How do people feel about this one? Will it be short and sweet?
Mod warning:
https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121425200/#Comment_121425200
8% over two years is a pay cut.
No.
So if im currently earning 62.8k. 8 percent more would be 5024 more.
67,824 is more than 62800. So therefore its an increase.
I know certain posters want to talk bollix about inflation like they think they know something. But its simple. As you can see above.
When inflation flattens and prices drop will these posters accept a paycut. Thought not.
IT certainly not!!!
Talk me thru how 8% over 2024 and 2025 is a pay cut with inflation predicted to be at 3.2% in 2024 and 2.1% in 2025.
I think they'll cover inflation and perhaps 1.5 or 2% backdated for last 2 years inflation.
Bullshit. Bullshit of the worst order.
You are ignoring inflation in 2021, 2022 and 2023 which was not compensated for in the current pay agreement.
Lower inflation does not mean prices drop. It means prices rise, just slower than before.
Deflation - prices falling - almost never happens.
There must be a serious lowering in intake standards if concepts this basic need to be explained.
You conveniently ignore the pay "rises" which were lower than inflation but you are clearly trolling so why should I or anyone else bother?
“When inflation flattens and prices drop”
You’ve really lost all credibility there with that comment.
I think the government can't use corporation tax as an argument:
Firstly, it's still massive. We still have huge corporation tax receipts they are just not as high as they were. We can have a massive budget surplus if we want one.
Secondly,if corporation taxes increase next year (and they are still expected too), the unions can walk back in and say "there's the money now, spend it".
Thirdly, the government have been (correctly imo) saying these tax returns are temporary. Hence, they should be put into the rainy day fund (bollix know) and capital projects. Public sector pay is a permanent commitment and trying to use corporation tax receipts effectively means everyone in future years can go cap in hand to the government looking for money.
I agree I expect the deal to be 6% (6-8%) over 2 years bringing us to around election time. However, i can't see them using corporation tax as an argument.
You understand that inflation is the first derivative of the consumer price index i.e.the slope of the line.
If it's positive, that means price are increasing. Whether it's 1% or 10% the average price of products in the basket is getting more expensive.
When inflation "flattens" (whatever that means) prices won't drop.
I think we're looking at 6.5% over 2 years.
2.5% April 2023, probably backdated to January, who doesn't love a bit of backdated money.
1.5% Autumn 2023
1.5% Spring 2024
1% Autumn 2024
4 pay increases over 2 years, enough to opiate the masses, myself included. I'd accept this.
All this with a promise that if inflation goes crazy again a review is possible. Plus something out of left field, as the yanks say, like consideration of a trial of a 4 day week at one of the smaller Departments. That would really distract us all. Of course the trial would only commence after this government is re-elected.
Do you think the deal will be agreed in April 2023? I don't see why pay needs to be backdated it happened last time because talks broke down months earlier.
I'd reject that. Doesn't cover inflation.
Sorry too early in the morning, replace 2023 for 2024 & 2024 with 2025.
I'd expect a deal to be put to members by February 2024.
That's a shockingly bad deal.
Is it really likely that inflation in 2024 will be 2.5% or less? Doesn't seem so judging by how high the ECB have whacked up interest rates.
So we continue to get poorer, while the effects of the last deal which made us poorer are ignored, and we are expected to vote for that??
One point up on the scale and a 6.5% increase, people don't cop that it's an effective pay decrease.
Its certainly not a good deal, but it's roughly what I'd expect us to be offered. I would accept it. A bad deal to me would be 2-4% over two years.
I personally wouldn't describe it as us getting poorer. To get poorer we'd first have to consider ourselves poor. I don't. I'm by no means well off but a long way from being poor.
Absolutely.
A 6percent increase would be 6percent more than im currently earning. So its a rise not a decrease.
Why the poorer line? Loads of us are by no means poor.
And what about those who are seriously struggling?
Your grade starts on approx 70K a year, so 6% might seem like a good deal to you.
To a CO on €28k it's very little.
Or are you one of those people who only cares about how pay deals affect your own grade?
I think the CO entry point is a massive issue. I'd like to see the Union make some real progress on that, it's way too low.
Maybe an increment every 6 months for the first 3 years subject to a decent PMDS?
Recruitment and retention at that grade is difficult, this might help.
Not just the CO but also EO and other similar levels on other pay scales. Lots of resources being wasted on recruitment campaigns currently with pay scales that are not attractive even with the non pay benefits of public and civil service positions.
I would prefer a deal like the Germans got - they got 5.5% increase with a minimum of €340 per month.
My salary started on 17k as an accoutancy trainee after retraining. 9k less than what Cos are getting. I wonder is that poster "poor".
So what? When I started in the CS my gross pay as a trainee was £60 a week.
You're not on 17k now, and I'm not on £60 a week.
Let's deal with the now.
My point is starting salarys are just feckin that arent they!!! I mean how much should an admin role start at with zero experience required? 40k is it? Some people dont live in the real world. For what its worth if they want to give the low grades 10% and the mid and higher 5% fair enough. So get off my case , plenty didnt want lower grades to get higher increases. I hate shite talk like oh ah we are all trying to stop being "poorer". And then the other shite talk of 10% not being a good deal.
There should be a pay rise reflecting the labour market in the various sectors. Anything else is playing politics, which is the curse of public service provision.
Starting salary's should be enough so that you can live in the real world where you don't have to live with your parents anymore.
A €340 per month (like what was given in Germany) would increase to the CO grade starting salary from €28k to a massive €32K.
Still too high for you?
I agree but that is not the case in basically any industry because of our housing crisis. OKay so you want them to get 15% grand. Thatll get them a house. Or eh they may have to get promoted.
Oh, the housing crisis excuse.
I used the German figures purely as an example, but yeah, if that equates to 15% then lets go with that.
If they still can't move out of their parents', at least it will give them a chance to start saving for a deposit on a house, someday.
That's all well and good but you also need to maintain a gap between grades otherwise nobody will go for promotion. AP is already limited by no flexi - you don't want to disincentivise it further by narrowing the pay gap between AO/HEO and it imo
Excuse hahaha. Here maybe just ignore my posts in future and il do the same.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wd.vanillicon.com/v2/d38dadd4e9049f636f3a15f844846484.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/ee3bbaed7151f7c3b682bc3fc04ae67e.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wd.vanillicon.com/v2/dbd35c43580ff62b54e9919958f2a898.svg)
