Cut in public sector pay for new employees only

Tim Robbins

Ok, so new public sector employees will have their pay cut for 10%?
Is not illegal? i.e. I thought there were all sorts of discrimination laws against this sort of thing. Sounds like blatant discrimination to me.

dan_d

I highly doubt it's discrimination.

Does anyone know if this also applies to semi-state companies? And where do county councils stand in this too??

Always number 1

Its not discrimination at all - it just means that the start off pay in the public service will be 10% less than what it is at the moment.
Whether this will apply to newly elected councillors/TDs etc; remains to be seen :rolleyes:

Jaysoose

So some public servant thats been sitting on their hole for the last twenty years is worth more than a new entrant?

This is beyond a joke..

ntlbell

Jaysoose wrote: »

So some public servant thats been sitting on their hole for the last twenty years is worth more than a new entrant?

This is beyond a joke..

someone who has worked 20 years should have a hell of lot more expirience and be "worth" more.

This goes in every walk of life not just in the PS

why should you start day one with no expirience as the same money as someone who's been working for the job twenty years?

Jaysoose

ntlbell wrote: »

someone who has worked 20 years should have a hell of lot more expirience and be "worth" more.

This goes in every walk of life not just in the PS

why should you start day one with no expirience as the same money as someone who's been working for the job twenty years?

Forgot it was the internet, in RELATIVE TERMS somebody that starts tommorow then works their way up to say EO super fast would be worth 10% less than somebody that has simply existed in the system long enough to get promoted.

I thought the whole premise of the croke park agreement was an increase in efficiency and better work practices etc, this indicates that the existing mindset is one of sloth and self entitlement. Any new blood should be welcomed not penalised.

ntlbell

Jaysoose wrote: »

Forgot it was the internet, in RELATIVE TERMS somebody that starts tommorow then works their way up to say EO super fast would be worth 10% less than somebody that has simply existed in the system long enough to get promoted.

I thought the whole premise of the croke park agreement was an increase in efficiency and better work practices etc, this indicates that the existing mindset is one of sloth and self entitlement. Any new blood should be welcomed not penalised.

In all types of jobs people sit around doing the same work some longer than others all earning different wages, the PS shouldn't be any different.

You should negotiate your wages at the start work hard over time and get the benifits and those who do SFA get SFA.

The startting salary shouldn't be set in stone regardless of the job.

Bench marking was suppose to an incrase in effiencey, we're still waiting and anyone that thinks the croke park agreement is going to bring it to us is deluded.

delonglad

ntlbell wrote: »

someone who has worked 20 years should have a hell of lot more expirience and be "worth" more.

This goes in every walk of life not just in the PS

why should you start day one with no expirience as the same money as someone who's been working for the job twenty years?

A hell of a lot experience in doing F all! Actually thats a generalisation which I should apologise for and slightly retract, but there is a lot of waste in the middle management, upper management of Public Sector. Let them take a bigger cut to bring them down to reality.

This new blood will hopefully work hard like most the front line PS!

Agreed they should start low but shouldn't the middle and top take a cut for their high levels of inefficiency first maybe?

It also goes in every walk in life that if you don't do what your paid for you get sacked!

Always number 1

So people are complaining that public sector pay is too high and yet when they want to bring in a measure to have the starting pay reduced they complain? :rolleyes:

It's all fairly immaterial anyway because essential services aside - nurses/guards etc; there's an embargo on anyway

ntlbell

delonglad wrote: »

A hell of a lot experience in doing F all! Actually thats a generalisation which I should apologise for and slightly retract, but there is a lot of waste in the middle management, upper management of Public Sector. Let them take a bigger cut to bring them down to reality.

This new blood will hopefully work hard like most the front line PS!

Agreed they should start low but shouldn't the middle and top take a cut for their high levels of inefficiency first maybe?

It also goes in every walk in life that if you don't do what your paid for you get sacked!

I think everyone outside of the PS would like to see this.

There should be no guarnteed increases. generate some compeition.

Sleepy

I'd love to know how this is supposed to save money when there's a recruitment embargo and the only strategies for removing the dead-wood are natural wastage and buying people off with excessive voluntary redundancy packages which will more than likely only appeal to those close to retirement or who are capable of getting work in the private sector (i.e. the hard-working ones).