Benefits of Public Sector over Private Sector

barneystinson

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Did you feel uncomfortable for the previous 50 years when it was just the lads who were being promoted, or is it just when it comes to the ladies that you get uncomfortable?

I'm not old enough to have benefitted from any such bias, any panel I've been on had more women than men on it. I'd just as soon not be collateral damage to a wrong being perpetrated to right an earlier wrong. So you don't think it's coincidence then?

AndrewJRenko

barneystinson wrote: »

I'm not old enough to have benefitted from any such bias, any panel I've been on had more women than men on it. I'd just as soon not be collateral damage to a wrong being perpetrated to right an earlier wrong. So you don't think it's coincidence then?

I didn't ask you whether you benefited from it. I asked you whether you feel uncomfortable about the kind of bias that led to the male dominated management levels prior to this action?

BMHOPE

barneystinson wrote: »

Based on the numbers the previous poster put up, it sounds like Revenue alright. Their recently published annual report indicates they reached 50/50 at PO last year.

In 2017, they ran a generic PO competition for positions in Dublin and 10 were panelled, 9 women and 1 man. There was certainly raised eyebrows over that outcome at the time, the man in question being jokingly referred to as the token male!

Most of the more recent PO positions have been filled by standalone Open competitions to fill a specific vacancy. A panel is created for each post but there's only ever likely to be one appointment. The vast majority of those in the last few years have been topped by a woman.

There's usually a man or two somewhere in these panels, but AFAIK from the beginning of 2019 up to the middle of this year there's been about 17-18 PO's appointed, of which 2 were men. That's consistent with the trend the previous poster was citing going back to 2017.

I don't really know what to make of it tbh, on the one hand it's hard to see how it could really just be a happy coincidence but on the other hand there's lots of high calibre people, regardless of gender, getting these jobs.

Most of the more recent PO positions have been filled by standalone Open competitions to fill a specific vacancy. A panel is created for each post but there's only ever likely to be one appointment. The vast majority of those in the last few years have been topped by a woman.

From what I have seen, there are a good few women at PO level alright in the Revenue but to be fair, in general they are big 4 qualified Accountants and or Chartered tax advisors with extensive private sector experience. They are of a calibre that would have no problem getting a senior management role in private sector either and not in place just because of gender, they are capable and competent. While there are some female assistant secretaries the board at present are all male.

doc22

BMHOPE wrote: »

Most of the more recent PO positions have been filled by standalone Open competitions to fill a specific vacancy. A panel is created for each post but there's only ever likely to be one appointment. The vast majority of those in the last few years have been topped by a woman.

From what I have seen, there are a good few women at PO level alright in the Revenue but to be fair, in general they are big 4 qualified Accountants and or Chartered tax advisors with extensive private sector experience. They are of a calibre that would have no problem getting a senior management role in private sector either and not in place just because of gender, they are capable and competent. While there are some female assistant secretaries the board at present are all male.

Taking gender out of it, promotion within organisations such as Revenue will be extremely though going into the future.

Those PO appointments came from open AP appointments.In the past it was the internal AOs and HEO who would have filled those roles who came up through the ranks towards end of careers. Now young POs will be potentially sitting in roles for years leaving those below with nowhere to go.

barneystinson

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I didn't ask you whether you benefited from it. I asked you whether you feel uncomfortable about the kind of bias that led to the male dominated management levels prior to this action?

Why do you get to dictate the conversation, answering my questions with questions?

It's almost like you do believe there's bias at play (a proposition you seemed to take exception to when it was first suggested), so are deflecting from the main thrust of my contribution by bringing me off down a cul de sac.

So I'll answer yours when you have answered some of mine.

Also, reading back on the thread, you did specifically say it couldn't be Revenue because they have not achieved balance AT PO LEVEL (not from PO up). One thing the PS really struggle with is acknowledging when we get something wrong...

KaneToad

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Did you feel uncomfortable for the previous 50 years when it was just the lads who were being promoted, or is it just when it comes to the ladies that you get uncomfortable?

I think the suggestion is that one bias shouldn't be replaced by another bias.

mrsgiller

ted1 wrote: »

I’d question why you couldn’t work with a broken leg ?
I’ve worked with broken legs, ankles and arms over various stages

Not insured to be in the building on crutches with one elevated leg for fire safety reasons and commute not possible.

pauliebdub

I've worked in both public and private. There's pros and cons.

Pros of public sector.
A secure job and usually a good pension, relatively easy to get promoted after a few years. It's a friendly and laid back environment.

Cons.
It can be frustrating dealing with poor performers, an environment that can be staid and not very dynamic that can be down to an older age profile. Many of the offices are run down with dated furniture and no money spent on them. No benefits such as health insurance.

Pros of private.
Depending on what you are doing can be very well paid and easy to move up. You'll also tend to work with younger people in a modern office, easier to manage a career and leave if you are unhappy. Can be great employee benefits.

Cons
Depending on where you are the work can be more demanding, pensions in many places aren't great. There's also the insecurity if there is a recession

doc22

pauliebdub wrote: »

I've worked in both public and private. There's pros and cons.

Pros of public sector.
A secure job and usually a good pension, relatively easy to get promoted after a few years. It's a friendly and laid back environment.

Only if you're in Dublin, tiny number of promotions in regions and competing against external candidates and experienced internals far from Easy

Treppen

pauliebdub wrote: »

I've worked in both public and private. There's pros and cons.

Pros of public sector.
A secure job and usually a good pension, relatively easy to get promoted after a few years. It's a friendly and laid back environment.

Cons.
It can be frustrating dealing with poor performers, an environment that can be staid and not very dynamic that can be down to an older age profile. Many of the offices are run down with dated furniture and no money spent on them. No benefits such as health insurance.

Pros of private.
Depending on what you are doing can be very well paid and easy to move up. You'll also tend to work with younger people in a modern office, easier to manage a career and leave if you are unhappy. Can be great employee benefits.

Cons
Depending on where you are the work can be more demanding, pensions in many places aren't great. There's also the insecurity if there is a recession

Public sector Pensions are usually good??

The new pension scheme for public sector is dire. You''ll probably get out of it just about what you put into it. (And that's not accounting for the ASC pension tax which goes into the general tax pot).

Pensions in many private sector jobs can be fairly good especially the multi nationals (and the bonuses + share bonus scheme on top). Depends on the sector I suppose.

CramCycle

The old PS pensions were great but the new ones only benefit is they are guaranteed and you don't have to think about them, most private ones are better. The difference is with the public sector, it's automatic, private sector you have to think about it and opt in. Many do so only after a few years.

I was lucky that our finance guy in my old job talked me into it unknowingly early on but loads of young people pay no heed for years.

raze_them_all_

I k ow certain new public sector pensions are about 15-16k a year and cant get it until 68 despite beimg forced to retire at 60 hardly an amazing gold plated pension people do go on about

doc22

doc22 wrote: »

Only if you're in Dublin, tiny number of promotions in regions and competing against external candidates and experienced internals far from Easy

In rural areas it's a well paid job so staff turnover is low. Nobody leaves unless it's for retirement.

doc22

Deleted User wrote: »

In rural areas it's a well paid job so staff turnover is low. Nobody leaves unless it's for retirement.

Totally agree. No one goes for promotion to Dublin either and transfers happen in one direction(taking more posts out of the pool for regional candidates). For 10ish years rural offices had pretty much the exact same staff with no changes

Sir Guy who smiles

pauliebdub wrote: »

Many of the offices are run down with dated furniture and no money spent on them. No benefits such as health insurance.

OP, I think you will want to avoid the trauma of dated furniture!

Seriously though, very many people are under the impression that a public sector job comes with free health insurance, it does not.

doc22

doc22 wrote: »

Totally agree. No one goes for promotion to Dublin either and transfers happen in one direction(taking more posts out of the pool for regional candidates). For 10ish years rural offices had pretty much the exact same staff with no changes

You can end up with the same staff sitting in the same seats for years and even decades. Can often lead to really toxic atmosphere in an office. I've seen it happen.

Hotblack Desiato

doc22 wrote: »

Only if you're in Dublin, tiny number of promotions in regions and competing against external candidates and experienced internals far from Easy

There are more promotion outlets in Dublin, but there are also far more people competing for them. The idea that anyone is getting promoted "easily after a few years" is nonsense no matter where they're based.

Geuze

Sir Guy who smiles wrote: »

Seriously though, very many people are under the impression that a public sector job comes with free health insurance, it does not.

Do people actually think that?

I have never met anybody who thinks that.

raze_them_all_

raze_them_all_ wrote: »

I k ow certain new public sector pensions are about 15-16k a year and cant get it until 68 despite beimg forced to retire at 60 hardly an amazing gold plated pension people do go on about

think thats a bit of a mixup of a few things you got there, its not quite as bad as all that

but certainly the single scheme is nobodys idea of a giveaway pension

think the summing up a few posts back was fair

glad to be in a decent salaried safe job with pension taken care of as we head into another tough patch

Pkiernan

raze_them_all_ wrote: »

I k ow certain new public sector pensions are about 15-16k a year and cant get it until 68 despite beimg forced to retire at 60 hardly an amazing gold plated pension people do go on about

3x higher at least than the average private sector pension.

Treppen

I wonder how the OP got on?

Pkiernan

Pkiernan wrote: »

3x higher at least than the average private sector pension.

pointless and groundless

what is the "average" private sector pension? kindly instance your response.

what contribution does the person getting that "average" private sector pension make over forty years?

you will of course know that the COAP to which you no doubt half-arsedly refer makes up 12k of the amount above, towards which public servants in the cohort in question pay the same PRSI as any employee?

absolutely worthless input tbh and tiresome to continuously have to correct lest the usual gang- of which you are prominent in these threads- start parading an unanswered statement as a victory

lets hear yer comeback

CramCycle

Pkiernan wrote: »

3x higher at least than the average private sector pension.

Also not helped by a number of workers outside the public sector who don't invest in a classic style pension. I have several friends whose pension is a house they have bought, or land they have, or something similar. Some buy stocks and shares directly but an even larger number just don't have one at all. Plenty of people still getting found with piles of cash around the house. I always laugh at my friend a plumber who says the number of times you find a wedge of 5000euro (or whatever) in a pensioners house while doing work, you hand it over and half the time, they forgot they ever left it there is incredible. When a neighbour of mine passed away we were asked to help clear out his house as he had no family and left everything to the church. Opened one wardrobe and found 30,000euro just sitting there. Its astonishing.

Pkiernan

[Deleted User] wrote: »

pointless and groundless

what is the "average" private sector pension? kindly instance your response.

what contribution does the person getting that "average" private sector pension make over forty years?

you will of course know that the COAP to which you no doubt half-arsedly refer makes up 12k of the amount above, towards which public servants in the cohort in question pay the same PRSI as any employee?

absolutely worthless input tbh and tiresome to continuously have to correct lest the usual gang- of which you are prominent in these threads- start parading an unanswered statement as a victory

lets hear yer comeback

Not sure why you're choosing to personally attack me, but I have reported it.

My figures are from here:

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.businessworld.ie/financial-news/New-survey-reveals-Irish-people-s-views-on-a-good-retirement-572802.html&ved=2ahUKEwjh46S859zrAhXpShUIHZXvAx4QFjABegQIBBAD&usg=AOvVaw1QneH5qUTCiRyK97YJp07y

Average private pension fund in Ireland will pay 4800 per year. Less than one third of the public service pension.

Pkiernan

Public service pension averages from the Orish Times.

I guess they are out to get you too?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/business/personal-finance/public-sector-pensions-worth-80-more-than-those-in-private-sector-1.3726553%3fmode=amp

kippy

Pkiernan wrote: »

Not sure why you're choosing to personally attack me, but I have reported it.

My figures are from here:

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.businessworld.ie/financial-news/New-survey-reveals-Irish-people-s-views-on-a-good-retirement-572802.html&ved=2ahUKEwjh46S859zrAhXpShUIHZXvAx4QFjABegQIBBAD&usg=AOvVaw1QneH5qUTCiRyK97YJp07y

Average private pension fund in Ireland will pay 4800 per year. Less than one third of the public service pension.

You'd want to pick your data a bit better.
That's a survey based on 1000 responses.
Hardly reflective of the national picture.....

you dont know enough to even respond to the points raised.

i was careful and comprehensive in detailing where your comment was wrong

youve responded to none of the relevant issues

i didnt expect you to but as i said its important to challenge that type of content-free one liner every time it comes up on this thread

if you feel that my disrespect for such lazy posting when it has been dismissed time and again *in this thread* feels personal then that's not something im going to be pulling punches about tbh

facts have a bias

Pkiernan

kippy wrote: »

You'd want to pick your data a bit better.
That's a survey based on 1000 responses.
Hardly reflective of the national picture.....

From the Irish Times:

Public-sector pensions worth 80% more than those in private sector.

Public-sector workers receive about nine times more pension tax relief per person, on average, than those in the private sector, new figures show, as pressure from the pensions industry mounts to retain the current generous tax relief regime in an effort to shore up private retirement savings.




https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/business/personal-finance/public-sector-pensions-worth-80-more-than-those-in-private-sector-1.3726553%3fmode=amp

Pkiernan

[Deleted User] wrote: »

you dont know enough to even respond to the points raised.

i was careful and comprehensive in detailing where your comment was wrong

youve responded to none of the relevant issues

i didnt expect you to but as i said its important to challenge that type of content-free one liner every time it comes up on this thread

if you feel that my disrespect for such lazy posting when it has been dismissed time and again *in this thread* feels personal then that's not something im going to be pulling punches about tbh

facts have a bias

Nothing lazy about posting facts about the huge difference between Public Servants gold plated, guaranteed pensions and the harsh reality that Private workers will face in comparison.

You seem very touchy about your pension. Don't worry, you're on the pigs back! Enjoy it!

kippy

Pkiernan wrote: »

Nothing lazy about posting facts about the huge difference between Public Servants gold plated, guaranteed pensions and the harsh reality that Private workers will face in comparison.

You seem very touchy about your pension. Don't worry, you're on the pigs back! Enjoy it!

Look, it's fairly simple. If you don't pay for an occupational pension, you don't get one.