Survey reveals a 44% pay gap between public and private sector

Welease · 02-08-2011 05:05PM

Itchianus wrote: »

It's like you read my mind! Clearly that makes more sense.

Unfortunately the argument has to rumble on though... I was hired, and took my job, based on the fact that subject to performance, my salary will, over a few years, catch up to some extent with what I could earn in the private sector. If your model replaced the current structure, how do I know I'm not going to get screwed over, in the absence of a defined pay structure...

But there is a defined pay structure, you are just not guaranteed a set % of it for x amount of years..

Putting it bluntly

If people are as good as they say they are... then they will be in the upper % of performance and would rise to their ultimate salary goal much quicker.. If they don't, they they are not as good as they think, they are not as good as their colleagues, and therefore are not being paid as much..

The system doesnt do anything except make sure that those who perform the highest take the biggest share of the available pot..

Itchianus · 02-08-2011 05:23PM

Welease wrote: »

But there is a defined pay structure, you are just not guaranteed a set % of it for x amount of years..

Putting it bluntly If people are as good as they say they are... then they will be in the upper % of performance and would rise to their ultimate salary goal much quicker.. If they don't, they they are not as good as they think, they are not as good as their colleagues, and therefore are not being paid as much..

The system doesnt do anything except make sure that those who perform the highest take the biggest share of the available pot..

Where do I sign?!

Seriously though, that clearly makes more sense than a scale that takes 13 years to top out, I mean surely after 5 or 6 years at most, you'd be doing a job about as well as you're going to.

I'd still love to hear if anyone has any experience or knowledge of how things are done in other countries, but I think I've arrived late to the party and most people are probably avoiding these sorts of thread at this stage!

(except for you SBWife, you have a lot to get off your chest!

)

sollar · 02-08-2011 06:42PM

There is a hell of alot of discussion on increments here when Mr Noonan has said he does not intend to stop them.

Itchianus · 02-08-2011 06:53PM

sollar wrote: »

There is a hell of alot of discussion on increments here when Mr Noonan has said he does not intend to stop them.

So what?! I seem to remember you were the life and soul of this thread not too long ago!

sollar · 02-08-2011 07:07PM

Itchianus wrote: »

So what?! I seem to remember you were the life and soul of this thread not too long ago!

I'm just concerned that people may be wasting time discussing this subject, BTW i knew the thread would really get going once everyone got back to work after the long weekend

I'm with the poster who said they would prefer another paycut rather than if increments were stopped. A paycut would hit everyone. Stopping increments wouldn't. I don't particularly fancy either though.

sollar · 02-08-2011 07:27PM

fliball123 wrote: »

No not forever but until this 18billion is closed it should definately be stopped..

Why? many countries are running deficits. Its quite common. Do the UK, USA, Italy etc stop paying bonuses, increments, payrises because they are running a deficit?

How would that work... in years that a government ran a surplus staff would get bonuses, but get nothing if they ran a deficit even though they may have been working just as hard. ? Doesn't seem like a great set up.

What about the bank bonuses here too. They are still being paid and some bankers even got payrises during this resession.

http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/lenihan-is-powerless-to-prevent-aib-paying-3pc-raise-to-staff-1917569.html

Itchianus · 02-08-2011 07:40PM

sollar wrote: »

I'm just concerned that people may be wasting time discussing this subject, BTW i knew the thread would really get going once everyone got back to work after the long weekend

I'm with the poster who said they would prefer another paycut rather than if increments were stopped. A paycut would hit everyone. Stopping increments wouldn't. I don't particularly fancy either though.

That'd be me then

I don't fancy either, either, but them's the times we're living in.

SBWife · 02-08-2011 07:43PM

Sollar - on more than one occasion the US has just not paid existing federal workers salaries because of issues with the deficit or budgeting process. Non-essential workers were just told to go home, it happened in 1995 and I believe it's happened on other occasions.

TheRealPONeil · 02-08-2011 07:43PM

fliball123 wrote: »

Would you stop I am over IT administrators in my company with DBAs and the likes reporting in to me ... and I past on what was said to me by my boss.....

And why are you needed if you're only "pasting"on what was said to you by your boss ??

You stolled into work this morning and posted an innane comment at 9:39, you really got to work at 9:50, 10:05, 10:17, 10:28, 10:57, 11:06, 11:08, 11:09 (really busy there), 11:48, 12:20, 12:36, 13:30, 13:39 (took a lunch break !!), 14:02, 14:04, 14:36, 14:45, 15:39 (clocked out !!)

You are either

- Working for the IMF
- on annual leave
- Delusional
- Jody Corcoran
or somebody who I would give a swift boot out of my company for posting on a bulletin board all day.

Good night.

Sizzler · 02-08-2011 09:20PM

Have to laugh at some of the posts saying increments are not pay rises per se. Even in the private sector most large org's have salary bands for particular roles, this does not mean you will get a de facto rise annually or even bi-annually till you arrive at the pay ceiling, its just a bracket FFS, not a target! The belief of PS workers that they deserve to max out the scale is simply farcical and makes a mockery of so called pay restraint in the PS.

What really gets me is roll back to 05/06 and you had the likes of Begg and O'Connor bullying FF into pay parity with the runaway private sector...now the country is on its knees there is zero recognition of the REAL circumstances and a downright unwillingness to play ball in a VERY critical situation. Perhaps the 44% pay gap is a tad high, but even at 4% the fact is union lads were banging the drum for catch up, they should accept the pain in return in light of the circumstances.

The croke park agreement is a nonsense and has the transparency of a 1980's smoke filled bookies

oppenheimer1 · 02-08-2011 09:22PM

bobbysands81 wrote: »

Folks,

Please think about this...

At a time when ALL public sector workers have been hit with the pension levy and a wage cut the Sunday Independent(sic) actually publishes a story saying our wages have increased.

You couldn't make it up... but they have.

Most public sector worker's take home pay has decreased 20-25% in past three years, don't let their lies detract from that fact.

You still get increments though.

Count Dooku · 02-08-2011 09:27PM

sollar wrote: »

What about the bank bonuses here too. They are still being paid and some bankers even got payrises during this resession.

http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/lenihan-is-powerless-to-prevent-aib-paying-3pc-raise-to-staff-1917569.html

Banks are effectively semi-state companies, where state owns them, but have very little power

thebman · 02-08-2011 09:33PM

Itchianus wrote: »

So could you explain how exactly you'd like to run the PS then?

I think you suggested already that everyone should be fired and rehired, but I mean beyond that, on an ongoing basis?

Actually that isn't what I said at all :rolleyes:

Read my actual posts and maybe you'll see how I would the system operate. The best would be retained under the system I suggested.

Nijmegen · 02-08-2011 09:38PM

Okay, okay, friggen increments already!

Degsy · 02-08-2011 09:41PM

Nijmegen wrote: »

And the odd wealth creating job.

Wealth creating my arse...there's no future in these companes over here..they're taking people for a ride.

Foreign multinationals owe nothing to the country and will bugger off as soon as they can do the job cheaper elsewhere...then they leave behind a bunch of suddenly unemployed prima donnas who never really did a days work in thier lives.

The_Thing · 02-08-2011 09:45PM

TheRealPONeil wrote: »

And why are you needed if you're only "pasting"on what was said to you by your boss ??

You stolled into work this morning and posted an innane comment at 9:39, you really got to work at 9:50, 10:05, 10:17, 10:28, 10:57, 11:06, 11:08, 11:09 (really busy there), 11:48, 12:20, 12:36, 13:30, 13:39 (took a lunch break !!), 14:02, 14:04, 14:36, 14:45, 15:39 (clocked out !!)

You are either

- Working for the IMF
- on annual leave
- Delusional
- Jody Corcoran
or somebody who I would give a swift boot out of my company for posting on a bulletin board all day.

Good night.

Fliball123, God bless him\her, claims to work 60 hours a week, and still finds time to make us laugh with his posts here on Boards.ie.

Itchianus · 02-08-2011 10:05PM

Nijmegen wrote: »

Okay, okay, friggen increments already!

Thanks a lot, I'm in the bad books now for waking my OH when I burst out laughing at that!

I know it's been done to death, (particularly if it's correct that the annual cost is 250m) but there's a fundamental difference in how people view them.

To me, and bearing in mind I'm new to the PS, I look at the payscale for the grade I'm at, and I know for a fact that I will earn at least 5k - 10k a year less in the next few years until the increments get me back to the ballpark of what I'd earn in the private sector.

If the top end of the scales have to be adjusted downwards in order to reduce the PS wage bill then so be it, and it would yield a much greater return than tinkering with friggin increments!

sollar · 02-08-2011 10:11PM

Itchianus wrote: »

I know it's been done to death, (particularly if it's correct that the annual cost is 250m) but there's a fundamental difference in how people view them.!

I'm a little skeptical of this 250 million figure. If its before Tax, PRSI, USC, Pension levy, Pension 1 and Pension 2 (these are all the deductions that come out of my gross pay) then what is the actual cost. I would love to know if its gross or net??? It would make a huge difference.

OMD · 02-08-2011 10:25PM

sollar wrote: »

I'm a little skeptical of this 250 million figure. If its before Tax, PRSI, USC, Pension levy, Pension 1 and Pension 2 (these are all the deductions that come out of my gross pay) then what is the actual cost. I would love to know if its gross or net??? It would make a huge difference.

The pension levy cut the PS pay bill by â‚¬800 million or so. 3 years of increments of â‚¬250 million have almost wiped that out completely. So the cost of increments is the same as pension levy. If you believe increments are not relevant then the pension levy is not relevant.

More importantly if you believe less than half of PS benefit from increments, it means that those who are getting increments have seen no pay cut at all (pension levy & pay cut). So the restt of the public sector have had to absorb all the cuts while those getting increments paid nothing

sollar · 02-08-2011 10:36PM

OMD wrote: »

The pension levy cut the PS pay bill by â‚¬800 million or so. 3 years of increments of â‚¬250 million have almost wiped that out completely. So the cost of increments is the same as pension levy. If you believe increments are not relevant then the pension levy is not relevant.

More importantly if you believe less than half of PS benefit from increments, it means that those who are getting increments have seen no pay cut at all (pension levy & pay cut). So the restt of the public sector have had to absorb all the cuts while those getting increments paid nothing

Only if the 250 million is a net figure. If its gross it wouldn't have wiped it out. We know the pension levy figure is net though.

Nijmegen · 02-08-2011 10:39PM

Degsy wrote: »

Wealth creating my arse...there's no future in these companes over here..they're taking people for a ride.

Foreign multinationals owe nothing to the country and will bugger off as soon as they can do the job cheaper elsewhere...then they leave behind a bunch of suddenly unemployed prima donnas who never really did a days work in thier lives.

You're right. We should go back to that happier time before we had multinationals. When we were self sufficient and could provide good Irish jobs for all making... Stuff.... And selling it to.... People.

I'm a little skeptical of this 250 million figure. If its before Tax, PRSI, USC, Pension levy, Pension 1 and Pension 2 (these are all the deductions that come out of my gross pay) then what is the actual cost. I would love to know if its gross or net??? It would make a huge difference.

This is unknown. The only figure was that given by Noonan to the Dail. In the end, every government cut or tax increase is not as it seems - there's always 'less' collected against each, thanks to this and that (taxes self collected on cuts, or less taxes collected on income that no longer exists.)

So we can only take each and every cut and tax increase on its gross figure and try and come to some estimate of final amount. Like if we cut a €50k job we only make a €30k saving or whatever (paper math, don't quote me on that...)

With increments, who knows, it's certainly more than 50%, likely 60% of the face value.

By the same token, the PS costs us less than the headline figure.

Yet, the absolute deficit isn't an accounting trick. It's €18bn that we borrow and then pay billions in real interest on.

That, I know, is damn tangible.

OMD · 02-08-2011 10:41PM

sollar wrote: »

[
Only if the 250 million is a net figure. If its gross it wouldn't have wiped it out. We know the pension levy figure is net though.

No, I am assuming the increments are gross like the pension levy. The pension levy decreased your gross salary, increments increase your gross salary

sollar · 02-08-2011 10:47PM

OMD wrote: »

No, I am assuming the increments are gross like the pension levy.

The pension levy comes directly out of our wages. There is nothing more to be added or subtracted from it. So what ever figure they quote as the pension levy is the complete saving.

bobbysands81 · 02-08-2011 10:48PM

fliball123 wrote: »

really so what are we the theory that disproves the rule..The private sector have been coming down in wages..Have you not noticed that or have you buried your head in the sand and yet the other 2 are going up

My God... do you really believe that our wages have been going up in th last few years???

Seriously???

I pity you if you do.

How can intentional lies like not be dealt with by moderators? No matter how many times facts are pointed out to you you choose to ignore them. Will I post you my payslips so yu can compare them from a few yars ago to today?

OMD · 02-08-2011 10:53PM

sollar wrote: »

The pension levy comes directly out of our wages. There is nothing more to be added or subtracted from it. So what ever figure they quote as the pension levy is the complete saving.

No. Pension levy is pre tax. So if you earn say 50K and pay 20% tax you take home 40k. So the actual cost to the government is 40k. If you have a pension levy of 10% your take home pay is now 36k So your pay is cut by 5000 but only saves the government 4000. Increments & pension levy therefore effect pay in similar ways

Good loser · 03-08-2011 12:06AM

sollar wrote: »

The pension levy comes directly out of our wages. There is nothing more to be added or subtracted from it. So what ever figure they quote as the pension levy is the complete saving.

Not true. The pension levy you are credited with includes tax the Govt would have got in any case.

Effectively our Govt is broke, currently borrowing 40% of all it pays out.

All discussions re pay etc should be in this context.

Of relevance too is that inflation since 2008 has been -4%.

Suggest a 10% across the board cut in PS pay/pensions/sw/semi state charges.

cursai · 03-08-2011 02:23AM

Social welfare for long term and people unable to work should be reduced before any talk of cutting working peoples pay is entertained. That and sly neutering of social delinqents.

maninasia · 03-08-2011 07:39AM

Itchianus wrote: »

Thanks a lot, I'm in the bad books now for waking my OH when I burst out laughing at that!

I know it's been done to death, (particularly if it's correct that the annual cost is 250m) but there's a fundamental difference in how people view them.

To me, and bearing in mind I'm new to the PS, I look at the payscale for the grade I'm at, and I know for a fact that I will earn at least 5k - 10k a year less in the next few years until the increments get me back to the ballpark of what I'd earn in the private sector.

If the top end of the scales have to be adjusted downwards in order to reduce the PS wage bill then so be it, and it would yield a much greater return than tinkering with friggin increments!

a) Try getting a job these days
b) Compare actual expectations to work and perform on the job
c) Compare hours worked
d) Compare job security and length of time in same job
e) Compare pensions and benefits

This is in general, but there you cannot compare an apple to an orange.

fliball123 · 03-08-2011 08:52AM

sollar wrote: »

Why? many countries are running deficits. Its quite common. Do the UK, USA, Italy etc stop paying bonuses, increments, payrises because they are running a deficit?

How would that work... in years that a government ran a surplus staff would get bonuses, but get nothing if they ran a deficit even though they may have been working just as hard. ? Doesn't seem like a great set up.

What about the bank bonuses here too. They are still being paid and some bankers even got payrises during this resession.

http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/lenihan-is-powerless-to-prevent-aib-paying-3pc-raise-to-staff-1917569.html

Do my taxes pay for any of above currently...Bankers are no longer being paid bonuses that was cut out last year...All I am saying a bit of sense ...Stop the increments till the deficit is closed then whent the money is there give increments to people in the ps who deserve it..Not just for showing up for work

fliball123 · 03-08-2011 08:55AM

TheRealPONeil wrote: »

And why are you needed if you're only "pasting"on what was said to you by your boss ??

You stolled into work this morning and posted an innane comment at 9:39, you really got to work at 9:50, 10:05, 10:17, 10:28, 10:57, 11:06, 11:08, 11:09 (really busy there), 11:48, 12:20, 12:36, 13:30, 13:39 (took a lunch break !!), 14:02, 14:04, 14:36, 14:45, 15:39 (clocked out !!)

You are either

- Working for the IMF
- on annual leave
- Delusional
- Jody Corcoran
or somebody who I would give a swift boot out of my company for posting on a bulletin board all day.

Good night.

haha pot kettle there kid how long did it take to do up this post checking my posts...By the way does your tax euro go to pay my wage..NO so what I do is my own fcuking business...Did you see me coming in at 5:30 the other morning NO...Did you see me leaving at 8:30PM last night..NO...Did you see what I was doing whilst I was posting NO...As anyone in IT will tell you ..You can kick off processes or jobs and unfortuanely you have to wait for it to finish......So get your facts right before you post sh1t

Survey reveals a 44% pay gap between public and private sector

Comments