How do people feel about this one? Will it be short and sweet?
Mod warning:
https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121425200/#Comment_121425200
Where are you seeing mention of a back payment to last February?
There is mention of it in the latest Irish Times article, although I didn't actually mention that in the post.
The formula to work out your backdated pay is Salary x 0.67, Result x 1.03 = Lump Sum.
Roughly 8 months (or 2/3rds annual salary) from Feb to October multiplied by the 3 percent.
Apologies, these figures are in:
Public sector pay talks conclude with unions offered 6.5% increase
https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/2022/08/30/public-sector-pay-talks-conclude-with-proposals-for-potential-deal/
Your formula is a bit off, the last multiplier is 0.03 not 1.03.
Thanks, just reading that now.
The proposals include three phases of pay increases.
The first would be a 3 per cent increase this year, retrospective to February. The second would be a 2 per cent increase from March 2023.
The third would be another 1.5 per cent increase - or a minimum of €750 - from October next year.
This last increase takes into account lower paid workers as it would give them an extra €750 even if that is above 1.5 per cent of their salary.
The backpay is a significant sweetner and will help get it over the line.
I still think dragging it out in drips and drabs doesn't help anyone. It makes it a news story ever time there's a pay increase so the general public think the PS are getting exorbitant salaries. But splitting it into one percent here and two there makes it feel like the paycheck isn't even changing.
I'd much prefer the whole increase, starting tomorrow, with no backdating. At least then it would be done.
How is 7.5%, including the 1% in October from the previous agreement an insult? That's over 16 months.
How much do you want?
Has it gone under the radar that ESB voted to accept a rise of something like 9% over 3 years a few months back? Not sure how I'd feel if I worked for them
The backdated pay won't even amount to an extra weeks pay will it? It's hardly going to swing too many who initially thought the 6.5% was poor.
Really an additional 5.5 percent over the 1 percent due in Oct but it's all happening in one year, pay rise, Oct, March and Oct again
That with the backpay means I'll vote for this.
Another hiring freeze isn't feasible, just to put that fear to rest.
Actually, to answer own question above, I guess splitting up the pay increases ultimately nets workers slightly more.
10,000 * 1.03 * 1.01 * 1.02 * 1.015 = 10,770.23
10,000 * 1.075 = 10,750
Can't speak for the government and i'm not a stock broker or financial professional but things I am hearing that is worrying:
Already asked and answered. Read the thread.
Do not put any faith in getting any increases next year, including increments.
The back pay is a huge sweetner and a win win for both sides really. It'll help the lower paid coming up to the Christmas and help the unions sell this deal. Also the minimum of 750euro rise if the 1.5percent is less than this is good for the lower paid grades too.
I'll be talking to my team and telling them that things are going to get bad soon and I remeber the last downturn and cuts that were imposed at the time. I was a CO and it was savage. But striking changed nothing but losing a few days pay. This is nothing like the last recession. Doesn't have a patch on it.
Remind of again of what percentage rise you are looking . Don't have people reading back over thousands of posts.
Could just not have just answered it again? Or am I expected to read 56 pages of mainly dribble?
Strange approach to discussion.
I actually worry for lower paid staff if this isn’t accepted. I’m in a more fortunate position but would dread going into the winter with nothing in the hope some better deal will be struck before the sh** hits the fan if I was a CO
You're right, my mistake
Read the last line of that post you quoted...
Play it safe, take the money and live to fight another day.
Only the "fighting another day" never comes, does it? Thats the problem. Which is why we get shafted, over, and over, and over, and over....
All talk, no action.
Wait, is the October 1% being included in this (6.5%) and the 3% back-dated to February?
That's how the Irish times article reads but that would mean the government only came back with an extra 0.5%. Surely not?
Also for anyone earning under ~50k, the 1.01 will be a flat 500 which will multiply to more with the following pay increases. For the purposes of showing the difference that makes, I'll leave the last multiplier as 1.5% rather than the 750 flat that you would also receive for being under the threshold.
So: 10,000 * 1.03 + 500 * 1.02 * 1.015 = 11,181.24
I've no interest in striking Loueze, the backpay element if true will get my vote.
in re: inflation and why it matters to try to match it *over extended periods of time*
firstly I presume that ppl generally agree that salaries generally have to do this otherwise they lose real value and in the medium term that's unsustainable- if you don't agree with this we have nothing to discuss tbh
secondly- the public sector pay deals happen across the board every few years and we have been chasing restoration for almost a decade. the pay and conditions of the majority of public sector workers are no better than they were for a worker in that grade equivalent 15 years ago (give or take). the dribs and drabs we have been negotiating the past five years are restorations that the government agreed to as part of FEMPI that they simply never unwound. This leaves aside the additional pension costs imposed.
if you can't take that into account- that public sector terms and conditions have essentially a decade of inflation- not just the current extraordinary levels- to take into account, then i don't think you are looking at a longer term picture.
I dont think the union should be matching current levels of inflation. but if you start measuring across different jobs/experience/qualifications the levels of pay on offer for roles in public vs private sector over the past several years you will find that it's a steady degradation vs going rate.
taking aside any debate on any given role expectations and workloads in public vs private that's the situation we are in after a steady drip-drip-drip of govt deals that the union should never have accepted. we are not starting from level here we are starting miles behind and we cannot get qualified staff at this stage. every deal we allow to happen on the cheap further exacerbates this until you get exactly the public service that you deserve- a cheap one, expected to provide the likes of fliball and tonesjones and salonfire on this thread with what they want, when they want it, with a level of argument and analysis that would embarrass a twelve year old.
the government *should not want this scenario* but they are FG and they do.
the public *should not want this scenario* and I'd hope that they don't- but newstalk and the indo and lamentably even rte do not provide the analysis and debate required to show what has been happening.
the taxpayer- including ourselves- *should not want this scenario* but understandably they are an easy sell
the only people who should want this scenario are people like we see on this thread- they have an aversion to government, especially an aversion to rules that control private profit activity, and they have an aversion to the concept of social costs incurred on economic activities.
we have never been america and we have never been moscow, and only idiots want us to be either. we are flooded with posters who have all day to demand the former while trying to convince us we are the latter, when in fact we are what we are paying for- a very, very **** effort at being finland.
the service cannot fill roles from technical/professional panels at the moment, we simply do not compete with salaries and working conditions on offer. if that makes you happy, then continue to describe increases below inflation as a deal we should be thankful for.
personally and professionally- because i am trying to run a team resourced at 33% of scoped staff here- it's a disaster that we keep trying to achieve govt aims with uncompetitive conditions. the turnover of the staff we do somehow get is murderous. only a fool could fail to trace the reasons why.
https://www.forsa.ie/wrc-proposes-public-pay-package/
No. The new deal is 6.5%. 1% from the old deal will be paid in October. So 7.5% over 16 14 Months from October to December 2023.
General consensus over tea was positive among 4 grades . Nothing to strike over.
When did you join the Public Service? As I've said I was a CO during the last recession and the current cost of liiving crisis doesn't have a patch on what happened to the lower paid then. Thankfully I've managed a few promotions since then. I know things are tough for the lower grades especially new entrants but it is what it ias. We won't do better than what we are being offered now and striking isn't going to help either.
I hate to say it and I'm not being flippant but if you are struggling with things at the moment maybe it is time you looked elsewhere for a better paying job. That's the scenaior that you are confronted with now. If you need help with any potential interview or competition feel free to PM me.
Clarity.
It would for me anyways. I think an extra week’s wages will go down very well with people. I thought the unions might get a back payment to the start of negotiations - i.e. June, but February is a significant win.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wd.vanillicon.com/v2/d38dadd4e9049f636f3a15f844846484.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wd.vanillicon.com/v2/d5a8197d7274f92eab37915a6d9f12a1.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/v2/b1a8522b26abe4367117071263a70671.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w0.vanillicon.com/v2/0e54e8024b002427df3ce2953d22b721.svg)
