Garda, nurses, teachers and doctor's pay

thomasdylan · 19-03-2016 01:02AM

xLisaBx wrote: »

They do have the degree already, the intern year is the equivalent to the Junior Doctor year, with 2 X 5,000 word thesis' due and regular examination. It's horrendous just how uneducated the general public are about this.

Just on this. Medicine in Ireland is a 5/6 year course. You have the pre-clinical years at the start which are theoretical will some patient interaction, clinical skills, learning procedures, etc and then the final two years are purely hospital based where you're learning and doing on wards with patients. You could leave after the pre-clinical years with an honours science degree but obviously you need to complete the final two years in hospital to get a medicine degree and be a doctor. Technically we all have a degree before we hit our final two placement years. Interns are doctors, registered with the medical council, but doctors do continuous exams and training from intern to sho to reg, spr etc..
If a junior biomed isn't regarded as registered to work independently with the appropriate board, etc. and make the decisions that go with that then it's not the equivalent of intern year where you seen as responsible for patients, working call shifts, commencing meds, antibiotics etc..

Pay should be much more than 5e though at that stage but as I explained in my other post I just can't see how you can justify equal pay between junior doctors and biomedical scientists.

Dingle_berry · 19-03-2016 01:46AM

thomasdylan wrote: »

You're right that I don't know much about your job, I really don't. I send a sample off to the lab, a couple of hours later results are on the system, what happens in between is a beautiful mystery. And my dealings with the lab in the hospitals I've worked in have been universally very positive. If I've made a mistake, if I want add on tests the medical scientists have generally been as accommodating as possible. I've only ever had two very negative experiences with the lab over the past few years which is pretty good going. The name thing was ignorance on my part and wasn't intended disrespectfully.

But it does work both ways, I don't know much about your job and I'd say you know only a bit more about mine. I don't agree that medical scientists should be paid as well as doctors as it had been suggested because we have to make the diagnosis (albeit helped by results from the lab, imaging from radiology, and clinical examination and history taking by ourselves), we have to decide on treatment, it's our responsibility. We work longer hours than anyone else in the hospital, break the bad news to patients and family when they've no options left, have to decide who to admit and who to discharge when there aren't enough beds. It's human nature to focus on the bad stuff, I'll feel okay for a while following a good result but when one of my patients dies unexpectedly the next few days are full of what ifs and guilt even if there was nothing could have been done. And things are worse for nurses, I see "my" patients for maybe 10 mins a day each if they're stable, a nurse will be with them all shift so it's tougher for them when things happen.

I do respect the job you do and I wouldn't be able to do mine properly without it so i didn't mean any of that in a disrespectful way.
(One question about what you said just for my own interest, what kind of professional advice are you allowed to give? Just might be useful for myself in future).

That the workings of the lab are a beautiful mystery to you is a compliment to your colleagues in the lab. When things work well people don't try to fix them and they don't learn about them. It's not because the work is simple (not that you claimed so) but that the systems work well.

I get that the title thing is just a lack of knowledge but again - a sign of respecting and valuing a colleague is making the effort to learn their title.

I don't think student Medical Scientists should be paid as much as NCHDs either but ones with their degrees should be paid at least as much as a Lab Aide. Just like you wouldn't leave an intern do an appendectomy or epidural alone I wouldn't let a student issue blood products or read a Gram. But I would let them run the FBC analyser which if they messed up could be expensive and lead you to perscribe unessecary investigations or transfusions. We would also face fitness to practise inquiries in those instances. In the past when this has happened the Medical Scientist at fault has attended court without the support of the hospital nor any doctor - despite the doctors ignoring clinical signs, history, epidemiological stats, etc. And acting on the false result alone. I know a few colleagues that can't sleep at night if they are facing a night on call for fear of a mistake.
We face the what ifs even when the patient survives. Because we're the last to know, if we are ever told, that the patient has survived or not. Theatre could have the entire path dept on stand by to look after a patient that's haemorrhaging and not even tell the lab to stand down and start prioritising other patients. Being beside the patient for the bad outcomes is awful. There's no refuting that. But there is also a cathartic element to it that's better than not knowing.

We are 'allowed' to tell you anything you want to know about the test and the result. What the best way to take a sample is and why. What the best biomarker of a pathology that we can do is. Why the blood gas analyser said the Hb was 6 when the lab analyser is saying that it's 9.
We're not allowed to tell you anything about interpreting a result for a specific patient because you need to do that with the clinical history, symptoms, etc. And cover-your-ass-medicine is all about avoiding blame by avoiding any situation that could incur blame!

xLisaBx · 19-03-2016 05:04PM

thomasdylan wrote: »

Just on this. Medicine in Ireland is a 5/6 year course. You have the pre-clinical years at the start which are theoretical will some patient interaction, clinical skills, learning procedures, etc and then the final two years are purely hospital based where you're learning and doing on wards with patients. You could leave after the pre-clinical years with an honours science degree but obviously you need to complete the final two years in hospital to get a medicine degree and be a doctor. Technically we all have a degree before we hit our final two placement years. Interns are doctors, registered with the medical council, but doctors do continuous exams and training from intern to sho to reg, spr etc..
If a junior biomed isn't regarded as registered to work independently with the appropriate board, etc. and make the decisions that go with that then it's not the equivalent of intern year where you seen as responsible for patients, working call shifts, commencing meds, antibiotics etc..

Pay should be much more than 5e though at that stage but as I explained in my other post I just can't see how you can justify equal pay between junior doctors and biomedical scientists.

A Junior Biomed is registered with the Academy, and therefore is considered a biomedical scientist. And yes, we do work shift work and nights.

Just on the college part, Biomedical Science is a 4 year course and a one year training year. Medicine is usually a 5 year course with a training year. There's only one year in the difference. And the first 2 years of medicine and biomedical science are shockingly similar- we study pharmacology, anatomy, physiology, pathology etc. in great depth. Our biochemistry modules are actually more in depth than that of medicine. Yet, it's suddenly common and acceptable for medicine students to fail
And repeat exams, while when we do we "aren't studying hard enough". Also, it really should be taken into consideration that medicine students get study week before final exams, while biomed students are in college for 30 hours on average the week before, plus writing up lab reports.

Little CuChulainn · 19-03-2016 06:14PM

c_meth wrote: »

True. Albeit it an ordinary level degree (level 7 NFQ) provided by the Guarda College in Tipperary.

True but you don't get paid a normal wage while in the college.

joe swanson · 19-03-2016 06:32PM

The way our emergency services are treated by the govt and the people they serve is an absolute disgrace.

Immensely underpaid for what they put up with and hugely underappreciated.

Yillan · 19-03-2016 06:37PM

xLisaBx wrote: »

They do have the degree already, the intern year is the equivalent to the Junior Doctor year, with 2 X 5,000 word thesis' due and regular examination. It's horrendous just how uneducated the general public are about this.

I don't think I'm especially uneducated about this. You know, about the details of individual biomed courses around the country. It's not exactly who's the minister for justice, or what year was the Battle of Hastings...

It sounds like the GMIT course and DIT courses are geared towards producing biomed scientists that can walk straight into a job in a lab, by virtue of doing a year of placement during the degree, while the Cork courses do not produce graduates with the necessary skills to immediately start working in a lab at full wages, and therefore graduates need to do their placement year after the course, effectively meaning the Cork course is five years long, compared with the DIT, GMIT courses which get it all done in four years. Perhaps you should have done one of them.

If you do a law degree, you work for a number of years on unpaid internships before you can start working as a solicitor. Bottom line is that a degree is just that, it's not a qualification. With the DIT and GMIT biomed degrees, you are qualified to work in Ireland or any of the commonwealth I believe. Same with any medical degree from Ireland. If you need a year of placement following your degree to be qualified to work in a particular field, that year of placement should not be equivalent to the first year following qualification in another field.

So no. Interns and Biomeds on placement should not be paid the same, regardless of whether or not they've gotten their degree.

thomasdylan · 19-03-2016 06:39PM

Dingle_berry wrote: »

That the workings of the lab are a beautiful mystery to you is a compliment to your colleagues in the lab. When things work well people don't try to fix them and they don't learn about them. It's not because the work is simple (not that you claimed so) but that the systems work well.

I get that the title thing is just a lack of knowledge but again - a sign of respecting and valuing a colleague is making the effort to learn their title.

I don't think student Medical Scientists should be paid as much as NCHDs either but ones with their degrees should be paid at least as much as a Lab Aide. Just like you wouldn't leave an intern do an appendectomy or epidural alone I wouldn't let a student issue blood products or read a Gram. But I would let them run the FBC analyser which if they messed up could be expensive and lead you to perscribe unessecary investigations or transfusions. We would also face fitness to practise inquiries in those instances. In the past when this has happened the Medical Scientist at fault has attended court without the support of the hospital nor any doctor - despite the doctors ignoring clinical signs, history, epidemiological stats, etc. And acting on the false result alone. I know a few colleagues that can't sleep at night if they are facing a night on call for fear of a mistake.
We face the what ifs even when the patient survives. Because we're the last to know, if we are ever told, that the patient has survived or not. Theatre could have the entire path dept on stand by to look after a patient that's haemorrhaging and not even tell the lab to stand down and start prioritising other patients. Being beside the patient for the bad outcomes is awful. There's no refuting that. But there is also a cathartic element to it that's better than not knowing.

We are 'allowed' to tell you anything you want to know about the test and the result. What the best way to take a sample is and why. What the best biomarker of a pathology that we can do is. Why the blood gas analyser said the Hb was 6 when the lab analyser is saying that it's 9.
We're not allowed to tell you anything about interpreting a result for a specific patient because you need to do that with the clinical history, symptoms, etc. And cover-your-ass-medicine is all about avoiding blame by avoiding any situation that could incur blame!

Yep I'd agree with everything there. The fact that I've had very few issues with the lab over the years is a credit to the people working in them especially considering how many samples and tests I've requested. The lab being in standby and not being given the all clear is something I haven't thought of and will have to consider in future.

xLisaBx · 19-03-2016 06:41PM

Yillan wrote: »

I don't think I'm especially uneducated about this. You know, about the details of individual biomed courses around the country. It's not exactly who's the minister for justice, or what year was the Battle of Hastings...

It sounds like the GMIT course and DIT courses are geared towards producing biomed scientists that can walk straight into a job in a lab, by virtue of doing a year of placement during the degree, while the Cork courses do not produce graduates with the necessary skills to immediately start working in a lab at full wages, and therefore graduates need to do their placement year after the course, effectively meaning the Cork course is five years long, compared with the DIT, GMIT courses which get it all done in four years. Perhaps you should have done one of them.

If you do a law degree, you work for a number of years on unpaid internships before you can start working as a solicitor. Bottom line is that a degree is just that, it's not a qualification. With the DIT and GMIT biomed degrees, you are qualified to work in Ireland or any of the commonwealth I believe. Same with any medical degree from Ireland. If you need a year of placement following your degree to be qualified to work in a particular field, that year of placement should not be equivalent to the first year following qualification in another field.

So no. Interns and Biomeds on placement should not be paid the same, regardless of whether or not they've gotten their degree.

The UCC/CIT one also allows graduated to work in the commonwealth. And no, perhaps I should not have done the DIT or GMIT one, because on completion of the DIT or GMIT degree, a graduate may work in 2 areas of a clinical laboratory only. A UCC/CIT graduate may work in all areas. That's why the course is longer, the standard is notoriously higher, there's much more to learn. More training is required.
Perhaps you aren't as educated in the matter as you thought?

TOEJOE · 19-03-2016 06:54PM

Hi I am new to this thread is the Medical scientist the old Medical Laboratory Technician, or is he/she a Biochemist?..

xLisaBx · 19-03-2016 07:02PM

TOEJOE wrote: »

Hi I am new to this thread is the Medical scientist the old Medical Laboratory Technician, or is he/she a Biochemist?..

We work in hospital laboratories to test patient samples to see if they are unwell. However, we can also work in biochemistry and research outside of the hospital. You could say we are a bit of both!

thomasdylan · 19-03-2016 07:15PM

xLisaBx wrote: »

A Junior Biomed is registered with the Academy, and therefore is considered a biomedical scientist. And yes, we do work shift work and nights.

Just on the college part, Biomedical Science is a 4 year course and a one year training year. Medicine is usually a 5 year course with a training year. There's only one year in the difference. And the first 2 years of medicine and biomedical science are shockingly similar- we study pharmacology, anatomy, physiology, pathology etc. in great depth. Our biochemistry modules are actually more in depth than that of medicine. Yet, it's suddenly common and acceptable for medicine students to fail
And repeat exams, while when we do we "aren't studying hard enough". Also, it really should be taken into consideration that medicine students get study week before final exams, while biomed students are in college for 30 hours on average the week before, plus writing up lab reports.

If you're qualified its not fair to work for 5e an hour. I completely agree with that, I don't agree that there should be parity with junior doctors though, especially as the pay scale is different and a junior doctor is everyone whose not a consultant.

The modules studied in college is irrelevant really. They might be similar, but the courses we did in our first few years were all background, the real learning started when we hit hospitals in our last two years. You can't expect that because there's some overlap in courses to get the same pay when the jobs are different. And the study weeks thing is a stupid point. Who cares, its irrelevant to the job you'll be doing (and its clear you're not finished college from the things you're fixating on). Every course gets shafted in it's own way, you mightent get a study week but what does that matter in the scheme if things.

Intern year is a training year but medicine is a training career. You do intern, working in 4 different specialties doing a lot of the call for the hospital. Then you apply for a basic training scheme. You do sho for a minimum of two years and have to complete the appropriate 3examinations. They're not easy, when I did them mrcp part 1 pass rate was less than 50%. Then once those exams are done, you're a registrar, then a specialist registrar if more exams are passed. By that stage you're well out of college, you're still a junior doctor, you're making huge decisions and with every jump on the pay scale comes more responsibility. And you're moving every 6 months. Junior doctor is a horrible job title really.

JuliusCaesar · 19-03-2016 07:29PM

JuliusCaesar wrote: »

Public sector employees tend to cluster around the lower grades - not everyone can get promoted and very few will make it to the top. The low grades get paid not a lot, they have had to pay a Pension Levy as well as extra taxes, and most have had their hours increased.

Linky

mad_cyclist wrote: »

37 k sounds pretty good for a very low skill job , clerical officer does less in general than an office secretary , answering phones , posting mail , my partner is a manager of a multinational retail store since 2006 , she earns 31 k gross and works saturday and sunday twice per month

Clerical officer standard scale:
23,177 – 24,255 – 25,339 – 26,420 – 27,502 – 28,583 – 29,635 – 30,688 – 31,743 – 32,795 – 33,840 – 35,471 – 36,75311 – 37,34122
1= After three years satisfactory service at the maximum.
2= After six years satisfactory service at the maximum

so 35k is max after 12 years service, then 36k after 3 years on that (15 years service) and 37k 3 years later again (18 years service). And unless you're promoted, that's it for the rest of your working days.

Does it make a bit more sense to you now? :rolleyes:

And yes, maybe your girlfriend is underpaid, if her company is making millions in profits.

Anyway, have a look at this:

the richest 20% of the population of Ireland own 73% of the wealth of the country;
the poorest 20% of the population own 0.2% of the wealth;
the top 5% own 60% of the wealth.

No wonder the middle is squeezed! Where's the fairness in that? And yet the middle 60% is giving out stink and fighting amongst each other!

And we don't have a tradition in Ireland of the wealthiest people setting up and funding charitable foundations such as the Rockerfeller or Guggenheim or Gates foundations. So the money doesn't get spread around at all.

.

Yillan · 19-03-2016 07:31PM

xLisaBx wrote: »

The UCC/CIT one also allows graduated to work in the commonwealth. And no, perhaps I should not have done the DIT or GMIT one, because on completion of the DIT or GMIT degree, a graduate may work in 2 areas of a clinical laboratory only. A UCC/CIT graduate may work in all areas. That's why the course is longer, the standard is notoriously higher, there's much more to learn. More training is required.
Perhaps you aren't as educated in the matter as you thought?

It's your degree. You're the expert.

I'm not sure I understand though. The CIT/UCC degree may allow you to work in the commonwealth, but not without a year of placement on top of the degree. What are you complaining about? You did a degree without a placement within it. Other degrees have a placement within them, with a narrower course content, and as such, students are qualified following graduation. In order for you to get a qualification of equal merit, you need to do a placement. What I am having trouble with is how you think your placement, which is equivalent to the DIT/GMIT third year placement as far as I can see (Paid the same, viewed the same by the academy), is equal to being an intern. In order to do a broader degree, you sacrificed your placement year, and now you have to do it.

I think the question is, do you do the same job as a DIT grad, or as the DIT student on placement?

kowloon · 19-03-2016 08:10PM

tayto lover wrote: »

They should be starting on about 40K rising to 65K after 20 years. Same for nurses. Very important if you want to attract the best people.

The best people are the people who choose to do it despite the wage, but they deserve better.

xLisaBx · 19-03-2016 09:35PM

Yillan wrote: »

It's your degree. You're the expert.

I'm not sure I understand though. The CIT/UCC degree may allow you to work in the commonwealth, but not without a year of placement on top of the degree. What are you complaining about? You did a degree without a placement within it. Other degrees have a placement within them, with a narrower course content, and as such, students are qualified following graduation. In order for you to get a qualification of equal merit, you need to do a placement. What I am having trouble with is how you think your placement, which is equivalent to the DIT/GMIT third year placement as far as I can see (Paid the same, viewed the same by the academy), is equal to being an intern. In order to do a broader degree, you sacrificed your placement year, and now you have to do it.

I think the question is, do you do the same job as a DIT grad, or as the DIT student on placement?[/QUOTE]

See this is where I need to stress that the DIT/GMIT degrees are not of equal merit. The clinical laboratory prospects of a graduate from DIT/GMIT are less than that of UCC/CIT because they can only work in 2/5 areas of the clinical lab. We can work in all 5. We are more employable, and due to our science modules on top of biomed modules, we are in a better position to apply for PhD's and work in industry.

Also, we do much more on placement than DIT/GMIT. Ours lasts a full 9 months, as opposed to an academic year for them. Also, depending on the hospital and day in question, we actually work as biomeds as opposed to observation.

Due to the nature of our qualification, of course we should be training for an extra year, and I don't mean to say that we should be highly paid for this year. What I wish to question is how we are supposed to live on 5 euro an hour in a city setting? I don't think this is viably possible. I just can't see the sense to it, plus we must pay 600 euro to do the intern year.

lostintransit2 · 19-03-2016 11:26PM

See this is where I need to stress that the DIT/GMIT degrees are not of equal merit. The clinical laboratory prospects of a graduate from DIT/GMIT are less than that of UCC/CIT because they can only work in 2/5 areas of the clinical lab. We can work in all 5. We are more employable, and due to our science modules on top of biomed modules, we are in a better position to apply for PhD's and work in industry.

Also, we do much more on placement than DIT/GMIT. Ours lasts a full 9 months, as opposed to an academic year for them. Also, depending on the hospital and day in question, we actually work as biomeds as opposed to observation.

Due to the nature of our qualification, of course we should be training for an extra year, and I don't mean to say that we should be highly paid for this year. What I wish to question is how we are supposed to live on 5 euro an hour in a city setting? I don't think this is viably possible. I just can't see the sense to it, plus we must pay 600 euro to do the intern year.[/quote]

In fairness, you've chosen a broader qualification that takes 5 years to achieve. Undergraduate Medicine is also a 5 year degree, none of which you are paid for and frequently involves placements outside of the city you are doing the degree in and all the costs that goes along with that.

As I mentioned earlier first year WORKING salary is actually equal for an entry level medical scientist and an intern.

I agree medical scientists should be paid well but if you are on placement rather than an employee then that is an issue related to your means of qualification rather than salary discrepancy.

Dingle_berry · 20-03-2016 03:15AM

lostintransit2 wrote: »

I agree medical scientists should be paid well but if you are on placement rather than an employee then that is an issue related to your means of qualification rather than salary discrepancy.

I'll re-iterate my earlier point with a little more clarification. By virtue of when & where I did my biomed placement I was trained as a new, full member of staff in that hospital, in each & every lab within the pathology dept. There were others in third year who were given more leeway yet paid the same. I now work with non-cork students. Even the best of them can't be left without direct supervision. I would however be happy to let a cork graduate do certain tasks unsupervised. The cork graduate is not only a graduate but also has much more knowledge and wet lab experience behind them. That's where the analogy between an intern and a cork graduate is made. A similar comparison would be between the cunning Med student who goes to the Caribbean for a 4 year MD versus the 5-6 year domestic one.

To get the conversation back to pay, a medical scientist could process hundreds of patient samples in a day. The results from those samples directly and strongly influence the course of treatment for each individual patient. A first officer piloting an aircraft with less souls gets paid more to complete similar tasks - and has perks of the job like staff travel. A medical scientist can't even get a blood test done without violating their contract, never mind a discount on treatment in their own hospital. Joe public has an idea of what a pilot does and respects it more than the invisible Med lab.

20-03-2016 04:26AM

JuliusCaesar wrote: »

Clerical officer standard scale:
23,177 – 24,255 – 25,339 – 26,420 – 27,502 – 28,583 – 29,635 – 30,688 – 31,743 – 32,795 – 33,840 – 35,471 – 36,75311 – 37,34122
1= After three years satisfactory service at the maximum.
2= After six years satisfactory service at the maximum

so 35k is max after 12 years service, then 36k after 3 years on that (15 years service) and 37k 3 years later again (18 years service). And unless you're promoted, that's it for the rest of your working days.

Does it make a bit more sense to you now? :rolleyes:

And yes, maybe your girlfriend is underpaid, if her company is making millions in profits.

Anyway, have a look at this:

the richest 20% of the population of Ireland own 73% of the wealth of the country;
the poorest 20% of the population own 0.2% of the wealth;
the top 5% own 60% of the wealth.

No wonder the middle is squeezed! Where's the fairness in that? And yet the middle 60% is giving out stink and fighting amongst each other!

And we don't have a tradition in Ireland of the wealthiest people setting up and funding charitable foundations such as the Rockerfeller or Guggenheim or Gates foundations. So the money doesn't get spread around at all.

.

We are a highly educated workforce (for the most part) but in general low paid for our skills and over taxed if a paye worker.

We don't fight who we should be fighting because as a race we're the biggest shower of begrudgers and sheep in the world.

This can be seen in this thread and others where a lot of people have what appears to be a general hatred for people in the public service or those who dare to go on strike for better pay and conditions.
The same posters are also the first to belittle and give out about the benifits those who are unlucky enough to have been made unemployed.

purplecow1977 · 21-03-2016 01:01PM

Well said DubinMeath

Public service workers are generally seen as scapegoats. Our anger is never directed at the true target - why?

As with any profession, improvements could be made to clean up non productive departments, but we need to be realistic.

Padraig Mor · 21-03-2016 02:46PM

esforum wrote: »

NowPadraig, I know the stats were long and boring reading but when you were going through it did you happen to notice the following statements:

"In the four years to Q2 2013 public sector earnings have fallen by €17.30 (-1.8%), and this compares with an increase of €5.10 (+0.8%) in private sector average weekly earnings in the same period" So [public sector down, private sector up

"The largest percentage increase was in Construction sector (+6.7%) from €18.70 to €19.95, followed by the Transportation and storage sector (+5.4%) from €19.79 to €20.85. The largest sectoral percentage decrease was recorded in the Professional, scientific and technical sector" so again, private sector up, public sector down

"However, across the sectors hourly earnings have decreased in 7 of the 13
sectors with the largest percentage decrease recorded in the Human health and social work sector (-6.5%) from €24.91 to €23.29. The largest percentage increase in average hourly earnings over the same period was recorded in the Information and communication sector (+7.4%) from €25.91 to €27.83. well blow me if that isnt public sector down, private sector up

And all of this irrelevant waffle has precisely what to do with the topic of this thread, which is the pay of nurses and Gardaí, rather than the overall public sector? In fact, you've actually demonstrated that while average public sector pay has decreased, Garda pay has risen over the same period - which is not quite the story the unions like to spin.

"Average weekly paid hours were 31.6 in Q2 2013, which represented an increase of 0.3% (+0.1 hours) over the year". Public sector work a minimum of 39 hours so if the national average is 31 hours, maybe the private sector are working less average hours per week? If thats the case maybe that would have a knock on effect to the average annual income do you think? Wow I am shocked, someone working 40 hours a week earning more than someone on 30 hours!

Perhaps try reading whole sections of the report, rather than grasping at figures here and there. Average public sector hours worked is exactly the same as the private sector, at 31.6 hours. The public sector average is dragged down mostly by the education sector at 23.5 hours. Excluding education, average public sector hours are 36 hours per week, giving Gardaí an average of 4.8 hours extra. Don't forget the overall figures include the many part time, job sharing etc staff lowering the average hours worked. I might be wrong here, but I don't think there are any part time Gardaí?

"It should be noted that all earnings are gross amounts before deductions for PRSI, tax and other levies. This is particularly relevant to the public sector since March 2009 when the pension levy was introduced." Pension levy is a public sector tax of 7% that the private sector does not pay.

Tax and PRSI are paid by everyone so are irrelevant. Pension levy - it's an average of ~3.5% reduction after tax and is paid by all public sector staff. I should know - I pay it too.

"Many public sector employees are paid on the basis of incremental scales.
Recruitment, particularly at lower levels, to these sectors would generally result in a depression to average earnings. The absence of recruitment has the opposite effect. Earnings are inclusive of overtime and irregular earnings." So, it includes overtime. INCLUDES OVERTIME

Read my post before getting overexcited. I clearly stated that the Garda pay figures were based on hours worked which of course includes overtime (and many allowances). It was the nurse pay figure excluded overtime.

Now onto my next point and I am afraid I must shout SHENANIGANS very very loudly here. The average wage in An Garda Siochana does NOT only show the average wage for Garda rank. It shows the average wage in the entire force. You do realise how averages work right? I am a Garda, I earn 10 grand a year, The commisioner warns 90 grand a year. The Gardai 'average' 50 grand a year. Get it?

I imagine I know a damn sight more than you about how averages work. Again, please read my post before attacking the keyboard. I clearly stated that the Department said a couple of years ago that average pay for rank and file Gardaí (i.e. Garda rank) was ~€60k. I didn't include a link because, frankly I couldn't be bothered. But if you want me to embarrass you, I'll find it and post it.

Also, full credit for relying on an article from 2007 to prove the average Nurses wages. Thats only 9 years ago and before the economic crash and resulting slashing of wages. Kudos indeed.

Public sector wages were not 'slashed' by any measure, with the possible (and short term) exception of current staff and their unions selling out new entrants to protect their own pay. If you want to get into the nitty gritty of it, pay in the health sector decreased by just 0.2% on average from 2009 (around the start of various financial measures) to 2013. It's likely that nurse pay has increased over that time due to their union's use of a 'patient safety' fig leaf to extract various concessions which increase nurse pay, but do little to help patients (the opposite, usually).

Ya know, I have asked many times but why are all the whingers not joining these jobs?

I am in your beloved public sector.

Again, I am not making an argument as to how much pay nurses or Gardaí deserve, simply pointing out that they are not as poorly paid as most believe and that their pay has not been 'slashed' to any great degree, and certainly no more than anyone else.

Little CuChulainn · 21-03-2016 04:36PM

Padraig Mor wrote: »

And all of this irrelevant waffle has precisely what to do with the topic of this thread, which is the pay of nurses and Gardaí, rather than the overall public sector? In fact, you've actually demonstrated that while average public sector pay has decreased, Garda pay has risen over the same period - which is not quite the story the unions like to spin.

The only rise in Garda pay that I am aware of has been from the reduction in tax rates, which affected everyone.

21-03-2016 07:20PM

purplecow1977 wrote: »

Well said DubinMeath

Public service workers are generally seen as scapegoats. Our anger is never directed at the true target - why?

As with any profession, improvements could be made to clean up non productive departments, but we need to be realistic.

I'm not in the public service myself, but work for a large US multinational where of course unions are not recognized .

There are plenty of staff where I work for that who are always sick the Friday before a bank holiday, are always the first to complain that they can't take additional work on for any number of reasons, but nothing is done regarding these staff, its just left up to the rest of us to take up the slack.

But these staff also get pay rises etc that the rest of us get as the company will not entertain individual bargaining, so where pay rises are given their blanket raises.

I've seen the same in nearly every Irish company I've also worked for where I wasn't a manager.

Its nothing to do with the rights that we have as workers as those who take up the slack end up working additional unpaid hours to cover the slack, breaking the maximum working time rules.

I've friends who work in different sections of the public service (revenue, hse, social welfare) and they tell the same story and believe that these people should be let go. The same ones are normally the same ones who give the members of the public the most abuse when dealing with them.

However as long as the work is done, managers who should be tackling these issues will just sit back and let the situation continue.

purplecow1977 · 22-03-2016 11:35PM

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/news/ill-probably-go-back-to-tesco-and-ill-be-better-paid-too-three-newly-qualified-gardai-have-quit-force-over-low-pay-34563837.html

maryishere · 23-03-2016 06:44AM

purplecow1977 wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/news/ill-probably-go-back-to-tesco-and-ill-be-better-paid-too-three-newly-qualified-gardai-have-quit-force-over-low-pay-34563837.html

2 can play that game.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/garda-pension-worth-11m-26518918.html

http://www.herald.ie/news/retiring-gardai-will-get-average-payoff-of-107k-28000137.html

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/retiring-garda%C3%AD-receive-25-9-million-in-pension-lump-sums-1.1750860

23-03-2016 09:17AM

maryishere wrote: »

2 can play that game.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/garda-pension-worth-11m-26518918.html

http://www.herald.ie/news/retiring-gardai-will-get-average-payoff-of-107k-28000137.html

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/retiring-garda%C3%AD-receive-25-9-million-in-pension-lump-sums-1.1750860

Senior gardai retiring with most likely an equivilant pension to a senior management in the private sector, but not as good as some.

http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/bid-to-force-bonus-banker-fingleton-to-repay-1m-26837531.html

http://www.thejournal.ie/aib-letters-executives-voluntary-pension-1303732-Feb2014/

Little CuChulainn · 23-03-2016 11:55AM

maryishere wrote: »

2 can play that game.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/garda-pension-worth-11m-26518918.html

http://www.herald.ie/news/retiring-gardai-will-get-average-payoff-of-107k-28000137.html

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/retiring-garda%C3%AD-receive-25-9-million-in-pension-lump-sums-1.1750860

Doesn't really help you pay the bills in the intervening 30 years.

purplecow1977 · 23-03-2016 01:08PM

maryishere wrote: »

2 can play that game.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/garda-pension-worth-11m-26518918.html

http://www.herald.ie/news/retiring-gardai-will-get-average-payoff-of-107k-28000137.html

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/retiring-garda%C3%AD-receive-25-9-million-in-pension-lump-sums-1.1750860

You're not playing the same game either.
Your first article is dated 2009

Hardly comparable to talk about pensions at retirement when these people have bills to pay NOW

Your second article is dated 2012, and again refers to senior gardaí.

Your third article- what a surprise, relates to senior gardaí and I think it's quite laughable as I would say it's a very small minority that receive 170,000!!!

This is like the equivalent of the average teacher salary of 60,000 that's usually blasted about in the media!

Fighting Irish · 23-03-2016 02:13PM

kowloon wrote: »

The best people are the people who choose to do it despite the wage, but they deserve better.

So anyone who works for a bad wage is automatically the best for the job?

You should be in government, you talk a lot of sense

tayto lover · 23-03-2016 02:16PM

Fighting Irish wrote: »

So anyone who works for a bad wage is automatically the best for the job?

You should be in government, you talk a lot of sense

Ha ha indeed.
People working for the ISPCA and ISPCC should get very little.

maryishere · 23-03-2016 09:09PM

purplecow1977 wrote: »

Hardly comparable to talk about pensions at retirement when these people have bills to pay NOW

You provided an Independent papers link for your point. I replied with:
"2 can play that game.
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news...-26518918.html "

The link I showed you stated that "the cost of buying a garda's pension on the open market would amount to €1.1m, new figures reveal." That is the average Garda's pension, using conservative data. To quote from the article:

"This means that ordinary members of the force are effectively retiring as millionaires, pensions experts said.
The State will have provided 90pc of their pension pot, or €1m, once account is taken of tax relief, Ms Daly said.
Gardai are unusual in the public sector as they can retire on full pension at the age of 50. The calculations are based on a garda who joins the force after changes made to pensions arrangements in 1995 and retires on a salary of €52,822.
On retirement after 30 years the garda is entitled to a tax-free lump sum of €79,233, and an annual pension of €26,411.
Ms Daly said the value of this retirement lump sum was €1.12m, of which the State will have contributed €1m"

I acknowledge that newly recruited Gardai are not very well paid for the first few years but was that not as a result of a deal done a few years ago with the unions to preserve the pay and pensions of those already in the force?
There was a doctor on the radio today saying how he is only paid €15 an hour even though he is fully qualified after 5 years study. There was a few architects saying it is 5 or 6 years since they qualified after 5 years study and they would love to have the same pay and security and pension as any Gardai, even newly recruited ones. So everything can be put in perspective.

Maybe pay of Gardai should be increased at the beginning, the working career should be longer that 30 years ( people are living longer and who else can retire on full pension at 49 or 50? ) and the pension changed to a defined defined contribution scheme, same as nearly everyone else has to put up with nowadays.

Garda, nurses, teachers and doctor's pay

Comments