Are the Private Sector simply Jealous of the Public Sector?

ardmacha

Look at this article from David mc Williams, and it shows in 2004 our public sector was already best paid in Europe. http://www.davidmcwilliams.ie/2008/1...onomic-history

This article is entirely without figures, so doesn't show anything.

The public sector unions are annoying everyone as they havent put forward any viable solution that is fully costed and rapidly achievable.

The government has not put forward any plan of any sort, other than cutting people whether they are efficient or not or whether they are overpaid or not.

ixoy

ardmacha wrote: »

The government has not put forward any plan of any sort, other than cutting people whether they are efficient or not or whether they are overpaid or not.

That'd be the better approach but unions are fiercely resistant to even the notion that a single one of their members is ineffecient or overpaid. They wouldn't even look at this sort of reform, or would procastinate over it, and the government cannot afford a laboured combatitve process on this and needed to act now.

WalterMitty

ardmacha wrote: »

This article is entirely without figures, so doesn't show anything.



The government has not put forward any plan of any sort, other than cutting people whether they are efficient or not or whether they are overpaid or not.

The articcle originally had a table of figures from Eurostat, and our public sector got lot more since 2004

Quoting Eurostat labour cost survey 2004, McWilliams in the Sunday Business Post predicts that if Ireland continues to recruit and wildly overpay public sector workers,it will slide far down in the international economic performance rankings. That's because of the resulting unnecessary tax burden and public sector workers' likely opposition to reforms. The Eurostat figures show:

[]Ireland's average public sector pay in 2004 of €45,643 is the highest in the range of six advanced EU countries and compares with Britain at €35,189 and Germany €33,905. Irish public sector pay is 30% higher than Britain's.

[]Ireland is unique in the group of six in paying its public sector more than private sector pay,a whopping 28% more. And that's before valuing jobs for life security and gold plated final salary pensions.This is a form of state orchestrated looting of the private sector.

[]In the other countries, private sector pay is higher than the public sector's: in Britain by 8%,Germany 5%,Denmark 8%,Finland 12% and Netherlands 0.4%

woodseb

ardmacha wrote: »

The government has not put forward any plan of any sort, other than cutting people whether they are efficient or not or whether they are overpaid or not.

I'm sorry but cutting public sector pay is by definition a

solution that is fully costed and rapidly achievable.

Thoie

I'm in the private sector, and I neither hate, nor am jealous of, my friends in the public sector. I get frustrated at times that some don't seem to recognise what they have, particularly when it comes to pensions. If you mention paying for pensions they seem to automatically jump in with "that's minus the state pension anyway". Even with that, and with their new(ish) pension levy, I will pay far more into a pension fund than they ever will, and get a lot less out of it. One was shocked when I showed him my pension statements for the last few years and realised that it's worth an awful lot less than I had paid into it.

I appreciate that they have some of the same frustrations that I've had in private sector jobs (things getting delayed, computers crashing, etc), but I get tired when I hear the following stories:

1. I've taken a pay cut because I now have to pay for my pension. See above.
2. There's a 6 month backlog, and they won't hire any new people to clear it. In the private sector that kind of backlog would usually be dealt with by unpaid overtime. Can you imagine if a large retailer told you there would be a 6 month wait before they could arrange your refund?
3. Someone's contract wasn't renewed, and now I'm doing the work of two people. But yet you still manage to leave work at 5pm every day? Is that why there are 6 month backlogs?
4. Well, there's a ban on overtime pay, so I'm not allowed stay after 5pm. Who won't allow you? Your boss said you may not do a little extra unpaid? Or is this a union rule?

SkepticOne

I think there's some jealousy, yes. But there's also a sense that among us that we've let down the public sector workers by allowing a grandiose sense of entitlement to develop. Someone was talking about low morale among PS workers and I think it is this overblown feeling of entitlement that may be at the route of it rather than anything to do with cuts, which deep down most public sector workers accept need to be made. It is the dissonance between the irrational sense of entitlement and the rational understanding of the need for cuts over the next several years that is leading to the low morale, imo.

ardmacha

They wouldn't even look at this sort of reform, or would procastinate over it, and the government cannot afford a laboured combatitve process on this and needed to act now.

Granted quick action is needed. However the need for change has been evident for 18 months now, without any indication of a plan. The only message from the government is that we will proceed as politically expedient, which is exactly what they have been doing for the last decade. The negotiations before Christmas were a complete stunt by the government, there were 3 days for talks after the need for talks was evident for months. Sad to say but even this forum, despite the trolls, has put forward better arguments than the government.

dvpower

I'm sure there is an element of jealousy - and not without good reason; public sector workers do seem to have an easy ride (better pay, great pension, job for life, annual increments, good holidays, good conditions, relaxed regime etc*).

On top of that, on a lot of the threads here they often seem to be living in a different world ("We didn't cause the problem, why should we have to suffer", "You could have joined the PS, but you didn't. Tough!", "We're going on strike even though our employer is bankrupt")

There is a basic unfairness at the centre of the whole public / private debate.

*Obviously, some of this perception does not match the actual facts.

epgc3fyqirnbsx

There is jealousy to an extent, thats only human nature. And there is conflict being built up in the media and on these boards.
I wouldn't begrudge anyone for having a job, indeed I am very happy for them. But I do get frustrated when I hear many of my friends in the public sector argue about how they were stuck on the same wages when the rest of the country made millions. This is nonsense, a few got very rich but by and large, public sector always were well paid and continue to be well paid. And the pension is a really huge advantage....
I'd just be very quietly happy to be in such a position now

irishh_bob

mickeyk wrote: »

+1 I just don't buy this "we were ridiculed and laughed at during the boom", it simply isn't true. Pete I also did the EO exam once around 2005 as it happens and the numbers applying were massive, for only a handfull of vacancies. Similar with Gardai when they were recruiting.

I believe much of the hatred is jealousy tbh, that is human nature, if you lose a good job and are unemployed, or even put on short-time, and then hear your PS neighbour talking about strikes over relatively modest cuts to their often very good salary, of course you are gonna be jealous and frustrated. Many people are now regretting not applying for PS jobs in the good times, however like you say these jobs were not as freely available as some people make out, and there was always fierce competition from well qualified people for them. I doubt this dispute will end until we are back in full employment, and that ain't gonna be for quite some time. I know many PS and they are all good people, it is the ones that go on national media complaining that they can't live on 55k that infuriate people, as well as unions who spout utter nonsense on shows like Frontline etc.

the we were laughed at during the boom line has no basis in reality , it is a union invention designed to foster a sense of pity and persecution among public sector workers in order to prime them for millitantism and strikes

Olduvai

I have had the pleasure of working in both the public and private sector. Its not jealously! "Work to Rule" if persons are not doing their job I dont care if they are clerical officers or nurses they should be disciplined end of!

What the public sector dont seem to grasp is that the economy is in total freefall, tax take is down, unemployment is unprecedented with little chance of employment, emmigration is raring its ugly head again, the brain drain is again a feature of Irish society, and while the public service may be complaining about levies and so forth, people in the private sector dont have the job security that many permanent employees in the public sector have and they dont have defined benefit pensions and tax free lump sums when they retire.

Even the unemployed and other social welfare dependants have had their income reduced and people are actually losing their homes.

It amazes me, in looking a some public sector jobs and the people holding these posts. Accountability from the top down in neglible - one only has had to look at ministers to those who were suppose to regulate. When many vacancies arise in Departments and agencies funded by the state the only qualifications of many appointees is that they are career civil servants! Rather than ceasing opportunities to instill new blood into an already institutionalized system they go with the safe option and dont rock the boat.

Welease

Jealous?

Hardly.. If anything I feel sorry for a lot of them..

Sorry that those who work hard in the PS and provide as good a service as they can, will get uniformly hit with the same cutbacks that their financially broke employer will need to make, because of the resistance to make common sense economy and efficiency rationalisations that the modern world demands.

If some form of meritocracy and realism was brought into the service their pay and conditions could be maintained while the rest were cut free..

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

mkahnisbent

Look, there are wasters in both the private and public sector, and it's fair to say based on much anecdotal evidence the problem is a tad worse in the public sector.

But ignoring who is worse than the other, the problem is the fact that wasters in the private sector are only ripping off the shareholders, whereas wasters in the public sector are ripping off everyone.

And of course, wages in the public sector are extraordinarily high for a near bankrupt country.

Btw I work in the public sector.

Paulzx

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Can't argue with anything you have said. However, at present the government is only interested in instant cost savings and is happy to apply the broad stroke of across the board paycuts. It's quicker and yields instant savings. They're not interested in sorting out other ways of saving that might take longer.

You are correct in saying that efficient, motivated and skilled wokers are carrying the burden of the slackers

Thoie

Paulzx wrote: »

Can't argue with anything you have said. However, at present the government is only interested in instant cost savings and is happy to apply the broad stroke of across the board paycuts. It's quicker and yields instant savings. They're not interested in sorting out other ways of saving that might take longer.

You are correct in saying that efficient, motivated and skilled wokers are carrying the burden of the slackers

Honestly, if the government turned around tomorrow and said that the 5% of the civil service who "performed" best over the next 12 months would get a tax free bonus and a small payrise, the next 90% would get a payrise in the region of 1-2% (performance based) and the bottom 5% would be fired, do you think the unions would accept that?

Count Dooku

Thoie wrote: »

Honestly, if the government turned around tomorrow and said that the 5% of the civil service who "performed" best over the next 12 months would get a tax free bonus and a small payrise, the next 90% would get a payrise in the region of 1-2% (performance based) and the bottom 5% would be fired, do you think the unions would accept that?

I have strong suspicion that 5% of best performers accidentally will be top managers…

P. Breathnach

Count Dooku wrote: »

I have strong suspicion that 5% of best performers accidentally will be top managers…

Should one expect otherwise? You want the best performers promoted.

Welease

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Should one expect otherwise? You want the best performers promoted.

Promoted or compensated.. yes...
Promoted to managers ... No..

MysticalRain

I'm unemployed at the moment due to an injury and have very little chance of securing employment in the foreseeable future. I have two parents working in the public sector. I have worked in a public sector job previously (not in Ireland, but abroad). I have also worked alongside public sector workers when I was in the private sector. So I have a pretty good view of what goes on in the public sector. Some of it positive. Some of it negative.

My politics are center left. So under normal circumstances, my sympathies would be biased towards unionized PS workers. However, the PS lost my support when I saw one too many over pampered fatcats on salaries of 50/60K and more complaining about how hard done by they were just because they had a small fraction of their wages cut. Yer wan on Pat Kenny complaining about being on Valium because she couldn't pay her bills or the mortgage on her rental property in Bulgaria. A 24 year old teacher on 42K a year berating Batt O'Keefe because she might have to cut back on her Celtic Tiger lifestyle so she can make her mortgage payments on the brand-new overpriced house she was conned into buying at the top of the market. Etc. etc. I have said before that the smartest thing the beards running the PS unions could have done would have been to tell their members to shut up and take the heat so as to keep the good deal that they had under the radar. Thanks to them protesting too much, the private sector is now all too aware of just how pampered and overpaid they are.

I don't begrudge anybody a decent wage. Especially if they happen to be good at their jobs. I don't even believe that PS workers earning under 30K should have had any pay cuts (strangely enough, the lower paid seem to be the ones doing the least amount of whining). But it would be nice if the fatcats in the public sector would actually appreciate the situation they're in and just stop complaining. It is an awful lot worse for the 435,000 people on the dole as I can personally attest.

Stark

Welease wrote: »

Promoted or compensated.. yes...
Promoted to managers ... No..

There are "manager" grades in the civil service that don't involve people management. Being promoted to AO or AP just means more job responsibility, not necessarily of the people management sort.

For me, it's not about public vs private. It's about those of us living in the real world vs union bull****.

MysticalRain wrote:

I don't even believe that PS workers earning under 30K should have had any pay cuts (strangely enough, the lower paid seem to be the ones doing the least amount of whining).

I'd be wary about making blanket decisions like no-one below 30k. Would you include part-timers and people in job sharing agreements in the protected pile? You could end up with someone previously on 35k for doing a full-time professional job earning the same salary as someone doing 3 days a week. Same story for someone straight out of college or doing a job that someone in the private sector would get minimum wage for doing.

Pay adjustments (I say adjustments as there are probably high performers who should be getting more at the expense of the deadwood) should be done on a case by case basis imo.

The_Honeybadger

Stark wrote: »

I'd be wary about making blanket decisions like no-one below 30k. Would you include part-timers and people in job sharing agreements in the protected pile? You could end up with someone previously on 35k for doing a full-time professional job earning the same salary as someone doing 3 days a week. Same story for someone straight out of college or doing a job that someone in the private sector would get minimum wage for doing.

An ESRI study actually showed the biggest gap between the sectors existed at this level, not hard to believe either as clerical officers can earn up to 38k (after many years service), there is simply no way anybody doing similar work in the private sector would ever hope to earn a wage like that, but agree with Mysticalrain, cuts at this pay grade are pretty brutal. There was however no way of cutting the amount they needed to cut fairly IMO, someone will always feel hard done by.

MysticalRain

Stark wrote: »

I'd be wary about making blanket decisions like no-one below 30k. Would you include part-timers and people in job sharing agreements in the protected pile? You could end up with someone previously on 35k for doing a full-time professional job earning the same salary as someone doing 3 days a week. Same story for someone straight out of college or doing a job that someone in the private sector would get minimum wage for doing.

Pay adjustments (I say adjustments as there are probably high performers who should be getting more at the expense of the deadwood) should be done on a case by case basis imo.

I agree it is a blanket statement to a certain extent. I didn't have part-timers in mind when I said that. I said it to illustrate a point more than anything else.

P. Breathnach

mickeyk wrote: »

An ESRI study actually showed the biggest gap between the sectors existed at this level, not hard to believe either as clerical officers can earn up to 38k (after many years service), there is simply no way anybody doing similar work in the private sector would ever hope to earn a wage like that,

Agreed.

but agree with Mysticalrain, cuts at this pay grade are pretty brutal. There was however no way of cutting the amount they needed to cut fairly IMO, someone will always feel hard done by.

The problem is that pay should really reflect what the work is worth (itself, admittedly, a tricky question) rather than the cost of living (another tricky question) of the employee.

changes

mickeyk wrote: »

An ESRI study actually showed the biggest gap between the sectors existed at this level, not hard to believe either as clerical officers can earn up to 38k (after many years service), there is simply no way anybody doing similar work in the private sector would ever hope to earn a wage like that, but agree with Mysticalrain, cuts at this pay grade are pretty brutal. There was however no way of cutting the amount they needed to cut fairly IMO, someone will always feel hard done by.

I think its now 36K and after 15 years. Take out the levies, tax, prsi etc and its about 480 take home pay per week. Anyone 15 years with a private sector company wouldn't be on much less i'd guess.

WalterMitty

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Agreed.



The problem is that pay should really reflect what the work is worth (itself, admittedly, a tricky question) rather than the cost of living (another tricky question) of the employee.

To offer value to the country/taxpayer a public sector position should only offer the minimum required to attract enough sufficiently qualified people. Of course we may decide that we only want first class degree holders as teachers then the pay would have to rise to attract only the top people.

P. Breathnach

WalterMitty wrote: »

To offer value to the country/taxpayer a public sector position should only offer the minimum required to attract enough sufficiently qualified people...

I don't think it is quite as straightforward as that when there is a recession, and a labour surplus.

The_Honeybadger

changes wrote: »

I think its now 36K and after 15 years. Take out the levies, tax, prsi etc and its about 480 take home pay per week. Anyone 15 years with a private sector company wouldn't be on much less i'd guess.

Everybody pays those deductions, I am talking about someone doing similar work for the same length of time, no way they would be earning that wage IMO, a private sector employer would be daft to allow that as it doesn't represent value for money when you take into account the responsibilities and skills required to carry out the job.

The_Honeybadger

P. Breathnach wrote: »

The problem is that pay should really reflect what the work is worth (itself, admittedly, a tricky question) rather than the cost of living (another tricky question) of the employee.

You are right, however a big problem arises when through your own carelessness you allow people to become financially dependent on a salary higher than what their skills and labour are worth. It simply wouldn't be fair to then cut severely them when times are hard, it would devastate families and Gov would be painted as monsters by the Unions, a PR disaster which they can hardly afford.

MaceFace

mickeyk wrote: »

You are right, however a big problem arises when through your own carelessness you allow people to become financially dependent on a salary higher than what their skills and labour are worth. It simply wouldn't be fair to then cut severely them when times are hard, it would devastate families and Gov would be painted as monsters by the Unions, a PR disaster which they can hardly afford.

It may not be fair, but it is happening, and will continue.
As for the fallout of this, the Unions are loathed by the majority of those not in the public sector. For me anyway, anytime I hear the Unions leaders speak, I instantly take the opposite stance, not because I may agree with it, but I just assume what they say is pure propaganda to further their own aims.

Also, FF don't seem to be doing to bad out of it. The consensus is that Lenihan has played a stormer. No longer are we the bad egg of Europe.
I have a feeling that when the next election comes around, it will be a lot closer than people think.

And as for the original question - yes - private sector workers are jealous of those that are relatively unaffected by the recession in comparison in the same way everyone is jealous of others earning more than them.
That feeds a lot of the hatred, but there is an unfairness in society that needs to be fixed.