Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Private to Public sector: Salary

  • 07-06-2023 11:21PM
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 80 ✭✭atahuapla


    I’ve recently saw a vacancy in a public sector organisation that has caught my eye but I’ll admit, after 20yrs in the private sector I’m clueless about public sector pay.

    Salary listed is between €62k - €98k and it states that:

    “This role will be filled in line with public pay policy at point 1 at the relevant salary scale unless the successful candidate is appointed from an existing public sector role.”

    So would point 1 here refer to the lower end of this band for an external candidate?



«1345

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,359 ✭✭✭gipi


    Yes.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,810 ✭✭✭✭mickdw


    How is that even legal?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,639 ✭✭✭✭Mrs OBumble




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 80 ✭✭atahuapla


    Wow, so salaries are based on nothing more than public service tenure rather than experience and knowledge in a specialism?

    Doesn’t strike me as a particularly effective way to hire the best people.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,075 ✭✭✭✭fits


    some managers can get around it. I was hired at top of scale a few years ago as new entrant. They have to go through a process though.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 10,930 Mod ✭✭✭✭Jim2007


    So if you change roles with your current employer, you'd be happy for them to reset your salary ignoring your knowledge of their business and the seniority you build up... is that what your are saying?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,725 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    Plus, on top of the salary scales, there's a system of allowances that can be paid to people who have, e.g., particular qualifications or specialist training. To what extent this might be relevant in relation to this (or any other) position depends on the position and how advantageous it might be for the occupant to have extra qualifications or training. (As in, they won't pay you an additional allowance for being over-qualified for the position you hold.)



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,639 ✭✭✭✭Mrs OBumble


    Yes, that is how the Irish public sector works at this time

    Agree that it's absolutely not how to hire the best people. But that's not the goal.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,551 ✭✭✭kaymin


    I'm pretty sure his point is why should external candidates not get the same remuneration as internal candidates. It is discriminatory.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,755 ✭✭✭lbunnae


    They only get higher up on the scale if they are currently earning higher up on the scale. Hence why they do it , otherwise they will not get internal applicants looking for a paycut.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,551 ✭✭✭kaymin


    I appreciate that but it makes no sense to me (if I set aside the fact it's the PS) to overpay an internal candidate and having to backfill their previous role. And it's still discriminatory to external candidates - equal pay for the same work and all that.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,725 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    There has never been a law preventing employers from discriminating between the people they employ and the people they don't. If there were, every single vacancy would have to be advertised and be the subject of a public competition; none could be filled by internal promotion or transfer. It would be a nonsense.

    Discrimination is only unlawful if it's on one of the prohibited grounds - age, sex, race, religion, family status, etc.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,755 ✭✭✭lbunnae


    It's not overpaying, it could well cost the PS less. It has never ever ever been equal pay for the same experience



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,962 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    If you want to at the top end of a scale you'd be better aiming for jobs that will get you the bottom of the next scale.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 80 ✭✭atahuapla


    No. That’s not what I’m saying. If they’ve the relevant experience and skillset, then the higher band would be justified. Should be the same for an external candidate; based on experience and skills rather than tenure.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,725 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    As fits says, there is a process for appointing people at above the entry grade on the scale if they have particular experience or are otherwise especially desirable candidates. It happens reasonably often, depending mainly on how tight the labour market is. But it requires the employing authority to make a case, and it's not something they can or ever do offer in the job ad, because at that point no case has been made.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,962 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    What your describing is the private sector.

    What your asking is to have both the mobility of the private sector with the security of public sector.

    The trade for that security is the (length) tenure of service that is required.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,263 ✭✭✭Daith


    This tends to come up a lot from people with lots of private sector experience.

    Unfortunately the answer will be, you are expected to start to the minimum scale or the hiring department will make a case for you. You won't know until you actually interview and an offer is made.


    While I'd agree this can prevent them hiring certain candidates, it does mean they tend to retain people a lot.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,551 ✭✭✭kaymin


    I didn't say it was unlawful, it's discriminatory nonetheless.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,725 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    Yes, but this is one of those "true but trivial" things. There's nothing wrong with discrimination unless it's done on grounds that we consider objectionable. If you think about it, the entire process of filling a job vacancy is inherently discriminatory.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,696 ✭✭✭Former Former Former


    It is not discriminatory because working in the private sector is not one of the 'nine grounds'.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 80 ✭✭atahuapla


    Thanks for that. Public sector ruled out then.

    The highest end of this bracket would have still meant a significant paycut, which I’d be OK with but the lower end would take me back to ‘08/‘09.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,962 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    Sounds like you're looking at roles far below your level for some reason.

    It would be more logical to move into a role with salary at minimum that gas parity with your current salary.

    Over qualified candidates are unlikely to stay in role thats much lower than what they are coming from.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,551 ✭✭✭kaymin


    You're referring to whether it is unlawful. Something can be discriminatory without being unlawful.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,551 ✭✭✭kaymin


    Personally I don't consider it trivial and do consider objectionable. It doesn't sit easy with me that equally qualified and suitable candidates are paid different rates of pay depending on whether they come from the public or private sector. I think that is quite different from the normal hiring processes and weeding through candidates. But then a lot about the public sector is objectionable



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,066 ✭✭✭HerrKuehn


    It makes perfect sense and explains the level of public services we have. Ireland has a love affair with mediocrity.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 915 ✭✭✭never_mind


    They can indeed and DO get around that. The only other thing to take on board is that you will have many more deductions to your nett pay because you'll be working in the PS. Pension and pension levy being two. Salaries also can change frequently enough based on what's going on in the economy in general. The higher end of the scale you're looking at was around 84k four years ago. It happens slowly, but it can go up and down as I mentioned before. Not as simple as private sector where it's more based on your performance and general health of the company.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,962 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    There's two parts to this,

    ...equally qualified and suitable candidates are paid different rates of pay...

    Why not?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,962 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    Nothing stopping anyone providing the same services privately and undercutting the public services. They they won't is what's mediocre.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,962 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    You have to ask why would someone earning more in the private sector want to leave it and join the public sector. If private is better why are they looking at the public jobs in the first place. Especially something at much lower salary. There is something driving them out of the private sector. There is some "value added" about the Public Sector thats making them look.



Advertisement