues and wed back in the office this morn. no overtime no travel time
do you do that ?

dont you know that public service workers **** smells better , the day you become a public servant is the day a sense of entitlement becomes ingrained in you
the biggest difference between private and public sector is spare pricks are not tollerated in the private sector where as thier ten a penny in the public sector

gandalf

jonny24ie wrote: »

The bold statement is one area in which your being a bit petty about.

I'm sorry but where am I being petty. In other posts on this forum I have stated that in my business life I interface with CS/PS/SS and I am basing my opinions on those interfaces.

At the end of the day I pay taxes aswell so in effect I pay my own wage but remember when I deal with shops/companies etc I pay their wages but do you see me going on about how they run their place of business??

But you do have your say, you can remove your business. The taxpayer does not have this choice with the CS/PS/SS sectors now does it.

Just because you pay tax doesn't mean you have a right to say.

I think I will highlight that statement and just say that yes everyone should have a say on how our tax monies are being spent or squandered.

I know people that have been sacked in the PS/CS long before this recession and that will continue its just taking alot longer than it should because of all the policies!!

Probably for gross misconduct, but I have never heard of CS/PS/SS workers being let go because they were surplus to requirements (with the exception of the front line medical staff in healthcare who look like the whipping boys of the public sector and temporary contract staff). Obviously the wastage has continued unabated according to this article today.

Hopefully ISME's call for a cull of 30,000 is listened to and actioned along with a wholesale moderisation of the CS/PS/SS work practices to bring them in line with modern Irish business standards and not 19th century British Civil Service ones.

Actually here is a very interesting quote from that article.

Public servants are paid on average €49,000 per annum in comparison to €41,500 in the private sector and well in excess of the average industrial wage, currently €34,000. The public sector pay and pensions bill has increased by 118% since 2000 and is forecast at almost €19 billion by year end, accounting for almost half of total public current expenditure

ninty9er

irish_bob wrote: »

the biggest difference between private and public sector is spare pricks are not tollerated in the private sector where as thier ten a penny in the public sector

Not true. Spare pricks are 50 a penny in the retail sector, especially at management level.

dresden8

Public servants are paid on average €49,000 per annum in comparison to €41,500 in the private sector and well in excess of the average industrial wage, currently €34,000. The public sector pay and pensions bill has increased by 118% since 2000 and is forecast at almost €19 billion by year end, accounting for almost half of total public current expenditure

That includes brain surgeons, other consultants, Gardai, Politicians, Prison Officers, Nurses, Senior Civil servants, Professional Grades, Quangos, Bertie's mates etc etc. Not fair to compare them to waitresses.

The average clerical grade civil servant is on fairly crap money. If the money was so great why would people go to college and get qualified if they could just walk into a cushy, well paid pensionable job in the CS. How would that be the smart choice?

Because the job was looked down upon, that's why. **** job for **** money taking abuse in a public office off scummers, sorry, I mean customers.

Now the CS looks attractive, don't moan that you didn't go for it before.

gandalf

Dresden including that long list of brain surgeons and other professionals is not really valid, the private sector one would also include various highly paid professionals as well and their "lower" grade workers so that argument has absolutely no merit at all.

The basic fact is the civil service is top heavy, its not efficient and any attempt to modernise it has been botched and more than likely made it worse (decentralisation anyone) because the politicians lacked the imagination and political will to actually get the job done.

So again a modern streamlined administration or a 19th Century throwback to the British Empire, those are the choices.

seamus

dresden8 wrote: »

The average clerical grade civil servant is on fairly crap money. If the money was so great why would people go to college and get qualified if they could just walk into a cushy, well paid pensionable job in the CS. How would that be the smart choice?

Because it's *always* been accepted that the civil service was a cushy, safe bet, but if you wanted to actually have a fulfilling career (unless you're a doctor or teacher), you go into the private sector. This is the way that the civil service have always been viewed, that view hasn't changed in the slightest since the economy took a downturn.

People were saying that the CS is top-heavy in 1994. They were saying it in 1998, 2000, 2004 and 2008. The only reason you think it's an issue now is because there's a very real likelihood that the CS will be held to account for themselves like the rest of us have to.

Because the job was looked down upon

scummers, sorry, I mean customers.

And you wonder why people complain about the attitude of civil servants :rolleyes:

I'll be clear here: I have no interest in joining the civil service. Not now, not ever.

The reason it's an issue for me is because I have to pay taxes which are haemorrhaging out a very big, very costly, very inefficient hole.

ednwireland

gandalf wrote: »

Public servants are paid on average €49,000 per annum in comparison to €41,500 in the private sector and well in excess of the average industrial wage, currently €34,000. The public sector pay and pensions bill has increased by 118% since 2000 and is forecast at almost €19 billion by year end, accounting for almost half of total public current expenditure

isnt that private sector average down from €38,000 last year? it'll have to come down a bit more before i'm on the average

AnotherHelenD

ednwireland wrote: »

as to the person who said he was working his a$$ off and doing jobs grades above him wkelcome to my world i have had to do that in every job i've been in i only got pay rises afetr working for years at a higher level seeing new people come in on more money just deal with it the rest ofus have to and we cant go crying to the unions - whats a national pay award btw never had one ofthose either

bunch of f***ing whiners

my company is putting soeme staff on short time not that we havent got work cant afford the wages whose gonna take up the workload - the rest of us, its the real world guys you do what you have to to allow the company to survive. 2 guys have been in the uk got up at 3am on mon finished work in the late evening mon long days tues and wed back in the office this morn. no overtime no travel time
do you do that ?

This smacks of begrudgery. Is this the type of job you want us all to work in? Even in an economic boom you were not able to get a job where you were treated well. Should we all do nothing (not even whine) when we are being paid badly and treated unfairly. All you have managed to do here is make a very good case for union membership.

AnotherHelenD

seamus wrote: »

Because it's *always* been accepted that the civil service was a cushy, safe bet, but if you wanted to actually have a fulfilling career (unless you're a doctor or teacher), you go into the private sector.

You mean like a banker, property developer, management consultant?
In which case you may have meant to say 'rewarding'.

Or do you mean 'fulfilling' like the jobs referred to in my previous post?

dresden8

seamus wrote: »

And you wonder why people complain about the attitude of civil servants :rolleyes:

Yeah, maybe I do take death threats from junkies too personally. Or having to tip-toe around gangsters and terrorists.

Silly me, over-reacting.

Nermal

dresden8 wrote: »

That includes brain surgeons, other consultants, Gardai, Politicians, Prison Officers, Nurses, Senior Civil servants, Professional Grades, Quangos, Bertie's mates etc etc. Not fair to compare them to waitresses.

No, waitresses aren't workshy spongers.