Public Sector Increments Suspension.....

Avatarr

Howlin defends public service pay increments.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0723/howlin-defends-public-service-pay-increments.html?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=pulsenews

This is all the more astonishing when you consider the increment appraisal system presently being used (or not been used as the case may be) works off a 5 point system where you require at least 2 to qualify for increments. Only 18% of these appraisals conducted in 2011. Last year only 30 out of 30,000 civil servants were denied increments for poor performance. Howlin in the last couple of days has indicated that the level needs to be increased to 3 points to qualify for an increment. With only 18% of appraisals completed and some questions as to the "quality" of the reviews, this does not appear to be anything more than a token gesture.

All increments should be suspended until appraisals are completed on 100% of all civil servants. Simply, a prerequisite for increment should be an approved review at 3 points or above. Additionally, random samples of these appraisals should be open to independent scrutiny to verify system robustness.

juan.kerr

A bit of a joke alright. Also when they mention the annual costs they are being disingenuous. These aren't one off payments, the figures mentioned refer to the cost of that years increases only. Once granted they are rolled up into salary for subsequent years, increasing the overall wage bill year on year. Some of this is obviously offset by retirements etc.

I wonder also whether the figures provided by the minister include the additional pension costs...presumably not.

n97 mini

Avatarr wrote: »

All increments should be suspended until appraisals are completed on 100% of all civil servants.

Just to be clear you're not saying increments should be suspended, but rather unappraised increments should be suspended.

Avatarr

n97 mini wrote: »

Just to be clear you're not saying increments should be suspended, but rather unappraised increments should be suspended.

Standardised appraisals, working of a bell curve, taking into account pay scales, attendence e.t.c. There are plenty of options and methods/models out there in other sectors. Reward the performers and penalise the others. If the 82% in 2011, do not have completed appraisal in 2012, they would not get increments.

Would this not be fair???

gandalf

Given this country is running at a deficit then increments and pay increases should be suspended, all un-vouched allowances ended period and no changes considered until such time that our finances are back in order.

Instead they close down hospital beds, reduce the number of teachers and damage front line services to protect that flawed Croke Park agreement and the core of permanent public service staff who seem to have been deemed untouchable by our politicians.

Dannyboy83

19,422 earn under €20,000
26,749 earn €20,000 - €30,000
66,504 earn €30,000 - €40,000
68,935 earn €40,000 - €50,000
44,019 earn €50,000 - €60,000
30,315 earn €60,000 - €70,000
22,285 earn €70,000 - €80,000
10,814 earn €80,000 - €90,000
4,146 earn €90,000 - €100,000
3043 earn €100,000 - €125,000
1,212 earn €125,000 - €150,000
2,536 earn over €150,000

Realistically speaking, only about 46,171 are going to see 75% of the increment anyway.
And they are going to spend that on day to day living, not ski trips in Zakopane.

Anybody in the €30,000 to €40,000 bracket and onward (the vast majority) are going to see most of it savaged before they ever get to it.

Our social welfare rates may discourage people from returning to work,
but our tax system definitely kills off the incentive to progress quite early on.

Total cost: €18m (I'M ASSUMING HE IS CITING GROSS FIGURES AND NOT NET??)
Net cost: €11m or €12m or thereabouts ??

I was under the impression that the increments were in the realm of €100m plus.
To be honest, this is very minor stuff.
Cut out the wastage in the HSE for 1 week and you would save that.


Yes I would certainly like to see people judged on merit, but there are a million other things that ought to happen in the state sector but probably won't. That's a well beaten path.


Hopefully they will make some serious headway on the HSE and Social Welfare.
That would repair some serious damage.

Dannyboy83

Considering we are on Week 31 of 2012 and the HSE overspend is already over €250m (and we are acutely aware that there is serious wastage), and considering the IMF have cited the urgent need to revamp Social welfare...

We are talking about €1.25 billion minimum NET, versus about €18 million GROSS.
Is this a diversionary tactic?

Avatarr

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

Considering we are on Week 31 of 2012 and the HSE overspend is already over €250m (and we are acutely aware that there is serious wastage), and considering the IMF have cited the urgent need to revamp Social welfare...

We are talking about €1.25 billion minimum NET, versus about €18 million GROSS.
Is this a diversionary tactic?

Yes this may be in comparison to our debt, a small amount, but add it to 75mil saving on allowances which was due to be decided in february and the promised health legislation to allow HSE to use generic drugs and charging health insurers for private patients using public beds, saving another 200mil. That's close on 300million, we can't aford not to pursue every last cent.

Most importantly, it's the right thing to do.

n97 mini

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

Anybody in the €30,000 to €40,000 bracket and onward (the vast majority) are going to see most of it savaged before they ever get to it.

A lot of the the lower paid are working part time.

This shows that no grade in the civil service, and few in the wider PS, earn less than 20k, yet there are almost 20,000 people earning less than 20k

woodoo

My last increment was €10 per week net after taxes and all were taken out. Hardly ginormous.

They should be looking at some of the silly allowances and cutting the travel costs bill.

Sleepy

If that €520 a year extra is so insignificant you'll hardly miss it.

In a private firm that's doing well, one can expect a larger share of the profits when their contribution to those profits increases. If things are going badly for that firm, however, even if you're contributing more than ever, you'll be lucky to keep the same salary.

Gumbo

Sleepy wrote: »

In a private firm that's doing well, one can expect a larger share of the profits when their contribution to those profits increases. If things are going badly for that firm, however, even if you're contributing more than ever, you'll be lucky to keep the same salary.

In SOME Private firms....your post should state. You cannot speak for the whole private sector. My friend got a near 10k salary increase last year. She works in banking and a bailed out bank at that albeit not bailed out by our country. Some private sector firms are giving salary increases, and not just €5 per week or similar.

My last increment saw me with €7 increase per pay day.....im paid forthnightly, so thats 3.50 per week if my maths are up to scratch.

Sleepy

Is that bank profitable or still losing money? Something tells me it's the former. Salary increases aren't particularly tolerated by shareholders of loss-making businesses. Unless your friend got her raise for a promotion? Fairly widespread practice in a recession for people to be promoted with a raise that leaves their salary lower than that of the person they're replacing?

Sleepy

Yes, I can imagine how one might tire of constantly being reminded that they're in an untenable position that must eventually be rectified. The Quinn Family's supporters seem just as reluctant to face reality.

the_syco

Sleepy wrote: »

If that €520 a year extra is so insignificant you'll hardly miss it.

I'd love €520 a year extra. I'd love to have something like that added each year.

Gumbo

Sleepy wrote: »

Is that bank profitable or still losing money? Something tells me it's the former. Salary increases aren't particularly tolerated by shareholders of loss-making businesses. Unless your friend got her raise for a promotion? Fairly widespread practice in a recession for people to be promoted with a raise that leaves their salary lower than that of the person they're replacing?

Her private sector company gave her a pay rise. Similar to Dunnes Stores giving my mam her annual pay rise. Salary went up.

the_syco wrote: »

I'd love €520 a year extra. I'd love to have something like that added each year.

Not all increments are the same though. This years could be 520e to coencide with a 5 year term or similar but next years could be 234e.

waster81

kceire wrote: »

Her private sector company gave her a pay rise. Similar to Dunnes Stores giving my mam her annual pay rise. Salary went up.



Not all increments are the same though. This years could be 520e to coencide with a 5 year term or similar but next years could be 234e.

Her private sector company got bailed out by the state - she shouldnt have had her job saved because it would have went bust without the state saving her job

Its not similar to dunnes and to claim otherwise is just deluded

waster81

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

Considering we are on Week 31 of 2012 and the HSE overspend is already over €250m (and we are acutely aware that there is serious wastage), and considering the IMF have cited the urgent need to revamp Social welfare...

We are talking about €1.25 billion minimum NET, versus about €18 million GROSS.
Is this a diversionary tactic?

We are €250 over target budget - the fact that maybe the targets were unrealistic you fail to grasp

Gumbo

waster81 wrote: »

Her private sector company got bailed out by the state - she shouldnt have had her job saved because it would have went bust without the state saving her job

Its not similar to dunnes and to claim otherwise is just deluded

and to assume is also deluded.

galway2007

gandalf wrote: »

Given this country is running at a deficit then increments and pay increases should be suspended, all un-vouched allowances ended period and no changes considered until such time that our finances are back in order.

Instead they close down hospital beds, reduce the number of teachers and damage front line services to protect that flawed Croke Park agreement and the core of permanent public service staff who seem to have been deemed untouchable by our politicians.

do you not think that maybe they should look in to HOGAN and the €9000 he spent on a 24 hour trip first?????????

Sleepy

Honestly? No.

I'm in no way attempting to justify whatever Phil Hogan has done to enrage the public this time but 9k is what, 10 people's increments?

Lets fix the country's finances first, then we can fine-tune the structures of government and TD's expenses. It may not be the popular option but it's the financially prudent one.

Jaysoose

galway2007 wrote: »

do you not think that maybe they should look in to HOGAN and the €9000 he spent on a 24 hour trip first?????????

So you would place more importance on something like this than the hospital system and services being negatively affected?

Its unjustifiable that increments (Pay rises) are being awarded when its been admitted that the system of measurement is completely flawed and in the majority of cases not even being used.

Gumbo

Sleepy wrote: »

I'm in no way attempting to justify whatever Phil Hogan has done to enrage the public this time but 9k is what, 10 people's increments?

That 9k would cover about 20 people in my department.

n97 mini

Spending 9k without justification is spending 9k without justification, doesn't matter it's on unjustified increments or on a unjustified junket.

gandalf

galway2007 wrote: »

do you not think that maybe they should look in to HOGAN and the €9000 he spent on a 24 hour trip first?????????

No we need to go after areas where we can save the most first so frontline services are impacted to a minimum. That would strike me as the most logical route to take. Of courselves every piece of expenditure needs to be examined and vouched for fully.

Lumbo

gandalf wrote: »

No we need to go after areas where we can save the most first so frontline services are impacted to a minimum. That would strike me as the most logical route to take. Of courselves every piece of expenditure needs to be examined and vouched for fully.

Unvouched is probably the only word in the English language that actually makes my blood boil.

Degsy

n97 mini wrote: »

Spending 9k without justification is spending 9k without justification, doesn't matter it's on unjustified increments or on a unjustified junket.

Why unjustified?

People work,they should get paid.

Maybe you think they should be on 25 grand for life because the private sector banks and construction industry fcucked up the economy?

golden lane

Degsy wrote: »

Why unjustified?

People work,they should get paid.

Maybe you think they should be on 25 grand for life because the private sector banks and construction industry fcucked up the economy?

they should less money because their bosses caused the country to be in it's present state.....

Degsy

golden lane wrote: »

they should less money because their bosses caused the country to be in it's present state.....

And who voted for them?

Who swelled the party coffers with bribes and "donations"?

Who wined and dined and courted politicians so they'd turn a blind eye to legislation?

Who worked cash in hand,or a nod and a handshake for years and moved assets to thier spouses to avoid paying back loans?

Who raised the cost of living by inflating a bogus Propert bubble?

Vizzy

golden lane wrote: »

they should less money because their bosses caused the country to be in it's present state.....

So I assume that using your logic,all Private sector workers will be delighted to accept less pay or no pay when there boss fcuks up and lands the company in debt?

Degsy

Vizzy wrote: »

So I assume that using your logic,all Private sector workers will be delighted to accept less pay or no pay when there boss fcuks up and lands the company in debt?

I cant think of any public sector organisation that has fewer "customers" than it did ten years ago.

Education,Health,Revenue,Social Welfare,Gardai and Prison Officers are ALL busier now than ever before.

Add to that the current moratorium on recruitment and something has to give.

A simple work to rule in the public sector would put things in persepctive for those who take these services for granted.

It is only thanks to the Public Sector Agreement that industrial action hasnt already be taken.

Avatarr

Degsy wrote: »

A simple work to rule in the public sector would put things in persepctive for those who take these services for granted.

This is what's wrong with the public sector, they always use the nuclear option, treats of strike or work to rule to stop any sort of discussion on reform. How can anyone defend a blanket rewarding of increments regardless of performance.

If I am missing something here, please enlighten me.

ParkRunner

Avatarr wrote: »

Degsy wrote: »

A simple work to rule in the public sector would put things in persepctive for those who take these services for granted.

This is what's wrong with the public sector, they always use the nuclear option, treats of strike or work to rule to stop any sort of discussion on reform. How can anyone defend a blanket rewarding of increments regardless of performance.

If I am missing something here, please enlighten me.

In fairness, the government has managed to implement public sector pay cuts, sweeping reforms, an embargo on promotions and new entrants, the pension levy i.e. another pay cut, a cut in certain allowances, increased contracted working hours in some sectors etc and all they had to deal with was a one day strike and a short term work to rule.

There is no opposition to implementing a proper PMDS/increment system, but you say the public sector responds with a blanket nuclear strike whereas this thread is all about a blanket suspension of increments and yet more reviews rather than a more balanced way of having proper performance review systems

Avatarr

EF wrote: »

In fairness, the government has managed to implement public sector pay cuts, sweeping reforms, an embargo on promotions and new entrants, the pension levy i.e. another pay cut, a cut in certain allowances, increased contracted working hours in some sectors etc and all they had to deal with was a one day strike and a short term work to rule.

There is no opposition to implementing a proper PMDS/increment system, but you say the public sector responds with a blanket nuclear strike whereas this thread is all about a blanket suspension of increments and yet more reviews rather than a more balanced way of having proper performance review systems

Please read back through the thread, I am advocating the completion of reviews and then award increments inline with the Performance.


When you speak of "sweeping reforms", we need to dig into the detail. Tom geraghty general secretary of the public services executive union, was quoted as saying that croke park is working, with savings in excess of 650 millipn saved. He went onto say that by 2015, billions will be saved. 650 million is to say the least a little embellished, 130 million was expenses that needed to be taken out, so that brings the figure down to 520 million. 130 million alocated for pensions of people that retired + cost of rehiring some of the same people. It later transpired that 130 million was only the cost of rehiring public servants. 1100 rehired (600 hse and 481 other departments, of 11000 retirements, 1 in 10 were rehired). Lump sums for people leaving public sector would hit 600 million alone, all saving figures started to imploded.

Croke part is not working, it is spin and a fog of inaccuracies, used to justify the madness of a incompetant government. Held to random by vested interests.

ardmacha

Lump sums for people leaving public sector would hit 600 million alone, all saving figures started to imploded

.

These lump sums would have had to be paid at some stage anyway. So they are not an extra cost nor a saving.

Croke Park is probably working best in sectors that are relatively efficient to begin with. If it isn't working elsewhere, then the detail should be clarified or changed to remove "inaccuracies".

Like the increments, the focus should be on the non performing, rather than the usual contention that some parts are non performing so scrap the whole thing.

Avatarr

ardmacha wrote: »

.
Like the increments, the focus should be on the non performing, rather than the usual contention that some parts are non performing so scrap the whole thing.

I agree, unfortunately it is hard to filter out the truth from the misimformation and spin.To illustrate the PR nightmare of the public sector, below are 4 examples.

A. 1.5bn paid for controversial expenses payments. 10% of public sector pay bill

B. Private circuit workers take on average 6 sick days per head. In the public sector that figure is 11.

C. Gross exchequer pension bill 2010 was 2.7 billion with 2.8 bil in tax receipts for public sector employees. With retirements tax won't cover it in the coming years.

D. A damning report prepared for embattled Minister for Health James Reilly reveals the Health Service Executive (HSE) to be an organisation racked by "inertia", with "unrealistic" plans for cost cuts which could place patients' lives at risk. Prepared by mark Ogden national health service north west Britain

woodoo

Degsy wrote: »

I cant think of any public sector organisation that has fewer "customers" than it did ten years ago.

Education,Health,Revenue,Social Welfare,Gardai and Prison Officers are ALL busier now than ever before.

Add to that the current moratorium on recruitment and something has to give.

A simple work to rule in the public sector would put things in persepctive for those who take these services for granted.

It is only thanks to the Public Sector Agreement that industrial action hasnt already be taken.

Thats true, my work has increased because of an increase of service users and because of non replacement of staff retiring/leaving. We deserve our increments for that reason alone. We are working harder. And staff numbers are going to continue to fall over the coming years.

A work to rule would cause massive problems if staff refused to take on anymore work.

woodoo

Avatarr wrote: »

A. 1.5bn paid for controversial expenses payments. 10% of public sector pay bill

That is what i'm talking about, its madness what goes on in the Councils, the HSE, Welfare etc with regards to expenses. The government won't get tough on them because they would be hypocrites as they abuse expenses themselves.

Cuddlesworth

Avatarr wrote: »

B. Private circuit workers take on average 6 sick days per head. In the public sector that figure is 11.

I'm discounting that figure until I see the HSE front line staff removed from it. I don't think its unreasonable to have a higher sick leave rate when your working in a hospital.

woodoo

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

I'm discounting that figure until I see the HSE front line staff removed from it. I don't think its unreasonable to have a higher sick leave rate when your working in a hospital.

In alot of areas of the PS they count weekends as sick. If you are off Friday and Monday that goes down as 4 days sick. You won't read that in the sunday indo

Hotblack Desiato

It can take years for someone who can never work again, to be retired from the public sector on health grounds.
In the meantime they're racking up thousands of sick days. Think of what that does to the average.
But... most of these long-term sick days aren't paid. Assuming you've no sick leave already used, you get on the current rules 6 months full pay, 6 months half pay, then pension rate based on length of service to date, which will be very low unless you're well into the second half of your career. There is actually a poverty trap here.
A pre-1995 public servant has no PRSI contributions, can't claim illness benefit, can be on 'pension rate' well below the poverty line, and can't even claim supplementary welfare as they're still 'employed', they'd be better off being let retire.

This is why the new sick leave rules will ensure a minimum payment of the equivalent of the basic welfare level (currently €188 a week.)

Needless to say, the reality is a lot more complicated than Indo headlines.


Also - I'd love to see a source for the claim that only 18% of civil service performance evaluations are completed??

amen

'd love €520 a year extra. I'd love to have something like that added each year

Of course thats the Net figure so the Gross Figure is higher and of course that means the annual pensionable salary is also higher.

amen

This shows that no grade in the civil service, and few in the wider PS, earn less than 20k, yet there are almost 20,000 people earning less than 20k

anyone know what the entrance requirements are for some of these Grades such as Senior Secretary and what the job entails and how that salary compares to a private sector job ?

Trotter

The trouble is, in this country people get frustrated that a 30 year old teacher for example is defending their annual increment from say €35000 to €36000... while the politicians at the top claim a €3500 annual laundry tax credit.

Ive heard a lot of "the country is broke" .. and in some ways I agree with that.. but I don't expect any young person to hand away their €1000 increment when

A) they don't have any way of sitting down with an employer to make a case for more money when they feel they're doing a good job. (I've done that in my previous job and I walked out of my review with over 2k of a raise).

and more crucially,

This. Until this stops, the country is not broke, its spending its scarce money disgracefully.
http://www.thejournal.ie/ministers-can-claim-e3500-tax-refund-for-laundry-expenses-287477-Nov2011/

While issues like B above still exist, theres no point in any politician or otherwise preaching that the lowest level need to tighten belts. Nobody will listen.

woodoo

And Public servants are acutely aware of the raise the government advisers got. Also we don't forget that Brian Lenihan gave the top civil servants back their paycut 2 years ago.

Big Phil squandering 9 grand in a day doesn't look great either. I'll be damned if i'd accept my increments cut in light of all that.

If they want to save additional money this year. Take the hatchet to allowances and expenses across the public service.

Avatarr

Trotter wrote: »

This. Until this stops, the country is not broke, its spending its scarce money disgracefully.

James Reilly, in his first 18 months in dail,he claimed 32k travel and subsistence even though he lived in rush, 18 mile from dail.

Utter disgrace. By the way I taught a sitting TD had to give up his seat if he was found yo be bankrupted. Is Reilly not bankrupt??????

woodoo

Avatarr wrote: »

James Reilly, in his first 18 months in dail,he claimed 32k travel and subsistence even though he lived in rush, 18 mile from dail. ?

How have these feckers the moral authority to cut anything.

granturismo

Sleepy wrote: »

If that €520 a year extra is so insignificant you'll hardly miss it...If things are going badly for that firm, however, even if you're contributing more than ever, you'll be lucky to keep the same salary.

Increments vary across the public and civil service. Some jobs may only have 5 increments ie after 5 years no more increments. A post I'm familiar with has 5 increments - the next step is to apply for a promotion which until 2008, most people got - then onto another 5 increments. So 10 increments in total for most staff in this post.

Increments are not given to all public and civil servants every year.

Greater scrutiny of promotions would have resulted in better savings to the Exchequer. Promotions have been greatly reduced and this should have been restricted much earlier.

unit 1

Avatarr wrote: »

This is what's wrong with the public sector, they always use the nuclear option, treats of strike or work to rule to stop any sort of discussion on reform. How can anyone defend a blanket rewarding of increments regardless of performance.

If I am missing something here, please enlighten me.

y

You are missing the blindingly obvious. There has been no strikes, or even threats of strike action.
The so called much maligned joke park deal has been an enormous sucess for this country.
All across the ps, and as one I can vouch for this, people are working harder, longer and more dilligently than ever. Meanwhile the whiners want more cuts cuts cuts in the precise areas where they are precluded from by agreement, not coercion.
People, especially the gullible prompted by the media think that the simple options are, maintain pay and cut services, or cut pay and maintain services.
The real options are maintain pay and try through efficiencies maintain as much services as possible, or cut pay and services through industrial action, if they give in to mob rule and unilaterally move on pay rates.
In my job alone since 08 we have had
pension levy
25% reduction in allowances
complete ban on overtime
pay cut
usc (just like everyone else, we're all in this together right)
renewed cuts and reductions in allowances
ban on recruitment ( more work for everyone yaaa)
Sadly the truth is for many in the ps there is very little left to give.

Dannyboy83

Avatarr wrote: »

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

Considering we are on Week 31 of 2012 and the HSE overspend is already over €250m (and we are acutely aware that there is serious wastage), and considering the IMF have cited the urgent need to revamp Social welfare...

We are talking about €1.25 billion minimum NET, versus about €18 million GROSS.
Is this a diversionary tactic?

Most importantly, it's the right thing to do.

Judge on merit - fully agree but the government dont have the spine to tackle the unions as we know. plenty of ps staff as as unhappy about that as you or i am.
its the government who are shirking their responsibilities. forget about it - thw unions are in control, not the government

cut all increments - utterly disagree. trivial short term gain for medium to long term domestic economic depression. stalingrad.
plus its immoral. Vindictive even... we are not bankrupt. the ecb have nade sure of it.

In relation to money that our creditors have stipulated must be saved elsewhere, its trivial, immoral and self defeating to take money from people who need it for day to day living, while billions could be saved by fighting the real war - hse and social welfare

Im probably at the pinnacle of the public sector hitlist, but im trying to
be pragmatic.
We desperately need people to spend to revive the domestic economy...it will have the reverse effect.

It would make far more sense to add another srcop above €50k and reduce the tax burden on the 30 to 50k tax paying group by 5%.
confidence would return, spending would resume, domestic economy would revive, more incentive to work harder, and the trade off is that the wealthy would just have smaller savings. Plus it IS the right thing to do.

I really hope people wont let this subject distract them from the REAL issue... hse and social welfare. Pressure desperately needs to be kept up on the government to do their actual job.

golfwallah

According to the Croke Park Agreement (CPA): “There will be significantly improved performance management across all Public Service areas, with promotion and incremental progression linked in all cases to performance”.

Therefore, I can only assume that the payment of increments to the vast majority of those not yet on max of scale is an indication of satisfaction by their employers (i.e. government ministers) with staff performance.

As performance management requires managers and staff to agree on goals and then measure performance against those goals, this can only mean that ministers are satisfied that the goals they set at the highest levels are being achieved.

But clearly, the improved performance is not happening. So, I can only conclude that either ministers are not setting out the challenging goals as promised to the electorate in the Programme for Government or they haven’t the courage to set such challenging goals for their high level public servants in the first place (and then ensure they are being delivered).

Instead of enforcing the terms of the existing CPA, what we hear is excuses why they can’t do this, that or the other and the latest talk in the media is about having to renegotiate the CPA, so they can “get things done”.

Why don’t our politicians stop obfuscating and just get on with doing the jobs they promised to do?