Public sector pay increase

The Rape of Lucretia · 01-06-2015 08:00PM

Yara Old Backyard wrote: »

I'd say your head is exploding now that this is all being signed up and happening.

Mine is.

Brendan Howlin has decided that the private sector is so well paid compared to the public sector that they can afford to contribute 600 million to those in the the public sector.

Still, a government standing up to unions incapable of reasonable though, and who see it as fair game to play hardball for what ever you can get, on the rationale that if you get it, then you are right to ask for it and those who are paying for it be damned, is a utopian dream.

Its unpalatable, unfair, and a sad indictment of they way we choose to run our country, but all in all, probably a price worth bearing to keep them quiet for a few years.

evolving_doors · 01-06-2015 08:34PM

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Mine is.

Brendan Howlin has decided that the private sector is so well paid compared to the public sector that they can afford to contribute 600 million to those in the the public sector.

Still, a government standing up to unions incapable of reasonable though, and who see it as fair game to play hardball for what ever you can get, on the rationale that if you get it, then you are right to ask for it and those who are paying for it be damned, is a utopian dream.

Its unpalatable, unfair, and a sad indictment of they way we choose to run our country, but all in all, probably a price worth bearing to keep them quiet for a few years.

So, lets get this straight...

You say the burden of paying 600million is being solely placed on the private sector!!!
I think you might recall a burden of a mere 100 odd billion being placed on the shoulders of all of us because of private sector 'sense of entitlement'.

A government standing up to unions. It was the unions who agreed to help foot the bill for the squandering of the private sector when the banks and construction industry went t1ts up. Don't mind spouting this revisionist agenda (thanks Lucinda and Eddie) that it was the overpaid public sector who caused the recession.

It was the unions who agreed to take pay cuts and work extra hours under FEMPI/Croke Park/Haddington road etc., with the clear agreement that this would be rescinded by 2017.
But do public sector workers think they'll ever get a modicum of gratitude for this.
WE know now that the extra hours worked will never go away (not that we ever expected thanks for it anyway!)

There's mention of Utopian dreaming, but I think it's more of a case of some folk in the private sector trying to rewrite history and present an alternate reality.

BTW, public sector employees spend money in the private sector too believe it or not!

Mongfinder General · 01-06-2015 10:19PM

Gebgbegb wrote: »

So, lets get this straight...

BTW, public sector employees spend money in the private sector too believe it or not!

No, no, no. Public servants do all their shopping on flexi days and privilege days in Newry.

evolving_doors · 01-06-2015 11:03PM

Mongfinder General wrote: »

No, no, no. Public servants do all their shopping on flexi days and privilege days in Newry.

Yes that's the nub of it really, the public sector worker is indeed prudent with their spending, and that's even in spite of being paid the alleged fortune that some will have you believe.

Paulzx · 01-06-2015 11:09PM

daithi7 wrote: »

This proposed body should help transparency and take some of the pressure off Irish politicians to accede to every public sector union demand as they appear to do currently.not!?

I suppose when the governement enforced numerous cuts in public sector salaries it was done because the unions demanded it.:D

I love this crap that the unions "run the country" and are all powerfull.

They were so powerfull that they stood by and allowed salaries and conditions be slashed without an iota of industrial action.

If the public sector unions were as powerfull as you seem to suggest we would have had 6 years of strikes.

Uncle Ben · 01-06-2015 11:51PM

daithi7 wrote: »

No,it is not a tax it is a pension contribution.

The only category of worker who pay extra tax rates in this skewed sector state are the self employed, who pay a higher rate of prsi with lower allowances. They also pay prsi on things like deposit interest. And to really make things totally ridiculous, their own private pension funds are currently being raided by the Irish taxman of. 6% per annum to mostly fund overpaid public servants.

So with ~10% unemployment, the only people being really screwed are the people who actually create wealth and indigenous jobsin the Irish economy ...... meanwhile the same paper pushers in the dept of finance, none of whom were fired, and who helped misdirect Ireland into a monumental economic crisis are back getting pay rises.....You couldn't make it up!!

People who will never get a PS pension are paying the pension levy.

Kristopherus · 02-06-2015 12:00AM

Uncle Ben wrote: »

People who will never get a PS pension are paying the pension levy.

Different levy and only a small percentage of what the PS pension levy is.

ardmacha · 02-06-2015 12:30AM

daithi7 wrote: »

No,it is not a tax it is a pension contribution.

As I am sure you well know, the legislation for the pension levy specifically states that it is not a pension contribution. Please stop this puerile assertion that it is.

Kristopherus wrote:

People who will never get a PS pension are paying the pension levy.
Different levy and only a small percentage of what the PS pension levy is.

Stop playing with words. It is perfectly obvious that the poster was talking about the PS pension levy and pointing out that it is paid by people who will never get a pension and paid by people on non pensionable payments. This is not surprising as it is not a pension contribution and is not connected to getting a pension.

daithi7 · 02-06-2015 12:55AM

Gebgbegb wrote: »

And what happens if they say our doctors, teachers, lecturers, garda, etc,etc are undervalued and recommend pay rises within the public sector, Would you be happy then?

Absolutely, and in all probability they would recommend some rises in particular areas of the public service, whilst normalising downwards in others and I suspect staying the same in many,many more. Although I think in aggregate such a body would recommend changes that would bring about net reductions, but it's not really for me to pre judge its view. The only body we got who were close to this were the troika implementation committee(s), and though they operated in strained times, granted, they made it quite clear what they thought of Irish public sector salary levels when they were here.

The important thing for me is that there is a crying need for such an expert review group to report to government and parliament on public sector pay, conditions, productivity and progress.

daithi7 · 02-06-2015 01:05AM

Yara Old Backyard wrote: »

Pension contribution my arse, its no more a pension contribution than USC or PAYE. Its a tax and public sector workers will never see a cent of it again. Its also a tax only on public sector workers which means if a private and public sector worker or on the same salary the private sector worker see a lot more in the net pay than the public sector worker......

Gwan ya tool, that fictitious net pay you try to compare would be before private sector pension contributions, because in the private sector workers have had to pay for their pension for their whole career....not just after a crisis, Imagine hey!? Anyway you've just illustrated my point succinctly, that all workers now contribute to the cost of their pensions these days, private sector through direct contributions and public sector through the pension levy which acts as a contribution, well done comrade.

P.s. This is further explained by http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/money_and_tax/personal_finance/pensions/civil_and_public_service_pensions.html

For those who still think it is a tax, they term it a pension contribution about 4 times in as many sentences. I hope this is enough for those who still insist on trying to call it a tax.

daithi7 · 02-06-2015 01:27AM

ardmacha wrote: »

As I am sure you well know, the legislation for the pension levy specifically states that it is not a pension contribution. Please stop this puerile assertion that it is.

Take up your 'puerile' protestations with
http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/money_and_tax/personal_finance/pensions/civil_and_public_service_pensions.html

Civil and public service pension contributions
Information
Information

The Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest Act 2009 introduced a new level of pension contribution to be made by all public and civil servants.

Pension contributions are deducted from your gross income. Income tax, PRSI and other deductions, were assessed on the balance of your income after pension contributions had been deducted. However, in Budget 2011 it was announced that PRSI and the new Universal Social Charge are payable on gross income from 1 January 2011.

Pension contributions are graduated so that the effect is less at lower income levels and greater at higher levels.

From 1 March 2009, pension contributions were deducted at:

3% on the first €15,000
6% on next €5,000
10% on the balance
The Department of Finance estimated that the average deduction would be 7.5%.....'

02-06-2015 10:24AM

daithi7 wrote: »

Gwan ya tool, that fictitious net pay you try to compare would be before private sector pension contributions, because in the private sector workers have had to pay for their pension for their whole career....not just after a crisis, Imagine hey!? Anyway you've just illustrated my point succinctly, that all workers now contribute to the cost of their pensions these days, private sector through direct contributions and public sector through the pension levy which acts as a contribution, well done comrade.

PS you have now proved you haven't a clue what you are talking about, thanks for that.

Public sector workers pay a pension contribution and a pension levy. The pension contribution is their pension same as a private sector worker and the pension levy is a tax that has nothing whatsoever to do with their pension and they will never see a cent of it again. The deductions even appear separately on my payslip as they are nothing to do with each other.

darkpagandeath · 02-06-2015 10:28AM

Why Is work done by People in the Public sector magically unquantifiable.

Mongfinder General · 02-06-2015 11:49AM

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Why Is work done by People in the Public sector magically unquantifiable.

What metrics are used to quantify output in your line of work?

Jawgap · 02-06-2015 04:05PM

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Why Is work done by People in the Public sector magically unquantifiable.

It's not that work done in the PS can't be quantified - the challenge is quantifying and managing performance in a way that policy objectives are met. Get it wrong and you undermine the policy objective because you skew activity in a perverse way.

darkpagandeath · 02-06-2015 04:07PM

Mongfinder General wrote: »

What metrics are used to quantify output in your line of work?

High end IT. Performance, Problem solving, Number of first time fixes, Time to resolution the normal stuff.

PeteFalk78 · 02-06-2015 04:22PM

darkpagandeath wrote: »

High end IT. Performance, Problem solving, Number of first time fixes, Time to resolution the normal stuff.

Ok. Quantify the performance of a teacher, paramedic, prison officer or a guard?

Quin_Dub · 02-06-2015 04:28PM

PeteFalk78 wrote: »

Ok. Quantify the performance of a teacher, paramedic, prison officer or a guard?

Are they the only professions in the Public Service??

Or just the ones trotted out when anybody challenges anything?

Are you seriously trying to suggest that there is no empirical way of measuring the success of any of the above examples?

Really? , Not one?....

darkpagandeath · 02-06-2015 04:38PM

PeteFalk78 wrote: »

Ok. Quantify the performance of a teacher, paramedic, prison officer or a guard?

I would benchmark their pay to similar areas in the private sector but that got shot down. Seems a lot of shooting down with no real reason why they are paid so much.

PeteFalk78 · 02-06-2015 04:51PM

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Are they the only professions in the Public Service??

Where did I mention it was. Did you want me to specify all the professions in the public Service?

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Or just the ones trotted out when anybody challenges anything?

Are you seriously trying to suggest that there is no empirical way of measuring the success of any of the above examples?

Really? , Not one?....

I'm looking for his answer. Or I'll allow you to answer if you want.

PeteFalk78 · 02-06-2015 04:51PM

darkpagandeath wrote: »

I would benchmark their pay to similar areas in the private sector but that got shot down. Seems a lot of shooting down with no real reason why they are paid so much.

That's great. Not the same as quantifying their performance is it?

KomradeBishop · 02-06-2015 05:19PM

The entire argument for monetarily quantifying the public sectors performance - and focusing only on that as a measure of success - is an argument for privatization, as the entire point of much of the public services, is to provide services that the private sector can't afford using profit motive alone.

Public services prioritize social benefit over profit, i.e. often deliberately run at a loss (which they can afford to do) in order to provide social benefit - and because social benefit is not an easily/objectively measurable thing, that means you can't objectively or precisely quantify the benefit of the public services.

This thread seems to be spinning in the usual degenerate circles, without a great quality of argument, so am reluctant to even dip in with that.

Quin_Dub · 02-06-2015 05:49PM

KomradeBishop wrote: »

The entire argument for monetarily quantifying the public sectors performance - and focusing only on that as a measure of success - is an argument for privatization, as the entire point of much of the public services, is to provide services that the private sector can't afford using profit motive alone.

Public services prioritize social benefit over profit, i.e. often deliberately run at a loss (which they can afford to do) in order to provide social benefit - and because social benefit is not an easily/objectively measurable thing, that means you can't objectively or precisely quantify the benefit of the public services.

This thread seems to be spinning in the usual degenerate circles, without a great quality of argument, so am reluctant to even dip in with that.

I would disagree, it's not about profit it's about value for money - It's also about rewarding those that do the best work.

Without question, there are a great many intangibles about the value of certain tasks within the public sector - The empathy of a nurse or carer for example , and some specific roles may be very hard to fully quantify empirically, but broadly speaking across the entirety of the Public sector there are massive opportunities to implement a fully functioning merit based remuneration system that allows the best people to be rewarded and efficiencies to be achieved..

Calina · 02-06-2015 05:59PM

Quin_Dub wrote: »

I would disagree, it's not about profit it's about value for money - It's also about rewarding those that do the best work.

Without question, there are a great many intangibles about the value of certain tasks within the public sector - The empathy of a nurse or carer for example , and some specific roles may be very hard to fully quantify empirically, but broadly speaking across the entirety of the Public sector there are massive opportunities to implement a fully functioning merit based remuneration system that allows the best people to be rewarded and efficiencies to be achieved..

I keep hearing this. The problem is I've never really seen a fully functioning merit based system in the private sector either. Anything but, in fact.

KomradeBishop · 02-06-2015 06:58PM

Quin_Dub wrote: »

I would disagree, it's not about profit it's about value for money - It's also about rewarding those that do the best work.

Without question, there are a great many intangibles about the value of certain tasks within the public sector - The empathy of a nurse or carer for example , and some specific roles may be very hard to fully quantify empirically, but broadly speaking across the entirety of the Public sector there are massive opportunities to implement a fully functioning merit based remuneration system that allows the best people to be rewarded and efficiencies to be achieved..

Is there past precedent of this ever having been done, in any country, in a way which wasn't just used as an excuse to seek cuts in public services and push for privatization?

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for money being spent wisely and not wasted, and pushing back against unions that are taking the piss (though hard to argue that's the case now, given the concessions public sector workers have had to make since the recession) - but there needs to be past precedent of a workable system, for there to be a basis for this argument.

Putting in place a system like that is something that 'seems' prudent, but you've got to remember, more often than not the methodology/rules that underly performance measurement systems like that, are usually explicitly written/formulated to try and 'big-up' or make a 'sell' for NeoLiberal policies - for making public services look exclusively bad, and to make privatization more palatable.

I sure as hell wouldn't trust this government, to put in place a performance measurement system, that wasn't exclusively geared as a form of marketing for privatization - given their track record.

darkpagandeath · 02-06-2015 07:16PM

Where is all the money in the HSE going ?

kidneyfan · 02-06-2015 07:44PM

PeteFalk78 wrote: »

Ok. Quantify the performance of a teacher, paramedic, prison officer or a guard?

Well teaching is an interesting example:
Clear barrier to entry, but the intellectual bar not that high (but quite real), requires significant emotional investment in the job to be done even adequately (and generally Irish teachers are much better than adequate), excellent conditions and pay that I would suggest is not bad (but not great).

So how to quantify?

1 Look at the metrics that make a good school and model the characteristics of a good school
2 Set targets
3 Have anonymous in the round mutual assessment and look for deviations from norm in school generally

So step 1

What are the metrics of a good school? What are the metrics of a good teacher?

Paulzx · 02-06-2015 07:58PM

kidneyfan wrote: »

What are the metrics of a good school? What are the metrics of a good teacher?

In School A it is an achievement to get pupils to attend.

In School B it is expected to have high levels of A standard results.

Then there's everything in between. Unfortunately there's no across the board way of measuring whether one is "better" than the other.

Whole School Evaluations try to do this but there are so many variables between different schools that comparison is difficult

Uncle Ben · 02-06-2015 10:00PM

Listened to Danny McCoy this morning from IBEC. He's not so concerned about the €2k pay rise-He deems them modest. He's more upset that there is no outsourcing of services to private sector.

Dan_Solo · 03-06-2015 02:34PM

Quin_Dub wrote: »

I would disagree, it's not about profit it's about value for money

Ok so, how do you get "value for money" from a patient with cancer or a special needs kid? The business way is to tell them to lump it, you'll cost us money.

Public sector pay increase

Comments