Government to reverse some Public Secor Pay cuts

fliball123

Vizzy wrote: »

And do you now agree that increments should be paid(because Noonan has told Howlin "to get back in his box" as you put it) ?

No I dont agree that increments should be paid , they should of been stopped for the period that we are/were in deficit.

fliball123

kceire wrote: »

The only fractions at war is about 4 or 5 people on this thread.
i dont see the hatred on the street, or in the eyes of the people i help every day, most of them are genuinely thankful.

A few more than that KC yeah there is no hatred on the streets

barneystinson

fliball123 wrote: »

Barney you only have to look at this thread to see the 2 fractions at war.

As for you question
Well Long answer = it was put back to you by a different poster that the countries which pay a high premium to their public sector are the piigs counties (Portugal,Ireland, Italy, Greece and Spain) as in all the counties that needed bailouts or close to it, funny how that correlation which was brought to your attention was ignored by you. Check and see what countries which are run well such as Germany, see what their differential is....
Short Answer = one we can afford

I stopped looking on the thread as FG ministers such as Noonan have more or less said Howlin should get back in his box and there is no room to give pay rises above increments and that the deficit would be tackled and tax reductions would be implemented first

You either deliberately or through carelessness have completely missed my point. Talking about pay differentials / absolute rates of pay is one thing, and in fact IIRC the discussion about the differential ended with the most recent and most detailed report suggesting that while in absolute terms the differential was 40-something %, after taking all the relevant factors into account, the differential was somewhere between 0% and 14%. And that was before factoring in the PRD.

You seem to want to keep having the same argument, which no-one will "win" because everyone's minds are made up. So to try to move the discussion along I've asked a simple question, about the SYSTEM within which PS pay operates. That is a system of incremental pay along a scale at each different grade, with increases based on time served subject to satisfactory performance. Ive asked you to tell me what other country's system should we be trying to emulate, since ours is so flawed in your opinion. you've mentioned Germany. Have a look at the German system, I think you'll find they pay incremental pay based on period of service.

As someone who has repeatedly expressed fundamental opposition to such pay systems, how do square that circle?

By the way I'm already on an increment freeze at the moment until at least 2016, so you've already got what you want from me, from everyone else at my grade and above, and everybody else who's already at the top of their scale, which is an ever increasing number of people.

fliball123

barneystinson wrote: »

You either deliberately or through carelessness have completely missed my point. Talking about pay differentials / absolute rates of pay is one thing, and in fact IIRC the discussion about the differential ended with the most recent and most detailed report suggesting that while in absolute terms the differential was 40-something %, after taking all the relevant factors into account, the differential was somewhere between 0% and 14%. And that was before factoring in the PRD.

You seem to want to keep having the same argument, which no-one will "win" because everyone's minds are made up. So to try to move the discussion along I've asked a simple question, about the SYSTEM within which PS pay operates. That is a system of incremental pay along a scale at each different grade, with increases based on time served subject to satisfactory performance. Ive asked you to tell me what other country's system should we be trying to emulate, since ours is so flawed in your opinion. you've mentioned Germany. Have a look at the German system, I think you'll find they pay incremental pay based on period of service.

As someone who has repeatedly expressed fundamental opposition to such pay systems, how do square that circle?

By the way I'm already on an increment freeze at the moment until at least 2016, so you've already got what you want from me, from everyone else at my grade and above, and everybody else who's already at the top of their scale, which is an ever increasing number of people.

You have just stated that it is 40% (by a third party who has nothing to gain or lose from it) and yet you start bringing in deflections away from the actual figure..So I will keep this in language you can understand, the actual figure is in fact the actual figure you can try and dilute it anyway you please and yet again you swerve the question again. Why is it that all the piigs countries have the same deficit problem and the one area of commonality with regards to spending as a country is the high differential between pay in the public and the private sector?

There is a very high wage discrepancy still between the 2 sectors. Sorry if your increments have been frozen but currently we cannot afford them ....when we are out of the mire you increments will be reinstated

And someone is winning as I say when Noonan came out and told Howlin to get back in his box, the country won.

Godge

fliball123 wrote: »

numerous FG ministers have come out and said that there is no room for PS pay rises above increments.

Link please?

fliball123

Godge wrote: »

Link please?

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/noonan-no-room-for-public-sector-pay-increases-635251.html

I believe O'donahue and Varadkar when interviewed on different shows have echoed this..but the big kahuna is Noonan

Godge

fliball123 wrote: »

You have just stated that it is 40% (by a third party who has nothing to gain or lose from it) and yet you start bringing in deflections away from the actual figure..So I will keep this in language you can understand, the actual figure is in fact the actual figure you can try and dilute it anyway you please and yet again you swerve the question again. Why is it that all the piigs countries have the same deficit problem and the one area of commonality with regards to spending as a country is the high differential between pay in the public and the private sector?

There is a very high wage discrepancy still between the 2 sectors. Sorry if your increments have been frozen but currently we cannot afford them ....when we are out of the mire you increments will be reinstated

And someone is winning as I say when Noonan came out and told Howlin to get back in his box, the country won.

You have no understanding of statistics or comparability.


Take a country of 10 people.

There are four private sector workers earning a salary of 30k each. There are two business owners exploiting those workers and taking 200k each out of their business.

In the public sector there are four people, two cleaners earning 25k and two administrators earning 35k.

Average pay in the public sector is 30k. Average pay in the private sector is 30k.

The two business owners agitate that the public sector is inefficient and that there should be more contracting out. The public sector decides to outsource cleaning. The two cleaners become employees of the private sector company who cut their wages to 20k.

Average pay in the private sector drops to €26k, average pay in the public sector rises to €35k. The two business owners see an increase in profits and also agitate that the public sector is overpaid even though nothing has changed except they have increased their exploitation of workers. Public service pay is cut to €30k and the taxes on the two business owners go down.

So, business owners see profits go up and taxes go down, both private and public sector see wages fall and the likes of filiball fall for the argument that the public sector are overpaid.

Godge

fliball123 wrote: »

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/noonan-no-room-for-public-sector-pay-increases-635251.html

I believe O'donahue and Varadkar when interviewed on different shows have echoed this..but the big kahuna is Noonan

That was July, the public sector finances improved by August when Howlin spoke, you are out of date as usual.


http://www.rte.ie/news/2014/0809/636109-howlin/


Please find me a link to someone saying no room for public sector pay increases since August.

fliball123

Godge wrote: »

That was July, the public sector finances improved by August when Howlin spoke, you are out of date as usual.


http://www.rte.ie/news/2014/0809/636109-howlin/


Please find me a link to someone saying no room for public sector pay increases since August.

Noonan was responding to Howlin .. so we are out of debt or the deficit yet?

fliball123

Godge wrote: »

You have no understanding of statistics or comparability.


Take a country of 10 people.

There are four private sector workers earning a salary of 30k each. There are two business owners exploiting those workers and taking 200k each out of their business.

In the public sector there are four people, two cleaners earning 25k and two administrators earning 35k.

Average pay in the public sector is 30k. Average pay in the private sector is 30k.

The two business owners agitate that the public sector is inefficient and that there should be more contracting out. The public sector decides to outsource cleaning. The two cleaners become employees of the private sector company who cut their wages to 20k.

Average pay in the private sector drops to €26k, average pay in the public sector rises to €35k. The two business owners see an increase in profits and also agitate that the public sector is overpaid even though nothing has changed except they have increased their exploitation of workers. Public service pay is cut to €30k and the taxes on the two business owners go down.

So, business owners see profits go up and taxes go down, both private and public sector see wages fall and the likes of filiball fall for the argument that the public sector are overpaid.

Your argument works on a small sample size like 10 but when the numbers are around 300k in the ps and 1.7m in the private they fall short. Thats kind of stats 101 the larger the sample size the more accurate the results. So you obviously have no understanding of stats by limiting it to 10 and then stacking the stat in favour of your argument. The report as a whole is everyone working in the public and private sector the whole sample size and you or barney can try and dilute it all you want..But it is there in black and white and is a slap in the face of people working in the private sector and the ps and unions are rightly scoffed at when they are asking for more pay rises above increments

Your gas Godge

lets take 10 employees 9 private sector employees all earning the minimum wage and one public sector earning over 200k a year...stats when not using the full compliment can be bent to what ever you want..but when the sample size is the entire picture you cant

ardmacha

fliball123 wrote: »

Your argument works on a small sample size like 10 but when the numbers are around 300k in the ps and 1.7m in the private they fall short. Thats kind of stats 101 the larger the sample size the more accurate the results. So you obviously have no understanding of states by limiting it to 10 and then stacking the stat in favour of your argument. The report as a whole is everyone working in the public and private sector the whole sample size and you or barney can try and dilute it all you want..But it is there in black and white and is a slap in the face of people working in the private sector and the ps and unions are rightly scoffed at when they are asking for more pay rises above increments

Your gas Godge

lets take 10 employees 9 private sector employees all earning the minimum wage and one public sector earning over 200k a year...stats when not using the full compliment can be bent to what ever you want..but when the sample size is the entire picture you cant

The concept does not fall short on a bigger scale. Unfortunately, I've had cause to recently attend a number of medical people, all of these earn considerably more than me in a year, however their earnings are not salaries. Someone doing a similar job in a public role would also be decently paid, if not quite as highly, but would have a salary. So the private salaries would not be influenced by this class of person, but the public salaries would. A judge may not earn more than the barrister appearing his court, but he is counted as high PS salary, while the barrister is a businessman and not counted in the private salaries.

You talk of black and white, but have entirely failed to refute the arguments provided, other than by rambling on to no particular purpose.

barneystinson

fliball123 wrote: »

Your argument works on a small sample size like 10 but when the numbers are around 300k in the ps and 1.7m in the private they fall short. Thats kind of stats 101 the larger the sample size the more accurate the results. So you obviously have no understanding of stats by limiting it to 10 and then stacking the stat in favour of your argument. The report as a whole is everyone working in the public and private sector the whole sample size and you or barney can try and dilute it all you want..But it is there in black and white and is a slap in the face of people working in the private sector and the ps and unions are rightly scoffed at when they are asking for more pay rises above increments

Your gas Godge

lets take 10 employees 9 private sector employees all earning the minimum wage and one public sector earning over 200k a year...stats when not using the full compliment can be bent to what ever you want..but when the sample size is the entire picture you cant

Mother of God, I'm embarrassed for you.

You cannot compare Apples and Oranges - as you've just said there are 1.7m people working in the private sector (I don't know if that's right or not but it's your figure so we'll run with it). That 1.7m includes every person on minimum wage in every shop, fast food restaurant etc., tradespersons, factory operatives, airline pilots, zookeepers etc etc etc

And the public sector comprises (again your figure) 300k different people doing, by and large, different jobs to most of the other €1.7m.

So can you explain to me how in your mind does taking a bald average figure give you anything that you can compare???

Trying to base your argument on that headline statistic is like saying we should do away with male / female toilets because the average worker in Ireland has slightly more than one breast, and slightly less than one testicle. It's mathematically true, and statistically sound, but bears no resemblance to reality.

The figures only bear a resemblance to reality when you take into consideration the differences in the composition of the two sectors. There is no "average" PS worker, just as there is no "average" private sector worker. As I already mentioned above, every minimum wage job in the country is in the private sector, so straight away even you must be able to see that is going to drag the average there down.

fliball123

ardmacha wrote: »

The concept does not fall short on a bigger scale. Unfortunately, I've had cause to recently attend a number of medical people, all of these earn considerably more than me in a year, however their earnings are not salaries. Someone doing a similar job in a public role would also be decently paid, if not quite as highly, but would have a salary. So the private salaries would not be influenced by this class of person, but the public salaries would. A judge may not earn more than the barrister appearing his court, but he is counted as high PS salary, while the barrister is a businessman and not counted in the private salaries.

You talk of black and white, but have entirely failed to refute the arguments provided, other than by rambling on to no particular purpose.

Ardmacha the full report is there, as I say the larger the sample size the more accurate the results, the class of person, education does not come into it? We are paying top dollar for public sector employees, now is this the case with the private sector, I would say yes in the areas you state, but at least you have a choice to shop around and if you think its too much you have the choice to walk away and do with out the service of that individual. We cannot do this with people/services in the public sector..and it could be argued that we pay on the double for things like calling out a fire brigade, going to a GP , going to Hospital, for water the list goes on and on...

You also leave out the argument of the public sector employee's pension and how much the private sector employee would have to pay to get something in the region of the ps. Taking one offs like you have and a small sample size like Godge does can be tilted either way.

Taking the whole sample size of both cannot be diluted ... It is what it is.

Also if we are to look at what services we receive for the very high taxes (both direct and indirect)we pay it IMO we get a very poor return.

Godge

fliball123 wrote: »

Noonan was responding to Howlin .. so we are out of debt or the deficit yet?

So Noonan can predict the future now.

Your link was dated July while Howlin spoke in August.

Really????

Noonan was replying to the so-called socialist Ruth Coppinger who propsed pay increases of 5-10%.

Howlin, a month later, was talking about a phased reversal of the pay cuts

They are two different things.

Riskymove

fliball123 wrote: »

Taking the whole sample size of both cannot be diluted ... It is what it is.

jaysus...we are heading for another 1,000 posts of these circular arguments

Fliball, no one disputes the accuracy of the stats...it is the interpetation or use of that statistic that is the problem

ardmacha

fliball123 wrote: »

Ardmacha the full report is there, as I say the larger the sample size the more accurate the results, the class of person, education does not come into it?

If you are saying that the type of job someone does should not affect their salary, then we are on entirely different wavelengths. You are in some utopia, or perhaps North Korea, whereas I am in the real world.

Godge

fliball123 wrote: »

We are paying top dollar for public sector employees, now is this the case with the private sector, I would say yes in the areas you state, but at least you have a choice to shop around and if you think its too much you have the choice to walk away and do with out the service of that individual.

This is where your ignorance of the statistics and the methods behind them shines clearly.

Ardmacha referenced doctors and barristers in the private sector. THEY ARE NOT IN THE STATISTICS for the private sector (apologies for shouting but you are failing to see the point). Therefore the private sector wages are artificially deflated because judges and consultants are in the public sector wages.

Similarly, I reference the contracting out of low-paid cleaning and security services by the public sector. There are virtually no such low-paid employees left in the public sector as most of these services have been contracted out. Again, that artificially deflates the private sector average.

As for the choice argument, most of the population live in a place where you can choose which school, you can choose which hospital etc so choice does exist in public services..

fliball123

barneystinson wrote: »

Mother of God, I'm embarrassed for you.

You cannot compare Apples and Oranges - as you've just said there are €1.7m people working in the private sector (I don't know if that's right or not but it's your figure so we'll run with it). That €1.7m includes every person on minimum wage in every shop, fast food restaurant etc., tradespersons, factory operatives, airline pilots, zookeepers etc etc etc

And the public sector comprises (again your figure) 300k different people doing, by and large, different jobs to most of the other €1.7m.

So can you explain to me how in your mind does taking a bald average figure give you anything that you can compare???

Trying to base your argument on that headline statistic is like saying we should do away with male / female toilets because the average worker in Ireland has slightly more than one breast, and slightly less than one testicle. It's mathematically true, and statistically sound, but bears no resemblance to reality.

The figures only bear a resemblance to reality when you take into consideration the differences in the composition of the two sectors. There is no "average" PS worker, just as there is no "average" private sector worker. As I already mentioned above, every minimum wage job in the country is in the private sector, so straight away even you must be able to see that is going to drag the average there down.

Funny that when the apples an oranges were compared twice during the benchmarking process..who is embarrassed now? TWICE it was done and all record of it was shredded and burnt.

Further to your argument both sectors work, there are a lot of low level PS employees working as well, and thats according to the low level ps guys and girls on here and are we to be believe them.

So is this a philosophical question what constitutes people working harder or who should be paid more?

Should a middle management in the HSE who has feck all to do all day get the high wage they are on? How individual do you or ardmacha want to go for every slant you put on these stats there is one that will disprove it..

The only stat that cant be disproved is the headline stat of 40% differential in favour of the public sector.

You go do a search over the last decade of absolute farcical scenarios that have played out in the public sector

Such as losing xrays
botched up operations
god I could go on and on with this..

Now look at what we pay them.

Now do the same with the private sector and you will see the same..

The difference is we have a choice to pay or not to pay in the private sector with one caveat and thats the banks and it was the politicians who made this so.

fliball123

ardmacha wrote: »

If you are saying that the type of job someone does should not affect their salary, then we are on entirely different wavelengths. You are in some utopia, or perhaps North Korea, whereas I am in the real world.

Ardmacha the public sector is not worth 40% more in wages then the private sector. They do not work 40% harder than the private sector. They get benefits that far outstrip those within the private sector. We get a pretty poor level of service through out the public service for what we pay. So regardless of education or class.. Ask yourself the question whats the difference between a dosser or a dosser with a degree ??

The likes of yourself always heads off on a tangent such as north korea when the poster is on the right right track

fliball123

Godge wrote: »

This is where your ignorance of the statistics and the methods behind them shines clearly.

Ardmacha referenced doctors and barristers in the private sector. THEY ARE NOT IN THE STATISTICS for the private sector (apologies for shouting but you are failing to see the point). Therefore the private sector wages are artificially deflated because judges and consultants are in the public sector wages.

Similarly, I reference the contracting out of low-paid cleaning and security services by the public sector. There are virtually no such low-paid employees left in the public sector as most of these services have been contracted out. Again, that artificially deflates the private sector average.

As for the choice argument, most of the population live in a place where you can choose which school, you can choose which hospital etc so choice does exist in public services..

Once again I ask you are they worth 40% more overall. You could also argue that the likes of tycoons and business owners earning millions and millions would skew the figure upwards for the private sector..once again I stated that any argument you make for one sector can be countered with another stat, but the overall figure cannot be ignored..Especially when the ps are looking for more and when we get a very poor return for it.

fliball123

Riskymove wrote: »

jaysus...we are heading for another 1,000 posts of these circular arguments

Fliball, no one disputes the accuracy of the stats...it is the interpetation or use of that statistic that is the problem

This is the thing Risky the headline stat cannot be ignored..yet people will skew things in their favour by picking limited sample sizes on either side..which is flawed statistics. Once you have a very large sample size which we have the results are extremely accurate. Then the counter you cannot compare apples and oranges comes out with complete ignorance of the benchmarking process. Then they leave out arguments such as choice you have in the private sector...not just in competition but as in not to participate in taking up a services offered in the private sector if you think the price is too steep.. Yet with a headline figure of 40% wage premium these union jokers want more ??

gazzer

fliball123 wrote: »

Once again I ask you are they worth 40% more overall. You could also argue that the likes of tycoons and business owners earning millions and millions would skew the figure upwards for the private sector..once again I stated that any argument you make for one sector can be countered with another stat, but the overall figure cannot be ignored..Especially when the ps are looking for more and when we get a very poor return for it.

Do a check for the wages that non Civil Servant staff in IT sections of government departments get for contract work and compare it against the salaries that Civil Servants IT Staff get. You will see there is a massive difference in favour of the contract staff.

barneystinson

I give up on arguing about averages with you Fliball, you'll no doubt think you've won somehow, but even the people on the anti-PS side who have any appreciation of the figures won't agree with the nonsense in your last few posts.

You still haven't told me what country's pay SYSTEM we should try to emulate BTW. Or should we take an average of Germany and Norway, Germway?!

fliball123

gazzer wrote: »

Do a check for the wages that non Civil Servant staff in IT sections government departments get for contract work and compare it against the salaries that Civil Servants IT Staff get. You will see there is a massive difference in favour of the contract staff.

Is that taking pensions, holidays, security of work into account aswell..As far as I am aware contract work has a high level of pay due to the insecurity and short term nature of it.

barneystinson

fliball123 wrote: »

Is that taking pensions, holidays, security of work into account aswell..As far as I am aware contract work has a high level of pay due to the insecurity and short term nature of it.

So what are you saying then, apples and oranges?:pac:

fliball123

fliball123 wrote: »

Ardmacha the public sector is not worth 40% more in wages then the private sector. They do not work 40% harder than the private sector. They get benefits that far outstrip those within the private sector. We get a pretty poor level of service through out the public service for what we pay. So regardless of education or class.. Ask yourself the question whats the difference between a dosser or a dosser with a degree ??

The likes of yourself always heads off on a tangent such as north korea when the poster is on the right right track

You are entitled to you opinion as much as anyone else, however have you anything new to add to this debate this thread is I don't know how many pages long and you are just going round and round in circles.

What I have take from this thread some people will never be happy no matter how much or little the public services are paid.

The posters with the well thought well reasoned argument about the public services long ago dropped out of the debate leaving it to the foaming at the mouth with rage posters, who post circular argument over and over again.

Some public servants don't under stand the terms and conditions of their own employment.

Some poster were under the impression that public servants only meant administrators.

The whole tread was almost completely pointless it was never going to happen in a general sense.

The HRA does allow for restoration in pay if certain factors are met.

Riskymove

fliball123 wrote: »

This is the thing Risky the headline stat cannot be ignored..

I'm not saying it should be...just that it should be understood for what it is

the same publication that gives the average PS wage of €918 and average private of €622 sets out the entire economy into 13 categories

Of these 13 categories, the average wage in 9 of them is in excess of the €622 figure

2 of the categories earn over €1,000 a week

the 622 figure has as much relevane to the entire 1.7m private sector workers as the 918 as to all 282k PS....very little

fliball123

barneystinson wrote: »

I give up on arguing about averages with you Fliball, you'll no doubt think you've won somehow, but even the people on the anti-PS side who have any appreciation of the figures won't agree with the nonsense in your last few posts.

You still haven't told me what country's pay SYSTEM we should try to emulate BTW. Or should we take an average of Germany and Norway, Germway?!

Barney your giving up because you know I am right in what I am saying..spinning a subset of a larger sample size in stats can be spun to what ever you want by picking the numbers you want.

I have said that you are right with regards to comparisons in both sectors , yet it was done twice before so that argument you have put forward is null and void as it can be done if there was a will to do it.

Look I have no problem with people in the PS getting payrises or increments if they deserve them and if the country was not broke and borrowing.

But looking at the stats they are overall paid 40% and we are borrowing 6 - 8 odd billion this year to pay the bills..Under those curcumstances and while we are still borrowing pay rises should not be happening.


as for a PS module I would follow Finland or Denmark..You never here of a crisis in either country the way we have been hearing about Portual, Greece or Cyprus..

Just to give you some bed time reading aswell..and I would be of the same opinoin as this man

http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/stats-dont-lie-public-sector-is-still-mollycoddled-29907776.html

Godge

fliball123 wrote: »

Once again I ask you are they worth 40% more overall. You could also argue that the likes of tycoons and business owners earning millions and millions would skew the figure upwards for the private sector..once again I stated that any argument you make for one sector can be countered with another stat, but the overall figure cannot be ignored..Especially when the ps are looking for more and when we get a very poor return for it.

Do you really understand nothing? Do you really never read anyone else's post? Seriously. I explained to you already using a simple example of a country of 10 people to show how the exclusion of business tycoons and the contracting out of cleaners distorted the statistics. Here it is again.

Godge wrote: »

You have no understanding of statistics or comparability.


Take a country of 10 people.

There are four private sector workers earning a salary of 30k each. There are two business owners exploiting those workers and taking 200k each out of their business.

In the public sector there are four people, two cleaners earning 25k and two administrators earning 35k.

Average pay in the public sector is 30k. Average pay in the private sector is 30k.

The two business owners agitate that the public sector is inefficient and that there should be more contracting out. The public sector decides to outsource cleaning. The two cleaners become employees of the private sector company who cut their wages to 20k.

Average pay in the private sector drops to €26k, average pay in the public sector rises to €35k. The two business owners see an increase in profits and also agitate that the public sector is overpaid even though nothing has changed except they have increased their exploitation of workers. Public service pay is cut to €30k and the taxes on the two business owners go down.

So, business owners see profits go up and taxes go down, both private and public sector see wages fall and the likes of filiball fall for the argument that the public sector are overpaid.

Changing the sample size does nothing as the principles remain. The statistics are skewed because self-employed, business directors, etc. are excluded from the private sector statistics and also because the public sector has contracted out many low-wage activity to the private sector. Please stop embarrassing yourself over this one as sometimes you make some good points on other issues but you are out of our depth on this one.

fliball123

barneystinson wrote: »

So what are you saying then, apples and oranges?:pac:

No I am just stating facts once again its taking a subset of the sample size and spinning it in the favour of the public service..

What about comparing the part time cleaners through out dublin and public sector cleaners? These arguments can be done to death without any significant results. The only stat that cannot be shied away from is the headline figure