Public Sector Increments Suspension.....

Avatarr · 29-07-2012 08:51PM #1

Howlin defends public service pay increments.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0723/howlin-defends-public-service-pay-increments.html?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=pulsenews

This is all the more astonishing when you consider the increment appraisal system presently being used (or not been used as the case may be) works off a 5 point system where you require at least 2 to qualify for increments. Only 18% of these appraisals conducted in 2011. Last year only 30 out of 30,000 civil servants were denied increments for poor performance. Howlin in the last couple of days has indicated that the level needs to be increased to 3 points to qualify for an increment. With only 18% of appraisals completed and some questions as to the "quality" of the reviews, this does not appear to be anything more than a token gesture.

All increments should be suspended until appraisals are completed on 100% of all civil servants. Simply, a prerequisite for increment should be an approved review at 3 points or above. Additionally, random samples of these appraisals should be open to independent scrutiny to verify system robustness.

juan.kerr · 29-07-2012 09:00PM

A bit of a joke alright. Also when they mention the annual costs they are being disingenuous. These aren't one off payments, the figures mentioned refer to the cost of that years increases only. Once granted they are rolled up into salary for subsequent years, increasing the overall wage bill year on year. Some of this is obviously offset by retirements etc.

I wonder also whether the figures provided by the minister include the additional pension costs...presumably not.

n97 mini · 29-07-2012 09:17PM

Avatarr wrote: »

All increments should be suspended until appraisals are completed on 100% of all civil servants.

Just to be clear you're not saying increments should be suspended, but rather unappraised increments should be suspended.

Avatarr · 29-07-2012 09:35PM

n97 mini wrote: »

Just to be clear you're not saying increments should be suspended, but rather unappraised increments should be suspended.

Standardised appraisals, working of a bell curve, taking into account pay scales, attendence e.t.c. There are plenty of options and methods/models out there in other sectors. Reward the performers and penalise the others. If the 82% in 2011, do not have completed appraisal in 2012, they would not get increments.

Would this not be fair???

gandalf · 29-07-2012 10:17PM

Given this country is running at a deficit then increments and pay increases should be suspended, all un-vouched allowances ended period and no changes considered until such time that our finances are back in order.

Instead they close down hospital beds, reduce the number of teachers and damage front line services to protect that flawed Croke Park agreement and the core of permanent public service staff who seem to have been deemed untouchable by our politicians.

Dannyboy83 · 29-07-2012 10:27PM

19,422 earn under €20,000
26,749 earn €20,000 - €30,000
66,504 earn €30,000 - €40,000
68,935 earn €40,000 - €50,000
44,019 earn €50,000 - €60,000
30,315 earn €60,000 - €70,000
22,285 earn €70,000 - €80,000
10,814 earn €80,000 - €90,000
4,146 earn €90,000 - €100,000
3043 earn €100,000 - €125,000
1,212 earn €125,000 - €150,000
2,536 earn over €150,000

Realistically speaking, only about 46,171 are going to see 75% of the increment anyway.
And they are going to spend that on day to day living, not ski trips in Zakopane.

Anybody in the €30,000 to €40,000 bracket and onward (the vast majority) are going to see most of it savaged before they ever get to it.

Our social welfare rates may discourage people from returning to work,
but our tax system definitely kills off the incentive to progress quite early on.

Total cost: €18m (I'M ASSUMING HE IS CITING GROSS FIGURES AND NOT NET??)
Net cost: €11m or €12m or thereabouts ??

I was under the impression that the increments were in the realm of €100m plus.
To be honest, this is very minor stuff.
Cut out the wastage in the HSE for 1 week and you would save that.

Yes I would certainly like to see people judged on merit, but there are a million other things that ought to happen in the state sector but probably won't. That's a well beaten path.

Hopefully they will make some serious headway on the HSE and Social Welfare.
That would repair some serious damage.

Dannyboy83 · 29-07-2012 10:46PM

Considering we are on Week 31 of 2012 and the HSE overspend is already over €250m (and we are acutely aware that there is serious wastage), and considering the IMF have cited the urgent need to revamp Social welfare...

We are talking about €1.25 billion minimum NET, versus about €18 million GROSS.
Is this a diversionary tactic?

Avatarr · 29-07-2012 11:16PM

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

Considering we are on Week 31 of 2012 and the HSE overspend is already over €250m (and we are acutely aware that there is serious wastage), and considering the IMF have cited the urgent need to revamp Social welfare...

We are talking about €1.25 billion minimum NET, versus about €18 million GROSS.
Is this a diversionary tactic?

Yes this may be in comparison to our debt, a small amount, but add it to 75mil saving on allowances which was due to be decided in february and the promised health legislation to allow HSE to use generic drugs and charging health insurers for private patients using public beds, saving another 200mil. That's close on 300million, we can't aford not to pursue every last cent.

Most importantly, it's the right thing to do.

n97 mini · 29-07-2012 11:36PM

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

Anybody in the €30,000 to €40,000 bracket and onward (the vast majority) are going to see most of it savaged before they ever get to it.

A lot of the the lower paid are working part time.

This shows that no grade in the civil service, and few in the wider PS, earn less than 20k, yet there are almost 20,000 people earning less than 20k

woodoo · 30-07-2012 12:00AM

My last increment was €10 per week net after taxes and all were taken out. Hardly ginormous.

They should be looking at some of the silly allowances and cutting the travel costs bill.

Sleepy · 30-07-2012 12:16AM

If that €520 a year extra is so insignificant you'll hardly miss it.

In a private firm that's doing well, one can expect a larger share of the profits when their contribution to those profits increases. If things are going badly for that firm, however, even if you're contributing more than ever, you'll be lucky to keep the same salary.

Gumbo · 30-07-2012 08:00AM

Sleepy wrote: »

In a private firm that's doing well, one can expect a larger share of the profits when their contribution to those profits increases. If things are going badly for that firm, however, even if you're contributing more than ever, you'll be lucky to keep the same salary.

In SOME Private firms....your post should state. You cannot speak for the whole private sector. My friend got a near 10k salary increase last year. She works in banking and a bailed out bank at that albeit not bailed out by our country. Some private sector firms are giving salary increases, and not just €5 per week or similar.

My last increment saw me with €7 increase per pay day.....im paid forthnightly, so thats 3.50 per week if my maths are up to scratch.

Sleepy · 30-07-2012 08:22AM

Is that bank profitable or still losing money? Something tells me it's the former. Salary increases aren't particularly tolerated by shareholders of loss-making businesses. Unless your friend got her raise for a promotion? Fairly widespread practice in a recession for people to be promoted with a raise that leaves their salary lower than that of the person they're replacing?

Sleepy · 30-07-2012 08:29AM

Yes, I can imagine how one might tire of constantly being reminded that they're in an untenable position that must eventually be rectified. The Quinn Family's supporters seem just as reluctant to face reality.

the_syco · 30-07-2012 08:33AM

Sleepy wrote: »

If that €520 a year extra is so insignificant you'll hardly miss it.

I'd love €520 a year extra. I'd love to have something like that added each year.

Gumbo · 30-07-2012 08:45AM

Sleepy wrote: »

Is that bank profitable or still losing money? Something tells me it's the former. Salary increases aren't particularly tolerated by shareholders of loss-making businesses. Unless your friend got her raise for a promotion? Fairly widespread practice in a recession for people to be promoted with a raise that leaves their salary lower than that of the person they're replacing?

Her private sector company gave her a pay rise. Similar to Dunnes Stores giving my mam her annual pay rise. Salary went up.

the_syco wrote: »

I'd love €520 a year extra. I'd love to have something like that added each year.

Not all increments are the same though. This years could be 520e to coencide with a 5 year term or similar but next years could be 234e.

waster81 · 30-07-2012 10:10AM

kceire wrote: »

Her private sector company gave her a pay rise. Similar to Dunnes Stores giving my mam her annual pay rise. Salary went up.

Not all increments are the same though. This years could be 520e to coencide with a 5 year term or similar but next years could be 234e.

Her private sector company got bailed out by the state - she shouldnt have had her job saved because it would have went bust without the state saving her job

Its not similar to dunnes and to claim otherwise is just deluded

waster81 · 30-07-2012 10:11AM

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

Considering we are on Week 31 of 2012 and the HSE overspend is already over €250m (and we are acutely aware that there is serious wastage), and considering the IMF have cited the urgent need to revamp Social welfare...

We are talking about €1.25 billion minimum NET, versus about €18 million GROSS.
Is this a diversionary tactic?

We are €250 over target budget - the fact that maybe the targets were unrealistic you fail to grasp

Gumbo · 30-07-2012 10:15AM

waster81 wrote: »

Her private sector company got bailed out by the state - she shouldnt have had her job saved because it would have went bust without the state saving her job

Its not similar to dunnes and to claim otherwise is just deluded

and to assume is also deluded.

galway2007 · 30-07-2012 10:46AM

gandalf wrote: »

Given this country is running at a deficit then increments and pay increases should be suspended, all un-vouched allowances ended period and no changes considered until such time that our finances are back in order.

Instead they close down hospital beds, reduce the number of teachers and damage front line services to protect that flawed Croke Park agreement and the core of permanent public service staff who seem to have been deemed untouchable by our politicians.

do you not think that maybe they should look in to HOGAN and the €9000 he spent on a 24 hour trip first?????????

Sleepy · 30-07-2012 11:40AM

Honestly? No.

I'm in no way attempting to justify whatever Phil Hogan has done to enrage the public this time but 9k is what, 10 people's increments?

Lets fix the country's finances first, then we can fine-tune the structures of government and TD's expenses. It may not be the popular option but it's the financially prudent one.

Jaysoose · 30-07-2012 11:58AM

galway2007 wrote: »

do you not think that maybe they should look in to HOGAN and the €9000 he spent on a 24 hour trip first?????????

So you would place more importance on something like this than the hospital system and services being negatively affected?

Its unjustifiable that increments (Pay rises) are being awarded when its been admitted that the system of measurement is completely flawed and in the majority of cases not even being used.

Gumbo · 30-07-2012 12:06PM

Sleepy wrote: »

I'm in no way attempting to justify whatever Phil Hogan has done to enrage the public this time but 9k is what, 10 people's increments?

That 9k would cover about 20 people in my department.

n97 mini · 30-07-2012 12:19PM

Spending 9k without justification is spending 9k without justification, doesn't matter it's on unjustified increments or on a unjustified junket.

gandalf · 30-07-2012 12:30PM

galway2007 wrote: »

do you not think that maybe they should look in to HOGAN and the €9000 he spent on a 24 hour trip first?????????

No we need to go after areas where we can save the most first so frontline services are impacted to a minimum. That would strike me as the most logical route to take. Of courselves every piece of expenditure needs to be examined and vouched for fully.

Lumbo · 30-07-2012 04:16PM

gandalf wrote: »

No we need to go after areas where we can save the most first so frontline services are impacted to a minimum. That would strike me as the most logical route to take. Of courselves every piece of expenditure needs to be examined and vouched for fully.

Unvouched is probably the only word in the English language that actually makes my blood boil.

Degsy · 30-07-2012 05:01PM

n97 mini wrote: »

Spending 9k without justification is spending 9k without justification, doesn't matter it's on unjustified increments or on a unjustified junket.

Why unjustified?

People work,they should get paid.

Maybe you think they should be on 25 grand for life because the private sector banks and construction industry fcucked up the economy?

golden lane · 30-07-2012 05:06PM

Degsy wrote: »

Why unjustified?

People work,they should get paid.

Maybe you think they should be on 25 grand for life because the private sector banks and construction industry fcucked up the economy?

they should less money because their bosses caused the country to be in it's present state.....

Degsy · 30-07-2012 05:12PM

golden lane wrote: »

they should less money because their bosses caused the country to be in it's present state.....

And who voted for them?

Who swelled the party coffers with bribes and "donations"?

Who wined and dined and courted politicians so they'd turn a blind eye to legislation?

Who worked cash in hand,or a nod and a handshake for years and moved assets to thier spouses to avoid paying back loans?

Who raised the cost of living by inflating a bogus Propert bubble?

Vizzy · 30-07-2012 05:12PM

golden lane wrote: »

they should less money because their bosses caused the country to be in it's present state.....

So I assume that using your logic,all Private sector workers will be delighted to accept less pay or no pay when there boss fcuks up and lands the company in debt?

Degsy · 30-07-2012 05:25PM

Vizzy wrote: »

So I assume that using your logic,all Private sector workers will be delighted to accept less pay or no pay when there boss fcuks up and lands the company in debt?

I cant think of any public sector organisation that has fewer "customers" than it did ten years ago.

Education,Health,Revenue,Social Welfare,Gardai and Prison Officers are ALL busier now than ever before.

Add to that the current moratorium on recruitment and something has to give.

A simple work to rule in the public sector would put things in persepctive for those who take these services for granted.

It is only thanks to the Public Sector Agreement that industrial action hasnt already be taken.

Public Sector Increments Suspension.....

Comments