nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Garda, nurses, teachers and doctor's pay

steddyeddy

The Luas driver's debate seems to bring up comparisons between the training involved and job difficulty and pay in the jobs in my title and the pay of Luas drivers.

I'm just wondering is there any job type that you think is overpaid or underpaid? I think the jobs in my title should be paid well as long as they're good at their job. I think carers and nurses should be paid more and I think hospital biochemists (the ones who test blood) should be paid a hell of a lot more (you can guarantee a strike will be in the works). Anyone else deserving of a pay rise?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Little CuChulainn

maryishere wrote: »

They certainly are different times. The government debt is 3 times more now. It is currently the second highest in the world per head of population. Your employer is bust.

Time pay reflected ability to pay and international comparables.

The state is not bust, it is still trading as normal. It is the fastest growing economy in Europe and expected to grow even more this year. It can certainly increase the wages of the public sector. I agree that pay should be limited by ability to pay but 23k for a new Garda is well below what the state can afford.

maryishere

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

The state is not bust, it is still trading as normal.

With huge debt, which is increasing. It is the second highest in the world per head of population. What happens if / when interest rates increase, oil prices rise, brexit, the US multinationals stop using Ireland as offshore tax haven for laundering profits through etc?

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

23k for a new Garda is well below what the state can afford.

I agree, but when some retired public servants are getting pensions of over 100k, which they do not need, it leaves little left for the new entrants. The unions looked after its well paid existing membership and shafted everyone else.

Get Real

maryishere wrote: »

With huge debt, which is increasing. It is the second highest in the world per head of population.

And its 14th in the world in terms of as a percentage of GDP. It all depends on what way you want to look at it.

Also, our national debt is decreasing, it is now just over 98% of GDP as of Dec 2015, down from 123% of GDP a year previous.

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/country-list/government-debt-to-gdp

Ireland's GDP grew at 7.8% last year, the fastest in the EU. Industrial production grew 17% and retail sales 8.5%.

http://www.focus-economics.com/countries/ireland

Steppenwolfe

Travis Melodic Whisk wrote: »

Where does it say that the new entrant pay was part of Croke Park? Was it not imposed by FEMPI legislation completely separate to the agreements.

It was imposed by FEMPI legislation. The PS unions have been trying to get that resolved. Even the luas drivers turned down a pay rise partly due to a similar condition being imposed. That does not suit the agenda of the union bashers, begrudgers and anti worker brigade though. They pay your salary don't you know. I wouldn't bother pointing it out to them, as nothing you can say will stop them twisting everything to their own view point. It's all down to the 'greedy/selfish' union members and their 'bearded/overpaid/trotski' bosses :rolleyes:

evolving_doors

maryishere wrote: »

For primary school teachers with at least 15 years of experience, the OECD average is $37,603 (£23,800). Thats about €29k - €33k depending on exchange rates.
http://www.theguardian.com/news/data...d-country-pisa
The OECD study placed us at 17th of 24 countries for literacy, 19th out of 24 for numeracy and even worse for problem solving. However I would still argue our teachers should not get less than the average OECD pay, but tell them to get their finger out and brush up. Not of this jobs for life mentality, with bad teacher only getting the sack if they are alcoholics spending every day in the bookies.

Ok so I'll take your 'generous' upper end answer as being €33k after 15 years. And we'll have to assume that's 15 years from being made permanent. So lets do a timeline.

Degree - Finish in 3 years
PME - 2 Years (Self funded)
Out of college looking for work. (say about 5-6 Years before permanent job comes up, subbing/maternity leaves in the mean time if you're lucky).
So on the lean side it would be about 28-29 yrs of age before you're on the 'True' payscale.

So about 15 years after this (43yrs old) you would reach the princely sum of €33k. That sound about right to you?

maryishere wrote: »

The median wage of private sector workers in the country is 28.5k a year, without security or long long holidays or nice pension.

What do you mean by private sector worker... building contractor/creche worker/call centre employee/media mogul. They're quite a disparate group to be lumping into an 'average wage' in fairness.

I think though maryishere you may be shocked to find the more educated people are, then the likelihood is that they will earn more (no matter if it be private or public sector what-lies-beneath-civil-and-public-service-pay-again

(even for criminals too! educated-criminals-earn-more-study-suggests ).

So to compare a teacher's wage to someone who went into an unskilled job after the Junior cert is a bit of a red-herring. (Although I'd be confident in stating that those in my class who left for unskilled work after the Junior cert have earned far far more than I ever will considering I only started to approach the full starting salary scale after 30yrs of age.

maryishere wrote: »

I think teachers should be treated better than the average private sector worker though.

€33k at 40 odd years of age!!! You may think it alright, but when it comes down to it you haven't done your sums to make you believe it yourself. And the simple reason for that is that you don't know of the facts of getting to that starting point on the scale in Ireland.

But anyway lets not let that get in the way of a grudge.

What's your own area of work?
How long did you spend in college?
Are you similarly on a par with the median wage of private sector workers in the country?

maryishere

<Re-reg>

He make some interesting points.
"A newly-trained garda, after 32 weeks in Templemore, starts at €23,750. But there are payments for unsocial hours, overtime and other allowances. The actual average pay for a garda on frontline duty after one year on the job is €31,000. After seven years the basic is €42,138 and actual earnings average around €50,000. For un-promoted gardai (below the rank of sergeant) at mid-scale, the average gross pay at present is over €60,000 including all allowances and overtime. You may feel that this is not enough for a tough job but it is propaganda to describe it as "poverty". Teachers are not on the bread-line either: the scale for new entrant teachers runs from €30,702 in the first year to €59,940 on the top of the scale."

He takes a great overview of the situation:"The crash in 2008 had its principal source in the credit bubble and subsequent insolvency of the banks. The result was the State's inability to fund itself and resorting, for the first time since Independence, to rescue by official lenders, the IMF and European institutions. A factor contributing to this disaster was the failure to control public spending through the bubble years, including the public pay bill. If Ireland ends up once again in a financial crisis, a repetition of the same failures is the most likely source."

Hard to argue with that, when statistics show that for primary school teachers with at least 15 years of experience, the OECD average is $37,603 (£23,800). Thats about €29k - €33k depending on exchange rates.

evolving_doors

maryishere wrote: »

<Re-reg>

He make some interesting points.
"A newly-trained garda, after 32 weeks in Templemore, starts at €23,750. But there are payments for unsocial hours, overtime and other allowances. The actual average pay for a garda on frontline duty after one year on the job is €31,000. After seven years the basic is €42,138 and actual earnings average around €50,000. For un-promoted gardai (below the rank of sergeant) at mid-scale, the average gross pay at present is over €60,000 including all allowances and overtime. You may feel that this is not enough for a tough job but it is propaganda to describe it as "poverty". Teachers are not on the bread-line either: the scale for new entrant teachers runs from €30,702 in the first year to €59,940 on the top of the scale."

He takes a great overview of the situation:"The crash in 2008 had its principal source in the credit bubble and subsequent insolvency of the banks. The result was the State's inability to fund itself and resorting, for the first time since Independence, to rescue by official lenders, the IMF and European institutions. A factor contributing to this disaster was the failure to control public spending through the bubble years, including the public pay bill. If Ireland ends up once again in a financial crisis, a repetition of the same failures is the most likely source."

Hard to argue with that, when statistics show that for primary school teachers with at least 15 years of experience, the OECD average is $37,603 (£23,800). Thats about €29k - €33k depending on exchange rates.

Well apart from not responding to my post and repeating a myth. I'll set it straight for you again (and Colm McCarthy too as he obviously doesn't know what teachers REALLY start off on)...

"Teachers are not on the bread-line either: the scale for new entrant teachers runs from €30,702 in the first year to €59,940 on the top of the scale."

New entrant teachers rarely start on €30,702, if he'd even read his own newspaper TODAY he would be enlightened as to the reality. Here's the link I've-a-masters-but-im-struggling-by-on-just-seven-hours-a-week

Sure, a 'great overview' alright.. especially tailored for the common pleb who doesn't care for facts.

evolving_doors

and BTW read his smoke and mirrors again...

"The crash in 2008 had its principal source in the credit bubble and subsequent insolvency of the banks. The result was the State's inability to fund itself and resorting, for the first time since Independence, to rescue by official lenders, the IMF and European institutions. A factor contributing to this disaster was the failure to control public spending through the bubble years, including the public pay bill. If Ireland ends up once again in a financial crisis, a repetition of the same failures is the most likely source."

No it bloody wasn't, what contributed to this disaster wasn't the public sector. It was the PRIVATE SECTOR banks over-lending and people over-borrowing. Full stop.

His above logic is flawed, he is saying we should prepare for another financial disaster by cutting public sector wages... again!
Wow, that's forward planning at it's best. That's like putting more lifeboats on to the Titanic so it won't hit another iceberg.

maryishere

Gebgbegb wrote: »

what contributed to this disaster wasn't the public sector. It was the PRIVATE SECTOR banks over-lending and people over-borrowing.

That was a factor too, but it was the job of the (public service) Irish Central Bank and regulators office and government to ensure that did not happen. They failed. Like the bankers now, who are effectively public service, they got to keep their pay and pensions.

The well respected economist said A factor contributing to this disaster was the failure to control public spending through the bubble years, including the public pay bill. He did not say it was the only factor.

maryishere

Gebgbegb wrote: »

New entrant teachers rarely start on €30,702, if he'd even read his own newspaper TODAY he would be enlightened as to the reality. Here's the link I've-a-masters-but-im-struggling-by-on-just-seven-hours-a-week

lol. She is 25 years old and thinks the world owes her a living, and she cannot get a full time job. "The 25-year-old Dubliner, who is qualified to teach religion and music, is working only seven hours a week." Pity about her, there are worse off than her.

Paulzx

maryishere wrote: »

lol. She is 25 years old and thinks the world owes her a living, and she cannot get a full time job. "The 25-year-old Dubliner, who is qualified to teach religion and music, is working only seven hours a week." Pity about her, there are worse off than her.

That's some attitude towards someone ready, willing and able to carry out paid work and struggling to get it.

You have one hell of a mean streak in you

maudgonner

Gebgbegb wrote: »

New entrant teachers rarely start on €30,702, if he'd even read his own newspaper TODAY he would be enlightened as to the reality. Here's the link I've-a-masters-but-im-struggling-by-on-just-seven-hours-a-week

Sure, a 'great overview' alright.. especially tailored for the common pleb who doesn't care for facts.

New entrants are getting a raw deal, most people would acknowledge that. Particularly those who can't get a permanent job.

The unions are seeking an increase in basic pay which will benefit all grades. How exactly is this meant to improve the lot of teachers stuck subbing? Surely it's going to mean a greater percentage of the money we spend on education will go on the salaries of older teachers. If anything it's going to mean less money available to make young teachers permanent, leaving them worse off than ever.

The real beneficiaries will be the people who need it least. New graduates may very well end up in an even worse position relative to their older colleagues. If there was any justice the absolute priority for unions would be pay parity and a substantial increase in the number of permanent teaching positions available. But then the unions don't seem to care very much about their most vulnerable members.

[Deleted User]

Reading the article in the Irish Times about the pay of Garda, Teachers, Nurses.
What ever the in and out of the arguments about pay. A lot of the complaints seem to be from people who retrained or joined the professions in their thirties ( other having a family and other responsibilities ) and seem to be shocked at the salaries: the salaries are aimed at those leaving college or in their early/mid twenties/at the start of their career.

The eventual salary for a primary school teacher is not too bad if you start at say 23 and have no other responsibilities other that yourself, you are in a different situation that someone who retrained in their thirties and already has a lot of other financial responsibility, however people know what they are getting in to before they start they know the salaries.

While I think they all should be starting on higher salaries, the reality is that all of the above careers attract a huge amount of applicants and are very sought after for retaining.

evolving_doors

maryishere wrote: »

lol. She is 25 years old and thinks the world owes her a living, and she cannot get a full time job. "The 25-year-old Dubliner, who is qualified to teach religion and music, is working only seven hours a week." Pity about her, there are worse off than her.

I agree, nobody owes anyone a living.... and that's the way it's always been in teaching believe it or not.

You've deliberately missed the point though!!(Yet again)

Teachers don't 'start off' on this figure quoted by your friend Colm Mc.... they start off on a portion of it for a number of years.... Do you agree?

maryishere

You miss the point yourself. In most careers some people start off with a full time job (I know many teachers who have), others start with part time hours and in many careers people may be out of work at some stage in their working career....or start at a very low wage. Getting a degree in religion and music does not, and should not, guarantee someone a job any more than getting a degree in architecture or quantity surveying or ancient Hebrew.

Inspector Coptoor

maryishere wrote: »

You miss the point yourself. In most careers some people start off with a full time job (I know many teachers who have), others start with part time hours and in many careers people may be out of work at some stage in their working career....or start at a very low wage. Getting a degree in religion and music does not, and should not, guarantee someone a job any more than getting a degree in architecture or quantity surveying or ancient Hebrew.

So.

Once again.

When asked a question, or indeed, a series of questions, you cop out of answering.

maryishere

Inspector Coptoor wrote: »

So.

Once again.

When asked a question, or indeed, a series of questions, you cop out of answering.

So.

Once again, when I answer a question, you accuse me of not answering.

I answered the question. Some teachers have started with a full time job, some with a part time job and no doubt there are teachers who for whatever reason cannot get a job after their studies.

However, as the respected economist Colm McCarthy says in todays paper, "teacher numbers are up by 3000 net, with no shortage of applicants for vacancies and strong Leaving cert points needed for teacher training",

Esel

Inspector Coptoor wrote: »

So.

Once again.

When asked a question, or indeed, a series of questions, you cop Garda out of answering.

FYP

maryishere

mariaalice wrote: »

the reality is that all of the above careers attract a huge amount of applicants and are very sought after for retaining.

correct. A Garda recruitment campaign in 2014 attracted 25,000 applicants, of whom 550 have entered service. No shortage of interest in the career. A new recruitment campaign is underway and there are so far 17,000 applicants for 450 places, suggesting that the package on offer is not inadequate to attract recruits. In the civil service there were 63,000 applications for 4000 appointments.

Rothmans

maryishere wrote: »

correct. A Garda recruitment campaign in 2014 attracted 25,000 applicants, of whom 550 have entered service. No shortage of interest in the career. A new recruitment campaign is underway and there are so far 17,000 applicants for 450 places, suggesting that the package on offer is not inadequate to attract recruits. In the civil service there were 63,000 applications for 4000 appointments.

25000 applicants which only yielded 550 recruits before they exhausted the panel and had to start a new campaign. Does that not tell you something? How many people actually follow the application up? 25,000 people applying is not surprising considering the application process for this job literally comprises of ticking a box to express your interest in the position. That's it! It's not like in the private sector where an application comprises, as the first part of the process, a massive application form which takes an age to complete (this stage doesn't come until after you have passed the civil/public service exams). As the fact that 25,000 applications shows, a massive amount of people don't follow up on these applications, which is demonstrated by the low yield of recruits.

Esel

Rothmans wrote: »

25000 applicants which only yielded 550 recruits before they exhausted the panel and had to start a new campaign. Does that not tell you something? How many people actually follow the application up? 25,000 people applying is not surprising considering the application process for this job literally comprises of ticking a box to express your interest in the position. That's it! It's not like in the private sector where an application comprises, as the first part of the process, a massive application form which takes an age to complete (this stage doesn't come until after you have passed the civil/public service exams). As the fact that 25,000 applications shows, a massive amount of people don't follow up on these applications, which is demonstrated by the low yield of recruits.

Few assumptions there.

For example, if 500,000 had applied, there still would have been 550 recruits.

maryishere

Rothmans wrote: »

25000 applicants which only yielded 550 recruits before they exhausted the panel and had to start a new campaign.

The subsequent campaign was 2 years later and there was nothing to stop people who were unsuccessful the first time applying the second time, if they had not got a career or job or studies they were interested in the meantime. 2 years is a long time, peoples cv changes.

Templemore can only train so many at a time and the government only commits to so many new recruits at a time.

Rothmans

Esel wrote: »

Few assumptions there.

For example, if 500,000 had applied, there still would have been 550 recruits.

Eh no. The Public Appointment Service creates a panel of all those who meet the qualifying standard. They are put on a list in order of merit, and are called up in this order. Once this panel approaches exhaustion, a new recruitment drive begins, as there is nobody left in the 2014 campaign to offer positions too. That's how public service recruitment works.

Rothmans

maryishere wrote: »

The subsequent campaign was 2 years later and there was nothing to stop people who were unsuccessful the first time applying the second time, if they had not got a career or job or studies they were interested in the meantime. 2 years is a long time, peoples cv changes.

Of course you're quite right.I'm sure many did. Yet the number of applications the second time round were significantly less :eek:

But that has nothing to do with the point I made, which you didn't address for some reason

maryishere

Rothmans wrote: »

But that has nothing to do with the point I made, which you didn't address for some reason

I think you were trying to make a point that they ran out of applicants. If you think that, please provide a link.
In the last recruitment campaign, launched months before the new election was called

, Garda Commissioner Nóirín O’Sullivan said "We've always attracted way more applicants than available positions" .

maryishere

Rothmans wrote: »

Of course you're quite right.I'm sure many did. Yet the number of applications the second time round were significantly less :eek:

because there were less positions available to fill the second time around too.
17,000 applicants for 450 places suggest there is no problem filling places.

Rothmans

maryishere wrote: »

I think you were trying to make a point that they ran out of applicants. If you think that, please provide a link.
In the last recruitment campaign, launched months before the new election was called , Garda Commissioner Nóirín O’Sullivan said "We've always attracted way more applicants than available positions" .

It's a matter of public record how public service recruitment campaigns work!!!

Are you seriously saying that you thought that the Public Appointments Service carry out numerous tests, interviews etc to find suitable candidates for positions, give them an order of merit, and then not offer the available candidates positions as they arise for favour of arbitrarily starting an unnecessary new campaign from scratch for absolutely no reason whatsoever??? When they have candidates ready to go to fill the availble positions!?

Jesus, I knew you had a low opinion of the public service, but I didn't think you thought that poorly of it :eek:

Rothmans

maryishere wrote: »

because there were less positions available to fill the second time around too.
17,000 applicants for 450 places suggest there is no problem filling places.

As I said, there isn't a given number of positions to be filled. For example, this article says there are 600 - http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/16700-apply-for-600-trainee-garda-positions-375304.html

These are estimates of how many Gardaí will be needed per year to cover retirements. That's it, estimates of projected requirements.

maryishere

At the time, not too many moths before the election, Minister for Justice, Frances Fitzgerald, announced that up to 600 new Garda trainees will be recruited in 2016. Another reason for the new recruitment campaign was to be fair to offer the opportunity of applying to those people who did not or could not apply 2 years previously, because of their age or studies then etc.
The point is, there is no shortage of people applying for the positions available. Nor would you expect there to be.
As Garda Commissioner Nóirín O’Sullivan said recently "We've always attracted way more applicants than available positions" .

Rothmans

maryishere wrote: »

At the time, not too many moths before the election, Minister for Justice, Frances Fitzgerald, announced that up to 600 new Garda trainees will be recruited in 2016. Another reason for the new recruitment campaign was to be fair to offer the opportunity of applying to those people who did not or could not apply 2 years previously, because of their age or studies then etc.
The point is, there is no shortage of people applying for the positions available. Nor would you expect there to be.
As Garda Commissioner Nóirín O’Sullivan said recently "We've always attracted way more applicants than available positions" .

Right mary, I've seen how you've been aggravating other posters with you're playing dumb routine, and pretending to be completely oblivious to the points being made. But I don't buy it. Nobody does. The reason you never address any of the points made, or questions asked of you is because you can't. You're not able to. So you pretend that you don't understand, or that things have completely gone over you're head.
I ain't gonna take the bait anymore Mary. You win. You're right. Public servants should be paid just enough to prevent them from starving. Public servants are responsible for the greed of the private sector during the boom. Indeed, public servants are most likely responsible for all of the ills in society.
I predict you'll make a smart comment about using sarcasm, as you've done with almost every other poster that's been dealing with you, but it seems to be the only thing you understand. You certainly do not appear to understand reason. Or so you would have us believe.