Public sector pay increase

Jawgap · 13-05-2015 07:15AM

myshirt wrote: »

Would they ever stop calling it 'Pay Restoration'. This really is infuriating.

If anything good came out of this recession and challenged economic period it was the reduction in the wages of SIPTU members. Why in God's name have they now the paw out again for something they never, ever deserved? Have we not learnt anything? I truly get the sense these people are insatiable and absolutely do not give a flying f*ck. It's disgusting.

That's what it is. There were two sides who agreed a deal and one unilaterally reneged on it - they're just putting back what they took.

suicide_circus · 13-05-2015 07:40AM

The country is, for all intents and purposes, broke with crippling national debt. Even more important than that is the fact that Europe as a whole is in an appalling state economically. The idea that public servants should have their pay restored to levels which should have never been agreed to at a time of economic frivolity is questionable to say the least. Every cent has to be borrowed and paid for by our kids twenty years down the line. This is far too soon and smacks of the financial imprudence that created this mess in the first place.

ThisRegard · 13-05-2015 08:11AM

I was listening to some labour spokesman yesterday evening on Matt Cooper and was a bit staggered hearing him go on about how great the public service has been over the last few years, making it out as if they single handily pulled the country into recovery, so they should be rewarded for doing so. Do these guys never learn ?

Lucinda Creighton was arguing the other side and she managed to sound the most reasonable on this point. Then some SF lad came along and sat both sides of the fence while complaining that the other 2 were getting involved in auction politics.

13-05-2015 08:32AM

I don't know why people take the unions so seriously, they are a faction group representing the members like a lot of faction groups in Ireland, anything form groups representing farmers, groups representing hotels, and so on a lot of it is PR, its a game get your issue on the main news programs.

Public servants are not going to be handed the money willingly or in a haphazard fashion that day is gone but there will be some rowing back after a lot of barging wont happen till next year and after the elections, I am a great believer in pragmatism.

13-05-2015 08:38AM

ThisRegard wrote: »

I was listening to some labour spokesman yesterday evening on Matt Cooper and was a bit staggered hearing him go on about how great the public service has been over the last few years, making it out as if they single handily pulled the country into recovery, so they should be rewarded for doing so. Do these guys never learn ?

Lucinda Creighton was arguing the other side and she managed to sound the most reasonable on this point. Then some SF lad came along and sat both sides of the fence while complaining that the other 2 were getting involved in auction politics.

You have summed up SF perfectly sit on the fence till you see what the wind is blowing then get behind whatever is popular.

Geuze · 13-05-2015 08:40AM

suicide_circus wrote: »

The country is, for all intents and purposes, broke with crippling national debt. Even more important than that is the fact that Europe as a whole is in an appalling state economically. The idea that public servants should have their pay restored to levels which should have never been agreed to at a time of economic frivolity is questionable to say the least. Every cent has to be borrowed and paid for by our kids twenty years down the line. This is far too soon and smacks of the financial imprudence that created this mess in the first place.

There is no question of all the pay cuts being restored in one go, or even over 2-3 years, I guess.

Geuze · 13-05-2015 08:42AM

ThisRegard wrote: »

I was listening to some labour spokesman yesterday evening on Matt Cooper and was a bit staggered hearing him go on about how great the public service has been over the last few years, making it out as if they single handily pulled the country into recovery, so they should be rewarded for doing so. Do these guys never learn ?

PS numbers did fall.

PS pay was cut three times.

PS productivity did rise.

Now, the PS did not "single-handedly pull the country into recovery".

ThisRegard · 13-05-2015 09:16AM

Geuze wrote: »

PS numbers did fall.

PS pay was cut three times.

PS productivity did rise.

I never claimed otherwise. But it's still far from a slimline, effective and economical organisation that it should and could be.

bjork · 13-05-2015 09:33AM

Jawgap wrote: »

Who is 'they'? We're the people who vote them in - if we vote in shysters, numpties and incompetents then that's our own fault.

You can´t vote for people who don´t stand for election

Jawgap · 13-05-2015 10:12AM

ThisRegard wrote: »

I never claimed otherwise. But it's still far from a slimline, effective and economical organisation that it should and could be.

People seem to think the PS is some kind of monolith. It's not so describing it as an organisation is pointless.

It is a collection of organisations, agencies, authorities etc - some executive, some operational and some contemplative. And yes, some are wasteful and some are efficient, and effective and economical and some are wasteful some days and effective on others.

Also, the fact remains that any moves towards improving operational effectiveness or efficiency in certain PS organisations are universally met with vocal public objections - try closing a local, inefficient hospital or Garda station and see what happens. Likewise, propose a national fire service and see how far that gets, or the amalgamation of schools.......everyone is happy for a hospital to close or schools to be amalgamated as long as it's not their hospital or schools

bjork · 13-05-2015 10:13AM

Jawgap wrote: »

People seem to think the PS is some kind of monolith. It's not so describing it as an organisation is pointless.

It is a collection of organisations, agencies, authorities etc - some executive, some operational and some contemplative. And yes, some are wasteful and some are efficient, and effective and economical and some are wasteful some days and effective on others.

Also, the fact remains that any moves towards improving operational effectiveness or efficiency in certain PS organisations are universally met with vocal public objections - try closing a local, inefficient hospital or Garda station and see what happens. Likewise, propose a national fire service and see how far that gets, or the amalgamation of schools.......everyone is happy for a hospital to close or schools to be amalgamated as long as it's not their hospital or schools

You are correct with the bolded bit. How then can a unilateral payrise be given across the board with no questions asked?

Jawgap · 13-05-2015 10:23AM

bjork wrote: »

You are correct with the bolded bit. How then can a unilateral payrise be given across the board with no questions asked?

Because that's the way the PS works - come up with a better way and it will be implemented.

I think that's been explained repeatedly - the PS is not the private sector - there are certain business processes which are common (and which should be outsourced if they are not of strategic importance) but by-and-large the PS works on different problems to the private sector and generally does not employ a profit model

bjork · 13-05-2015 10:26AM

Jawgap wrote: »

Because that's the way the PS works - come up with a better way and it will be implemented.

I think that's been explained repeatedly - the PS is not the private sector - there are certain business processes which are common (and which should be outsourced if they are not of strategic importance) but by-and-large the PS works on different problems to the private sector and generally does not employ a profit model

But on one hand you are saying that they are all individual entities and can not be judged as as a group

On the other when it comes to pay they can, simply because that's the way it works

ThisRegard · 13-05-2015 10:38AM

Jawgap wrote: »

People seem to think the PS is some kind of monolith. It's not so describing it as an organisation is pointless.

It is a collection of organisations, agencies, authorities etc - some executive, some operational and some contemplative. And yes, some are wasteful and some are efficient, and effective and economical and some are wasteful some days and effective on others......

I fully understand that, but I have 5 family members working in one department or another. 2 as nurses which I wouldn't do for the life of me and they deserve everything they get in terms of rewards, and more. Another in education who has it pretty easy.

But the others are lifers and the things they do, or do not do, is ridiculous. The pay rises they get, and complain about when delayed, make no sense. There's no bearing on a persons performance within that job, and when you employ that across the public service as if each person was part of a monolith exceeding performance targets etc you can see what gets peoples hackles up.

Having said that, I put it down to the unions and weak management for the most part, perhaps they go hand in hand. One of the nurses became the de facto union person in their ward for a while. They were initially enthusiastic, particularly in the debates we had, but they soon tired of the hassle they themselves even got from the union when they made suggestions of extra things they could do to make life as a whole for themself and colleagues easier.

She ended up having a big row anyway and has nothing much to do with them these days.

And just to clarify for myself, I don't see the PS as inclusive as nurses, firemen, gardai etc. I think it's unfortunate that politicians use these as examples when talking about giving the public sector their "pay back". These people do, not all desk jockeys do.

Celticfire · 13-05-2015 10:43AM

bjork wrote: »

You are correct with the bolded bit. How then can a unilateral payrise be given across the board with no questions asked?

Much the same way as pay was unilaterally cut across the board without any consideration a unilateral restoration of pay can also be done.

bjork · 13-05-2015 10:46AM

Celticfire wrote: »

Much the same way as pay was unilaterally cut across the board without any consideration a unilateral restoration of pay can also be done.

They could also take this opportunity to just give it to those that deserve it. It was cut for a reason.

Celticfire · 13-05-2015 10:51AM

bjork wrote: »

They could also take this opportunity to just give it to those that deserve it. It was cut for a reason.

According to some people nobody deserves it. So how would you define "deserves it"? What criteria would you use?

Kermit.de.frog · 13-05-2015 10:52AM

Celticfire wrote: »

Much the same way as pay was unilaterally cut across the board without any consideration a unilateral restoration of pay can also be done.

And bust the country again? No.

Public sector pay restoration should ONLY be for those who actually work hard - on merit.

evolving_doors · 13-05-2015 10:59AM

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

And bust the country again? No.

Public sector pay restoration should ONLY be for those who actually work hard - on merit.

Ah, like merit pay which was introduced for Irish Water employees. That went down well with the public didn't it?

Roger Hassenforder · 13-05-2015 11:14AM

bjork wrote: »

You are correct with the bolded bit. How then can a unilateral payrise be given across the board with no questions asked?

It's a restoration of pay

awec · 13-05-2015 11:15AM

Jawgap wrote: »

Also, the fact remains that any moves towards improving operational effectiveness or efficiency in certain PS organisations are universally met with vocal public objections - try closing a local, inefficient hospital or Garda station and see what happens. Likewise, propose a national fire service and see how far that gets, or the amalgamation of schools.......everyone is happy for a hospital to close or schools to be amalgamated as long as it's not their hospital or schools

Of course.

But we wouldn't need to cut so many front line services if we could just cut a lot more of the briefcase carrying bureaucrats and pointless managers that exist in the public sector.

But as said earlier in the thread any attempt to properly fix the public sector and improve services will be blocked by public sector unions and their lapdogs. They have a vested interest in maintaining the current shambles.

bjork · 13-05-2015 12:27PM

Celticfire wrote: »

According to some people nobody deserves it. So how would you define "deserves it"? What criteria would you use?

You want me to define all the criteria for every role in the public service?

:pac::pac:

Jawgap · 13-05-2015 12:31PM

bjork wrote: »

But on one hand you are saying that they are all individual entities and can not be judged as as a group

On the other when it comes to pay they can, simply because that's the way it works

They are a group in the same way the 'IT sector' or 'social media companies' are a group - but they all do different things, and work on different problems.

And yes you can individualise pay and conditions, but then the cost and size of things like HR and Finance functions would explode exponentially. You would also lose the flexibility to move staff around.

At the moment you can negotiate pay with a group of unions, imagine trying to negotiate 250,000 separate pay and condition deals - or put it another way when I left the PS it came at the end of three weeks of negotiations with my new employer - if even 10% of the PS had individualised pay, how much time, effort and cost would have to go into negotiating their contracts of employment?

Jawgap · 13-05-2015 12:34PM

ThisRegard wrote: »

I fully understand that, but I have 5 family members working in one department or another. 2 as nurses which I wouldn't do for the life of me and they deserve everything they get in terms of rewards, and more. Another in education who has it pretty easy.

But the others are lifers and the things they do, or do not do, is ridiculous. The pay rises they get, and complain about when delayed, make no sense. There's no bearing on a persons performance within that job, and when you employ that across the public service as if each person was part of a monolith exceeding performance targets etc you can see what gets peoples hackles up.

Having said that, I put it down to the unions and weak management for the most part, perhaps they go hand in hand. One of the nurses became the de facto union person in their ward for a while. They were initially enthusiastic, particularly in the debates we had, but they soon tired of the hassle they themselves even got from the union when they made suggestions of extra things they could do to make life as a whole for themself and colleagues easier.

She ended up having a big row anyway and has nothing much to do with them these days.

And just to clarify for myself, I don't see the PS as inclusive as nurses, firemen, gardai etc. I think it's unfortunate that politicians use these as examples when talking about giving the public sector their "pay back". These people do, not all desk jockeys do.

I'm not getting into performance management again - my earlier posts covered it.

And while desk jockeying is not in the same league as the 'blue light services' someone has to make sure the lights come on, the comms gear works, people get paid etc Or would you prefer trained police officers to be doing routine admin?

Celticfire · 13-05-2015 12:37PM

bjork wrote: »

You want me to define all the criteria for every role in the public service?

:pac::pac:

You were the one using the wide but vague brushstroke "deserve it". I want you to define " deserve it". It should be simple, you're the one that said it.

ThisRegard · 13-05-2015 12:45PM

Jawgap wrote: »

And while desk jockeying is not in the same league as the 'blue light services' someone has to make sure the lights come on, the comms gear works, people get paid etc Or would you prefer trained police officers to be doing routine admin?

Again, I'm not referring to all desks jockeys (I'm one myself), particularly not those in any of the emergency services.

But we all know there is deadwood being dragged along by the current until retirement that reap all the benefits. I think that's general problem people have.

Tiger Mcilroy · 13-05-2015 12:46PM

Jawgap wrote: »

I'm not getting into performance management again - my earlier posts covered it.

And while desk jockeying is not in the same league as the 'blue light services' someone has to make sure the lights come on, the comms gear works, people get paid etc Or would you prefer trained police officers to be doing routine admin?

With all due respect nothing has been covered in regards performance management in the public sector.

The tiny amount of non-performing public servants that get below acceptable scores using the performance management system indicates that managers are either incapable of assessing their staff or simply do not bother.

The argument that the work being done is not quantifiable defies all logic and is simply an indicator of the inept and farcical system that is being protected by all involved.

bjork · 13-05-2015 12:48PM

Celticfire wrote: »

You were the one using the wide but vague brushstroke "deserve it". I want you to define " deserve it". It should be simple, you're the one that said it.

Do you think everyone in the PS deserves it?

Celticfire · 13-05-2015 12:55PM

bjork wrote: »

Do you think everyone in the PS deserves it?

So no definition of your cover all phrase " deserve it" then?

suicide_circus · 13-05-2015 12:56PM

Celticfire wrote: »

You were the one using the wide but vague brushstroke "deserve it". I want you to define " deserve it". It should be simple, you're the one that said it.

It really is irrelevant who deserves it. We cant afford it.

Public sector pay increase

Comments