nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Civil Servants Demanding Shorter Working Week

Creative83

Currently they are expected to work 37.5 hours per week. Jeez that seems very reasonable to me considering most private sector full time workers are on the standard 40 hour work.

They are now demanding to be reverted to 34.5 hours per week.

I have seen some shysters in my time but hard to top this bunch....

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/civil-servants-demand-shorter-working-week-36821698.html

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Ursus Horribilis

The pension levy takes a hefty lump out of the net pay too. That's never reflected in the pay scales.

Chips Lovell

Could people stop bringing facts into the discussion? We're trying to get a pitchfork wielding mob going here and you're ruining it.

Squatter

Dr. Kenneth Noisewater wrote: »

As I already said, that's the Union just taking a ball up off the ground and running with it. Most Civil Servants have enough cop on to know that this looks bad.

A "Union" is made up of its members. Not its paid officials, who are basically mere employees, tasked with carrying out the members' requirements as decided at the Union's Annual Conference or similar before possibly being refined by the Union's elected executive.

What happened here is that some members of the union tabled a motion at their Branch AGM to go forward to the Annual Conference, and the motion was carried. This is unsurprising, given that many Branch AGMs are poorly attended, mainly by activists and members with a bee in their bonnet about something! It's almost inevitable that motions regarding increases in pay or leave or reduction in working hours will go through both Branch AGMs and Annual Conferences, as very few delegates will vote against them.

At the end of the day, it means very little except that the Union's paid officials will have to include the claim in its next meeting with the "Official Side" to discuss pay and conditions. The claim will either be rejected or accepted and, ultimately, will probably be incorporated in some sort of fudge whenever the next pay award is agreed.

But it gives the media and critics of civil and public servants another opportunity to vent and rail against the greed and lack or realism of this so-called "privileged elite" - which is great fun altogether! And after the storm has died down, life goes on much as before.

na1

Ursus Horribilis wrote: »

I'm a former public servant and I never took an hour for lunch. Nobody in the office ever did. We worked flexi hours and we clocked in and out for lunch. So if anyone took a long lunch break it meant they'd have to make up for it by staying longer or coming in earlier. And despite those tired old stereotypes, where I worked people weren't sitting on their arses all day playing Solitaire. There were deadlines set and targets to be met.

If the company (Irish State) is not doing well financially could they legally make a civil servant redundant?
(I'm serious, not joking)

Dr. Kenneth Noisewater

And it is for reasons like that that I am no longer a Union member.

na1

Ursus Horribilis wrote: »

The pension levy takes a hefty lump out of the net pay too. That's never reflected in the pay scales.

And they get the standard rate contributory pension when retired?

na1

PhoenixParker wrote: »

That’s public sector not civil service.
Big and important difference.
Public sector includes all hospital staff, teachers, Gards etc. as well as civil service.

The public sector average is not reflective of the civil service average.

Oh, ok. So nurses teachers and gards are high pay workers who improve the public service statistics?

PhoenixParker

na1 wrote: »

If the company (Irish State) is not doing well financially could they legally make a civil servant redundant?
(I'm serious, not joking)

No, but they can redeploy people and move them around roles at the drop of a hat in a way that would be completely unacceptable in the private sector and even in other parts of the public sector.

They’re not like for like, it’s difficult to compare without looking at a big picture

PhoenixParker

na1 wrote: »

Oh, ok. So nurses teachers and gards are high pay workers who improve the public service statistics?

Compared to the civil service yes.
You only have to look at the salary scales to see.

Squatter

na1 wrote: »

And they get the standard rate contributory pension when retired?

The civil servants who pay the full (Class A) stamp get it as part of their retirement pension. The pension levy is a contribution towards the remainder of their pension.

Rasputin87

Dr. Kenneth Noisewater wrote: »

From a Civil Servant's point of view, this is embarrassing. The actual workers on the ground aren't demanding a shorter working week. Out of 8 of us here in my office, nobody supports trying to claw those extra hours back. We're happy enough. We've had a bit of pay restoration, which is what most people were more worried about. Just leave well enough alone ffs.

This is just a case of the unions trying to make themselves look busy. Again, I have to say, I'm just embarrassed. Lads like him are making us all look like money grabbing, self-entitled layabouts.

Feck it, I'll say it once more, this is embarrassing.

I appreciate your honesty and groundedness, it certainly provides a counter-balance to the usual opinion on civil service workers on here.

Unfortunately, your story doesn't fit in with the pre-conceived opinion I (and many others) have of civil service workers which is - admittedly - built upon a foundation of hearsay and TheJournal comment sections.

With that in mind, I'm going to completely disregard what you have posted and continue to tar you and your seven colleagues with the same brush I have tarred your kind with for years.

Thanks for your input, you lazy overpaid shíte.

:pac:

Squatter

na1 wrote: »

Oh, ok. So nurses teachers and gards are high pay workers who improve the public service statistics?

Not necessarily. Although some of the highest overtime earners in those jobs - plus prison officers - earn a pretty good annual wedge.

It's the likes of air corps pilots, engineers, architects, hospital consultants, doctors, statisticians, teachers, university lecturers, meteorologists, lawyers, vets, economists, accountants etc. etc. that bring up the overall average PS salary.

na1

Squatter wrote: »

na1 wrote: »

And they get the standard rate contributory pension when retired?

The civil servants who pay the full (Class A) stamp get it as part of their retirement pension. The pension levy is a contribution towards the remainder of their pension.

So they pay more to get higher pensions, right?
Also their public service pensions are proportional to their contributions.
While the private sectors workers who pay PRSI as a percentage of their income are all getting the same pension, depending on the years worked.
So the company CEO will get the same contributory pension as the person on the minimal wage

na1

PhoenixParker wrote: »

na1 wrote: »

If the company (Irish State) is not doing well financially could they legally make a civil servant redundant?
(I'm serious, not joking)

No, but they can redeploy people and move them around roles at the drop of a hat in a way that would be completely unacceptable

Could you give an example please?

BazzyB

As a Civil Servant of 3 years and having worked before that in a large tech multinational and a big 4 firm I would like to agree with statement that the union has really placed a negative public perception on Civil Servants through this announcement.

The people I work with day to day here work just as hard as those who I worked with in any of my other roles. They are relatively happy with their conditions and the pay restoration meant far more to them than regaining the lost hours. My team have stayed late on more than one occasion without my asking to help out near a deadline. The salaries below senior management aren't all they are cracked up to be and are freely available in the public domain along with any pension deductions which need to be taken into account. The cultural norm for all staff below senior management would be a half hour lunch and to head home earlier in the evenings, much the same as it was in the tech multinational.

Money wise I used to make much more in the private sector where hard work is recognized through bonuses etc. the public sector does not have the liberty to or administrative capability to pay its staff in this manner. However I moved because I wanted a change of role and to make a contribution to the functioning of the country. It really is comparing apples to oranges and at times I wish I never left the private sector, I may go back in future. I feel it is nosense to tar everyone with the same brush there are lazy people everywhere it isn't a public sector phenomenon.

Keyzer

Creative83 wrote: »

Currently they are expected to "work" 37.5 hours per week.

Fixed that for you...

c68zapdsm5i1ru

awec wrote: »

Asking for a shorter working week when the public sector is already an under-worked, overpaid bloated heap of ****e is not really doing much to dispel this point of view.

Really? Have you anything to back this up, apart from articles from the Sunday Indpendent and stuff you've heard from your neighbour's aunty who once knew a lazy civil servant?

Billgirlylegs

na1 wrote: »

And they get the standard rate contributory pension when retired?

How much do you think "they" get?

Nermal

Christina Loud Pinball wrote: »

They are asking for their normal working hours, which were extended during the recession along with pay cuts, and holiday and sick leave reductions, to be restored to them, now that the recession is over and we are no longer in an 'emergency' situation.

Who told you that? We still spend more than we earn.

PhoenixParker

na1 wrote: »

Could you give an example please?

There’s not really much to explain.
To the civil service (especially within a department) a CO is a CO is a CO.

If someone leaves a critical role, or a few people leave together from the same area and they need someone in that spot, they’ll yoink someone at the appropriate level from what they’re doing and get them to do it permanently.

Generally they’ll ask around for nominations/volunteers but if there are none forthcoming they’ll just tell someone, that’s it, from Monday you’re doing that job. It can be a huge change from say filing to face to face with the public all day. It may even involve an office move, especially in Dublin.

Ted Plain

I'm in favour of it, as long as it is applied universally. I want it too.

Why is there a need to work 8-hour days? A six-hour day sounds perfectly fine to me.

I'm sure that back in Victorian times that the working day was much longer and maybe even was a 6-day work week, and that the idea of shorter hours would have been met with resistance.

4 day week, six hours a day. The way of the future. Would be a nice EU directive.

PhoenixParker

BazzyB wrote: »

As a Civil Servant of 3 years and having worked before that in a large tech multinational and a big 4 firm I would like to agree with statement that the union has really placed a negative public perception on Civil Servants through this announcement.

The people I work with day to day here work just as hard as those who I worked with in any of my other roles. They are relatively happy with their conditions and the pay restoration meant far more to them than regaining the lost hours. My team have stayed late on more than one occasion without my asking to help out near a deadline. The salaries below senior management aren't all they are cracked up to be and are freely available in the public domain along with any pension deductions which need to be taken into account. The cultural norm for all staff below senior management would be a half hour lunch and to head home earlier in the evenings, much the same as it was in the tech multinational.

Money wise I used to make much more in the private sector where hard work is recognized through bonuses etc. the public sector does not have the liberty to or administrative capability to pay its staff in this manner. However I moved because I wanted a change of role and to make a contribution to the functioning of the country. It really is comparing apples to oranges and at times I wish I never left the private sector, I may go back in future. I feel it is nosense to tar everyone with the same brush there are lazy people everywhere it isn't a public sector phenomenon.

As someone who’s made the same move in the last year, this has been my experience too.

Amazing people, some massively overqualified for their roles, overall about the same levels of work ethic and laziness as the private sector. Stuff like sick leave is far tighter then anywhere I ever worked in the private sector.

Geuze

Creative83 wrote: »

What is the average industrial wage in your view... lots of different figures flying around

No longer published by the CSO.

What is published is the following:

http://www.cso.ie/en/statistics/earnings/

http://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/er/elca/earningsandlabourcostsannualdata2016/

2016 average earnings = 36,919

2016 average FT earnings = 45,611

Note that earnings incl overtime

Geuze

na1 wrote: »

And they get the standard rate contributory pension when retired?

PS hired since 1995 pay 4% PRSI + 6.5% pension conts + 10% PRD

[Deleted User]

Clerical Officer Higher Scale
24,618 – 25,312 – 26,351 – 27,389 – 28,428 – 29,465 – 30,485 – 31,493 – 32,192 – 33,187 – 34,735 – 35,954 – 36,515 – 37,267.

The vast majority.

The rest.Revised payscales with effect from 1 April 2017 for General Service grades.

1= After three years satisfactory service at the maximum.
2= After six years satisfactory service at the maximum.

Secretary General I
190,233

Secretary General II
180,900

Secretary General III
171,533

Deputy Secretary

157,433

Assistant Secretary

122,313 – 127,813 – 133,770 – 139,728

Principal (Higher)
83,519 – 85,943 – 90,004 – 93,443 – 96,267 – 99,242¹ – 102,212²

Principal
77,849 – 81,004 – 84,140 – 87,302 – 89,965 – 92,728¹ – 95,487²

Assistant Principal (Higher)
66,457 – 68,467 – 70,898 – 73,317 – 75,742 – 77,155 – 79,548¹ – 81,924²

Assistant Principal
62,966 – 65,257 – 65,760 – 66,874 – 69,026 – 70,281 – 72,465¹ – 74,657²

Administrative Officer
29,742 – 32,288 – 32,619 – 35,420 – 39,004 – 41,734 – 44,463 – 47,202 – 49,930 – 52,653 – 54,532¹ – 56,415²

Administrative Officer Higher Scale
41,734 – 44,463 – 47,202 – 49,930 – 52,65 – 54,532 56,392 58,251

Higher Executive Officer
44,816 – 46,125 – 47,426 – 48,730 – 50,035 – 51,347 – 52,653 54,532¹ – 56,415²

Higher Executive Officer Higher Scale
47,426 – 48,730 – 50,035 – 51,347 – 52,653 – 54,532 – 55,766 – 57,007 – 58,251

Executive Officer
27,383 – 29,265 – 30,314 – 32,094 – 33,679 – 35,219 – 36,749 – 38,247 – 39,760 – 41,233 – 42,749 – 43,760 – 45,187¹ – 46,616²

Executive Officer Higher Scale
30,314 – 32,094 – 33,679 – 35,219 – 36,749 – 38,247 – 39,760 – 41,233 – 42,749 – 43,760 – 45,187 – 46,251 – 47,315 – 48,379

Staff Officer
34,070 – 35,481 – 36,751 – 37,894 – 39,043 – 40,199 – 41,359 – 42,473 – 43,350¹ – 44,906²

Clerical Officer
23,565 – 24,618 – 25,312 – 26,351 – 27,389 – 28,428 – 29,465 – 30,485 – 31,493 – 32,192 – 33,187 – 34,735 – 35,954¹ – 36,515²

Clerical Officer Higher Scale
24,618 – 25,312 – 26,351 – 27,389 – 28,428 – 29,465 – 30,485 – 31,493 – 32,192 – 33,187 – 34,735 – 35,954 – 36,515 – 37,267

Head Services Officer
560.75 – 578.95 – 596.85 – 614.86 – 626.72 – 644.49 – 665.68¹ – 689.03²

Services Officer
402.63 – 415.91 – 427.87 – 443.81 – 460.00 – 476.59 – 488.45 – 495.59 – 519.67 – 536.61¹ – 556.09²

Services Attendant
402.63 – 403.35 – 427.87 – 434.59 – 446.05 – 462.41 – 483.74 – 493.26 – 513.34 – 529.79¹ – 549.06²

Cleaner
377.69 – 399.91 – 409.44 – 425.60 – 442.21 – 453.70¹ – 472.29²

Public Sector

n!ghtmancometh

386 per week is what I get. Joined civil service 1 year ago after online aptitude tests, in person aptitude test, interview and extensive Garda vetting which altogether took about a year. Currently fighting with our woeful centralised hr (Peoplepoint) for my increment which is about 11 euro extra a week.

I come in at 8.30 and leave at 5. Get 22 days annual leave per year. Can work up to a maximum day and a half off each month if you work 11 hours extra flexi hours the prior month. I take 30 minutes for lunch, and have never encountered anybody taking any more than that, as you will just have to stay longer to make the clock balance out at the end of the month.

My section has lost 4 experienced people since I joined through promotion and retirement, so I'm now the most experienced and am somehow training other new CO's as well as new EO's from external panel who waltz into the place expecting the job to be as handy as the ill informed posters here make it out to be! They lose that idea fairly quickly!

If all the negative posters want to experience this cushy life then there is always recruitment campaigns running on publicjobs.ie

Captain Obvious

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

The Union dude was given a right grilling by Pat Kenny this morning. Very little public support for this. Time to reject the demands of these self-entitled chancers.

Public support is irrelevant to this union. As is the support of other public sector workers. When the Gardaí sought a derogation from the new sick pay rules the civil servants threatened strike action if it was granted and they were successful in blocking it.

[Deleted User]

Creative83 wrote: »

Currently they are expected to work 37.5 hours per week. Jeez that seems very reasonable to me considering most private sector full time workers are on the standard 40 hour work.

Out of interest, how many hours do you work per week?
What if you exclude your lunch breaks?

That 40 hour week generally includes a 1hr lunch, bringing the total to 35hrs.

tastyt

Geuze wrote: »

No longer published by the CSO.

What is published is the following:

http://www.cso.ie/en/statistics/earnings/

http://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/er/elca/earningsandlabourcostsannualdata2016/

2016 average earnings = 36,919

2016 average FT earnings = 45,611

Note that earnings incl overtime

Not having a go at the poster but these figures for average wage are always ridiculously high and skewed by the very small very high wage earners.

Numbers wise the vast majority of people earn less than 45K

Mrs OBumble

Geuze wrote: »

PS hired since 1995 pay 4% PRSI + 6.5% pension conts + 10% PRD

Indeed.

I recently looked in to apply for PS positions.

Assuming I worked with the PS for 20 years (just possible, provided I don't get sick in my 60s, I would be entitled to a pension of 25% of my PS-career-average wage, minus the value of the standard contributory pension.

This means that unless I got some impressive promotions (very unlikely given my location, lack of Irish language and age), I would be paying the deductions and getting ZERO pension apart from the government contributory. And hell... I can get that by working in the private sector and simply paying standard PRSI.