Benchmarking

fourtycoats

This is how it all began on the cost side of the equation. Just read the "Approach" section and weep

1 July 2002
Report of the Public Service Benchmarking Body

Click here to go to the Benchmarking Report

The Minister for Finance, Mr Charlie McCreevy, TD, has received the Report of the Public Service Benchmarking Body from the Chairman of the Body, Mr Justice Quirke.

The Report recommends varying levels of pay increases for the grades examined. It covers all the major groups in the public service (apart from top posts which are dealt with by the Review Body on Higher Remuneration in the Public Sector), including administrative/clerical grades, the Gardai, teachers, nurses, other health professionals and the Defence forces. The pay of approximately 230,000 public servants will be affected by the Report.

The Minister said "The Report is a very important development in how public service pay is determined. For the first time an attempt has been made to assess in a comprehensive exercise the appropriate pay for all of the key public service grades and categories by reference to the pay for equivalent jobs in the private sector".

Under the December 2000 agreement on the adjustment to the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness the parties agreed that following receipt of the report, discussions about its implementation would begin immediately between the public service employers and unions. It was also agreed that one quarter of any increases recommended by the Body would be paid with effect from 1 December 2001 and that the balance would be implemented on a phased basis, to be agreed between the parties, taking account of the desirability of implementing the Benchmarking Body's recommendations as speedily as possible, the level of increases involved, any successor to the PPF which might be agreed between the social partners (or whatever other arrangements may be in place on the expiry of the Programme) and the need to respect any links which the Benchmarking Body might establish between levels of pay and other developments.

The Minister will be reporting to the Government on the Report tomorrow.

The Minister said that "An initial assessment suggests that full implementation of the recommendations in the report would give rise to a full year cost of over €1 billion in current terms. The budgetary implications of this would be significant and are a factor to which regard will have to be had in any discussions with the public service unions on the implementation of the Report."

He added " The work involved in the preparation of this Report has been extremely extensive and demanding on the members of the Benchmarking Body. The Body has completed its task on time and I would like to thank the Chairman, Mr Justice Quirke, and all of the Body's members and the secretariat for their efforts in finalising the Report within the tight deadline set by the parties at the beginning of the process almost two years ago".

Ends


Notes

Public Service Benchmarking Body

Background

The Public Service Benchmarking Body, established under the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness (PPF), was asked to undertake a fundamental examination of the pay of public service employees vis-a-vis the private sector.

The agreed terms of reference and its membership is as follows:

Membership

Chairperson:

The Hon Mr Justice Quirke, Judge of the High Court

Members:

Mr Billy Attley (former General Secretary of SIPTU)

Mr John Dunne (Chairman, IDA, and former Director General of IBEC)

Mr Phil Flynn (consultant, former President of ICTU and former General Secretary of IMPACT)

Ms Maureen Lynott (Management Consultant)

Mr Paddy Mullarkey (former Secretary General, Department of Finance)

Mr Jim O’Leary (former Chief Economist, Davy Stockbrokers, currently lecturer, NUI Maynooth). Mr O'Leary resigned from the Benchmarking Body in April, 2002.


Terms of Reference

General

To examine public service pay and jobs in the manner outlined below and to make recommendations thereon. The Benchmarking Body is asked to produce its report and recommendations by 30 June 2002. A single report is to be produced covering all grades, groups and categories within the Benchmarking Body’s terms of reference.

It would be impractical to examine every single grade across the entire public service within the agreed time frame. Instead, the Body is being asked to examine all the major groups and categories within each sector. A list of such groups will be agreed between the parties, together with details of how the remaining grades will be dealt with in the light of the outcome of the benchmarking exercise; a copy of this agreement will be supplied to the Benchmarking Body.

Implementation of the Benchmarking Body’s recommendations will be discussed between the parties within the context of any successor to the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness which might be agreed between the social partners, or whatever other arrangements may be in place on the expiry of this Programme.

Role review and pay research

The Benchmarking Body’s recommendations should be grounded in a coherent and broadly-based comparison with jobs and pay rates across the economy.

It will, therefore, be required to examine existing roles, duties, responsibilities, etc. in the public service and across the economy, and not just the pay rates applicable in the private sector to jobs with similar titles to, and superficially similar roles as, jobs in the public service.

As an integral part of the Benchmarking Body’s examination, it is asked to arrange in-depth and comprehensive research, examination and analysis of pay levels across the private sector on the following basis:

(a) overall public service and private sector pay levels as well as the pay rates of particular occupational groups (such as clerical/administrative staff and technicians) and other identifiable groupings (such as graduate recruits);

(b) the overall pattern of pay rates in the private sector and employments across a range of type, size or sector; and

(c) the way reward systems are structured in the private sector.

The results of the role review and pay research referred to above should have regard to differences between the public service and the private sector, and between the various public service groups within its remit, in working conditions, the organisation of work, perquisites, conditions of employment and other relevant benefits including security of tenure and superannuation benefits (these factors are based on provisions in the civil service and teachers’ conciliation and arbitration schemes).

Relativities

In conducting its examination and arriving at its recommendations, the Benchmarking Body is to have regard to the following points which were agreed in the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness:-

Cross sectoral relativities are incompatible with the operation of benchmarking: in practice, wide variations would be unlikely to emerge between the various sectors in the pay of common groups such as clerical and administrative staff, engineers and technicians.

Within each sector, internal relativities would be a relevant criterion but traditional or historical relativities between groups in a sector should not prevent the Benchmarking Body from recommending what it considers are appropriate pay rates on the basis of existing circumstances.

Public service modernisation

The exercise should be undertaken within the context of the provisions on public service modernisation in the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness. As stated in that programme the parties are committed to full and ongoing co-operation with change, continued adaptation and flexibility and the delivery of the modernisation programme in the public service set out in Section 1.4 of the Programme, including the provisions on organisational flexibility contained in paragraph 22 thereof. It is accepted that change is a requirement of a modern high- performing public service and is not, in itself, a basis for claims for improvements in pay and conditions.

Approach

In reaching its recommendations the Benchmarking Body is to have regard to the following considerations:

the need to recruit, retain and motivate staff with the qualifications, skills and flexibility required to exercise their different responsibilities;

the need to ensure ongoing modernisation of the public service so that the public service can continue to adapt to necessary changes and to achieve greater efficiency and effectiveness;

the need to ensure equity between employees in the public service and the private sector; and

the need to underpin Ireland’s competitiveness and develop our economic prosperity on a sustainable basis.

Ends



Users who read this document also viewed..
27 July 1998 - Following the Freedom of Information ( Amendment ) Act, 2003, more ...
06 October 2002 - The Strategic Management Initiative was set up in 1996 and marks more ...
07 June 2003 - The Department of Finance is responsible for ".... the more ...
20 February 2003 - Recruitment to all Civil Service Departments/Offices is more ...
01 June 2003 - Welcome to the Department of Finance Website. With the more ...



Dept of Finance, Government Buildings, Upr Merrion St. Dublin 2, Ireland. Tel +353 1 676 7571 webmaster@finance.gov.ie

PARKHEAD67

fourtycoats wrote: »

This is how it all began on the cost side of the equation. Just read the "Approach" section and weep

Basically more money for nothing. Everyone and their granny knows what a disgrace this deal was. Teachers have more time off than anyone. They could easily have a 2nd job during the summer. Handy hours-off every weekend.All they do is moan and whinge. Get real FFS.Grossly overpaid.

ardmacha

There is nothing wrong with what the benchmarking said it was going to do. However it did not do this, and concealed its calculations so that it was not possible to claim that it did not do its job. If I was the new government I would publish the data for this first benchmarking.

BeardyFunzo

I got 3% from the first round of benchmarking and nothing from the second. I'm now down 13% thanks to the two paycuts.
How about you give it a rest? Its too late to try and change this year's budget, so start your whingin in August next year and you might see some results.

Dannyboy83

BeardyFunzo wrote: »

I got 3% from the first round of benchmarking and nothing from the second. I'm now down 13% thanks to the two paycuts.
How about you give it a rest? Its too late to try and change this year's budget, so start your whingin in August next year and you might see some results.

Odd response.
It's in your best interest to push for full disclosure and reform more than anyone - unless you are content with 10% reductions? And more?

femur61

If they were able to bench mark wages by increases, why were decreases not implemented when our economy took a nose dive.

ParkRunner

femur61 wrote: »

If they were able to bench mark wages by increases, why were decreases not implemented when our economy took a nose dive.

http://www.finance.gov.ie/documents/publications/other/2010/payagree/payagree1014final.pdf

The Government acknowledges that public servants have made a very significant contribution towards the recovery of the economy over the last 2 years with over €3 billion saved from the potential Public Service pay and pensions bill:
· The general round pay increases under the terms of the Review and Transitional Agreement due in 2009 were not paid;

· A general moratorium on recruitment and promotion was applied to most of the Public Service, and incentivised early retirement and career break schemes introduced;

· A pension related deduction of an average of nearly 7% was applied to all the earnings of all public servants; and most recently -

· A reduction in rates of pay and allowances took effect on 1 January, 2010.

doc_17

femur61 wrote: »

If they were able to bench mark wages by increases, why were decreases not implemented when our economy took a nose dive.

wtf?

Is that a serious post?

Paulzx

As said in an earlier post...

My situation

8% in first benchmarking

0% in second benchmarking


14% wage decrease in last couple of years.


Which part of benchmarking do you want me to give back?

I tell you what. In the interest of the nation i'll give back 100% of what i got in the second round benchmarking.

Now i'm feeling the pain:rolleyes:





My prediction for this thread is 10 pages of the exact same crap as on about 5 other threads that are running at the moment

MrMatisse

I dont think its fair to bash public servants for wanting a slice of the pie.

Dannyboy83

Really-Stressed wrote: »

I dont think its fair to bash public servants for wanting a slice of the pie.

A proportionate slice of the pie.
There are some very highly qualified people in the public service - I don't think anyone would claim they shouldn't be well rewarded based on performance.
However, public expenditure is out of control:

The public sector wage bill for 330k public servants is €19.8 billion
The private sector MNC wage bill for 270k private employees is €7 billion.

I highly recommend anyone who is confused read this article:
http://www.ronanlyons.com/2010/11/30/irelands-economic-crisis-what-sort-of-hole-are-we-in-and-how-do-we-get-out/

jmayo

I am just waiting for the next round of banchmarking

Oh and can someone explain to some people that a pay freeze means you don't get service increments. :rolleyes:

doc_17

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

The public sector wage bill for 330k public servants is €19.8 billion
I highly recommend anyone who is confused read this article:
http://www.ronanlyons.com/2010/11/30/irelands-economic-crisis-what-sort-of-hole-are-we-in-and-how-do-we-get-out/

Question for you. Of those 330k workers that supposedly share 20bn......how many are retired? And does that mean the actual size of the PS workforce is less than 300K? Significantly less?

Or shouldn't you have said Public sector pay AND pension bill?

I think confusion is a good choice of words. people bandy about stats and fail to properly understand them themselves.

Anyway this s**t has been the subject of many a thread and I fell like I'm trolling.

galway2007

BeardyFunzo wrote: »

I got 3% from the first round of benchmarking and nothing from the second. I'm now down 13% thanks to the two paycuts.
How about you give it a rest? Its too late to try and change this year's budget, so start your whingin in August next year and you might see some results.

I got 2.6 % over 7 year I became a millionaire
Benchmarking was not the problem
The problem was the wage agreement that were trying to keep workers slandered of living up with that pace of inflation cause by a private sector employers greed and there employees high wages
Private sector GREED = High inflation = wage demand
Will I draw yea a picture?????????????