EU Public Sector Comparison Figures From OECD

SBWife

http://www.iiea.com/blogosphere/public-sector-pay-at-a-glance

Third highest pay for second lowest number of hours "worked" (perhaps on the job would be more appropriate in some cases). It's an embarrassment.

sarumite

This is just going to turn into another PS apologist V's PS basher thread. I wonder whats happening in the photography forum....

SBWife

How in any way is pointing out the difference in ranking between pay and hours worked deemed to constitute bashing?

Tipp Man

Shocking

Well and truely shocking

ei.sdraob

So to summarize (each set of values is in decreasing order, highest to lowest):

• Public Sector Employment as % of Labour Force: 11/22
• Average hours worked: 21/22 :eek:
• Senior Management Renumeration: 4/14 :cool:
• Middle Management Renumeration: 5/14
• Exec secretary Renumeration: 7/14

Sarn

I agree that in the senior and middle management rankings we don't do so well, but when salaries are normalised for hours worked it gets slightly better. Thankfully the senior positions only make up a small overall percentage of total. Middle managers of which we have quite a lot earn a little over the OECD average.

The bulk of the staff in the report are executive secretaries and secretaries, which are just slightly above and below the OECD average, respectively, when adjusted for working hours.

The fact that as a percentage of the overall workforce, our public sector is below the OECD average is also good to see.

ardmacha

Good to see someone actually posting data. This is about what you would expect. Contrary to rants on this forum there is not an usually large number of people in the public sector, in many sectors there are not enough. The managers have paid themselves well, but people in the middle are slightly above the Euro average, which reflects high wages in the Irish economoy generally.

Not sure about the hours thing, it seems bit strange. But in general, nothing to see. Perhaps this will stop some of the nonsense posted here.

Icepick

ardmacha wrote: »

Good to see someone actually posting data. This is about what you would expect. Contrary to rants on this forum there is not an usually large number of people in the public sector, in many sectors there are not enough. The managers have paid themselves well, but people in the middle are slightly above the Euro average, which reflects high wages in the Irish economoy generally.

Not sure about the hours thing, it seems bit strange. But in general, nothing to see. Perhaps this will stop some of the nonsense posted here.

lol

hint: we are bankrupt

Tipp Man

ardmacha wrote: »

Good to see someone actually posting data. This is about what you would expect. Contrary to rants on this forum there is not an usually large number of people in the public sector, in many sectors there are not enough. The managers have paid themselves well, but people in the middle are slightly above the Euro average, which reflects high wages in the Irish economoy generally.

Not sure about the hours thing, it seems bit strange. But in general, nothing to see. Perhaps this will stop some of the nonsense posted here.

Have you lost the plot completly - see post below and tell me how that is nothing to see. Or have you forgotten the country is bankrupt and in debt up to its neck

ei.sdraob wrote: »

So to summarize (each set of values is in decreasing order, highest to lowest):

• Public Sector Employment as % of Labour Force: 11/22
• Average hours worked: 21/22 :eek:
• Senior Management Renumeration: 4/14 :cool:
• Middle Management Renumeration: 5/14
• Exec secretary Renumeration: 7/14

sollar

Whats an Executive Secretary?


'The Executive Secretary is responsible for providing secretarial, clerical and administrative
support in order to ensure that services are provided in an effective and efficient manner'

ardmacha

Have you lost the plot completly - see post below and tell me how that is nothing to see. Or have you forgotten the country is bankrupt and in debt up to its neck

The impression is sometimes given here that the PS is Ireland is vastly larger than equivalent places and that this causes the financial problems. The reality is that the Irish PS is within normal parameters, and is being reduced. If there is a public finance problem compared to other places then other things must be out of proportion to cause this and it is these which must be addressed. In particular, taxes which exist in other places, like annual property taxes and charges which exist in other places, like water charges, will have to be introduced and welfare provision will have to be examined.

Tipp Man

ardmacha wrote: »

The impression is sometimes given here that the PS is Ireland is vastly larger than equivalent places and that this causes the financial problems. The reality is that the Irish PS is within normal parameters, and is being reduced. If there is a public finance problem compared to other places then other things must be out of proportion to cause this and it is these which must be addressed. In particular, taxes which exist in other places, like annual property taxes and charges which exist in other places, like water charges, will have to be introduced and welfare provision will have to be examined.

Let me get this straight

The public sector in ireland is near the top in terms of pay but at the bottom (bar Portugal) in terms of hours worked and your solution is to tax people more.???

Tax them more so that the elite in our society (public servants) can maintain there over paid underworked lifestyles which the rest of us are paying for by working harder for less money than the public sector. some fair messed up logic there

FFs no wonder this country is up the creek - the mupppets running the show have lost the plot - muppets = civil service as well as politicians

sollar

Senior and Middle Management do OK but Executive Secretaries are just middle of the road.

And our % of the workforce is half that of Norway and just middle of the road also.

Whats the big deal... nothing to see here!!

ardmacha

The public sector in ireland is near the top in terms of pay

Pay levels generally in Ireland are near the top in terms of pay.

your solution is to tax people more.

have you forgotten the country is bankrupt and in debt up to its neck?

sollar

ardmacha wrote: »

Pay levels generally in Ireland are near the top in terms of pay.

So when our high cost of living is factored in the humble Executive Secretary has less spending power than their EU counterparts.... interesting.

ardmacha

So when our high cost of living is factored in the humble Executive Secretary has less spending power than their EU counterparts.... interesting.

No. The data should have been adjusted for this already.

As PS numbers have declined and as the census showed that the population is higher than estimated, we are probably even below the median on the "Public Sector Employment as % of Labour Force" measure.

Tipp Man

ardmacha wrote: »

Pay levels generally in Ireland are near the top in terms of pay.



have you forgotten the country is bankrupt and in debt up to its neck?

I haven't but you seem to have forgotten or can't seem to join the dots - a major part of the reason we are in debt up to our neck and sinking rapidly is public spending and guess what public sector wages is a huge proportion of that spending

It doesn't matter if a private company can pay high wages if they can afford it - the government can't afford to pay high wages as it is borrowing 18 billion this year alone. Anyway most studies prove that PUBLIC wages are HIGHTER than private which just highlights the complete madness of it all

Tipp Man

ardmacha wrote: »

No. The data should have been adjusted for this already.

As PS numbers have declined and as the census showed that the population is higher than estimated, we are probably even below the median on the "Public Sector Employment as % of Labour Force" measure.

And what the hell is wrong with being in the median or towards the bottom?

Do these numbers include defence forces??

douglashyde

I wouldn't be so annoyed at public servants' inflated wages if they weren't so damn useless and inefficient. It's perplexing that with all the cuts and all the negative talks that a harder stance isn't been taken on public sector wages and reform.

Sorry for the rant, but driving from work today I seen three junkies stumble into a house and wondered what they did for a living... I then started to think about how there is something inherently wrong with some of Irish culture today; that we expect so much for so little sacrifice.
.

ardmacha

And what the hell is wrong with being in the median or towards the bottom?

Because our GNP per capita is not towards the bottom and other citizens in Ireland have high wages, PS wages should be proportionate.

guess what public sector wages is a huge proportion of that spending

Just over a quarter. Large proportion perhaps, huge proportion no.

It doesn't matter if a private company can pay high wages if they can afford it - the government can't afford to pay high wages as it is borrowing 18 billion this year alone.

The government is broke, it cannot continue giving services away for nothing. What private company whose services is in demand gives them away for nothing?

ixoy

ardmacha wrote: »

The government is broke, it cannot continue giving services away for nothing. What private company whose services is in demand gives them away for nothing?

It can also look at its cost base though as well and see if figures there can be reduced. I know there's talks of addressing this, under the CPA, but I haven't noticed any difference in the area I'm familiar with.

Tipp Man

ardmacha wrote: »

Because our GNP per capita is not towards the bottom and other citizens in Ireland have high wages, PS wages should be proportionate.

It has been proven time and again that Public wages are HIGHER than private wages

GNP per captia doesn't matter a damn when you are borrowing huge amounts to pay for public spending

Would you acknowledge that the public spending is too large??

Godge

As always the fine print is the most important part. Found this in relation to the pay of middle managers

"Ireland: Data take into account the decrease of the salaries following the Financial
Emergency Measures in the Public Interest Act 2009. "



That means it takes into account the effect of the pension levy. Unfortunately for the public-sector bashers looking for support, it therefore does not take into account the pay cuts at the start of 2010 and the pay cut for new entrants at the start of 2011. As always these surveys are somewhat out of date and don't take into account recent developments.


Edit update: Just checked the figures for executive secretary, confirmed they are based on 2009 figures, so don't take into account the pay cuts in 2010 or the new person pay cuts in 2011.

Hotblack Desiato

douglashyde wrote: »

Sorry for the rant, but driving from work today I seen three junkies stumble into a house and wondered what they did for a living....

Chances are they were not public servants.

sollar

Godge wrote: »

Edit update: Just checked the figures for executive secretary, confirmed they are based on 2009 figures, so don't take into account the pay cuts in 2010 or the new person pay cuts in 2011.

So they are most likely at the lower end of the scale then.

murphaph

According to that report only 7.9% of the Greek workforce work for the state, but according to pretty much all the news reports (on German TV) I have seen about Greece, it's more like 40-45%, one of the major problems the Greeks face is the massive (much worse than Ireland) %age of people reliant on the state for their pay cheques.

I'm not really sure how much faith I have in this report.

Reports aside: Ireland is flat broke and can't afford its current PS/SW bill. Changes to these areas of expenditure must happen.

SBWife

sollar wrote: »

So they are most likely at the lower end of the scale then.

I doubt it, there would be very few people on the new entrant pay scale (due to the much needed hiring freezes) and existing wages would need to be cut by 25-30% on a time adjusted basis for the vast majority to bring them down to the low end of the scale.

sollar

SBWife wrote: »

I doubt it, there would be very few people on the new entrant pay scale (due to the much needed hiring freezes) and existing wages would need to be cut by 25-30% on a time adjusted basis for the vast majority to bring them down to the low end of the scale.

The 2010 paycut was not included in those figures either

donegal11

It should be noted that we are 5% and 7% above our counterparts in Portugal and Greece in terms government employment as a percentage of labour force. They would be a better reflection of where we should be at rather then the OECD average.

And on a side note how do the Scandinavian countries manage such high government employment rates, do they tax more, have lower wage rates or include semi states such as the oil companies in Norway.

SBWife

sollar wrote: »

The 2010 paycut was not included in those figures either

Neither were the increments paid in 2010 and 2011.

Are you actually trying to argue that the average paycut for executive secretary grades comes to the 25-30% that would be needed to bring the average adjusted compensation into the low end of the scale?

If so I'd highly advise you stop sniffing the Tippex - you do know it kills brain cells.

Nijmegen

For me it's a very simple debate. Rounded figures: €50bn spending. €30bn taxes. Growth very weak (IE, taxes not likely to rocket to meet the difference.) Much increased taxes makes growth weaker/go backwards.

Therefore, the size of the spending must decrease.

One of the largest components of spending?

Public sector pay.

Therefore, public sector must shrink (jobs must go.)

Also, this myth of Ireland being a low tax economy is not holding water. In 2009, the latest year for comparison, Irish tax vs the EU27 + Norway and Switzerland was statistically indistinguishable from the mean: 35.9% of GNP, versus 36.7% mean with a standard deviation of 6.1 and a skew of 0.2

Switzerland has ranked within lowest 5 tax economies in 10 out of 11 years between 1999 and 2009. The country with functional public services and great public infrastructure has managed its affairs on the average tax revenues of just 29.3% of its GDP against the average of 31.7% of GDP and 37.5% of GNP for Ireland.

Source: True Economics here and here.

SBWife

donegal11 wrote: »

It should be noted that we are 5% and 7% above our counterparts in Portugal and Greece in terms government employment as a percentage of labour force. They would be a better reflection of where we should be at rather then the OECD average.

And on a side note how do the Scandinavian countries manage such high government employment rates, do they tax more, have lower wage rates or include semi states such as the oil companies in Norway.

As for Scandinavia they tax significantly more and some semi-states are included if they are seen as being controlled by government. The definition is in the second paragraph under Employment.

sollar

SBWife wrote: »

Neither were the increments paid in 2010 and 2011.

Are you actually trying to argue that the average paycut for executive secretary grades comes to the 25-30% that would be needed to bring the average adjusted compensation into the low end of the scale?

If so I'd highly advise you stop sniffing the Tippex - you do know it kills brain cells.

How do you know the other countries don't have an incremental scale also. I'd imagine they'd have allowed for the likes of that.

Look at the ES Total figures - Ireland would easily drop below Sweden with the 5 to 7% cut applied.

Nijmegen

SBWife wrote: »

Neither were the increments paid in 2010 and 2011.

I should note that Michael Noonan answered a Dail question stating that increments cost the state about €250,000,000 per year. About €823.84 a head increase per year (if simply divided against number of PS workers listed in Croke Park report.)

ardmacha

For me it's a very simple debate. Rounded figures: €50bn spending. €30bn taxes.

It is simple, if you largely pluck the figures you are using out of the air.
PS pay is about one quarter of expenditure, and one third of that comes straight back in taxes, levies and whatnot. As has been pointed out numerous times here, if you close the public service you would still have a deficit.

It is not a question of Ireland being a low tax country, it is a question of the Irish citizens having had a pissup and the government has had to pay for it, and so they must pay more tax as a consequence.

SBWife

sollar wrote: »

How do you know the other countries don't have an incremental scale also. I'd imagine they'd have allowed for the likes of that.

Look at the ES Total figures - Ireland would easily drop below Sweden with the 5 to 7% cut applied.

There are a cluster of 4 countries with close to the same paylevels I would consider the actual ranking within these 4 or changes to it be be meaningless (as would any other economist or statistician worth their salt the total difference between the ranking of Ireland and Italy for example is less than 1%). To move below the UK the next country outside the cluster would require a 13% decrease almost twice that already implemented.

Nijmegen

ardmacha wrote: »

It is simple, if you largely pluck the figures you are using out of the air.
PS pay is about one quarter of expenditure, and one third of that comes straight back in taxes, levies and whatnot. As has been pointed out numerous times here, if you close the public service you would still have a deficit.

It is not a question of Ireland being a low tax country, it is a question of the Irish citizens having had a pissup and the government has had to pay for it, and so they must pay more tax as a consequence.

I love this, every friggen argument, 'cutting my special interest won't close the deficit.'

No. Cutting many special interests will.

The Irish state doesn't provide value for money, is our trouble, not low taxes.

It's a ludicrous world where we have such a deficit and an agreement that no public sector permanent jobs shall be cut. They may not be the whole saving, but they sure as hell aren't a small one!

As for precise figures on the deficit, as you wish:

The General Government deficit, projected to amount to minus €50.3 billion this year, is projected to fall to minus €20 billion – or 12.2 per cent of gross domestic product (GDP) in 2011.

The exchequer balance will be €18,744 in the red for 2010 and will rise to minus €22,445 billion in 2011, the White Paper on receipts and expenditure shows.

The Government will spend €4.8 billion on servicing the national debt in 2010. The figure is forecast to jump to €5.1 billion next year, as the Government seeks to stabilise Ireland’s budget deficit.

sollar

SBWife wrote: »

There are a cluster of 4 countries with close to the same paylevels I would consider the actual ranking within these 4 or changes to it be be meaningless (as would any other economist or statistician worth their salt the total difference between the ranking of Ireland and Italy for example is less than 1%). To move below the UK the next country outside the cluster would require a 13% decrease almost twice that already implemented.

Lies, damned lies and statistics. You are moving the goalposts to suite your argument.

You're the one who made reference to these tables. So, if the 5% to 7% cut was applies Ireland would be at the lower end of the scale...

Nijmegen

sollar wrote: »

Lies, damned lies and statistics. You are moving the goalposts to suite your argument.

You're the one who made reference to these tables. So, if the 5% to 7% cut was applies Ireland would be at the lower end of the scale...

This also misses the point that those other countries aren't running deficits like Ireland is.

sollar

Nijmegen wrote: »

The exchequer balance will be €18,744 in the red for 2010 and will rise to minus €22,445 billion in 2011, the White Paper on receipts and expenditure shows.

The exchequer balance has barely changed in the last 3 years despite the government taking... what is it.. 16 or 20 billion out of the economy.

Whatever they are doing is failing.

Nijmegen

sollar wrote: »

The exchequer balance has barely changed in the last 3 years despite the government taking... what is it.. 16 or 20 billion out of the economy.

Whatever they are doing is failing.

It's simple. The size of government spending isn't actually coming down (in fact, it's increasing at the moment versus last year.) The plan relies on growth in the economy to increase tax take and solve the problem without major (and I mean major) pain.

That growth isn't showing up, and funnily enough our bond yields are going up and credit ratings down as everyone bar the Irish government has put two and two together on that one.

ardmacha

No. Cutting many special interests will.

Having everyone pay more taxes will, trying to pay for excess by everyone by charging it to 14% of the people will not work.

It's a ludicrous world where we have such a deficit and an agreement that no public sector permanent jobs shall be cut. They may not be the whole saving, but they sure as hell aren't a small one!

The size of the public sector is reducing, laying off people and paying redundancy etc may advance things somewhat but does make a huge difference. The government is trying to manage this reduction without chaos.

As for precise figures on the deficit, as you wish:

Pre-budget figures from last December, this is July. Not very precise.

SBWife

sollar wrote: »

Lies, damned lies and statistics. You are moving the goalposts to suite your argument.

You're the one who made reference to these tables. So, if the 5% to 7% cut was applies Ireland would be at the lower end of the scale...

Ireland would remain in the middle of the scale...where's the banging one's head against the wall smilie when you need him.

Nijmegen

Having everyone pay more taxes will, trying to pay for excess by everyone by charging it to 14% of the people will not work.

As I've pointed out:

1. Ireland is not low tax to begin with
2. GDP growth isn't turning up as it is. Increased taxes will solve this?

More tax = less growth = less taxes. Look at VAT, which is going backwards... And they want to raise it a few % in the coming years? Bye bye demand.

The size of the public sector is reducing, laying off people and paying redundancy etc may advance things somewhat but does make a huge difference. The government is trying to manage this reduction without chaos.

What, pray tell, would be chaotic about cutting fat, reducing services in areas we don't need them (combine quangos, cut their combined corporate services division, say), and doing what so many private sector businesses have done since the beginning of the recession without 'chaos'?

Take HP. Cut 25,000 jobs. Then cut another 9,000 jobs. Then replaced 6,000 jobs in new areas with new skills to meet new demand. My word, imagine trying that in the public sector?

Chaos comes from voluntary redundancy, natural wastage and a recruitment freeze. Chaos is planning departments in councils keeping all their staff while construction is non existent and hospitals losing almost their entire catering staff to feed patients.

This 'can't do' attitude really bugs me.

Pre-budget figures from last December, this is July. Not very precise.

As you wish. Will the mid year exchequer balance suffice?

At €10.8 billion, the Exchequer Deficit for the first six months of the year is better only than the €14.7 billion deficit recorded in 2009, but is worse than the €8.9 billion deficit recorded in 2010.

By the half-way point of last year our debt interest costs had run to €2.18 billion and all had been met from the Exchequer Account. The equivalent figure from the Exchequer Account for 2011 is €2.41 billion.

This year central government expenditure will be around €68 billion, with around €60 billion of that in the current account. With nearly 90% of expenditure coming through the current account it is important to track the changes here.

And changes there are none. At €7.2 billion, the current account deficit is exactly the same as it was in 2009, and while there does appear to be a €0.8 billion reduction on the €8.0 billion current account deficit recorded to this time last year, that is eroded when we add back in the €0.8 billion interest paid from the CSRA. The current account deficit isn’t budging.

To be fair this is what the DoF have forecast as they see last year’s €18.7 billion Exchequer deficit falling to €18.2 billion this year and hence the claims that the public finances are “on target”. Maybe it’s time we moved the goalposts and aimed for “improving” rather than just “not getting worse”.

More scathing commentary here.

sollar

SBWife wrote: »

where's the banging one's head against the wall smilie when you need him.

You don't need one. You just need to look at the table again and place Ireland below Sweden.

ardmacha

As you wish. Will the mid year exchequer balance suffice?

So you contend that the budget deficit is similar to 2009, although there have been two sets of pay cuts in the PS since then. That worked well, didn't it?

Nijmegen

ardmacha wrote: »

So you contend that the budget deficit is similar to 2009, although there have been two sets of pay cuts in the PS since then. That worked well, didn't it?

The rise in unemployment and the continued collapse of the private sector contributed to that.

Clearly, deeper cuts are required.

Solair

I worked, as a private sector employee, along side public servants and civil servants and what flabbergasted me was how there were usually a core of committed people who basically did everything and kept the ship afloat while their colleagues were doing almost nothing.

Something's seriously wrong with the public service if the hours worked are that low.

I also don't understand how people can work in an environment where a large % of the workforce are basically not pulling their weight.

I think what sums it up for me is that there are only two types of organisations that open at 9:30 and close to the public at 4:30pm ... 1) public service offices and 2) banks...

I'm not public service bashing in general, I just think the whole thing needs urgent reform and oversight of its productivity levels.

Bosco boy

Solair wrote: »

I worked, as a private sector employee, along side public servants and civil servants and what flabbergasted me was how there were usually a core of committed people who basically did everything and kept the ship afloat while their colleagues were doing almost nothing.

Something's seriously wrong with the public service if the hours worked are that low.

I also don't understand how people can work in an environment where a large % of the workforce are basically not pulling their weight.

I think what sums it up for me is that there are only two types of organisations that open at 9:30 and close to the public at 4:30pm ... 1) public service offices and 2) banks...

I'm not public service bashing in general, I just think the whole thing needs urgent reform and oversight of its productivity levels.

everyone in the private sector pulls their weight! Yeah! Pull the other one, take it from someone who has worked in the private sector, semi state and public sector there are wasters in them all and all sectors carry them!

femur61

sarumite wrote: »

This is just going to turn into another PS apologist V's PS basher thread. I wonder whats happening in the photography forum....

I hope so its our/my money that are paying the PS wages, we the public should have a say in how its spent. We are such a sabserviant nation and if we receive bad service we are not happy we are entitled to say something albeit in cyberspace. Maybe we will wake up and smell the coffee.

sollar

Solair wrote: »

I think what sums it up for me is that there are only two types of organisations that open at 9:30 and close to the public at 4:30pm

Where is this?