Its official : public sector pay per hour is 49% higher than private sector

Spipov · 15-12-2010 04:14PM

dissed doc wrote: »

Private sector doctors make considerably more than their public sector counterparts.

id like to know where you are getting that from?

because ive worked in both public and private sector, and the private sector salary is EXACTLY the same as the public sector. in fact, they base their salaries on how the public sector is going.

seriously though, back it up with a link or a personal experience or something!

irishh_bob wrote: »

thats because private sector doctors ( GP,s etc ) dont opperate in the free market , they operate in a highly protectionist sheltered sector of the economy

would be very interested in knowing who you are referring to with the etc.

GP's are self employed i gather, so lets assume its private sector. therefore, there are no public sector equivalent to this job.

same with other doctor jobs, you have to compare equivalents. once you do, then you can say whether one is higher than the other.

irishh_bob wrote: »

how they really milk it is due to the tightly controlled number of new entrants allowed in as new practicing GP,s , same deal with consultants

its not that they do not want more gp's or consultants, its because there is no creation of new posts. im going to leave the gp argument out because i am not the most aware of how the gp scheme goes,

but for consultants, its not up to them to restrict the numbers, its the HSE and the ministry that have to sanction posts. Once a post/team/discipline needs more resources, then you can appoint consultants. since there is an embargo on recruitment, what is happening is there are VERY few new consultant jobs being created, but the ones who are retiring or leaving are replaced by the senior registrars that have qualified and are awaiting a job opening.

Rob A. Bank · 15-12-2010 04:26PM

This public-sector/private-sector nonsense is getting tiresome and reminds me of sheep bickering with one another as they are being led up the ramp to the slaughterhouse.

“Divide et impera”

“Divide and conquer”… one of the oldest strategies in the book being used now to deflect anger from our gombeen men, while the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.

The Irish experiment with the bull$h*t neo-liberal agenda of Friedman, Thatcher and Harney/FF has failed spectacularly. But they are still trying to enforce it, this time for the benefit of foreign banks.

Enough already !!!

newbie2 · 15-12-2010 04:27PM

Spipov wrote: »

.....the private sector salary is EXACTLY the same as the public sector....

Hang on a second! japer says there's a 49% difference

i'm confused...

Spipov · 15-12-2010 04:29PM

newbie2 wrote: »

Hang on a second! japer says there's a 49% difference

i'm confused...

for doctors, in the same kind of job at the same level of expertise, ie a senior house officer year 1 in private/public the salary is the same.

i dont know if in other disciplines its true, and i dont know which exact jobs they are comparing to, but the job i do (and ive worked the same level in both private and public) is the same salary for the same thing.

professore · 15-12-2010 04:32PM

What should be done is to look at a Western European country with a similar GDP and an efficient cost effective public service (say Germany maybe) or maybe a basket of these countries and benchmark the salaries of people in similar jobs there with similar jobs here. If the wages are higher, well and good, if lower, well and good too.

Also there should be active recruitment of expensive staff like hospital consultants from other W.E. countries where skill levels are high but salaries are lower, especially if there are strikes, see graphic

http://www.spiegel.de/international/0,1518,grossbild-575805-399537,00.html

We can't afford to pay our people less more than countries such as these and then expect to borrow money from them to pay it !!!!

We also need some credible way to reward real ability and extra effort with a credible bonus scheme. It is so unfair to staff who are genuinely doing a good job to just get the same cut as the guy at the next desk sitting on his or her ass.

Fighting Irish · 15-12-2010 04:37PM

fliball123 wrote: »

Yeah but your forgetting that we still have to pay the old gaurd their pensions and people are living longer and longer....The reason why is the gov know that teh P.S is overpaid and are afraid of unions to tackle the problem...No one has come up with a better opinion as to why the new entrants are paid 10% less

Aren't there contracts in place?

You want lawsuits that will cost more?

neelyohara · 15-12-2010 05:08PM

fliball123 wrote: »

yeah but P.S staff do not directly contribute to my pension now do they?

They pay tax don't they? Where do you think your pension comes from?

And just a couple of notes for PS pensions:

- Unlike private pensions the government actually hold the money belonging to current employees and can do what they like with it until it is due to be paid out. This is money in the system that they can use to invest in the country.

- PS staff aren't entitled to a state pension and their pension is created by the government withholding some of their salary until they retire. PS staff don't have the option of being entitled to a state pension and then availing of private pension on top of it.

- In private pensions the employer makes a contribution to the pension, afaik this is 5.8%, the government does not make this contribution to public pensions.

- Not all PS staff HAVE a pension but they are required to pay a pension levy anyway!

Also, for those who might not be aware of it, PS salaries are about to take another hit with some fine print from the Budget:

“From 1 January 2011, employee contributions to occupational pension schemes and other pension arrangements (includes Pension Levy-PH) will be subject to employee PRSI and the Universal Social Charge. The PRSI change will be legislated for in the Social Welfare Bill”-Department of Finance, Budget 2011

This really means that people will be required to pay PRSI and the Universal SC on the levy.

The reason I mention it is because it is another example of how you cannot compare like with like. This is another hidden tax on PS salaries.

Do any of these reports or statistics note if they are looking at gross or net salaries when they are making the comparisons? What you earn and what ends up in your hand are two very different things, I think that's something we can all agree on!

hazelhoff · 15-12-2010 05:10PM

this is all sheer tit for tat. you could say the exact same thing about private sector (which i am in by the by, i am not public sector). every job is different and the only way you will know for certain is if you do the maths with every position and compare each sector.

i know solicitors that work for the legal aid board who have their own privat pracises on the side to get more money. then doctors, the only one i can think of where they might get more money than us is admin roles but in fairness the sh*t they have to put up with. i would well rather be on reception in my job right now a few grand worse off then the receptionist in the motor tax office or passport office or social welfare.

the reason why there was such a demand for public sector jobs and huge volumes of people sitting exams every few weeks to get into goverment jobs is because there jobs for life you can move up and get raises because its set like that (like if there was a union in your job - private sector or public) and there was potential to move up in your career. if any of you complaining had that opporunity to take a public sector job and be paid more you would and you would be b*tchin about private sector right now.

no one can all this, only that public sector jobs might have more benefits overall in percentage than private and some are paid higher but some are not its the same vice versa!

ebbsy · 15-12-2010 05:16PM

fliball123 wrote: »

yeah do you know what your post would be funny bar the numerous scandals coming out of the public sector and Quangos where will I begin

hows about the prime time special done on care for the elderly while the gov just cut carers allowance

FAS

ESB - top man earning 750 and still charging ever increasing prices

Ministers getting paid as being in the dail even do they are somewhere else

Child abuse scandals

Guards being paid an allowance for being on holiday and not being able to avail of overtime

Contniuous payments to P.S via the Nat wage aggreement

Hairy Marney or Mary harneys make up bill

Having to pay more to get a passport quicker???

HSE too many to mention here but slush funds, x-rays, cancer diagnosis the list is endless

Most procurement by gov over the last number of years have been bought at over inflated prices

2 members of the gov sitting on AIB board and bonuses were still being paid till last week

Anglo - where were the p.s regulators

Lenny stopping the AIB bonuses and then paying 90 people out of the dept of finance as they are doing a super duper job

I could actually continue this list indefinately but you see my point its not actually funny infact where is my gun

Good post

And not forgetting the last regulator who got a payoff despite being the banks b**ch

thebman · 15-12-2010 05:19PM

hazelhoff wrote: »

this is all sheer tit for tat. you could say the exact same thing about private sector (which i am in by the by, i am not public sector). every job is different and the only way you will know for certain is if you do the maths with every position and compare each sector.

i know solicitors that work for the legal aid board who have their own privat pracises on the side to get more money. then doctors, the only one i can think of where they might get more money than us is admin roles but in fairness the sh*t they have to put up with. i would well rather be on reception in my job right now a few grand worse off then the receptionist in the motor tax office or passport office or social welfare.

the reason why there was such a demand for public sector jobs and huge volumes of people sitting exams every few weeks to get into goverment jobs is because there jobs for life you can move up and get raises because its set like that (like if there was a union in your job - private sector or public) and there was potential to move up in your career. if any of you complaining had that opporunity to take a public sector job and be paid more you would and you would be b*tchin about private sector right now.

no one can all this, only that public sector jobs might have more benefits overall in percentage than private and some are paid higher but some are not its the same vice versa!

Unfortunately the state is now 20 billion in the red and can't afford any perks.

I work in the private sector and my previous employer was in that position (albeit not 20 billion) and I was let go along with many others. Public sector workers aren't being let go which is their perk but as a consequence the state has to make the 20 billion shortfall up somewhere and the only possible way to do this on the scale required is wage cuts to the public sector.

If you tax the private sector more, you damage the economy more than if you cut the public sector. The IMF have the studies that back this up on their website, feel free to go have a look. In reality, people that suggest we just borrow this money with massive interest or tax it out of the economy are actually calling for bigger worse cuts down the road as that is all you are doing is kicking the ball further down the road where we might not be able to deal with the size of the problem then as many are saying we can't do it now as we struggle to try to deal with the issue.

I'm not saying the private sector should have no tax increases but the majority must come from reform and cuts in the public sector/social welfare/quangos.

The reality is even if the 50% higher than private sector is a massively inaccurate figure, it does not change that the state is 20 billion in the red and must resolve this issue very shortly or we will face a 20 billion adjustment in one year once nobody in the world will lend to us anymore and it will probably be more than 20 billion at that point as we would most likely have to leave the Euro which will have another massive negative affect on the economy.

There is no happy, easy way out of this one unfortunately for anyone.

fliball123 · 15-12-2010 05:24PM

Fighting Irish wrote: »

Aren't there contracts in place?

You want lawsuits that will cost more?

Read the full post...it was in the aib's contracts yet they can stop bonuses

fliball123 · 15-12-2010 05:27PM

neelyohara wrote: »

They pay tax don't they? Where do you think your pension comes from?

And just a couple of notes for PS pensions:

- Unlike private pensions the government actually hold the money belonging to current employees and can do what they like with it until it is due to be paid out. This is money in the system that they can use to invest in the country.

- PS staff aren't entitled to a state pension and their pension is created by the government withholding some of their salary until they retire. PS staff don't have the option of being entitled to a state pension and then availing of private pension on top of it.

- In private pensions the employer makes a contribution to the pension, afaik this is 5.8%, the government does not make this contribution to public pensions.

- Not all PS staff HAVE a pension but they are required to pay a pension levy anyway!

Also, for those who might not be aware of it, PS salaries are about to take another hit with some fine print from the Budget:

This really means that people will be required to pay PRSI and the Universal SC on the levy.

The reason I mention it is because it is another example of how you cannot compare like with like. This is another hidden tax on PS salaries.

Do any of these reports or statistics note if they are looking at gross or net salaries when they are making the comparisons? What you earn and what ends up in your hand are two very different things, I think that's something we can all agree on!

I pay into my own pension no one else does ...what is the USC going to add maybe another % and thats accross the board as well...

Like I said and no one has came up with a reasonable answer why are new entrants getting 10%???/

Japer · 15-12-2010 05:30PM

almighty1 wrote: »

Its an easy way for the government to cut wages long term without feeling the wrath from the unions. Eventually the new entrants (with their -10%) will outnumber the old guard therefore lowering the overall average PS wage (obviously this will take many years)
.

It will be proved to be too little, too slowly, too late.

Riskymove · 15-12-2010 05:34PM

fliball123 wrote: »

I pay into my own pension no one else does ......

will you get the OAP?

you also get tax relief

Like I said and no one has came up with a reasonable answer why are new entrants getting 10%???/

we have offered what we think is a reasonable answer...if you are the only judge of whats reasonable and believe you are the one who knows for sure why they did it, what is the point of asking for other views?

thebman wrote:

I'm not saying the private sector should have no tax increases but the majority must come from reform and cuts in the public sector/social welfare/quangos.

exactly, all these things need to happen

Riskymove · 15-12-2010 05:36PM

neelyohara wrote: »

- PS staff aren't entitled to a state pension

FYI

many public servants will now get it (entrants since 1995) but not on top as their occupational pension, one is reduced by the other

fliball123 · 15-12-2010 05:36PM

Riskymove wrote: »

will you get the OAP?

you also get tax relief

we have offered what we think is a reasonable answer...if you are the only judge of whats reasonable and believe you are the one who knows for sure why they did it, what is the point of asking for other views?

exactly, all these things need to happen

No you have provided any link why should someone be getting paid 10% for doing the same job?...I pay my tax to get OAP and the tax relief for pensions is being cut your making a case for the p.s cuts keep digging and will be completely cut out by 2014/5 according to lenny...So why not the same cuts in the public sector...

almighty1 · 15-12-2010 05:38PM

fliball123 wrote: »

Like I said and no one has came up with a reasonable answer why are new entrants getting 10%???/

almighty1 wrote: »

Its an easy way for the government to cut wages long term without feeling the wrath from the unions. Eventually the new entrants (with their -10%) will outnumber the old guard therefore lowering the overall average PS wage (obviously this will take many years)

Reasonable enough for me.

Riskymove · 15-12-2010 05:42PM

fliball123 wrote: »

No you have provided any link why should someone be getting paid 10% for doing the same job?

.

yes I did give an answer

Quote:
and as I have said before and no one has came up with a credible answer as to why the P.S new entrants are paid 10% less???

convenience tbh

theoretical future entrants are not in a position to complain (pending time travel breakthrough)

..I pay my tax to get OAP

then others are contributing to your future OAP including PS

you are paying for current OAPS just like others, including PS

and the tax relief for pensions is being cut and will be completely cut out by 2014/5 according to lenny...So why not the same cuts in the public sector...

the same cuts in tax relief are being made for PS pension levy and PRSI payments so they will pay more too

and you will still get some tax relief and therefore the Country loses out on tax

almighty1 · 15-12-2010 05:43PM

Riskymove wrote: »

FYI

many public servants will now get it (entrants since 1995) but not on top as their occupational pension, one is reduced by the other

I presume you mean NOT instead of NOW

As Risky said, its included in the overall final PS pension and cant be claimed separately.
Also a FYI, a person on 50k in the PS contributes over €120 a week to their pension - thats a massive contribution over 40 years (€250,000) - taking into account that they cant claim the state pension seperately afterward.

Riskymove · 15-12-2010 05:46PM

almighty1 wrote: »

I presume you mean NOT instead of NOW

?

No I do mean now

many public servants will now get it (entrants since 1995) but not on top as their occupational pension, one is reduced by the other

entrants since 1995 will get it...but

the occupational pension will be reduced ....but they will have two seperate pensions - although the aggregate amount will be the same

almighty1 · 15-12-2010 05:48PM

Riskymove wrote: »

?

No I do mean now

entrants since 1995 will get it...but

the occupational pension will be reduced ....but they will have two seperate pensions - although the aggregate amount will be the same

Yes sorry I misread.

fliball123 · 15-12-2010 05:48PM

Riskymove wrote: »

.

yes I did give an answer

then others are contributing to your future OAP including PS

you are paying for current OAPS just like others, including PS

the same cuts in tax relief are being made for PS pension levy and PRSI payments so they will pay more too

and you will still get some tax relief and therefore the Country loses out on tax

Thats b0ll0x I pay my taxes so I can recive my pension at 68 so I am paying for myself... people currently retired paid for their oap during their working yeaars..
no one else pays for my pension bar me...I help to pay the public sector pensions...and as stated relief on private pensions has gone down to 33% tax relief and it will be nothing by the time 2015 comes into play so why hasnt the public pensions and the public sector not taken the same hits..

Can you please remind me what the answer was for the 10% less but once again honestly I cant seem to find it

Sorry I just seen it your response is convenience...will you come up out of it...The reason why is because you are over fcuking paid and the gov is trying its best to come up with ways to cut your salaries without the poxy unions bringing the country to a stand still...Convenience is the wasy that the cut was introduced not the reason for it so come back to me when you have a valid reason as outlined its because of the following

P.S is overpaid
current gov are afraid of the unions

Riskymove · 15-12-2010 05:52PM

fliball123 wrote: »

I pay my taxes so I can recive my pension at 68 so I am paying for myself... people currently retired paid for their oap during their working yeaars..

you think PRSI paid would cover the full cost of the OAP?

you think there is a pension fund somewhere in PRSI pool with your name on it with contributions going in each week....thats not the way it works

as stated relief on private pensions has gone down to 33% tax relief and it will be nothing by the time 2015 comes into play so why hasnt the public pensions and the public sector not taken the same hits..

?

as stated these exact same cuts have been made to PS

Can you please remind me what the answer was for the 10% less but once again honestly I cant seem to find it

I think posting it twice is plenty but the thirds a charm right

convenience tbh

theoretical future entrants are not in a position to complain (pending time travel breakthrough)

almighty1 · 15-12-2010 05:55PM

fliball123 wrote: »

Thats b0ll0x I pay my taxes so I can recive my pension at 68 so I am paying for myself... people currently retired paid for their oap during their working yeaars..
no one else pays for my pension bar me...I help to pay the public sector pensions...

PS pay taxes. I see a big fat €100+ sum come out of my payslip every week. Im pretty sure its pension related. :rolleyes:

fliball123 wrote: »

Can you please remind me what the answer was for the 10% less but once again honestly I cant seem to find it

My post 4 posts back was one anyway.

Riskymove · 15-12-2010 05:57PM

it m,ust be great to be just able to see every one else's views as bollox and just tell everyone who has a different perspective to fck off

life would probably be asier alright

fliball123 wrote: »

P.S is overpaid
current gov are afraid of the unions

if that is the bottom line...

the obvious question then is why did they cut it last year...and bring in the levy....and remove tax reliefs on Unions.......and bring in new prsi increases just for PS...etc...

fliball123 · 15-12-2010 05:59PM

Riskymove wrote: »

you think PRSI paid would cover the full cost of the OAP?

you think there is a pension fund somewhere in PRSI pool with your name on it with contributions going in each week....thats not the way it works

?

as stated these exact same cuts have been made to PS

I think posting it twice is plenty but the thirds a charm right

So convenience ...no sorry that is how this was implemented not the reason why..

The reason is 2 fold

PS is overpaid
Gov is afraid of the unions..

So your telling me that I have paid taxes since I was 17 and will continue to pay till I am 68 (will probably be fcuking 80 by the time I retire) and your telling me I wont have paid enough to cover my pension I believe I will I pay a lot of PRSI if I even get 1/10th of what I have and will pay I will be well and truly covered...

fliball123 · 15-12-2010 06:01PM

Riskymove wrote: »

it m,ust be great to be just able to see every one else's views as bollox and just tell everyone who has a different perspective to fck off

life would probably be asier alright

if that is the bottom line...

the obvious question then is why did they cut it last year...and bring in the levy....and remove tax reliefs on Unions.......and bring in new prsi increases just for PS...etc...

Am I not entitled to my opinion I never told you to fck off...I just think that you should wipe your fingers cause its spewing sh1t not typing fact......

Riskymove · 15-12-2010 06:03PM

fliball123 wrote: »

So your telling me that I have paid taxes since I was 17 and will continue to pay till I am 68 (will probably be fcuking 80 by the time I retire) and your telling me I wont have paid enough to cover my pension I believe I will I pay a lot of PRSI if I even get 1/10th of what I have and will pay I will be well and truly covered...

PS pay taxes from when they start work til they retire too but you seem to have a different view of that

anway...thats enough of that really...if I want to have expletives thrown at me I can go talk to the missus

fliball123 · 15-12-2010 06:06PM

Riskymove wrote: »

PS pay taxes from when they start work til they retire too but you seem to have a different view of that

anway...thats enough of that really...if I want to have expletives thrown at me I can go talk to the missus

haha good man look I know things are getting heated we will just have to aggree to disagree but just something to ponder

Lenny has come out saying that the p.s is overpaid
Dame Edna has said the same
The majority of the population would aggree with this (well anyone not in the p.s who I know seem to be of the same idea)
Most ecconomic experts and studies seem to agree

The 2 groups that need to be convinced are the unions and the ps
the 1 group that will need to take a stance is the IMF but if these constant figures keep coming up like in the OP I think the PS willl get a severe cut next year.

Idbatterim · 15-12-2010 06:11PM

Its funny how the AIB bonuses cant be paid, but those the the DOF can!

Its official : public sector pay per hour is 49% higher than private sector

Comments