Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Public sector pay increase

1…4142444647…57

Comments

  • #1292
    martingriff
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,829 ✭✭✭✭martingriff


    daithi7 wrote: »
    The public sector are simply not good at figures, if they were:

    -Ireland wouldn't be the most indebted people ever in the history of modern democracy!?
    -the pubic and civil servants would never have been paid bonkers benchmarking billions
    -Bertie would never have proclaimed himself a socialist and indebted the country forever while doing so, like most socialists do btw
    -Increments would have been abolished when the bust happened
    -Irish pubic and civil servants would be paid something similar to Portugal's, Spains or Cypr u s, not Switzerland, Kuwait & Monaco!!
    -Irish pubic sector unions would but be asking for pay increases on already overly high salaries from a country that is still borrowing to fund pubic expenditure

    But, Irish public servants are worth it, aren't they just ?!

    Truth is, pay increases in the pubic service should be effectively given through gradual tax reductions as the pubic purse can afford it, like lowering of the usc, that all sectors the working population would enjoy and not only the overpaid, fully secure, precious, public sector. But that's obviously far too much financial prudence & common sense for our politicians, who wish to pawn the silver from our sinking titanic, and of course, for our pubic service as represented by our beloved public sector unions!!

    No we are not.

    Just wondering do you actually know what public servants make or are you making crap up. Do you actually know what various public/civil servants get paid (I do not mean the average).

    People here seem to think that all public servants get paid the great average and get minted pensions. In relation to what they may give back it will be in elation to the pension levy which was never for the mention and has been clarified many times by politicians.


  • #1293
    martingriff
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,829 ✭✭✭✭martingriff


    darkpagandeath wrote: »
    Genuin question why can't they be fired ?

    They can and some have been but is difficult due to unions and I can say a a civil servant I am sick of it.


  • #1294
    crusier
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 596 ✭✭✭crusier


    daithi7 wrote: »
    The public sector are simply not good at figures, if they were:

    -Ireland wouldn't be the most indebted people ever in the history of modern democracy!?
    -the pubic and civil servants would never have been paid bonkers benchmarking billions
    -Bertie would never have proclaimed himself a socialist and indebted the country forever while doing so, like most socialists do btw
    -Increments would have been abolished when the bust happened
    -Irish pubic and civil servants would be paid something similar to Portugal's, Spains or Cypr u s, not Switzerland, Kuwait & Monaco!!
    -Irish pubic sector unions would not be demanding pay increases on already overly high salaries, from a hugely indebted country that is still borrowing heavily to fund pubic current expenditure. Something you should never do btw.

    But, Irish public servants are worth it, aren't they just ?!

    Truth is, pay increases in the pubic service should be effectively given through gradual tax reductions as the pubic purse can afford it, like lowering of the usc, so that all sectors of the working population would enjoy the benefits and not only the overpaid, fully secure, precious, public sector. But that's obviously far too much financial prudence & common sense for our politicians, who wish to pawn the silver from our sinking titanic for auction politics, and of course, for our pubic service as ably represented by our beloved public sector unions!!

    Cock!


  • #1295
    Jawgap
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,296 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    daithi7 wrote: »
    .....

    -the pubic and civil servants would never have been paid bonkers benchmarking billions
    ....

    You see, here's the thing I don't understand - I joined the PS post-benchmarking and left last year.

    If the post-benchmarking wages were so brilliant, how come recruitment was so difficult? I remember interviewing peope for jobs and being laughed at when they were told the starting salary.

    I remember running a team that had an annual churn rate of about 40%.

    I also remember plenty of examples of people starting work with us at 9-00am and leaving at lunchtime and never coming back - the record was the guy who started at 9 and was gone by 10-30!

    ......and I also remember people pestering me about earning more in the private sector, which was true but my reasons for working in the PS were personal and professional rather than economic.

    It's funny, how the begrudging rhetoric directed at the PS has amped up over the years by, I suspect, people who thought they were too good to work in PS 10 years ago because they didn't just think they were 'worth it' - they thought they were worth more ;)


  • #1296
    crusier
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 596 ✭✭✭crusier


    Jawgap wrote: »
    You see, here's the thing I don't understand - I joined the PS post-benchmarking and left last year.

    If the post-benchmarking wages were so brilliant, how come recruitment was so difficult? I remember interviewing peope for jobs and being laughed at when they were told the starting salary.

    I remember running a team that had an annual churn rate of about 40%.

    I also remember plenty of examples of people starting work with us at 9-00am and leaving at lunchtime and never coming back - the record was the guy who started at 9 and was gone by 10-30!

    ......and I also remember people pestering me about earning more in the private sector, which was true but my reasons for working in the PS were personal and professional rather than economic.

    It's funny, how the begrudging rhetoric directed at the PS has amped up over the years by, I suspect, people who thought they were too good to work in PS 10 years ago because they didn't just think they were 'worth it' - they thought they were worth more ;)

    Well said!


  • Advertisement
  • #1297
    To Elland Back
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,923 ✭✭✭To Elland Back


    martingriff wrote: »
    They can and some have been but is difficult due to unions and I can say a a civil servant I am sick of it.

    But you will probably stand by your fellow union member if there is any attempt to fire him for incompetence.


  • #1298
    Tiger Mcilroy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,562 ✭✭✭Tiger Mcilroy


    darkpagandeath wrote: »
    Genuin question why can't they be fired ?

    Apparently because its impossible to measure the performance of a public servant..why you ask?..just because.


  • #1299
    Tiger Mcilroy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,562 ✭✭✭Tiger Mcilroy


    Jawgap wrote: »
    You see, here's the thing I don't understand - I joined the PS post-benchmarking and left last year.

    If the post-benchmarking wages were so brilliant, how come recruitment was so difficult? I remember interviewing peope for jobs and being laughed at when they were told the starting salary.

    I remember running a team that had an annual churn rate of about 40%.

    I also remember plenty of examples of people starting work with us at 9-00am and leaving at lunchtime and never coming back - the record was the guy who started at 9 and was gone by 10-30!

    ......and I also remember people pestering me about earning more in the private sector, which was true but my reasons for working in the PS were personal and professional rather than economic.

    It's funny, how the begrudging rhetoric directed at the PS has amped up over the years by, I suspect, people who thought they were too good to work in PS 10 years ago because they didn't just think they were 'worth it' - they thought they were worth more ;)

    I quite simply dont believe that people laughed at the wages in an interview. this didnt happen.


  • #1300
    Roger Hassenforder
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,555 ✭✭✭Roger Hassenforder


    darkpagandeath wrote: »
    Hey I got a mention. Restored to what ? The Celtic tiger overpaid amount ? Please justify the level of increases they received during the boom ?

    youre barred from this thread until you come back with that company!! :D


  • #1301
    Roger Hassenforder
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,555 ✭✭✭Roger Hassenforder


    Tiger Mcilroy wrote: »
    I quite simply dont believe that people laughed at the wages in an interview. this didnt happen.

    people see the scale advertised for the post and assume they're so fabulous what being private sector and that, they'll march straight to the top. We've had people refuse offers when they realise were they're starting.

    most people in the public service worked in the private at some point (there are a few lifers all right, i find them (very) generally the most resistant to changes). I have worked in private mostly, public and now a type of semistate. there's a different culture and ethos in each, one not necessarily better than the other. Who generally treated their staff better? Private.
    Where was i paid more: semi state.
    Where had i the most job satisfaction? Public service.

    The most vitriolic in criticisms are the ones that haven't worked in different sectors, either through failure to "get in", or failure to apply for one reason or another. Its an open competition, if you don't apply, its your own fault. If you didnt get in, its your own fault. Most public servant acknowledge the system has flaws and is in need of serious reform.


  • Advertisement
  • #1302
    Jawgap
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,296 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    Tiger Mcilroy wrote: »
    Apparently because its impossible to measure the performance of a public servant..why you ask?..just because.

    No, it's quite easy to measure performance - the problem is how do measure action as opposed to movement?


  • #1303
    Tiger Mcilroy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,562 ✭✭✭Tiger Mcilroy


    Roger Hassenforder wrote: »
    people see the scale advertised for the post and assume they're so fabulous what being private sector and that, they'll march straight to the top. We've had people refuse offers when they realise were they're starting.

    most people in the public service worked in the private at some point (there are a few lifers all right, i find them (very) generally the most resistant to changes). I have worked in private mostly, public and now a type of semistate. there's a different culture and ethos in each, one not necessarily better than the other. Who generally treated their staff better? Private.
    Where was i paid more: semi state.
    Where had i the most job satisfaction? Public service.

    The most vitriolic in criticisms are the ones that haven't worked in different sectors, either through failure to "get in", or failure to apply for one reason or another. Its an open competition, if you don't apply, its your own fault. If you didnt get in, its your own fault. Most public servant acknowledge the system has flaws and is in need of serious reform.[/QUOTE]

    I have worked in both and have seen first hand what you describe, couldnt get back to the private sector quickly enough as i could feel the motivation being drained from my work.

    Most public servants acknowledge the flaws but are still happy to hide behind these when increments are being handed out.


  • #1304
    Jawgap
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,296 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    Tiger Mcilroy wrote: »
    I quite simply dont believe that people laughed at the wages in an interview. this didnt happen.

    Well I must've imagined it then.

    It happened once in about late 2006 when I was interviewing a graduate for a starter position with the regulator I was working for.

    The problem was that the PS was (and presumably still is) competing against the Big 4 - in comparison the starting salaries were (and probably still are) ludicrous.

    He didn't have to laugh though.


  • #1305
    Sheldons Brain
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,394 ✭✭✭Sheldons Brain


    If you want to be able to control the wasters in the PS and reward the diligent, then stop voting for wasters to set the policies. It is the wasters representing you, the citizen, that have brought this about.


  • #1306
    Roger Hassenforder
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,555 ✭✭✭Roger Hassenforder


    Tiger Mcilroy wrote: »


    I have worked in both and have seen first hand what you describe, couldnt get back to the private sector quickly enough as i could feel the motivation being drained from my work.

    Most public servants acknowledge the flaws but are still happy to hide behind these when increments are being handed out.

    you're right. they should refuse them in a spirit of collegiality with their private sector colleagues, who in turn will refuse bonuses, BIK, share schemes, perks...

    meanwhile in the real world...


  • #1307
    Jawgap
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,296 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    Roger Hassenforder wrote: »
    you're right. they should refuse them in a spirit of collegiality with their private sector colleagues, who in turn will refuse bonuses, BIK, share schemes, perks...

    meanwhile in the real world...

    Let's put it another way......

    I worked in the PS for 10 years, and got about 6 increments - as well as the various pay rises and pay cuts. Each increment was worth (before tax) about €1,100.....

    ......so I had about €6,500 in incremental pay adjustments.

    I left the PS to return to the private sector - the base salary is a bit better, but throw in the fact that I don't have to pay for my health insurance any more, I've an expensed car (which I do pay BIK for), my professional fees are paid for (as is my indemnity insurance), I can earn annual and interim bonuses (and benefit from team bonuses) and I know which I prefer.......;)

    .......oh, and I was given a bike as part of the signing bonus in lieu of gym membership (which I didn't really want).


  • #1308
    bjork
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,554 ✭✭✭bjork


    Jawgap wrote: »
    Let's put it another way......

    I worked in the PS for 10 years, and got about 6 increments - as well as the various pay rises and pay cuts. Each increment was worth (before tax) about €1,100.....

    ......so I had about €6,500 in incremental pay adjustments.

    I left the PS to return to the private sector - the base salary is a bit better, but throw in the fact that I don't have to pay for my health insurance any more, I've an expensed car (which I do pay BIK for), my professional fees are paid for (as is my indemnity insurance), I can earn annual and interim bonuses (and benefit from team bonuses) and I know which I prefer.......;)

    .......oh, and I was given a bike as part of the signing bonus in lieu of gym membership (which I didn't really want).

    Why did you leave the bit I bolded out of your calculations?

    Ingenious to say the least


  • #1309
    Tiger Mcilroy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,562 ✭✭✭Tiger Mcilroy


    Roger Hassenforder wrote: »
    you're right. they should refuse them in a spirit of collegiality with their private sector colleagues, who in turn will refuse bonuses, BIK, share schemes, perks...

    meanwhile in the real world...

    Your off on a bit of a tangent now.

    Real world ..lol..


  • #1310
    Jawgap
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,296 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    bjork wrote: »
    Why did you leave the bit I bolded out of your calculations?

    Ingenious to say the least

    Because they were balanced out by the pay cuts, but even if you want to remove the pay cuts from the equation I doubt all the pay rises I received, even if I was still benefiting from them when I left the PS would cover even half the cost of the company jammer I'm toddling about in.


  • #1311
    Roger Hassenforder
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,555 ✭✭✭Roger Hassenforder


    Tiger Mcilroy wrote: »
    Your off on a bit of a tangent now.

    Real world ..lol..

    If Public service workers are expected to forgo increments in protest at the system, there should be some reciprocal movement from the private sector. Oh wait, thats bull****; first introduced by yourself.

    Re: real world, apparently only Private sector workers inhabit it.


  • Advertisement
  • #1312
    Roger Hassenforder
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,555 ✭✭✭Roger Hassenforder


    bjork wrote: »
    Why did you leave the bit I bolded out of your calculations?

    Ingenious to say the least

    you probably meant to say "disingenuous" ?:p


  • #1313
    bjork
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,554 ✭✭✭bjork


    Roger Hassenforder wrote: »
    you probably meant to say "disingenuous" ?:p

    No?


    in·gen·ious (ĭn-jēn′yəs)
    adj.
    1. Having great inventive skill and imagination: an ingenious negotiator.
    2. Marked by or exhibiting originality or inventiveness: an ingenious solution to the problem.
    3. Obsolete Having genius; brilliant.


    Numbers are numbers, but it's they inventive way they're spun that counts :)


  • #1314
    Jawgap
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,296 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    bjork wrote: »
    No?


    in·gen·ious (ĭn-jēn′yəs)
    adj.
    1. Having great inventive skill and imagination: an ingenious negotiator.
    2. Marked by or exhibiting originality or inventiveness: an ingenious solution to the problem.
    3. Obsolete Having genius; brilliant.


    Numbers are numbers, but it's they inventive way they're spun that counts :)

    well don't let my figures get in the way.....

    About two years ago I published details of my salary on another discussion.....

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=84781410&postcount=4570


  • #1315
    Tiger Mcilroy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,562 ✭✭✭Tiger Mcilroy


    Roger Hassenforder wrote: »
    If Public service workers are expected to forgo increments in protest at the system, there should be some reciprocal movement from the private sector. Oh wait, thats bull****; first introduced by yourself.

    Re: real world, apparently only Private sector workers inhabit it.

    Im honestly trying to understand your point.

    The bit in bold ..now you getting it.


  • #1316
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 12,694 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Another issue is the way the negotiation are done via the media and you have the likes of Ingrid Miley with breathless excitement reporting on the public services unions then you have the various political discussion programs on both television and radio.

    If you looked at political programs in the Uk how many of them are about public servants pay? in comparison to the here? The Uk has huge public debt just like we do.

    I acutely think that is one of the issue holding Ireland back from having a mature political culture, clientism is another one.


  • #1317
    uki
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28 ✭uki


    Dear Cruiser!

    What you are saying is partly right - but not the full story. I agree there are different sections of society to blame for the downturn. However the wrong applied benchmarking made the public sector paybill to large for the Country. Spending went up by 70 % from 2001-2007. The public sector got to big. Sucking out to much money from country.
    Agreed savings were not fully implemented from PS. (Haddington Rd agreement).
    That is not sustainable in any country. It put an unfair burden on the taxpayer.

    Unfortunately elections are coming and the government will do anything to get votes from PS on the expense of private sector. That was done by Bertie and I can see it happening again.


  • #1318
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 12,694 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    uki wrote: »
    Dear Cruiser!

    What you are saying is partly right - but not the full story. I agree there are different sections of society to blame for the downturn. However the wrong applied benchmarking made the public sector paybill to large for the Country. Spending went up by 70 % from 2001-2007. The public sector got to big. Sucking out to much money from country.
    Agreed savings were not fully implemented from PS. (Haddington Rd agreement).
    That is not sustainable in any country. It put an unfair burden on the taxpayer.

    Unfortunately elections are coming and the government will do anything to get votes from PS on the expense of private sector. That was done by Bertie and I can see it happening again.

    Why would the government do that the private sector are bigger that the public sector so it would be in there interests to court the private sector not the public.

    I think whats in the ether form the government to the civil servants is....look lads vote for us and we will give you back some of the money after the next election...live horse and you will get grass.

    Perception is everything the government is not going to alienate the private sector by giving the public services a pay restoration/rise before the next election.


  • #1319
    Quin_Dub
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 17,597 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    Sheldons Brain wrote: »
    If you want to be able to control the wasters in the PS and reward the diligent, then stop voting for wasters to set the policies. It is the wasters representing you, the citizen, that have brought this about.

    The issue is the undue influence exerted by the Unions..

    I think that the people that we actually want to keep and reward in the Public sector would be ok with the introduction of a meritocracy. Rewards for being above average, penalties (or at least no reward) for being below average etc.

    The impediment to that is the unions and the cohort of Public Sector staff that provide them with their mandate to do what they do..

    Back in 2008/2009 there should not have been blanket pay cuts.. There should have been targeted redundancies (not voluntary) and targeted pay cuts..Instead we got everybody from top to bottom getting the same % cut..

    Utterly ridiculous..

    So , the question is - How do we break the negative influence of the PS unions without breaking employment laws etc?


  • #1320
    Sheldons Brain
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,394 ✭✭✭Sheldons Brain


    Quin_Dub wrote: »
    Back in 2008/2009 there should not have been blanket pay cuts.. There should have been targeted redundancies (not voluntary) and targeted pay cuts..Instead we got everybody from top to bottom getting the same % cut..

    Er no, everyone did not get the same pay cut, those on higher salaries have been cut by 20%+, those on lower salaries by less. But when you conduct some comparison with the private sector, it is at lower levels that the PS is better paid.


  • Advertisement
  • #1321
    Quin_Dub
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 17,597 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    Sheldons Brain wrote: »
    Er no, everyone did not get the same pay cut, those on higher salaries have been cut by 20%+, those on lower salaries by less. But when you conduct some comparison with the private sector, it is at lower levels that the PS is better paid.

    Yes , but it was blanket across the categories..

    Instead of reducing the wage bill by X amount through targeted redundancies and variable pay cuts based on role etc. They just cut everyone.

    Making it unfair and inefficient.


Advertisement
Advertisement