Civil Servants on Less than 60K!!

nw1dqsv7amx026

Anybody see the Impact union rep on Saturday stating that ""despite the public perception most civil servants aren't well paid and are on less than €60K"".

That to me shows the bubble they are living in when they think a salary of 60K is not well paid.

One of my colleagues who was laid off last week (along with 300 others in the company) mentioned in passing that with his degree in computer science and 10 years experience he was on €43K.

I have not been laid off yet but with my Engineering Degree and my almost 20 years experience in the private sector I too am on less than 60K, but I consider myself well paid.

Another key difference is that I have no job security.

Incidentally my family has also taken a pay cut with my wife being laid off. She too has an IT degree and was also paid much less than 60K.

yoshytoshy

The unions will be the final straw for the economy. How did these people get these jobs ?

The Corinthian

I vaguely remember one of the teachers unions complaining around 2000 that IT workers were getting paid vast amounts of money in comparison to teachers. When the dotcom bubble burst and all the IT workers lost their jobs, these complaints went strangely silent.

Unfortunately, this is one of the fundamental differences between the private and public sectors, in that one has security and the other does not (this is before one considers how this, in turn, affects productivity or civil service pensions). As a result, the argument has long been that the price for this security is a lower salary, however, when things were good, the government was all to happy to bump up public sector pay to a point where there really is very little advantage to being a private sector worker - outside of sanity, from what I hear.

A readjustment is inevitable, especially in light of private sector job losses. The public sector unions may kick up, but they will find that their arguments will likely fall of deaf ears amongst the larger population; who are at the end of the day, paying their salaries.

thehamo

I hate everyone lumping teachers in as civil servants! They are not, they are public service not civil servants. Teachers salary start on in the early thirties and takes at least ten years of employment to reach the 40k mark.

I know a serious amount of civil servants on less than 35k too. 60k is not a representative figure for all the lower paid civil servants and I think it is a very bad use of language for Impact to use.

IM not saying that these are bad salaries, especially in times like this. However they are not half as extortionate as they are made out to be in a lot of cases.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

Terrance Zealous Snowmobile wrote: »

Anybody see the Impact union rep on Saturday stating that ""despite the public perception most civil servants aren't well paid and are on less than €60K"".

Jeez! He was saying that despite the public perception, and figures being quoted in the media and on messageboards, most civil servants earn less than €60k. He was not lamenting that they are on €59k!
I know civil servants who have 20 years in the job and are well below €40k. I know others with 30 years on €80k. Then again I know private sector workers on €36k and on €120k. What's the point in such comparisons?

The Corinthian

Giovanna Prehistoric Crane wrote: »

What's the point in such comparisons?

There's not much point with anecdotal evidence.

However, this thread was based upon a claim by a Impact union representative that "most civil servants aren't well paid and are on less than €60K".

'Most' can mean 99%, but when it is given to us by someone who is attempting to put forward the idea that "civil servants aren't well paid", we would be forgiven for thinking that it is closer to 51%. Of course this could have been a poor choice of words by the union representative in question (not unknown to happen).

Salary levels of both private and public sector workers should probably be judged dispassionately, ignoring both the top and bottom 5% percentiles for both. Once that happens we can see if the public sector is paid a similar amount to the private sector, or if less, whether this gap is commensurate to the value of a secure job and pension.

Schuhart

thehamo wrote: »

I hate everyone lumping teachers in as civil servants! They are not, they are public service not civil servants. Teachers salary start on in the early thirties and takes at least ten years of employment to reach the 40k mark.

That may be so, but according to the Central Statistics Office, average weekly earnings of teachers as a group are actually higher than average weekly earnings of administrative civil servants.

Now, I'm not particularly saying this is right or wrong. Just that this seems to be the case.

The best paid public servants seem to be Prison Officers and Gardaí. Tbh, in the case of Prison Officers especially, I'd say that's understandable.

Average weekly earnings of a public servant was €921 in 2007, which would presumably be about €48,000 p.a.

thehamo wrote: »

IM not saying that these are bad salaries, especially in times like this. However they are not half as extortionate as they are made out to be in a lot of cases.

I think this is a fair point. I mean, I don't expect there's anyone in the public sector pulling in Brian Goggin's salary.

That said, the ESRI did a study which tried to compare public sector salaries to private sector salaries for jobs occupied by people with a similar level of qualifications and experience. The overall finding was that public sector salaries were higher by a factor of 10% at senior levels and 30% at junior levels. That said, clearly those public sector jobs have been there for the last ten years for people to apply for if they wanted them.

At the same time, I'd agree that even a premium of 30% is not extortionate, merely 'attractive' (to borrow the language of job adverts).

In any event, isn't the key point about public sector pay really just that the Government is currently borrowing about one third of the money it spends. So, regardless of whether public sector pay is high or low, the present situation is unsustainable.

jim o doom

I am a civil servant - I earn 26k, which is VERY average & nearly everyone I know in the service earns around that much. 26k is a MASSIVE amount less than "60 k". Factor that into your ideas about what we should be earning and what we should therefore have to pay.

Lightning McQue

Folks

Why dont you look up circular 18/2008 on the Dept of Finances website. Starting point for a Clerical Officer is €24397. It takes about 18 years to get to €39558. It is the Principal Officers and above who are on the big money starting at approximately €90000. It is linked to the TD's salary. I heard that the TD's etc are getting or have got a 1.1% pay increase recently.

Lightning McQueen

ixoy

jim o doom wrote: »

I am a civil servant - I earn 26k, which is VERY average & nearly everyone I know in the service earns around that much. 26k is a MASSIVE amount less than "60 k". Factor that into your ideas about what we should be earning and what we should therefore have to pay.

Well then your unions are mis-representing you - why not get on to them because these are the sort of words and phrases that appear in press releases, in the paper, and on the news. They're doing you no favours if they're persisting this image of civil servants being well paid, especially given how the divide has broadened.
Also, I believe APs can reach that salary and HEOs, after years of service, wouldn't be too far off.

nw1dqsv7amx026

"Starting point for a Clerical Officer is €24397"

I do not intend to be dismissive of people on the CO grade and entry requirements but how can you consider the two (Clerical Officer and IT degree) to be equal.

Starting point in my company (not relevant anymore) for somebody with an Engineering/It Degree is €30K.
That is after at least 4 years study, good leaving cert etc.

That is also without a salary scale increments, National wage agreement, good pension, job security etc.

I do believe there is a perception in the public sector/services that people in the private sector are making huge money.

I have seen (of course it may have been disinformation from the HSE) figures quoted for nurses pay and also guards pay which is close to 60K.

Of course everybody wants to protect what they have and hence the protests over the pension levy.
But, to my colleagues who are losing their jobs and have no hope of getting a new one, these protests/comments are extremly irritating to say the least.

nesf

Terrance Zealous Snowmobile wrote: »

I have seen (of course it may have been disinformation from the HSE) figures quoted for nurses pay and also guards pay which is close to 60K.

The problem with both jobs is accounting for the value of overtime. The base salary for both is substantially below 60K but they get time and a half (I think, I could be wrong) on overtime which is very much available and this bumps up their take home pay considerably.

The problem then comes when you start looking at salaried workers in the private sector whose basic pay looks very generous until you realise that they don't get any extra money for overtime. I've friends who were bringing in 50-60K in the financial sector but who could easily have been putting in 80 hour weeks close to deadlines. This is a major disparity with the public sector which for most jobs pays well for overtime that is readily available, the exception being junior doctors who have been known to be paid half their basic hourly rate for overtime worked and up to a few years ago didn't get anything for it if I remember correctly.



Edit: I also find the official's choice of words bizarre. They imply 50K a year isn't well paid when bluntly in the real world that's a very decent wage to be bringing home.

Lightning McQue

There are plenty of CO's who have degrees in various disciplines even Masters yet they are quite prepared to work in the Civil/Public Sector. There is nothing preventing you from joining the Civil/Public Sector, pass an exam/interview and you might even get a job at various levels from CO to AP in Mr. McCreevys very expensive decentralisation programme. You could start as a Junior (30K) or a Senior System Analyst (46K.)

jim o doom

ixoy wrote: »

Well then your unions are mis-representing you - why not get on to them because these are the sort of words and phrases that appear in press releases, in the paper, and on the news. They're doing you no favours if they're persisting this image of civil servants being well paid, especially given how the divide has broadened.
Also, I believe APs can reach that salary and HEOs, after years of service, wouldn't be too far off.

It's not the unions mis-representing us; the wages I earn are exactly the reason we are going on strike - because removing over a grand and a half from my already low wage is just plain WRONG.

It's the government & the papers that are misrepresenting what a lot of us earn.

otwb

thehamo wrote: »

I hate everyone lumping teachers in as civil servants! They are not, they are public service not civil servants. Teachers salary start on in the early thirties and takes at least ten years of employment to reach the 40k mark.

Are these the same teachers that get a €5k allowance for having a degree and can earn over 60k for the same job they were paid a 35k starting salary for just for hanging on in there for 20 years or so?

...35k starting salary for nine months work a year ain't that bad...

Schuhart

jim o doom wrote: »

It's not the unions mis-representing us; the wages I earn are exactly the reason we are going on strike - because removing over a grand and a half from my already low wage is just plain WRONG.

In fairness, its not. Regardless of whether this wage is particularly low for what you do, the State just cannot afford the salaries currently paid to staff.

The Corinthian

jim o doom wrote: »

It's not the unions mis-representing us; the wages I earn are exactly the reason we are going on strike - because removing over a grand and a half from my already low wage is just plain WRONG.

It's the government & the papers that are misrepresenting what a lot of us earn.

What are your hours?
Do you get overtime? What rate? How much generally?
How many holidays do you get?
How's the pension plan?
Can you lose your job?

I ask these things because you would then need to compare this against someone in the private sector. I have never gotten overtime, unless I negotiated (blackmailed) it. My hours have consistently been over 40 per week, probably averaging out at around 44 during a non-deadline period. Other than public holidays, I have always gotten no more than 21 days per year. I have only ever received once any kind of pension contribution from any employer - I get no pension from work. And I've been made redundant on one occasion.

Let me know how you compare.

ParkRunner

It seems like harmony won't be achieved until public sector workers are getting low pay, minimum holidays, no job security and poor pensions.

Raskolnikov

I heard Pat Rabbitte making similar comments on public sector pay.

Apparently €50k is a "modest" salary, and €30k is "very low paid".

I think it was that moment that any thought of voting Labour disappeared in my mind.

yoshytoshy

Raskolnikov wrote: »

I heard Pat Rabbitte making similar comments on public sector pay.

Apparently €50k is a "modest" salary, and €30k is "very low paid".

I think it was that moment that any thought of voting Labour disappeared in my mind.

These would be gross salaries though ,30k is probably about 450 euro/week.

Mr. Presentable

The Corinthian wrote: »

There's not much point with anecdotal evidence.

However, this thread was based upon a claim by a Impact union representative that "most civil servants aren't well paid and are on less than €60K".

'Most' can mean 99%, but when it is given to us by someone who is attempting to put forward the idea that "civil servants aren't well paid", we would be forgiven for thinking that it is closer to 51%. Of course this could have been a poor choice of words by the union representative in question (not unknown to happen).

Salary levels of both private and public sector workers should probably be judged dispassionately, ignoring both the top and bottom 5% percentiles for both. Once that happens we can see if the public sector is paid a similar amount to the private sector, or if less, whether this gap is commensurate to the value of a secure job and pension.

You seem to have taken the 60k figure and run with it, without seeing the rest of what you posted. Nowhere does it say €60k is not well paid. It makes two statements.

1 Most civil servants are not well paid

2 Most civil servants earn under 60k.

nesf

nipplenuts wrote: »

It makes two statements.

1 Most civil servants are not well paid

2 Most civil servants earn under 60k.

It doesn't. The second statement is presented as a justification or support for the first statement implying that the definition of "not well paid" is earning under 60K a year. Ignoring the linkage in the statement is fallacious.

Raskolnikov wrote: »

I heard Pat Rabbitte making similar comments on public sector pay.

Apparently €50k is a "modest" salary, and €30k is "very low paid".

I think it was that moment that any thought of voting Labour disappeared in my mind.

And people wonder why we've competitiveness problems when we consider €30K as very low pay.

Schuhart

yoshytoshy wrote: »

These would be gross salaries though ,30k is probably about 450 euro/week.

Indeed, but just to give some context, the current minimum wage seems to be €1,462 a month, which I take it is about €17,500 p.a.. The average industrial wage in 2006 was €624 for men and €451 for women, which is about €32,000 and €23,452. (And I take it that 'average' means there is a spread around those amounts.)

In this context, it would seem strange to be talking about €30k as "very low paid". Or, if it is, it won't be for long.

Is it also fair to say that the concept of "low pay" depends on personal circumstances. A school-leaver being paid €20,000 is a different proposition people earning €30,000 but with family commitments.

dvpower

thehamo wrote: »

Teachers salary start on in the early thirties and takes at least ten years of employment to reach the 40k mark.

Not bad for a part time job:D

dvpower

EF wrote: »

It seems like harmony won't be achieved until public sector workers are getting low pay, minimum holidays, no job security and poor pensions.

Or until they realise that their good pay, generous holidays, job security and fantastic pensions are not available to most people.

Nermal

EF wrote: »

It seems like harmony won't be achieved until public sector workers are getting low pay, minimum holidays, no job security and poor pensions.

Harmony will be achieved when we're not borrowing over fifty million euro a day to pay for the PS.

NewDubliner

Nermal wrote: »

Harmony will be achieved when we're not borrowing over fifty million euro a day to pay for the PS.

And bankers and property speculators..

thomasj

dvpower wrote: »

Or until they realise that their good pay, generous holidays, job security and fantastic pensions are not available to most people.

its amazing that up to a few years ago private sector workers wouldnt dare go into the public sector because of the low pay and now after being out of the job they finally realise 25-30 better than nothing. Sour grapes i tell ya.

Its amazing that for all the whining out there that probably half of private sector employees didnt even apply to contribute to a pension and now they are giving out because the public sector have been paying a pension contribution

i dont know where you got the idea that the job is permanent i know mine is not and i am post 1995

and lets not talk about the paid christmas parties bonuses paid for in some cases health contributions and nights out

ParkRunner

dvpower wrote: »

Or until they realise that their good pay, generous holidays, job security and fantastic pensions are not available to most people.

Public service jobs are filled through open competitions so they are available to quite a lot of people. 21 days holidays for me is about average. If I work more than my agreed hours I get flexi time off, max 1.5 days a month. Paid over-time is a very rare event. My pension will be well funded by me once the levy kicks in. I got bonuses in the private sector, never in the public sector.
What public sector worker would risk taking out a mortgage now with the focus of cuts to be on public sector pay? There must be enough potential tax revenue and jobs locked up in the empty properties around the country to get this economy back on its feet.

K-9

yoshytoshy wrote: »

These would be gross salaries though ,30k is probably about 450 euro/week.

It would be about €500 for a single person.

Schuhart wrote: »

Indeed, but just to give some context, the current minimum wage seems to be €1,462 a month, which I take it is about €17,500 p.a.. The average industrial wage in 2006 was €624 for men and €451 for women, which is about €32,000 and €23,452. (And I take it that 'average' means there is a spread around those amounts.)

In this context, it would seem strange to be talking about €30k as "very low paid". Or, if it is, it won't be for long.

Is it also fair to say that the concept of "low pay" depends on personal circumstances. A school-leaver being paid €20,000 is a different proposition people earning €30,000 but with family commitments.

The average industrial wage isn't a fair comparison anymore really.

I think the average public sector wage is now about €50,000, the average services wage is about €46,000 from memory.

http://www.finfacts.ie/irelandbusinessnews/publish/article_10006397.shtml

A Dub in Glasgo

What is the median wage?

SkepticOne

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

What is the median wage?

Not calculated in Ireland to my knowledge. It would be something below the average.

dvpower

thomasj wrote: »

its amazing that up to a few years ago private sector workers wouldnt dare go into the public sector because of the low pay and now after being out of the job they finally realise 25-30 better than nothing. Sour grapes i tell ya.

The problem with the public sector (CS in particular) is that its very difficult to move in and out. Someone who has 5 years experience in administration can't join as a Clerical Officer on point 5. A project manager with 5 years experience can't just join as an HEO half way up the scale. If you want to get into the public service, you generally have to join at a few predefined points, so it's practically closed to many people.

thomasj wrote: »

Its amazing that for all the whining out there that probably half of private sector employees didnt even apply to contribute to a pension and now they are giving out because the public sector have been paying a pension contribution

I'd have little sympathy for some complaining about their lack of pension if they haven't sorted one out. But I have great sympathy for those (of us) that have been paying large chunks of our salary into personal pension schemes only to see this going down the tubes. If I could pay an extra 9% to convert my defined contribution pension into a defined benefits one, I would in a heartbeat.

thomasj wrote: »

i dont know where you got the idea that the job is permanent i know mine is not and i am post 1995

Worst of both worlds; not getting the benefits but still paying the price.

thomasj wrote: »

and lets not talk about the paid christmas parties bonuses paid for in some cases health contributions and nights out

Fair enough, but the people most at risk of losing their jobs now aren't those who have been getting the big perks.

... and lets not talk about the flexi time, the privilege days, the half day xmas shopping (is that still going?), the time off to travel home for xmas (I presume that one's gone by now?)

L.R. Weizel

Terrance Zealous Snowmobile wrote: »

Anybody see the Impact union rep on Saturday stating that ""despite the public perception most civil servants aren't well paid and are on less than €60K"".

That to me shows the bubble they are living in when they think a salary of 60K is not well paid.

One of my colleagues who was laid off last week (along with 300 others in the company) mentioned in passing that with his degree in computer science and 10 years experience he was on €43K.

I have not been laid off yet but with my Engineering Degree and my almost 20 years experience in the private sector I too am on less than 60K, but I consider myself well paid.

Another key difference is that I have no job security.

Incidentally my family has also taken a pay cut with my wife being laid off. She too has an IT degree and was also paid much less than 60K.

My Dad is retired and my Mum is a public servant earning much less than 60K. They need the money to fix up the house. I'm sorry but I think you're completely out of touch, my mother is a modest worker and is taking a huge cut in her wages.

iseethelight

Impact don't represent the lower paid Civil/Public Servants the CPSU do listen to what they have to say.

pete

dvpower wrote: »

... and lets not talk about the flexi time, the privilege days, the half day xmas shopping (is that still going?), the time off to travel home for xmas (I presume that one's gone by now?)

Why not talk about them?

Flexi time is effectively free overtime for the employer. You work an extra 10.5 hours over a 4 week period, you can take the 10.5 hours over the following 4 week period. What's wrong with that?

Privilege days are a carryover from the british empire and are a total anachronism - orginally days off for the monarch's birthday (?) and something else not suitable for the Free State, I think. They should have been rolled up into annual leave entitlements years ago.

Someone once told me that the the "time off to travel home for christmas" was where the christmas shopping leave originated. It's a joke anyway. Don't think it happens everywhere, but definitely should have been knocked on the head.

pete

iseethelight wrote: »

Impact don't represent the lower paid Civil/Public Servants the CPSU do listen to what they have to say.

Impact represent the "professional grades" - engineers, architects and the like. Certainly not Civil Servants as understood by joe public, anyway.

Still, I'd like to know what the actual question was that this nameless Impact rep was responding to.

dvpower

EF wrote: »

Public service jobs are filled through open competitions so they are available to quite a lot of people.

But only at a limited set of levels. As I've said above, in general, you can only join at the bottom of your level. The private sector is far more open.

EF wrote: »

21 days holidays for me is about average.

which for many civil servants at least can be augmented by up to 18 flexi days. I accept that this is worked time, but still pretty handy to be able to work an extra 1/2 hour a day and take this as days off.

EF wrote: »

If I work more than my agreed hours I get flexi time off, max 1.5 days a month.

In many public sector jobs you get nothing for extra time worked or you have some ad-hoc deal. It is generally accepted that you will work more than your contracted hours.

EF wrote: »

Paid over-time is a very rare event.

I've heard tales about paid overtime, but haven't personally experienced it.

EF wrote: »

My pension will be well funded by me once the levy kicks in.

My personal pension was well funded by me, but I'm afraid to look at it now.

EF wrote: »

I got bonuses in the private sector, never in the public sector.

Fair enough.

EF wrote: »

What public sector worker would risk taking out a mortgage now with the focus of cuts to be on public sector pay?

What bank would risk giving a mortgage to someone who isn't a public sector worker?

EF wrote: »

There must be enough potential tax revenue and jobs locked up in the empty properties around the country to get this economy back on its feet.

We can only hope. I'm off to troll on the "Should we introduce a property tax on second properties?" thread

iseethelight

pete wrote: »

Impact represent the "professional grades" - engineers, architects and the like. Certainly not Civil Servants as understood by joe public, anyway.

Still, I'd like to know what the actual question was that this nameless Impact rep was responding to.

Yes I'd like to know that.I feel the unions are making a shocking job of representing the normal public sector worker. They need to get some alternative proposals to the table.

pete

ixoy wrote: »

Well then your unions are mis-representing you - why not get on to them because these are the sort of words and phrases that appear in press releases, in the paper, and on the news. They're doing you no favours if they're persisting this image of civil servants being well paid, especially given how the divide has broadened.
Also, I believe APs can reach that salary and HEOs, after years of service, wouldn't be too far off.

Some civil servants are well paid. Nobody's denying this. And, similarly, some aren't.

But IMPACT - the subject of this thread - are a broad public service union, rather than a civil service union.

On a Civil Service union scale:

CPSU members (COs & SOs)are generally low to OK paid
PSEU (EOs, HEOs & AOs) members range from OK to well paid
AHCPS (APOs & POs) members are well paid

It's all relative depending on which union is making the statements.

Sticking with a PSEU grade, the post-1995* HEO salary starts at €49k, rising to a max of €62K after 12 years. A very, very small number of HEOs would be on the higher scale (a sort of merit based non-promotion), the max of which is €64k after 8 years. The last two points on the standard HEO scale are 'long service increments' which are paid after 3 and 6 years. These don't exist on the higher scale.

I know that civil service grades can be pretty meaningless to outsiders looking to make comparisons, but I've worked in different sections over the years where single HEOs had no staff, 2 staff, 4 staff and 55+ staff.



* PRSI contributions increased for anyone recruited to the CS after 1995 and the salary scales were adjusted upwards to reflect this. Pre-1995 recruits are paid less, but don't pay a full A contribution so don't get the dental, optical, unemployment benefits etc. Lose-lose.

dvpower

pete wrote: »

Flexi time is effectively free overtime for the employer. You work an extra 10.5 hours over a 4 week period, you can take the 10.5 hours over the following 4 week period. What's wrong with that?

Hardly free overtime since the time is taken off later. More like time in lieu.

As I understand it, it's entirely up to the employee if they want to avail of it or not. So its a perk, and a sweet one at that.

Schuhart

L.R. Weizel wrote: »

My Dad is retired and my Mum is a public servant earning much less than 60K. They need the money to fix up the house. I'm sorry but I think you're completely out of touch, my mother is a modest worker and is taking a huge cut in her wages.

Well, in a situation where the Government is borrowing one third of everything it spends (including your mum's salary) I think its fair to ask who is out of touch with what.

iseethelight wrote: »

Impact don't represent the lower paid Civil/Public Servants the CPSU do listen to what they have to say.

Why, are the CPSU saying that their members get a 30% premium over private sector equivalents, while Impact's members merely get a 10% premium?

I feel more reliable information might come from the ESRI

THE PAY premium enjoyed by public sector workers should - as a matter of urgency - be put on the agenda for discussion between the Government and the social partners in light of the recession, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI) researchers say in the organisation's new quarterly report.

Conservative estimates suggest that the pay of senior public servants was more than 10 per cent ahead of their private sector counterparts in 2006, while public servants on the lowest grades earned a premium in excess of 30 per cent.

According to researchers Elish Kelly, Séamus McGuinness and Philip O'Connell, the extent of the gap between public and private sector pay in Ireland is "far higher" than in many other countries. The average wage advantage increased to 20 per cent in 2006 from less than 10 per cent in 2003 thanks to several rounds of pay awards, while the pay gap in the rest of Europe rarely exceeds 10 per cent. "This differential would be difficult to justify in normal economic circumstances," they say.

Incidently, I've seen some try to mistakenly suggest that the ESRI study didn't take account of different education levels. In fact, as they say on page 12 of their report,

By adopting a multivariate estimation strategy, we can assess the extent to which higher earnings in the public sector go beyond the level that can be attributed to characteristic effects i.e. the framework allows us to accurately estimate the extent of any public sector wage premium, controlling for differences in educational levels, work experience and so on.

Now, let me stress, I'm not suggesting for a moment that public sector workers need to hang their heads in shame. Clearly, these jobs are open to whomever wishes to apply for them.

All I'm really saying is:
1) if the Government is borrowing one third of its budget, then it needs to cut back. So either we have fewer public servants or lower paid public servants, or a bit of both.

2) Public sector workers are quite well paid by comparison to the private sector. Hence, it seems reasonable to cut pay.

3) Junior public servants are relatively better paid by comparison to the private sector than senior public servants. Therefore, there is no particular reason to cut the pay of junior public servants by less.

pete

dvpower wrote: »

Hardly free overtime since the time is taken off later. More like time in lieu.

It's extra hours worked over and above the contracted amount, and at no cost to the employer. Ergo, free

As I understand it, it's entirely up to the employee if they want to avail of it or not. So its a perk, and a sweet one at that.

Working an extra day this month so you can take a day off next month? Oh yeah, that's a real swish perk alright.

pete

just on that ESRI survey - so a CO starting on €24,397 is being paid about €5,500 (i.e. 30%) too much? What's the comparable job in the private sector?

K-9

iseethelight wrote: »

Impact don't represent the lower paid Civil/Public Servants the CPSU do listen to what they have to say.

Indeed. I think even FF have said they are open to changes here.

Nobody is saying there aren't Civil Servants on 25k, same as 30% of the Private Sector.

Tbh, I can see FF compromising on this and looking good to the lower paid/Working class vote.

K-9

pete wrote: »

just on that ESRI survey - so a CO starting on €24,397 is being paid about €5,500 (i.e. 30%) too much? What's the comparable job in the private sector?

Good question. I suppose you'd need to add on the Pension calculation, about 15% and rising and job security if permanent.

What is it comparable to? What exactly does a CO do?

Firetrap

pete wrote: »

just on that ESRI survey - so a CO starting on €24,397 is being paid about €5,500 (i.e. 30%) too much? What's the comparable job in the private sector?

Bog standard secretaries?

Scofflaw

pete wrote: »

It's extra hours worked over and above the contracted amount, and at no cost to the employer. Ergo, free

Working an extra day this month so you can take a day off next month? Oh yeah, that's a real swish perk alright.

Still better than working an extra day this month and again next month, with no time off in lieu at all...also, they have to "repay" you the day. Ergo, not free.

cordially,
Scofflaw

thomasj

dvpower wrote: »

The problem with the public sector (CS in particular) is that its very difficult to move in and out. Someone who has 5 years experience in administration can't join as a Clerical Officer on point 5. A project manager with 5 years experience can't just join as an HEO half way up the scale. If you want to get into the public service, you generally have to join at a few predefined points, so it's practically closed to many people.



I'd have little sympathy for some complaining about their lack of pension if they haven't sorted one out. But I have great sympathy for those (of us) that have been paying large chunks of our salary into personal pension schemes only to see this going down the tubes. If I could pay an extra 9% to convert my defined contribution pension into a defined benefits one, I would in a heartbeat.




Worst of both worlds; not getting the benefits but still paying the price.



Fair enough, but the people most at risk of losing their jobs now aren't those who have been getting the big perks.

... and lets not talk about the flexi time, the privilege days, the half day xmas shopping (is that still going?), the time off to travel home for xmas (I presume that one's gone by now?)

I do agree with regards to the pension aspect, it was unfair. What makes me wonder though is with all the goings on in the banking sector etc could this major loss have been avoided?

Ok regarding the public service perks you got me there!! (time off to travel home is gone not sure what else) each in it own we were not allowed to be seen to go out and social occasions if we did we paid for it ourselves the same with the bonus.

with regards to the co ive been a co for 6 years am currently on just over 30k a year gross (26k net)

pete

Scofflaw wrote: »

Still better than working an extra day this month and again next month, with no time off in lieu at all...

yeah it's also better than having your fingernails pulled out. what's your point?

also, they have to "repay" you the day. Ergo, not free.

cordially,
Scofflaw

It doesn't cost anybody anything. It's flexibility - nothing more, nothing less. Zero cost all round.

pete

K-9 wrote: »

Good question. I suppose you'd need to add on the Pension calculation, about 15% and rising and job security if permanent.

So about €21,500? (technically a CO on the first two points of the scale has no job security since they're on probation)

edit: Actually I'm basing that figure on the assumption that the ESRI's "30% premium" means they're being paid 130% of what they should be. If you were to say that they should only get 70% of what they're on now then that works out €17,078. Or €19,640 if we include your assumption of 15% for pension, but not including the new pension levy they'll soon be hit with. Worth bearing in mind that the last round of benchmarking suppressed salaries by 12% because of these pension entitlements, so your 15% is a double hit.

What is it comparable to? What exactly does a CO do?

As little as possible, ho ho ho.

The Clerical Officer position is the first step into an exciting career in the Civil Service.

Clerical Officers work in all departments in Ireland, providing vital input to the team through a range of general office duties. Promotional opportunities are available to all Clerical Officers when they are made permanent. Clerical Officers need a good general standard of education and a customer focused attitude.

It used to be the basic paper shuffling, form filling, data entry stuff, but they're also the people on social welfare or tax office counters. There are also COs doing IT helpdesk support (and i'm not talking the CO IT grades here - just regular COs) and other more specialised work.