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

Public service pay cut?

[Deleted User]

Will, there be public service pay cuts and cuts to services themselves after COVID 19? interesting discussion on RTE 1 radio about this, on the other hand, the likes of David McWilliams take a different view on how we can pay for this.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Geuze

addaword wrote: »

Nurses average wage is 57k per year. Average industrial wage is only thirty something k per year.

AIW not published anymore.

2018 earnings data: average annual earnings in Industry = 46,399

https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/er/elca/earningsandlabourcostsannualdata2018/

Bobtheman

Geuze wrote: »

AIW not published anymore.

2018 earnings data: average annual earnings in Industry = 46,399

https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/er/elca/earningsandlabourcostsannualdata2018/

Given the **** nurses deal with even before this crisis-youd begrudge them13 k extra?

Vizzy

addaword,

Any sign of the answer that I asked you yesterday about your knowledge of people sitting at home getting paid to do nothing ?

HartsHat

Let us not forget that a lot of public servants, for example the Gardaí in Cyprus and our Soldiers in Syria cannot come and wont have seen their families in months.

You would be a brave man to suggest a pay cut for them.

Vizzy

HartsHat wrote: »

Let us not forget that a lot of public servants, for example the Gardaí in Cyprus and our Soldiers in Syria cannot come and wont have seen their families in months.

You would be a brave man to suggest a pay cut for them.

See post 824 above.

I will wager that there will be a thread here in about 6 months complaining how much(insert nurse/Garda/Paramedic) are getting paid.

[Deleted User]

addaword wrote: »

As I said, it was you who claimed not all teachers had a laptop or tablet, and you used that as an excuse for some teachers not being able to teach online as fully as they otherwise might. Here is your quote yet again from 14.43 hours yesterday:

It's good of you to provide the quote. Would you like someone to explain the difference to you between 'teaching online' and 'managing their students on the service'? Or do you think you can actually work this out for yourself?

addaword wrote: »

I never claimed "all the people that you know sitting at home doing nothing and being paid are teachers". Please read more carefully and pay attention to detail.

Though interestingly, you haven't been able to come up with one specific example of any employee in any organisation who is sitting at home doing nothing on full pay. The only example you've given is, in fact, the one I mentioned. You've been furiously scrambling round looking for other people to give you examples. So it's obvious as the nose on your face that actually, you don't know of any examples yourself of people sitting at home getting paid to do nothing. You made it up and thought you'd get away with it.

That was a bit silly, wasn't it?

pillphil

addaword wrote: »

...I'm just quoting your last post to respond to you...

Look, I have no real dog in this fight. I'm private sector, but i work directly with the public(civil? can never remember) sector.

I've found the majority to be completely competent, dedicated people. (And tbh Andrew I'm surprised to see you defend the retention rate, as these people i work with are pissed off at the very small minority of people in the office that are completely useless but no-one has any interest in getting rid off. I won't tar the entire sector with them, but they definitely exist and are a detriment to the entire department)

However, i would say that no public(civil?) servant should be working from home on their own equipment. As I say that, i know that all of my (public/civil) co-workers are doing exactly that, because the majority haven't been provided with equipment to do so, but i think it's a mistake.
Allowing people access to the system we work on with entirely unsecured computers is an absolute disaster. Every private employee in my company could access the same system with private equipment, but we were told in no uncertain terms not to.

Edit: I realised I left out a bit. All of the private employees have company issued laptops that have a certain minimum level of security, antivirus, etc. If something i specifically installed on that laptop causes a data breach, there's a record that i knowingly installed it, despite a warning that maybe i shouldn't. If i take a compute i already own and it already has some malicious software on it, then i access the system, there's no accountability. it's the departments fault for trusting my computer, not the other way around.

If there is any data breach because of them working on their own equipment, who's fault is it?

addaword

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Though interestingly, you haven't been able to come up with one specific example of any employee in any organisation who is sitting at home doing nothing on full pay. The only example you've given is, in fact, the one I mentioned.

So you are admitting now that some teachers are doing nothing? I suppose they have the excuse you provided for them though, as (to quote you) "not all teachers have laptops or tablets, so how they supposed to manage their students on the service?"

What about the other people mentioned, eg Special Needs Assistants, Librarians, HSE dentists and Physios, Bord Failte staff, Librarians? What are they doing now? I guess, according to you, they can be excused for not working if they do not have a laptop or tablet either.

Let us think of the kids. Some parents have found there has been no communication from their school in 5 weeks. Could parents donate old tablets / laptops to certain schools, for the sake of the kids?

HartsHat

addaword wrote: »

So you are admitting now that some teachers are doing nothing? I suppose they have the excuse you provided for them though, as (to quote you) "not all teachers have laptops or tablets, so how they supposed to manage their students on the service?"

What about the other people mentioned, eg Special Needs Assistants, Librarians, HSE dentists and Physios, Bord Failte staff, Librarians? What are they doing now? I guess, according to you, they can be excused for not working if they do not have a laptop or tablet either.

Let us think of the kids. Some parents have found there has been no communication from their school in 5 weeks. Could parents donate old tablets / laptops to certain schools, for the sake of the kids?

There are physios working in hospitals. Civil service librarians are working too.

yenom

A clerical officer starts off on under 400 a week after tax, I can't see that being cut any further. I'd say planed increases will be postponed.

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

youve been asked about ten times to compare relevant figures and still are unable to do so

this was to addaword a few days ago. still waiting.

the gall to be misrepresenting- repeatedly- a minor point from another poster over six pages when they themselves have talked nonsense throughout the thread and haven't had a fact nor opinion of any more substance than a pub bore

rolling. my. damn. eyes.

addaword

riddles wrote: »

The lack of any kind of proactive approach from the department of education in Covid has been nothing short of appalling. In fact its reactive approach has been just as bad.

One kid in national school - no contact from the school in five weeks and no access to the books.

One in secondary school getting loaded on work with no coordination among teachers of workload volume.

How hard would it have been to create remote virtual classroom offering per year in primary albeit not a two way engagement per class year for 3 hours a day and then the current teacher distributes and corrects homework

A similar model per subject and year in secondary.

The department of education and a lot of the teaching community have absolutely no interest in their roles. A function currently totally unfit for purpose and in urgent need of reform.

PS the only current measure still active in the PS is whether you swipe in every day. Most don’t even have laptops and are at home on full pay. Others are literally swamped in work which is a representation of the PS in normal operations. About 30% carrying the 70% that do SFA.

Many parents with kids in school would agree with you. To do something constructive about it, I wonder could we set up a scheme to appeal to people to donate old laptops and tablets to schools?

addaword

HartsHat wrote: »

There are physios working in hospitals. Civil service librarians are working too.

I know someone waiting on a physio and they were told no appointment can be made during the lockdown. I suppose Special Needs Assistants from schools and librarians and public service dentists and so on are busy working from home. They are not on €350 per week anyway.

Mad_maxx

yenom wrote: »

A clerical officer starts off on under 400 a week after tax, I can't see that being cut any further. I'd say planed increases will be postponed.

good money considering how little they do bar answering phones and sending out post , a receptionist and low level sectretary in the private sector would be on less and obviously without the same pension plan

smelly sock

Mad_maxx wrote: »

good money considering how little they do bar answering phones and sending out post , a receptionist and low level sectretary in the private sector would be on less and obviously without the same pension plan

LOL.

Chaos Black

Mad_maxx wrote: »

good money considering how little they do bar answering phones and sending out post , a receptionist and low level sectretary in the private sector would be on less and obviously without the same pension plan

A Civil Servant clerical officer role varies depending on where they work, so you can't really say all they do is phones and post. Some do, some do even less then that and a lot more have a range of tasks that among others things will require knowledge of legislation relevant to their area and so on.

Most people outside of the Civil Service don't know what civil servants do on a daily basis. Most civil servants likely equally know little of what the daily life is like in other Departments unless you have worked in it or know people who do.

If I was to comment in a general sense, I would say that a lot of clerical officers have it hard in that the work tends to have more interaction with the public and be high volume. My experience in the private sector was the same at the lower levels. The pay for post 2013 is also in line or less then the private sector equivalent roles.

I don't fully agree with the increment system as for example, you get cases where long term clerical officers are on more then their manager, or even their managers manager (in the case of a clerical officer reporting to an executive officer who reports to an administrative officer which is increasingly the common middle manager grade in some places despite it advertised as a graduate roles as they are cheaper). A clerical officer on 35+ for doing the post is excessive, although that happens with old contracts in the private sector as well. The last pay deal addressed it by reducing pay and pension terms for new entrants. Like I say, I don't think you can repeat that again soon and either way it is a longer term solution.

TheDavester

Mad_maxx wrote: »

good money considering how little they do bar answering phones and sending out post , a receptionist and low level sectretary in the private sector would be on less and obviously without the same pension plan

try harder

yenom

Mad_maxx wrote: »

good money considering how little they do bar answering phones and sending out post , a receptionist and low level sectretary in the private sector would be on less and obviously without the same pension plan

I see, very interesting.

[Deleted User]

pillphil wrote: »

However, i would say that no public(civil?) servant should be working from home on their own equipment. As I say that, i know that all of my (public/civil) co-workers are doing exactly that, because the majority haven't been provided with equipment to do so, but i think it's a mistake.
Allowing people access to the system we work on with entirely unsecured computers is an absolute disaster. Every private employee in my company could access the same system with private equipment, but we were told in no uncertain terms not to.

Edit: I realised I left out a bit. All of the private employees have company issued laptops that have a certain minimum level of security, antivirus, etc. If something i specifically installed on that laptop causes a data breach, there's a record that i knowingly installed it, despite a warning that maybe i shouldn't. If i take a compute i already own and it already has some malicious software on it, then i access the system, there's no accountability. it's the departments fault for trusting my computer, not the other way around.

If there is any data breach because of them working on their own equipment, who's fault is it?

I'd broadly agree with you that people shouldn't working from home on their own equipment, though possibly for different reasons. No-one should have to fund equipment to do their job. If there is going to be a 'BYOD' structure, there should be fair compensation for the costs involved. A laptop that gets used for eight hours work a day plus an hour or two leisure in the evening is going to need replacement much earlier than a laptop used for an hour or two in the evening.

Generally, there is no significant security issue arising from remote access on a personal device. If this is set up properly with Citrix or other similar tool, there is zero interaction between the local device and the target system. There is no file interface, no ability to save files locally, no cut/paste onto the local system. So it really doesn't matter if the local device is riddled with viruses and ransomware. These don't travel through a simple 'window' system like Citrix.

addaword wrote: »

So you are admitting now that some teachers are doing nothing? I suppose they have the excuse you provided for them though, as (to quote you) "not all teachers have laptops or tablets, so how they supposed to manage their students on the service?"

It would really help keep the discussion at a rational level if you could read the words that I actually said, instead of making up your own words and putting them into my mouth. I didn't say that teachers are doing nothing. Those who don't have laptops or tablets don't need 'an excuse' for not providing online services to their school or their students. They need their employer to provide them with the tools to do their job, just like any other employer.

addaword wrote: »

What about the other people mentioned, eg Special Needs Assistants, Librarians, HSE dentists and Physios, Bord Failte staff, Librarians? What are they doing now? I guess, according to you, they can be excused for not working if they do not have a laptop or tablet either.

So you're just asking these questions now? I thought you had all the answers from all the people you know who are sitting at home doing nothing? Who are these people that you know sitting at home doing nothing? Still no sign of any actual examples of who these people are and who do they work for? Just ignorant speculation - is that all you've got?

And again, those who don't have laptops or tablets don't need 'an excuse' for not providing online services to their employer. They need their employer to provide them with the tools to do their job, just like any other employer.

addaword wrote: »

Let us think of the kids. Some parents have found there has been no communication from their school in 5 weeks. Could parents donate old tablets / laptops to certain schools, for the sake of the kids?

addaword wrote: »

Many parents with kids in school would agree with you. To do something constructive about it, I wonder could we set up a scheme to appeal to people to donate old laptops and tablets to schools?

I don't claim to speak for teachers, but I'd guess that most of them would say that they don't want your charity. They want to be paid properly and fairly, and they want their services to be properly funded, so they don't have to be running cake sales three times a year to keep the heating on in the school.

addaword wrote: »

I know someone waiting on a physio and they were told no appointment can be made during the lockdown. I suppose Special Needs Assistants from schools and librarians and public service dentists and so on are busy working from home. They are not on €350 per week anyway.

Is the someone you know waiting for physio the same as the people you know sitting at home on full pay doing nothing? Could you not at least come up with an original wrapping for your spoofing instead of relying on your traditional approach which has been exposed multiple times?

And more of that idle, ignorant speculation - attempting to slur entire professions by spreading doubts and rumours, but no actual facts. That's a fairly low tactic.

Mad_maxx wrote: »

good money considering how little they do bar answering phones and sending out post , a receptionist and low level sectretary in the private sector would be on less and obviously without the same pension plan

You seem to be about 20-30 years out of date. There are no secretaries and very few receptions in the civil and public service these days. Most receptionists are now outsourced security staff. Most secretary posts are gone. Most clerical officers are the people on the front line of public services - the social protection counter staff, the Revenue phone staff, the Customs officers in the airport and the docks.

Chaos Black wrote: »

If I was to comment in a general sense, I would say that a lot of clerical officers have it hard in that the work tends to have more interaction with the public and be high volume. My experience in the private sector was the same at the lower levels. The pay for post 2013 is also in line or less then the private sector equivalent roles.

I don't fully agree with the increment system as for example, you get cases where long term clerical officers are on more then their manager, or even their managers manager (in the case of a clerical officer reporting to an executive officer who reports to an administrative officer which is increasingly the common middle manager grade in some places despite it advertised as a graduate roles as they are cheaper). A clerical officer on 35+ for doing the post is excessive, although that happens with old contracts in the private sector as well. The last pay deal addressed it by reducing pay and pension terms for new entrants. Like I say, I don't think you can repeat that again soon and either way it is a longer term solution.

In fairness though, any decent manager will get a lot more out of a clerical officer with 10+ years experience than one that is just in the door a few months. The more experienced staff will know the people, the organisation, the work, the political environment and a lot more.

And the point about earning more than your manager - so what? In the private sector staff, I had staff reporting to me who earned more than me more than once.

Dr. Bre

Mad_maxx wrote: »

good money considering how little they do bar answering phones and sending out post , a receptionist and low level sectretary in the private sector would be on less and obviously without the same pension plan

Seriously how do know that’s all CO’s do. ? Loads of different departments so different work

Chaos Black

My point on the increment system is that it can result in some over payed staff at all grade levels as it is based on time rather then merit. That does not factor into the discussion on an overall paycut during a pandemic though.

In relation to the comment on a manger earning less then a CO, my point is that in a hierarchy organisation like the Civil Service the manager carries the responsibility (which is how it should be). I don't dispute that as a manager you also benefit from the hard work and skills of those who report to them. A sensible approach is to consult the experienced staff of all grades as you say.

But in general, outside of an example where someone has a specialist skill set or expertise i'd lack, I would probably like to get paid more as a manager if I carry the responsibility and more is generally expected of me. A CO of two decades may argue they do have expertise and knowledge built up that I lack. Another CO may just do the post and equally make more money. This I think is a flaw in the a general approach of pay structure and the post 2013 entrants pay deal but overtime it will resolve itself as people retire.

Edit: I should add, in the above example it is not the CO's issue and is the managers problem. My view is they signed a contract and their terms are what they are. I would not be advocating for a pay cut to them.

[Deleted User]

Chaos Black wrote: »

My point on the increment system is that it can result in some over payed staff at all grade levels as it is based on time rather then merit. That does not factor into the discussion on an overall paycut during a pandemic though.

In relation to the comment on a manger earning less then a CO, my point is that in a hierarchy organisation like the Civil Service the manager carries the responsibility (which is how it should be). I don't dispute that as a manager you also benefit from the hard work and skills of those who report to them. A sensible approach is to consult the experienced staff of all grades as you say.

But in general, outside of an example where someone has a specialist skill set or expertise i'd lack, I would probably like to get paid more as a manager if I carry the responsibility and more is generally expected of me. A CO of two decades may argue they do have expertise and knowledge built up that I lack. Another CO may just do the post and equally make more money. This I think is a flaw in the a general approach of pay structure and the post 2013 entrants pay deal but overtime it will resolve itself as people retire.

Edit: I should add, in the above example it is not the CO's issue and is the managers problem. My view is they signed a contract and their terms are what they are. I would not be advocating for a pay cut to them.

It would be very difficult to cut the pay of COs relative to the grades above them. It just wouldn't wash. It would be seen as attacking the lowest paid and weakest in the PS.

In my experience its the lower grades that do the bulk of the work and shoulder the responsibility if anything goes wrong. Those above them certainly dont take much responsibility.

[Deleted User]

Deleted User wrote: »

It would be very difficult to cut the pay of COs relative to the grades above them. It just wouldn't wash. It would be seen as attacking the lowest paid and weakest in the PS.

In my experience its the lower grades that do the bulk of the work and shoulder the responsibility if anything goes wrong. Those above them certainly dont take much responsibility.

I agree with you on the CO pay, but I don't think you're right about responsibility. You don't find CO's up at the PAC or other committees being grilled by the opposition.

[Deleted User]

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I agree with you on the CO pay, but I don't think you're right about responsibility. You don't find CO's up at the PAC or other committees being grilled by the opposition.

That's at the top. The supervisory grades in talking about.

smelly sock

Lets not forget during the last downturn CO's had their pay cut. I remember as a CO being out on strike and all other grades passing the picket.

addaword

tastyt wrote: »

When your employer is broke in either public or private employment you cannot expect pay rises increments etc. And if pay cuts happen it’s the small price public servants pay for the great job security and pension they have which a private worker simply doesn’t. Especially in these tough times it is a huge advantage to be a public servant considering the amount of people who lose there job through no fault of their own

It’s not rocket science, I don’t know how people can’t get this .

Some people still cannot get this, or at least they let on as if they cannot get it. The lower paid public servants should be protected. It is the ones above the p.a. average of 50k a year who should be targeted. And those not working at all like Special Needs Assistants should be on 350 a week like everyone else out of work.

Vizzy

addaword,

I see you are up and about. Good morning.

Any sign of the answer to my question ?

addaword

Vizzy wrote: »

addaword,

I see you are up and about. Good morning.

Any sign of the answer to my question ?

Sure. Public sector workers earn 35% more than private sector workers, according to the Irish Independent.

[Deleted User]

addaword wrote: »

Sure. Public sector workers earn 35% more than private sector workers, according to the Irish Independent.

Good reliable source there...

addaword

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Good reliable source there...

The Irish Times and various media programmes report the same.