Proposed Public sector pay rises

sarumite

chopper6 wrote: »

Have you any proof of this or is it just something you happen to think?

Well proof is something that exists in maths or the application thereof. However if you are asking for evidence which is a more appropriate request, then I would say that evidence does exists to support my statement. As I have pointed out here, cherry picking a single statistic and throwing it out is pointless and worse still can actually serve to muddy the water (although I do suspect sometimes that is the intent) so providing an adequate amount of evidence is actually a fair amount of work. As I don't have the time now, I will start with this article which assumes a gender imbalance as a matter of factual existence and even refers to the "traditional view"

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/335/6072/1030

"Wendy Williams and Stephen Ceci of Cornell University argue that the traditional view of female underrepresentation as a complex mixture of discrimination, differential abilities, and career preferences misses the mark. Instead, say the husband-and-wife team, the evidence from studies stretching back more than a decade points overwhelmingly to the primacy of “the dynamics of family formation in Western society,” or, in a word, motherhood."

On edit: If you simply google "academia imbalance" I could have used the first full page of results alone to make my point. So yes, not only is there evidence for what I said, the evidence is widespread and in abundance.

chopper6

sarumite wrote: »

Well proof is something that exists in maths or the application thereof. However if you are asking for evidence which is a more appropriate request, then I would say that evidence does exists to support my statement. As I have pointed out here, cherry picking a single statistic and throwing it out is pointless and worse still can actually serve to muddy the water (although I do suspect sometimes that is the intent) so providing an adequate amount of evidence is actually a fair amount of work. As I don't have the time now, I will start with this article which assumes a gender imbalance as a matter of factual existence and even refers to the "traditional view"

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/335/6072/1030

"Wendy Williams and Stephen Ceci of Cornell University argue that the traditional view of female underrepresentation as a complex mixture of discrimination, differential abilities, and career preferences misses the mark. Instead, say the husband-and-wife team, the evidence from studies stretching back more than a decade points overwhelmingly to the primacy of “the dynamics of family formation in Western society,” or, in a word, motherhood."

On edit: If you simply google "academia imbalance" I could have used the first full page of results alone to make my point. So yes, not only is there evidence for what I said, the evidence is widespread and in abundance.

A postgrad Thesis written on gender imbalances in America..and it was published in 2012....that's not a "widely held view" or anything like "conventional wisdom".


Students can write nonsense about any topic they like..it doesn't make it true.

Has anybody written a thesis on gender inbalance in the construction industry, Trades and security industry( all private sector of course)??

Anyway,so how does that relate to the Irish Public Sector and the removal of the pension levy?

sarumite

chopper6 wrote: »

A postgrad Thesis written on gender imbalances in America..and it was published in 2012....that's not a "widely held view" or anything like "conventional wisdom".


Students can write nonsense about any topic they like..it doesn't make it true.

Has anybody written a thesis on gender inbalance in the construction industry, Trades and security industry( all private sector of course)??

Anyway,so how does that relate to the Irish Public Sector and the removal of the pension levy?

A swing and a miss. Go back, read the previous posts. Jumping in guns blazing really doesn't make for a cohesive discussion.

chopper6

sarumite wrote: »

A swing and a miss. Go back, read the previous posts. Jumping in guns blazing really doesn't make for a cohesive discussion.

And how does linking to an american thesis have any relevance to this discussion?

Much like the anti PS people that have gone before you..you copy and paste articles that you haven't read.


Although I admire your attempts to intellectualise by using words you're not familiar with.

sarumite

chopper6 wrote: »

And how does linking to an american thesis have any relevance to this discussion?

Much like the anti PS people that have gone before you..you copy and paste articles that you haven't read.


Although I admire your attempts to intellectualise by using words you're not familiar with.

I'm done wasting my time with idiotic posts and baseless ad hominem attacks.

chopper6

sarumite wrote: »

I'm done wasting my time with idiotic posts and baseless ad hominem attacks.

You tried to say that Irish third level institutions were " old boys clubs" according to " conventional wisdom"...when asked to back it up you linked to a thesis written by a student in america that you hadn't read yourself.


Ad hominem indeed.

barneystinson

chopper6 wrote: »

You tried to say that Irish third level institutions were " old boys clubs" according to " conventional wisdom"...when asked to back it up you linked to a thesis written by a student in america that you hadn't read yourself.


Ad hominem indeed.

Now, before you jump down my throat (again), I am (broadly speaking) on the same side as you. But as I've said to you before, your strategy of disagreeing with everything certain other posters say, does your overall argument (and by extension, mine too) a disservice.


I was at the UL graduation recently, and I remember noticing that the vast majority of the most ridiculously gowned/hatted/chained faculty present were middle aged men...

Just wondering makes you think the conventional wisdom is wrong, or are you agnostic on the matter?

chopper6

barneystinson wrote: »

Now, before you jump down my throat (again), I am (broadly speaking) on the same side as you. But as I've said to you before, your strategy of disagreeing with everything certain other posters say, does your overall argument (and by extension, mine too) a disservice.


I was at the UL graduation recently, and I remember noticing that the vast majority of the most ridiculously gowned/hatted/chained faculty present were middle aged men...

Just wondering makes you think the conventional wisdom is wrong, or are you agnostic on the matter?

Sure there are lots of men in such organisations..although i cant pretend to know very much about UL.

The poster was using this supposed gender inbalance to take a pop at the irish PS but had no way to back it up.

I asked for a study into gender inbalances in the private sector especially Trades,construction and security...when you talk about "vast majority" of a cohort being men i have seen plenty of women including former Irish presidents at these ceremonies i can tell you i've NEVER met a female construction worker or electrian.

beeno67

chopper6 wrote: »

Sure there are lots of men in such organisations..although i cant pretend to know very much about UL.

The poster was using this supposed gender inbalance to take a pop at the irish PS but had no way to back it up.

The poster backed up his post however more to the point he was correct in what he said in his post.

Do you believe his post was factually incorrect? If so you should point out where?
You pointlessly attacked his post, asking for proof of gender imbalance at the higher levels in Universities in Ireland. If this is your level of knowledge you probably need to educate yourself a little.

PS: the pope is catholic and no I am not going to prove it

creedp

beeno67 wrote: »

The poster backed up his post however more to the point he was correct in what he said in his post.

Do you believe his post was factually incorrect? If so you should point out where?
You pointlessly attacked his post, asking for proof of gender imbalance at the higher levels in Universities in Ireland. If this is your level of knowledge you probably need to educate yourself a little.

PS: the pope is catholic and no I am not going to prove it

While that is all well and good I don't think the example of the boy's club in Universities invalitates the general position that there is a greater degree of pay inequality in the private sector.. or does it?

beeno67

creedp wrote: »

While that is all well and good I don't think the example of the boy's club in Universities invalitates the general position that there is a greater degree of pay inequality in the private sector.. or does it?

I don't know is there? The point was that while male and females in theory get the same pay for the same jobs the reality may not match that as women maybe less likely to get promotion.

So for example an article in the Irish times last week pointed out that "On average, male primary teachers earn more than their female counterparts. The most recent data from the Department of Education showed women on an average salary of €53,766.75 in 2012, while men earned €58,040.59.". That is men earning on average 10% more. The vast majority of teachers in this country are female. The vast majority of principals are male.

Even look at the unions. Nursing and teaching professions predominately female, union leaders-male.

Women only make up 1 third of representatives on state boards.

On a national level when adjusted to the same hours, women earn 94% of what men earn (with teachers it is 92%).

You have areas, such as the health service where the majority of graduates are female yet the top earners are male. I know it takes 15 years to get from qualification to be a consultant and 5 to get to GP but still, in an equal system we should have much more female high earners.

How many heads of government departments are female?

Maybe discrimination is more common in private sector but it is not as definite as you imply and it is certainly common throughout the public sector although perhaps more subtle.

creedp

beeno67 wrote: »

Maybe discrimination is more common in private sector but it is not as definite as you imply and it is certainly common throughout the public sector although perhaps more subtle.

I agree with the above statement with the exception that I implied a definitive level of discrimination in the private sector. Instead I emplied a greater level of discrimination in the private sector which I see you are not entirely adverse to.

ezra_pound

barneystinson wrote: »

Now, before you jump down my throat (again), I am (broadly speaking) on the same side as you. But as I've said to you before, your strategy of disagreeing with everything certain other posters say, does your overall argument (and by extension, mine too) a disservice.


I was at the UL graduation recently, and I remember noticing that the vast majority of the most ridiculously gowned/hatted/chained faculty present were middle aged men...

Just wondering makes you think the conventional wisdom is wrong, or are you agnostic on the matter?

The fact that many of the successful students on a PhD programme are middle aged makes sense. If the PhD was in, for example, Civil Engineering and Materials Science, or aeronautical engineering, then it's quite reasonable to suggest that most of the students would be men.

barneystinson

ezra_pound wrote: »

The fact that many of the successful students on a PhD programme are middle aged makes sense. If the PhD was in, for example, Civil Engineering and Materials Science, or aeronautical engineering, then it's quite reasonable to suggest that most of the students would be men.

I said faculty though. (The PhD students didnt start off as the most ridiculously dressed, but ended up with hideous floppy hats on).

And it was the Kemmy business school graduation.

chopper6

beeno67 wrote: »

.

Maybe discrimination is more common in private sector but it is not as definite as you imply and it is certainly common throughout the public sector although perhaps more subtle.

How many electricians,bricklayers,plumbers and plasterers are female?

noodler

chopper6 wrote: »

How many electricians,bricklayers,plumbers and plasterers are female?

How many nurses are male?

Ooh this is fun.

Godge

noodler wrote: »

How many nurses are male?

Ooh this is fun.

I think the key question is how many male nurses are paid more than female nurses for doing the same job? The answer is none. This is down to the fact of equal pay based on salary scales.

In the private sector, the same rules don't apply as the pay is more individualistic and women are routinely discriminated against when they do the same job.

noodler

Godge wrote: »

I think the key question is how many male nurses are paid more than female nurses for doing the same job? The answer is none. This is down to the fact of equal pay based on salary scales.

In the private sector, the same rules don't apply as the pay is more individualistic and women are routinely discriminated against when they do the same job.

Godge.

Available to score points against the Private Sector against the Public Sector at a moment's notice.

Also available to expand the goalposts of any debate beyond its initial limits for fear of being proven wrong!

beeno67

creedp wrote: »

I agree with the above statement with the exception that I implied a definitive level of discrimination in the private sector. Instead I emplied a greater level of discrimination in the private sector which I see you are not entirely adverse to.

I didn't say you implied a definitive level of discrimination. I said that it was not definite that discrimination was more common in private sector.

beeno67

Godge wrote: »

I think the key question is how many male nurses are paid more than female nurses for doing the same job? The answer is none. This is down to the fact of equal pay based on salary scales.

You are talking about people on the same pay scale. Two people on the same pay scale are not necessarily doing the same job. This is especially true for something like nursing where there are huge variations in jobs depending on the job itself, the hospital or facility they are working in and other factors such as workload, supervision level and availability of other staff.

sarumite

Godge wrote: »

I think the key question is how many male nurses are paid more than female nurses for doing the same job? The answer is none. This is down to the fact of equal pay based on salary scales.

In the private sector, the same rules don't apply as the pay is more individualistic and women are routinely discriminated against when they do the same job.

"The private sector" is just a term used to describe a whole host of employers large and small. This is unlike the 'public sector' which has a single employer - the government. There are employers in Ireland that try and avoid gender discrimination, there are employers that are not as good as it. Unless your arguing that the government is unique in this regard, saying the 'the private sector' seems a bit silly since it doesn't actually describe the actions of an employer akin to the public sector.

Godge

noodler wrote: »

Godge.

Available to score points against the Private Sector against the Public Sector at a moment's notice.

Also available to expand the goalposts of any debate beyond its initial limits for fear of being proven wrong!

beeno67 wrote: »

You are talking about people on the same pay scale. Two people on the same pay scale are not necessarily doing the same job. This is especially true for something like nursing where there are huge variations in jobs depending on the job itself, the hospital or facility they are working in and other factors such as workload, supervision level and availability of other staff.

Noodler, thanks for the insult. It shows you were unable to refute the point made.

Beeno67, at least you made an effort, but unless you can show that males are more likely to be on the same pay scale but doing less work or less strenuous work, the point is moot as normally a job evaluation has matched up the jobs.

I can't be bothered digging up the links but there were plenty of reports that showed discrimination was more widespread in the private sector.

Rightwing

Godge wrote: »

Noodler, thanks for the insult. It shows you were unable to refute the point made.

Beeno67, at least you made an effort, but unless you can show that males are more likely to be on the same pay scale but doing less work or less strenuous work, the point is moot as normally a job evaluation has matched up the jobs.

I can't be bothered digging up the links but there were plenty of reports that showed discrimination was more widespread in the private sector.

I agree with the other posters, you can't really compare the 2 sectors. It's a failing of the PS, a great worker may not get recognised regardless of sex, whilst the dead wood on higher pay scales get paid more.

In the private sector, you quickly get found out if you are out of your depth. As for discrimination - very hard to say (let alone prove) when someone is looked over for a promotion whether it is discrimination or not, usually a number of factors are taken into account.

creedp

Rightwing wrote: »

I agree with the other posters, you can't really compare the 2 sectors. It's a failing of the PS, a great worker may not get recognised regardless of sex, whilst the dead wood on higher pay scales get paid more.

In the private sector, you quickly get found out if you are out of your depth. As for discrimination - very hard to say (let alone prove) when someone is looked over for a promotion whether it is discrimination or not, usually a number of factors are taken into account.

More sweeping generalisations as always ending with the same convenient conclusion ... Public bad and private good. I do agree that it is not possible to compare the 2 sectors given the diversity between and within each sector. .. Which is why the continual simplistic comparison of average salaries in both sectors is so futile.

barneystinson

Rightwing wrote: »

In the private sector, you quickly get found out if you are out of your depth.

Having spent most of my career to date in the private sector, this wasnt my experience. There's no shortage of laziness or ass covering there either. Shock horror, people acting like people...

crusier

barneystinson wrote: »

Having spent most of my career to date in the private sector, this wasnt my experience. There's no shortage of laziness or ass covering there either. Shock horror, people acting like people...

Having worked in both sectors I fully agree, there are plenty hiding places in the private sector and plenty legislation to help them remain in place!

Jawgap

barneystinson wrote: »

Having spent most of my career to date in the private sector, this wasnt my experience. There's no shortage of laziness or ass covering there either. Shock horror, people acting like people...

I think it depends on the size of the employer - the larger the number of employees the easier it is to get away with being a dosser

barneystinson

Jawgap wrote: »

I think it depends on the size of the employer - the larger the number of employees the easier it is to get away with being a dosser

I only ever worked for small employers, <20 employees.

I'm talking about professional services firms, and not only were a couple of the people I'm thinking of lazy, but they were also ambitious, which meant sabotaging or undermining other people to make themselves compare favourably.

This sort of ****e is universal, as you say it can be harder to deal with in larger more unionised organisations, but it's not a public/private issue really.

Arbiter of Good Taste

barneystinson wrote: »

I only ever worked for small employers, <20 employees.

I'm talking about professional services firms, and not only were a couple of the people I'm thinking of lazy, but they were also ambitious, which meant sabotaging or undermining other people to make themselves compare favourably.

This sort of ****e is universal, as you say it can be harder to deal with in larger more unionised organisations, but it's not a public/private issue really.

The longer I work in corporate, the more I realise it's the ambitious dimwits who seem to get ahead much better than hard working highly competent people. I flicked through "Top 40 people in under 40 in Ireland to look out for" last year nearly made me choke on my breakfast when I saw one of the names on it.

chopper6

Arbiter of Good Taste wrote: »

The longer I work in corporate, the more I realise it's the ambitious dimwits who seem to get ahead much better than hard working highly competent people. I flicked through "Top 40 people in under 40 in Ireland to look out for" last year nearly made me choke on my breakfast when I saw one of the names on it.

Reminds me of when I worked in Dunnes Stores..one of the biggest morons I ever met in my life worked in the Deli with me..the manager actually described him as being "like something out of planet of the apes"..an absolute skiver and a pilferer too.

A couple of years later I was shopping in that particular store and the bloke was a manager!