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

sollar · 15-02-2011 01:09PM

Euroland wrote: »

Usually public sector pays lower salaries, but gives more security over jobs, while private sector pays higher salaries, but gives less security over jobs.

Thats the theory anyway but I don't know if thats true in practice. It seems that in general ps workers are paid more especially at the lower end.
E.G
http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Business/Public-Sector-Workers-Paid-7000-More-Than-Private-Sector-Counterparts-Says-ONS-Report/Article/201009315729024

http://www.californiacenterforpublicpolicy.com/Reforming-Public-Employee-Compensation-Pensions.pdf

http://www.intellectualtakeout.org/library/public-employees/public-vs-private-pay/research-analysis-reports/public-sector-pay-gap-france-great-britain-and-italy

macannrb · 16-02-2011 02:09PM

back to the topic in the title

This graph shows the latest CSO average earnings figures per department of public servants. It also shows the current average wage for illustrative purposes

Screen%2Bshot%2B2011-02-13%2Bat%2B08.56.01.png

Screen%2Bshot%2B2011-02-13%2Bat%2B08.56.01.png

Maybe we could revise the title of the thread to 72% higher

Screen%2Bshot%2B2011-02-13%2Bat%2B08.55.48.png

Source http://trueeconomics.blogspot.com/2011/02/13022011-public-sector-earnings-need.html

ParkRunner · 16-02-2011 09:11PM

macannrb wrote: »

back to the topic in the title

This graph shows the latest CSO average earnings figures per department of public servants. It also shows the current average wage for illustrative purposes

Maybe we could revise the title of the thread to 72% higher

Source http://trueeconomics.blogspot.com/2011/02/13022011-public-sector-earnings-need.html

I think the figures are a bit mixed up there. Pay and pensions must surely be higher than pay alone. Average public sector pay is around €45-46,000 according to the cso. He is comparing private sector pay with public sector pay + public sector pension payments from what I can see.

macannrb · 16-02-2011 09:29PM

EF wrote: »

I think the figures are a bit mixed up there. Pay and pensions must surely be higher than pay alone. Average public sector pay is around €45-46,000 according to the cso. He is comparing private sector pay with public sector pay + public sector pension payments from what I can see.

not necessarily mixed up, private sector employees usually have to pay for their own pension from their pay packet, so its actually a better assessment IMO

ParkRunner · 16-02-2011 10:10PM

macannrb wrote: »

not necessarily mixed up, private sector employees usually have to pay for their own pension from their pay packet, so its actually a better assessment IMO

So why not count pension payments to private sector workers in this analysis? Alternatively take the quite significant pension contributions from public sector average pay

Welease · 16-02-2011 10:16PM

macannrb wrote: »

not necessarily mixed up, private sector employees usually have to pay for their own pension from their pay packet, so its actually a better assessment IMO

It's a pretty poor assessment imo.. PS pay a pension levy, and many Private sector companies pay a portion of their employees pension..

Citizen_Cutback · 17-02-2011 12:26AM

EF wrote: »

I think the figures are a bit mixed up there. Pay and pensions must surely be higher than pay alone. Average public sector pay is around €45-46,000 according to the cso. He is comparing private sector pay with public sector pay + public sector pension payments from what I can see.

Pay is what is paid in Salaries/Wages per annum.

Pay and Pensions is what is paid in Salaries/Wages per annum plus what is paid to Pensioners per annum.

BTW Pension payments deducted from pay, including the levy, substantially fund Pensions to a level of approximately 80% this year.

The largest average salaries overall are in Health and Policing/Prisons which are run on a 24/7 basis and pay an anti-social premium to staff.

Constantin Gurdgiev is inclined to always rail against Public Service employees; It must be a reaction to Communism, which he experienced as a youth.

It is important to see the wood from the trees in relation to the agendas of commentators. Gurdgiev is quite happy himself to work simultaneously in both the Public and Private sectors. I am sure that he is also well compensated for his media appearances.

noodler · 17-02-2011 12:48AM

Welease wrote: »

It's a pretty poor assessment imo.. PS pay a pension levy, and many Private sector companies pay a portion of their employees pension..

How many is many?

Of the 1.5m Private sector employees in the country, how many do you think have their employers make pension contributions on their behalf?

Citizen_Cutback wrote: »

Constantin Gurdgiev is inclined to always rail against Public Service employees; It must be a reaction to Communism, which he experienced as a youth.

Wow, reaching a bit there. Will you try and discredit every impartial analysis from a foreign expert like that?

Citizen_Cutback wrote: »

It is important to see the wood from the trees in relation to the agendas of commentators. Gurdgiev is quite happy himself to work simultaneously in both the Public and Private sectors. I am sure that he is also well compensated for his media appearances.

Relevance? I mean seriously, what is the relevance?

Welease · 17-02-2011 01:02AM

noodler wrote: »

How many is many?

Of the 1.5m Private sector employees in the country, how many do you think have their employers make pension contributions on their behalf?

Mine does for one..

So it's more than 0... and therefore it can't be dismissed as not existing which is what that graph does..

Plenty of companies who employ professionals have matching (or % matching) pension plans.

Japer · 17-02-2011 05:28AM

Welease wrote: »

Mine does for one..

So it's more than 0... and therefore it can't be dismissed as not existing which is what that graph does..

Plenty of companies who employ professionals have matching (or % matching) pension plans.

out of the 1.8 million people in the private sector, many are unemployed. Many more are self employed and do not have an employer to pay in to any pension plan ; many of these people are struggling to make ends meet as things are. Of the remainder i.e. employees, most do not have an employer paying in to company pension plan ; go around any shopping centre, industrial estate, hotel, restaurant , farm, fishing trawler or whatever and see if the employees there can leave work after 30 years service with a full pension worth 1.2 million, as gardai do. They will laugh at you. A few people in the private sector may be lucky enough to have an employer who pays big bucks in to a pension for them. Most do not. Its the public sector who have the golden pensions, paid for by the people who give the state money.

n900guy · 17-02-2011 07:29AM

Japer wrote: »

Its the public sector who have the golden pensions, paid for by the people who give the state money.

Do you want a public service? Or not?

You don't get people to break up drug gangs and be threatened or actually killed, stabbed, etc., for free. That is what Gardai do. NYPD can retire on a similar pension after 20 years, in their mid-40s.

Gumbo · 17-02-2011 10:06AM

Japer wrote: »

Its the public sector who have the golden pensions, paid for by the people who give the state money.

not to mention the generous contribution that the PS staff have to pay out of their wages towards their pension. but hey, dont let facts get in the way of your PS begrudegery rant.....

Welease wrote: »

Mine does for one..

So it's more than 0... and therefore it can't be dismissed as not existing which is what that graph does..

Plenty of companies who employ professionals have matching (or % matching) pension plans.

+1
when i was private Sector up to Jan 2009, my employer matched my private PRSA contributions for me too.

Welease · 17-02-2011 10:12AM

Japer wrote: »

out of the 1.8 million people in the private sector, many are unemployed. Many more are self employed and do not have an employer to pay in to any pension plan ; many of these people are struggling to make ends meet as things are. Of the remainder i.e. employees, most do not have an employer paying in to company pension plan ; go around any shopping centre, industrial estate, hotel, restaurant , farm, fishing trawler or whatever and see if the employees there can leave work after 30 years service with a full pension worth 1.2 million, as gardai do. They will laugh at you. A few people in the private sector may be lucky enough to have an employer who pays big bucks in to a pension for them. Most do not. Its the public sector who have the golden pensions, paid for by the people who give the state money.

If you look at my post history you will see I am one of the most vocal posters about the need to change the PS pension, and to reign in the colossal defecit in funding (to the tune of >$105 billion in current commitments)..

HOWEVER, that does not change the fact that displaying a graph which add's in pension funds for one sector while not displaying their payments, and neglecting to add the employer pension funding from the other sector means the graph is an invalid comparison on the compensation packages of both sectors..

fliball123 · 17-02-2011 10:18AM

n900guy wrote: »

Do you want a public service? Or not?

You don't get people to break up drug gangs and be threatened or actually killed, stabbed, etc., for free. That is what Gardai do. NYPD can retire on a similar pension after 20 years, in their mid-40s.

Usual reaction to a ps worker when its pointed out that they are blatently over paid...Hows about doing it for a good bit cheaper....We have not got the money to pay these high wages any more..If you dont like it leave the job/country I dont care but we cannot pay it....Next will be but the nurses the gaurds the fire brigade...whatever...we cannot afford it...Come on Enda Kenny cut the fcuk out of these people who think they have a right to a pension paid for off the backs of poeple who cannot pay for their own.

danbohan · 17-02-2011 10:23AM

n900guy wrote: »

Do you want a public service? Or not?

You don't get people to break up drug gangs and be threatened or actually killed, stabbed, etc., for free. That is what Gardai do. NYPD can retire on a similar pension after 20 years, in their mid-40s.

your comparing the life of a garda to life of an nypd officer , your having a laugh , let me remind you this is a bankrupt island with a pop of 4 million get a bit of reality into your life before its too late

macannrb · 17-02-2011 10:25AM

n900guy wrote: »

Do you want a public service? Or not?

You don't get people to break up drug gangs and be threatened or actually killed, stabbed, etc., for free. That is what Gardai do. NYPD can retire on a similar pension after 20 years, in their mid-40s.

Gardai risk their lives everyday of the week. That is unquestionable. But it is hard to compare this risk to what is a fair value is for the risk. How much would you be happy to die for? How likely are you to die on th job? multiply the two and you get a fair value of the risk you take i suppose. NYPD have a lot more gun crimes then Irish cops so its

To answer your question though, no i dont want a public service that I can't afford. I don't want a public service that pays far more then other countries do.

lets compare the starting salary of a gardai to that of Ireland to that of the UK

both 27k. Ok fair enough

after six years the irish guy gets 44k, and the uk guy gets 38k.

add in the extra chance of allowances on top of that, which are tax free, that the irish guy will probably get and then you get a more expensive PS.

which has to be paid for, and since the tax of the PS goes straight back in to the same coffers which pay their wages, it comes back to the private sector to pay for.

source
http://www.gra.cc/payscales.shtml
http://www.police-information.co.uk/policepay.htm#seargents

Welease wrote: »

HOWEVER, that does not change the fact that displaying a graph which add's in pension funds for one sector while not displaying their payments, and neglecting to add the employer pension funding from the other sector means the graph is an invalid comparison on the compensation packages of both sectors..

true to an extent, but its radically unfair that one person gets it guaranteed, and the has to pay for it, and may get something, but just because you get it doesn’t mean many others do. I for one don't

ardmacha · 17-02-2011 10:29AM

go around any shopping centre, industrial estate, hotel, restaurant , farm, fishing trawler or whatever and see if the employees there can leave work after 30 years service with a full pension

Go around any university, hospital, school, government office, local authority etc and people cannot leave work after 30 years with a full pension either, Gardai are untypical.

let me remind you this is a bankrupt island with a pop of 4 million

The population of the island is 6 million, things must be worse than I thought!

danbohan · 17-02-2011 10:36AM

ardmacha wrote: »

Go around any university, hospital, school, government office, local authority etc and people cannot leave work after 30 years with a full pension either, Gardai are untypical.

The population of the island is 6 million, things must be worse than I thought!

was referring to the bankrupt part , not the occupied part !

Welease · 17-02-2011 10:58AM

macannrb wrote: »

true to an extent, but its radically unfair that one person gets it guaranteed, and the has to pay for it, and may get something, but just because you get it doesn’t mean many others do. I for one don't

Agreed, but it doesnt change the fact that the figures in the graph don't reflect the reality.. The graph is not an indicator or fairness, its supposed to be an indicator of compensation, and there are glaring errors in the data..

Look at it from the other side in relation to you not getting employer payments to your pension whereas I (and many others do).. Nurses don't get Garda allowances and vice versa, would you be happy to see this graph with all allowances removed because not everyone gets them?. (I'm assuming not as it would be idiotic). If the graph was displayed with those criteria, then everyone would be all over it as misrespresenting PS pay.. in terms of fairness a consistent criteria needs to be in place for both sets of data..

In the private sector MANY companies (especially in the professional environment) contribute to their employees pensions. That is a simple fact which is not reflected in this graph.

macannrb · 17-02-2011 11:13AM

Welease wrote: »

In the private sector MANY companies (especially in the professional environment) contribute to their employees pensions. That is a simple fact which is not reflected in this graph.

I would also agree with you that both sets of data for comparisions sake should be fair. In the absense of which we must do with what we have.

My central argument is to lower wages in the PS wholesale so that way you dont have to cut numbers. comparisions internationally show that PS in Ireland are higher paid that others. We can't afford it so cuts are required. Most PS people will agree with this, so then how do we cut costs to within our means. I for one think there should be an emphasis on wage reduction rather then number cuts.

However the reality is that decent paid PS sector people have gotten high mortgages in the last few years, and any cuts could mean them losing their houses. So I can understand their anger. But this is also the case outside the PS. How many other employers have said there will be no redunancies until 2014? None. They should share the cuts with the rest of the work force.

I'd also agree that more professional private firms tend to give pensions to employees compared to less professional firms. Maybe then we should do something similar in the PS

fliball123 · 17-02-2011 11:19AM

Welease wrote: »

Agreed, but it doesnt change the fact that the figures in the graph don't reflect the reality.. The graph is not an indicator or fairness, its supposed to be an indicator of compensation, and there are glaring errors in the data..

Look at it from the other side in relation to you not getting employer payments to your pension whereas I (and many others do).. Nurses don't get Garda allowances and vice versa, would you be happy to see this graph with all allowances removed because not everyone gets them?. (I'm assuming not as it would be idiotic). If the graph was displayed with those criteria, then everyone would be all over it as misrespresenting PS pay.. in terms of fairness a consistent criteria needs to be in place for both sets of data..

In the private sector MANY companies (especially in the professional environment) contribute to their employees pensions. That is a simple fact which is not reflected in this graph.

And a lot of private companies dont contribute to pensions...the majority of MNC do but the shop retail etc do not..Look the ps are in a minority of thinking that they are paid appropriately and the evidence is in Enda Kenny and FG moving towards being a single party in government..The main reason being is that they are prepared to tackle the over inflated pay of the ps and will tackle the bearded ones...I for one will for vote for FG on this premise alone...So as I say he will wait till sept when the cpa has proved to be redundant and the cuts will come in December budget...I just hope they do it fairly I would not like to see those in the ps on the lower end hit too much but a scaling of the same %s as the USC would be a good beginning

Welease · 17-02-2011 11:19AM

macannrb wrote: »

I would also agree with you that both sets of data for comparisions sake should be fair. In the absense of which we must do with what we have.

My central argument is to lower wages in the PS wholesale so that way you dont have to cut numbers. comparisions internationally show that PS in Ireland are higher paid that others. We can't afford it so cuts are required. Most PS people will agree with this, so then how do we cut costs to within our means. I for one think there should be an emphasis on wage reduction rather then number cuts.

However the reality is that decent paid PS sector people have gotten high mortgages in the last few years, and any cuts could mean them losing their houses. So I can understand their anger. But this is also the case outside the PS. How many other employers have said there will be no redunancies until 2014? None. They should share the cuts with the rest of the work force.

I'd also agree that more professional private firms tend to give pensions to employees compared to less professional firms. Maybe then we should do something similar in the PS

Agree with every point you make

My single and sole point was to make sure people see the graph for what it is.. Somewhat of a misrepresentation of the compensation of BOTH sectors.

Gumbo · 17-02-2011 12:10PM

fliball123 wrote: »

I for one will for vote for FG on this premise alone...So as I say he will wait till sept when the cpa has proved to be redundant and the cuts will come in December budget.

its amazing that some people in this country will vote a whole policital party into government just to see someone else get a paycut.

it really is true what they say....the irish cant stand to see another person doing better than them.....

Count Dooku · 17-02-2011 12:20PM

kceire wrote: »

its amazing that some people in this country will vote a whole policital party into government just to see someone else get a paycut.

it really is true what they say....the irish cant stand to see another person doing better than them.....

BTW, public servants voted for FF only in order to get their pay better then in private sector
If for public sector it was pure envy, for private sector it is only unwillingness to sacrifice own income in order to subsidize high living standards for recipients of taxpayers money

fliball123 · 17-02-2011 12:32PM

kceire wrote: »

its amazing that some people in this country will vote a whole policital party into government just to see someone else get a paycut.

it really is true what they say....the irish cant stand to see another person doing better than them.....

Thats a bit pot kettleish when the majority if not the whole ps will be voting Labour....its simple you set out your stall and I will set out mine the only problem is that out of the 1.8 mill people working there are only 300k in the ps the rest would prefer to see more value for money out of the ps....and thats in black and white if you look at the poles...this not taking into consideration the unemployed who no doubt look at the last lot of cuts and see that the ps got none...

Its not to see you get a pay cut it is to see me get less of a tax hike

Citizen_Cutback · 17-02-2011 12:43PM

noodler wrote: »

How many is many?

Of the 1.5m Private sector employees in the country, how many do you think have their employers make pension contributions on their behalf?

Wow, reaching a bit there. Will you try and discredit every impartial analysis from a foreign expert like that?

Relevance? I mean seriously, what is the relevance?

Gurdgiev is Russian, his wife is Italian-American, their children are Irish. I believe that he means well and intends to stay in Ireland but his analysis has to be coloured by his own experiences with Communism.

Like a good Architect, I sometimes put in spurious additional features to attract the wrath of the planners; I notice that you did not find anything to criticise in the substantive points in my post.

Gumbo · 17-02-2011 01:23PM

fliball123 wrote: »

This not taking into consideration the unemployed who no doubt look at the last lot of cuts and see that the ps got none...

by also using your words, "This not taking into consideration the unemployed who no doubt look at the last lot of cuts and see that the Private Sector got none" also as all employees got hit with the same USC.

ps - im not voting labour so your making wild assumptions im afraid.

fliball123 · 17-02-2011 01:32PM

kceire wrote: »

by also using your words, "This not taking into consideration the unemployed who no doubt look at the last lot of cuts and see that the Private Sector got none" also as all employees got hit with the same USC.

ps - im not voting labour so your making wild assumptions im afraid.

Well by your the pension levy is a tax cut...private pensions got cut from being allowed relief at 40% to 33% in the last budget...that for the few out of the private sector who can afford it...

Fair play to ye for not voting labour...I am simple setting my stall out and being honest I do not care what any ps worker thinks I am entitled to vote for a party who will finally tackle this problem

Gumbo · 17-02-2011 01:34PM

fliball123 wrote: »

Well by your the pension levy is a tax cut...private pensions got cut from being allowed relief at 40% to 33% in the last budget...that for the few out of the private sector who can afford it..

didnt the tax relief for all pension contributions get cut/ even PS staff who earn above the 40% tax bracket lost this allowance?

fliball123 wrote: »

I do not care what any ps worker thinks I am entitled to vote for a party who will finally tackle this problem

thats fair enough, i agree with that.

Citizen_Cutback · 17-02-2011 01:40PM

kceire wrote: »

didnt the tax relief for all pension contributions get cut/ even PS staff who earn above the 40% tax bracket lost this allowance?

Fine Gael have promised to reverse this if they get into power.

Be careful what you vote for!

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

Comments