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

Arealred

Hard to believe this nonsense of cutting public sector wages is being mooted. The last time that happened every small business suffered because Mary the clerical officer or John the hospital porter didn't have a brass cent to rub together at the end of the week. Are we going to make the same mistake a second time?

At time when front line workers have given their all during this crisis and it's not just nurses although they have been exceptional the vast majority of public servants have done the state unbelievable service to have nonsense like this being spouted is unbelievable.

Also think of front line workers who we have lost during the last few months including the Detective Garda

addaword

mickuhaha wrote: »

If the private sector wanted to retain staff in the lower end of the workforce they would do the same.

Many staff are retained at the lower end of the workforce, without the need for the taxpayer to give them an extra €1000 each and every year.

mickuhaha

noodler wrote: »

Hmm let's pretend clerical staff in the private sectors get paid 50k per annum to make a silly point!

You must have missed the point I made about the increments being the reason for staff retention in the Civil service. If the private sector wanted to retain staff in the lower end of the workforce they would do the same. If you are a CO in revenue you get quite a bit of training as said. I am sure this is not cheap. Would you prefer a teen on the end of the phone when you call revenue about you tax or when you're down on your luck and need to apply for social welfare? A blank look when you're asking questions. What price would you put on knowledge and experience.

noodler

mickuhaha wrote: »

Thanks Geuze.

So this would mean that the Clerical grade will never reach the average earnings never mind the average for full time works and Executive Officer grade takes 7/8 years to get to average earnings and I think it's 16 years to get to average full time earnings. Who is earning all the wonderful money in the civil service. Is it specialist grades?

Hmm let's pretend clerical staff in the private sectors get paid 50k per annum to make a silly point!

Vizzy

Glinda wrote: »

Not that anyone ever changes their mind, but just for comparison;

an EO that was at the top of their scale in 2007 would have been earning 48,954. The same person in 2020 will now be on 50,834. No increments once you reach the top point (in this case after 18 years service in a forty year career). So that person will have seen a payrise of 1,880 in total, over the past thirteen years. That's 3.8 %. Not per year, that's the total over thirteen years.

Figure for an AO is 59,213 in 2007, increase to 61,545 today. Increase for AOs has been a little better - 2,332, or 3.93% in thirteen years.

For a Principal Officer, they would have been on 106,785 in 2007, and would be on 107,399 today. Increase a whopping 614 euro in their annual salary over the period. that's a little over half a percent in thirteen years.

Most people in the public service are not in their first few years, so a lot of the time increments are irrelevant.

This is a post that I put up earlier in this thread
"in my own case (Local Authority) I was at the top of the scale, including LSI's in 2010, so my gross salary has increased by 5.8% in 10 years.

Many of my colleagues would have been in the same position , i.e. at the max or very close to the max of the scale since 2010.
Some exceptions would probably be clerical officer who have a very long scale before they reach the max.

Very little opportunity to seek or get promotion until about 2018, and before somebody jumps in to say "why would you not travel to get promoted " - been there, done that. Want to buy a T-shirt or two ?"

Geuze

Glinda wrote: »

Not that anyone ever changes their mind, but just for comparison;

an EO that was at the top of their scale in 2007 would have been earning 48,954. The same person in 2020 will now be on 50,834. No increments once you reach the top point (in this case after 18 years service in a forty year career). So that person will have seen a payrise of 1,880 in total, over the past thirteen years. That's 3.8 %. Not per year, that's the total over thirteen years.

Figure for an AO is 59,213 in 2007, increase to 61,545 today. Increase for AOs has been a little better - 2,332, or 3.93% in thirteen years.

For a Principal Officer, they would have been on 106,785 in 2007, and would be on 107,399 today. Increase a whopping 614 euro in their annual salary over the period. that's a little over half a percent in thirteen years.

Most people in the public service are not in their first few years, so a lot of the time increments are irrelevant.

There you go. The CSO data shows that the PS pay premium, that did exist, has declined.

Your figures confirm that.

Glinda

And following on from my post above, before someone says EOs are being overpaid, the level of responsibility at that grade can be phenomenal. Especially if you're any good.

Glinda

Not that anyone ever changes their mind, but just for comparison;

an EO that was at the top of their scale in 2007 would have been earning 48,954. The same person in 2020 will now be on 50,834. No increments once you reach the top point (in this case after 18 years service in a forty year career). So that person will have seen a payrise of 1,880 in total, over the past thirteen years. That's 3.8 %. Not per year, that's the total over thirteen years.

Figure for an AO is 59,213 in 2007, increase to 61,545 today. Increase for AOs has been a little better - 2,332, or 3.93% in thirteen years.

For a Principal Officer, they would have been on 106,785 in 2007, and would be on 107,399 today. Increase a whopping 614 euro in their annual salary over the period. that's a little over half a percent in thirteen years.

Most people in the public service are not in their first few years, so a lot of the time increments are irrelevant.

Geuze

mickuhaha wrote: »

Thanks Geuze.

So this would mean that the Clerical grade will never reach the average earnings never mind the average for full time works and Executive Officer grade takes 7/8 years to get to average earnings and I think it's 16 years to get to average full time earnings. Who is earning all the wonderful money in the civil service. Is it specialist grades?

The CSO averages are across the whole workforce, not just the PS.

Table 5 shows the average earnings by sector, note the 5yr change:

Education = 8.3%
Health = 9.6%

ICT = 20.4%
Prof, scientific, technical = 19.7%

So the paycuts, and the slow pay restoration are working to cause PS to grow slower than private sector.

[Deleted User]

Geuze wrote: »

2019 Earnings data released today by the CSO.

https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/er/elca/earningsandlabourcostsannualdata2019/

Average earnings have now passed 40k, up 3.6%.

For FT workers, it's 49k.

Let's be honest, it's probably higher when you consider the wealthy elite aren't required to release their tax and salary information unlike the been top of the public sector.

mickuhaha

Geuze wrote: »

2019 Earnings data released today by the CSO.

https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/er/elca/earningsandlabourcostsannualdata2019/

Average earnings have now passed 40k, up 3.6%.

For FT workers, it's 49k.

Thanks Geuze.

So this would mean that the Clerical grade will never reach the average earnings never mind the average for full time works and Executive Officer grade takes 7/8 years to get to average earnings and I think it's 16 years to get to average full time earnings. Who is earning all the wonderful money in the civil service. Is it specialist grades?

Geuze

2019 Earnings data released today by the CSO.

https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/er/elca/earningsandlabourcostsannualdata2019/

Average earnings have now passed 40k, up 3.6%.

For FT workers, it's 49k.

NovemberWren

salonfire wrote: »

Nope.

Increments are not a thing in SMEs, so if the salary is €26,000, that's the way it stays.

There may be the odd cost of living increase across the board every few years or so.

the odd thing is the non-information given to people by local authority clerks, admin. etc. Everything is [maybe] put in a skimpy comment to some different department, i.e., never answered.

Are they really mainly there, just as a certain vote bloc ?
Yet, they grip on to a myriad of rules.

the best web is: www.Forsa.ie membership benefits pay scales.

of Local Govt. they seem well remunerated; considering everything that they simply Do Not Do.

[Deleted User]

the gig varies from co to co job, and in particular from dept to dept

theres co jobs out there that would command fair salaries of 35k starting off in the private sector, and increments wouldnt come into it because three years in youd be leaving for a 50k job based on your experience

but the system has too much demand for "co" roles to handle too much subtlety in this regard.

as a manager, you end up doing what you would anywhere.

your best co, the brightest ones on their way somewhere, throw the hard stuff at them and coach them to ao (they all have degrees these days, thats been the norm since the mid 00's id say) and away they go.

those lot are underpaid at the first several points on the co scale and once they make ao they will be underpaid for the work they do until they get into the halfway points there, is my observations about most of them

a bad co is worth nothing, i wont pretend not to have ever had to manage those either!

cue a few barrages from the usuals, but the point im making is that hiring twenty odd thousand under a simple "clerical grade" designation at twenty grand a pop starting off in no way conveys the range and complexity of the tasks that might be required.

im sure the detail will be wasted, but i enjoyed typing it out anyways

Ninthlife

Sultan of Bling wrote: »

To be fair you could say that about any job in both sectors.

I wouldnt dispute that at all but some on here consistently think that a CO is unskilled and as such does not deserve the renumeration given without ever contemplating or even knowing a fraction of what COs can be tasked with

Treppen

salonfire wrote: »

Oddly enough, not the case with the PS.

The well paid can sometimes be terrible, like the corrupt Gardai, teachers that shouldn't be in a classroom,etc.

While the poorly paid SW clerk generally provides a good service to the public. And even with the poor pay, thousands and thousands wait on panels hoping to join.

"While the poorly paid SW clerk generally provides a good service to the public. "

Says who?
Says you?
You must be rubbing your hands with miserly glee thinking of all those poorly paid public service lower grade workers putting in good service :pac:

Why is it the case that during recessions the demand for teaching courses and public sector positions skyrocket?
If they are always well paid them why isn't the demand always there?

"While the poorly paid SW clerk generally provides a good service to the public. "

So yould be against any cuts for them?

Exactly at What Salary point do you think cuts should be made?
30k
40k
50k
60k

Sultan of Bling

Ninthlife wrote:

Become a CO in Revenue and see the amount of information you are required to know. Some COs I know would have better knowledge than grades way above them.

To be fair you could say that about any job in both sectors.

Ninthlife

People here stating COs is low paid inskilled work really havent a clue about the work that some COs do.

Become a CO in Revenue and see the amount of information you are required to know. Some COs I know would have better knowledge than grades way above them.

Geuze

barneystinson wrote: »

I thought it was an established fact that, to the extent there's a pay premium it's at the lower end of the spectrum. So in absolute terms you may say a CO in SW (AKA DEASP BTW) is poorly paid, they are paid more than a private sector equivalent, apparently.

I think it's fair to say the top of the CO scale is above similar private sector norms.

That is probably a reflection of a host of factors:

unionisation
progression/promotion norms
etc.

daithi7

kippy wrote: »

I was refering to another post/poster - not you.

You're wrong there also, I explicitly stated PS earners pay income taxes, & would also benefit from overdue income tax cuts (rather than just increasing pay for PS workers).

You're having a shocker , aren't you!?

[Deleted User]

salonfire wrote: »

Nope.

Increments are not a thing in SMEs, so if the salary is €26,000, that's the way it stays.

There may be the odd cost of living increase across the board every few years or so.

So at 26,000 they are being paid more than a CO for two years, but according to you they won't get any pay increases.

I've never worked in a job where I didn't get an increase every year, and that included the time spent doing security where I could earn off the books if I wanted.

barneystinson

mickuhaha wrote: »

Just looked it up there this is the CO pay scale below . Doesn't look like high wages to me. Seven to eight years to get to the 600 a week bracket before tax. That would be a take home pay of about 505 after deductions. The fact that they get a pay increase is a good thing. That's how you retain experienced staff in a business. It takes 18 years to get to your top pay. That's what you call the long game.
24,104 (461.96) – 25,681 (492.18) – 26,083 (499.85) – 26,864 (514.83) – 28,017 (536.93) – 29,167 (558.99) – 30,319 (581.05) – 31,157 (597.11) – 32,105 (615.29) – 33,209 (636.43) – 33,986 (651.32) – 35,078 (672.24) – 36,162 (693.04) – 37,855 (725.48) – LSI 1 39,186 (750.99) – LSI 2 39,796 (762.68)

I think you're misunderstanding my point. I'm not suggesting that the pay is high, in absolute terms. I am simply referring to the fact that numerous reports have identified that the pay premium is highest at the lower paid end of the spectrum, i.e. the pay is high relative to private sector pay for equivalent roles.

tigger123

Just for info, there are other organisations that do increments, such as banks and building society's. It's not exclusive to the public sector.

Edit; a lot of NGOs do increments also.

[Deleted User]

kippy wrote: »

So there's no salary negotiation annually or every few years? Must be hard hold onto people.

For low skilled work like clerks, that anyone can do, I would say no.

kippy

salonfire wrote: »

Nope.

Increments are not a thing in SMEs, so if the salary is €26,000, that's the way it stays.

There may be the odd cost of living increase across the board every few years or so.

So there's no salary negotiation annually or every few years? Must be hard hold onto people.

[Deleted User]

DubInMeath wrote: »

After 18 years with the same company more than likely or they aren't going to stay for that length of time.

Nope.

Increments are not a thing in SMEs, so if the salary is €26,000, that's the way it stays.

There may be the odd cost of living increase across the board every few years or so.

[Deleted User]

salonfire wrote: »

Of course they are paid better than the equivalent in the private sector with increments. Everyone knows that.

You think the filing clerk in the local oil company is getting paid €39,796?

My point was more towards the new entrants at the bottom of the incremental scale.

After 18 years with the same company more than likely or they aren't going to stay for that length of time.

[Deleted User]

barneystinson wrote: »

I thought it was an established fact that, to the extent there's a pay premium it's at the lower end of the spectrum. So in absolute terms you may say a CO in SW (AKA DEASP BTW) is poorly paid, they are paid more than a private sector equivalent, apparently.

Care to square that circle for me? Or ignore if it if it's inconvenient...

Of course they are paid better than the equivalent in the private sector with increments. Everyone knows that.

You think the filing clerk in the local oil company is getting paid €39,796?

My point was more towards the new entrants at the bottom of the incremental scale.

mickuhaha

barneystinson wrote: »

I thought it was an established fact that, to the extent there's a pay premium it's at the lower end of the spectrum. So in absolute terms you may say a CO in SW (AKA DEASP BTW) is poorly paid, they are paid more than a private sector equivalent, apparently.

Care to square that circle for me? Or ignore if it if it's inconvenient...

Just looked it up there this is the CO pay scale below . Doesn't look like high wages to me. Seven to eight years to get to the 600 a week bracket before tax. That would be a take home pay of about 505 after deductions. The fact that they get a pay increase is a good thing. That's how you retain experienced staff in a business. It takes 18 years to get to your top pay. That's what you call the long game.
24,104 (461.96) – 25,681 (492.18) – 26,083 (499.85) – 26,864 (514.83) – 28,017 (536.93) – 29,167 (558.99) – 30,319 (581.05) – 31,157 (597.11) – 32,105 (615.29) – 33,209 (636.43) – 33,986 (651.32) – 35,078 (672.24) – 36,162 (693.04) – 37,855 (725.48) – LSI 1 39,186 (750.99) – LSI 2 39,796 (762.68)

barneystinson

salonfire wrote: »

the poorly paid SW clerk generally provides a good service to the public. And even with the poor pay, thousands and thousands wait on panels hoping to join.

I thought it was an established fact that, to the extent there's a pay premium it's at the lower end of the spectrum. So in absolute terms you may say a CO in SW (AKA DEASP BTW) is poorly paid, they are paid more than a private sector equivalent, apparently.

Care to square that circle for me? Or ignore if it if it's inconvenient...