View Full Version : Fury as most civil servants awarded zero pay increases
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/its-war-on-wages-1262843.html
The benchmarking report said most public servants are well paid compared with their private-sector counterparts and therefore do not qualify for benchmarking awards.
None of the unions had a problem when the benchmarking body gave out huge increases the last, now their up in arms. Most of us in the private sector don’t have the luxury of going on strike, for better pay. No one would care.
Couple of observations - the civils ervice is the biggest organisation in the country and as any of us who work for big companies knows, they can be infuriating.
Organisational politics, nobody wanting to take responsibility, incoherent or absent strategies - when you add that to the fact that poltiicans are calling the shots over funding, I would hate to work in the public service.
So, credit to the people there who do a good job. The issue is what to do with those people ion the public service who have no interest in doing a good job.
However, it is impossible to compare public with private sectors because of risk - the risk we take by working in the private sector has to be rewarded - that risk is in relative insecurity of employment, the possibility of termination, liquidation etc.
I am not tyring to suggest that the gap has been right (in fact, I think, despite the cost to the exchequer, recent public services rises have appropriately narrowed the gap) but I am saying that there should be a gap.
The review body says its taking into account the pension, job security etc in its calculations.
The review body says its taking into account the pension, job security etc in its calculations.
I don't think pensions difference was taken into account previously.
I think I would not be happy with 0.3% increase but maybe in the public sector more opportunities for promotion to move up through pay scales. In the private sector this may not be possible in smaller companies. Hopefully the best performing public sector people get rewarded with promotions.
2008 is going to be hardest time for the private sector in for probably 5 years & redundancies will increase.
Ultimately if benchmarking process was acceptable when giving large increases then it would be hypocritical to criticise same system for low increase. Some groups in the public sector may not be happy with benchmarking at all but thats the problem with collective union bargaining.
Risteard
11/01/2008, 10:24 AM
Is this decision separate from an annual increase in line with inflation?
I'm not talking about the incremental pay-rise for time served.
anto1208
11/01/2008, 10:38 AM
about 8 years ago they got a 9% rise something like that.
Ive been working for 7 years after the first year i got a 14% rise its been 10% every year since.
The pension thing i dont consider, anyone in the private sector would be mad to pay into a pension having one paid for you is worthless.
I think the pay should be related to how well you work rather than just giving everyone a raise there are so many rubbish lazy nurses/gaurds/civil servents out there that should nt get anything but at the same time there are many fantastic hard working people that are getting really under paid.
micls
11/01/2008, 10:59 AM
I think the pay should be related to how well you work rather than just giving everyone a raise there are so many rubbish lazy nurses/gaurds/civil servents out there that should nt get anything but at the same time there are many fantastic hard working people that are getting really under paid.
While I agree with you, I think it's very hard to access though. In my job for example(teacher) I don't see how it could be properly assessed.
Basing it on students results is ridiculous imo.
The only way to do it would be to observe the actual teaching, if the curriculum is being implemented, the children learning and enjoying the process of learning etc.
However it would be nearly impossible to do. Even if it were to happen(similar to a whole school evaluation) they would only see maybe a day or a few days of your teaching. It would be quite easy for a good teacher to have an off day and a poor/lazy teacher to put in the effort for one day(or a few) for the money. I don't see how it would work.
Would love to see some fair system of assessment happen though but I dont think its feasible
anto1208
11/01/2008, 11:20 AM
While I agree with you, I think it's very hard to access though. In my job for example(teacher) I don't see how it could be properly assessed.
Basing it on students results is ridiculous imo.
The only way to do it would be to observe the actual teaching, if the curriculum is being implemented, the children learning and enjoying the process of learning etc.
However it would be nearly impossible to do. Even if it were to happen(similar to a whole school evaluation) they would only see maybe a day or a few days of your teaching. It would be quite easy for a good teacher to have an off day and a poor/lazy teacher to put in the effort for one day(or a few) for the money. I don't see how it would work.
Would love to see some fair system of assessment happen though but I dont think its feasible
Ya you couldnt use a results system as no teacher then would want the dumb kids. Even having the headmaster choose would be open to personal arguements getting in the way. I think it should be easier to fire people that dont do there job properly.Every body had at least 1 if not 2 teachers that was terrible.( my English teacher was a joke :D)
But a lot of young people starting in the public sector have no job security teachers nurses etc are taken on temporary contracts for 6 months.
Wolfie
11/01/2008, 12:37 PM
I'm working in the public service for 10 years and I don't know how anyone thought there would be any increases of note in the offing from this process.
Benchmarking has adressed the gap, indeed if the process was applied to its logical conclusion there may have been legitimate cases for adjustments downwards.
Could be trouble in the offing with Nursing. It was widely believed that the only reason that Nurses called off the recent strike was on an understanding that their claims would be addressed by the Benchmarking body. Won't be surprised if their out again during the year.
Dricky
11/01/2008, 2:52 PM
While I agree with you, I think it's very hard to access though. In my job for example(teacher) I don't see how it could be properly assessed.
Basing it on students results is ridiculous imo.
The only way to do it would be to observe the actual teaching, if the curriculum is being implemented, the children learning and enjoying the process of learning etc.
However it would be nearly impossible to do. Even if it were to happen(similar to a whole school evaluation) they would only see maybe a day or a few days of your teaching. It would be quite easy for a good teacher to have an off day and a poor/lazy teacher to put in the effort for one day(or a few) for the money. I don't see how it would work.
Would love to see some fair system of assessment happen though but I dont think its feasible
It could be done through taking more courses, continuous development etc, this would be of benefit to the whole education system, you should be encouraged to do more (the system in the schools where seniorority is the driving force behind jobs and posts is wrong and needs to be change so the best person is hired for the job).
to sit in a job (both private and public) and expect pay rises without adding to the company through greater knowledge gained outside of work is daft.
Benchmarking was a marketing tool to stop Unions striking
OneRedArmy
11/01/2008, 4:21 PM
IIRC Irish civil service very well remunerated compared with other countries by comparison to private sector. Don't have time to reference this unfortunately as I'm too busy at work in the private sector :D Presumably there would be more of an outcry on here from the public sector bunch but they've long since gone home on flexi-time ;)
osarusan
11/01/2008, 4:29 PM
just wait until that benchmark-lovin' boh so good (http://foot.ie/showthread.php?t=79302) gets a look at this thread.
It could be done through taking more courses, continuous development etc, this would be of benefit to the whole education system, you should be encouraged to do more (the system in the schools where seniorority is the driving force behind jobs and posts is wrong and needs to be change so the best person is hired for the job).
to sit in a job (both private and public) and expect pay rises without adding to the company through greater knowledge gained outside of work is daft.
Benchmarking was a marketing tool to stop Unions striking
I agree with you. At the moment, most teachers would do about(at least) 2 week long courses yearly(you get up to 5 course days free during the year for doing so).
But a lot of people take the 'easy' courses, or do courses online just to get the course days rather than being interested in it, and actually using it to improve themselves as teachers. I think the same would happen were there pay increases for doing courses
inexile
11/01/2008, 8:34 PM
Ya you couldnt use a results system as no teacher then would want the dumb kids. Even having the headmaster choose would be open to personal arguements getting in the way. I think it should be easier to fire people that dont do there job properly.Every body had at least 1 if not 2 teachers that was terrible.( my English teacher was a joke :D)
But a lot of young people starting in the public sector have no job security teachers nurses etc are taken on temporary contracts for 6 months.
same with the gardai, just cos a guard goes out and arrests every second person he sees for the slightest thing doesnt neccessarily mean that he deserves more money than the fair guard who has a higher tolerance level than another one
Is this decision separate from an annual increase in line with inflation?
I'm not talking about the incremental pay-rise for time served.
Yes it is separate. Negotiations under the new national program Towards 2016 have still to take place. This is where the unions should be arguing for pay increases in line with inflation. That was never the purpose of benchmarking. Benchmarking did its job the last time around.
BohsPartisan
12/01/2008, 5:31 PM
We don't get an annual increase in line with inflation!
A few obs on this. The senior civil servants who gave us such monumental disasters as Ppars and other things that didn't work have been given their pay rise. The rest of us who have to deal with the consequences of these fck ups get nowt.
OwlsFan
12/01/2008, 6:47 PM
Civil servants don't have to contribute to their pensions and get twice their annual salary when they retire TAX FREE. Unconstitutional. God love them.
BohsPartisan
12/01/2008, 10:37 PM
Civil servants don't have to contribute to their pensions
YES WE DO. Either that or whoever prints my payslip is having a laugh.
Get your facts straight!
micls
13/01/2008, 10:47 AM
YES WE DO. Either that or whoever prints my payslip is having a laugh.
Get your facts straight!
Il second that
Lionel Ritchie
13/01/2008, 11:15 AM
third-ed
Public sector workers earned between 8 and 10 per cent more than their counterparts in the private sector before the first benchmarking payments were made, according to a study commissioned by the Public Service Benchmarking Body.
The study, conducted by Ernst & Young, in conjunction with Dr Anthony Murray of Oxford University, was submitted to the benchmarking body in September last.
The report did not take job security, pension values and the number of days worked and holidays taken into account for its comparisons.
All of these are hugely important, on top of wages
http://www.sbpost.ie/post/pages/p/story.aspx-qqqt=IRELAND-qqqm=news-qqqid=29586-qqqx=1.asp
Is benchmarking separate to national pay deals? i.e. public sector union members can still get pay increase (possibly around inflation levels) outside of benchmarking? My understanding of benchmarking was it is a process to compare public & private sector?
:confused:
Public sector workers contribute to pensions but because they defined benefit (does this include all the public sector?) are judged to be of greater value than average private sector pension.
The pay increases for top level civil servants is a scam used to justify TD & Ministerial pay increases.
Clifford
15/01/2008, 10:32 AM
On the Nurses thing is it correct that the management are possibly going to get a rise and the front line ones won't? If correct is there a reason behind it? I assume the front line one's will go ballistic if that happens as it's the management who've ballsed it up in the first place.
BohsPartisan
16/01/2008, 7:16 PM
Is benchmarking separate to national pay deals? i.e. public sector union members can still get pay increase (possibly around inflation levels) outside of benchmarking? My understanding of benchmarking was it is a process to compare public & private sector?
We'll get 1.5% or 2% or something like that in June in the national pay deal which is well below inflation.
I was always against these deals anyway as they mean more for the high paid guy and widen the difference in pay between grades.
Ringo
17/01/2008, 12:22 PM
We'll get 1.5% or 2% or something like that in June in the national pay deal which is well below inflation.
I was always against these deals anyway as they mean more for the high paid guy and widen the difference in pay between grades.
There has to be an incentive in all jobs, that if you work harder and take on more responsibilities then you earn more. It seems very fair. If the independent review body feels that certain wages are right after investigating wages, it seems very fair. I'm not sayiing you have to like it, but it seems to have been fair.
rebs23
17/01/2008, 12:27 PM
The title of this thread along with a lot of the media reports on this is completely misleading. Public Sector workers will get increases this year and in future years.
These increases will be in line with the increases in the national wage agreements, same as everyone else. Last round was 10% over 27 months. Only difference this time for public sector workers is they won't get any special increases above the national wage agreements.
Its a bit misleading to say the increase in January (last round of increases under last agreement for most people) of 2.5% isn't in line with inflation. The increases work out on an annualised basis at roughly 4.8%.(debateable about whether this is in line with inflation)
Anyway I can't see what the fuss is all about, benchmarking in previous incarnations delivered for the public sector, now they are getting the same increases as the rest of us and the slant on the current benchmarking awards is "no increases for public sector". Can you imagine the reaction of the public if any public sector workers go out on strike to get increase above the private sector!
BohsPartisan
17/01/2008, 9:37 PM
There has to be an incentive in all jobs, that if you work harder and take on more responsibilities then you earn more. It seems very fair. If the independent review body feels that certain wages are right after investigating wages, it seems very fair. I'm not sayiing you have to like it, but it seems to have been fair.
You sound like an old lady "it seems very fair". Repeat.
Does this seam fair?
http://archives.tcm.ie/irishexaminer/2008/01/11/story52342.asp
No its not. How is it fair that higher civil servants get big pay rises when the people on less than 30 grand get nothing. As for the national pay agreement, its a joke. Its less than inflation and it was bloody obvious when it was sold to us it was going to be less than inflation but the majority of people were sold a lie that inflation would stay low. As for the pensions argument, if you retire as a Clerical Officer (majority grade in the civil service) after 40 years service you get 18 grand per year. Hardly a bonanza now is it?
Anyway I can't see what the fuss is all about, benchmarking in previous incarnations delivered for the public sector, now they are getting the same increases as the rest of us and the slant on the current benchmarking awards is "no increases for public sector". Can you imagine the reaction of the public if any public sector workers go out on strike to get increase above the private sector!
So because private sector workers haven't got off their backsides to fight for better pay and conditions the rest of us should just accept scraps too? Rubbish, private sector workers instead of saying hold on, we don't have that, why should you? Should be saying, well we should be entitled to that too.
OneRedArmy
17/01/2008, 9:58 PM
So because private sector workers haven't got off their backsides to fight for better pay and conditions the rest of us should just accept scraps too? Rubbish, private sector workers instead of saying hold on, we don't have that, why should you? Should be saying, well we should be entitled to that too.I think you're missing (either accidentally or deliberately) Rebs23's point.
You appear to be trying to have your cake and eat it. By benchmarking against the private sector you (plural) accept greater volatility in wages, which is closely correlated with economic cycle (without taking on the volatility in employment status that exists in the private sector, but I digress......).
In relation to your point about "accepting scraps", well yes, if you want to get large private sector rises at the top of the cycle, you do have to take what little you get as we slide down the other side of the cycle.
As I said, remember you have a job for life which isn't priced into the equation iirc.
BohsPartisan
17/01/2008, 10:17 PM
Benchmarking wasn't just about linking to "private sector" wages. It was also about meeting some demands on "flexibility" - read accepting poorer conditions of work, which we (not me personally) foolishly agreed to. As I said, I never agreed with benchmarking or the national pay agreements for those reasons. People have to pay mortgages, pay the rent, pay bills, buy food - which is sky rocketing in price, pay for transport - which is rising in cost weather you drive or use public. No pay rise now and these scraps later in the year will not make up for that. You can make all the arguments you want about the supposed fairness of the review or whatever but that won't put food on the table or pay the bills and that is the bottom line for civil servants just the same as it is for private sector workers.
You sound like an old lady "it seems very fair". Repeat.
Does this seam fair?
http://archives.tcm.ie/irishexaminer/2008/01/11/story52342.asp
No its not. How is it fair that higher civil servants get big pay rises when the people on less than 30 grand get nothing. As for the national pay agreement, its a joke. Its less than inflation and it was bloody obvious when it was sold to us it was going to be less than inflation but the majority of people were sold a lie that inflation would stay low. As for the pensions argument, if you retire as a Clerical Officer (majority grade in the civil service) after 40 years service you get 18 grand per year. Hardly a bonanza now is it?
So because private sector workers haven't got off their backsides to fight for better pay and conditions the rest of us should just accept scraps too? Rubbish, private sector workers instead of saying hold on, we don't have that, why should you? Should be saying, well we should be entitled to that too.
Civil servants have job security & very little chance of losing their jobs due to laziness or incompetence. In the real world, you work hard, you get promoted & you earn more. It’s a lie to say people on less than 30K are going to get nothing. I’d have no issue with civil servants getting more money, if it was linked to productivity. I’m awaiting news from three different departments, since November. If you call in to any public desk, at a government department, there’s no sense of urgency, to look after the customers. I’m not saying all civil servants are lazy, but it seems highly inefficient.
OneRedArmy
18/01/2008, 8:32 AM
Benchmarking wasn't just about linking to "private sector" wages. It was also about meeting some demands on "flexibility" - read accepting poorer conditions of work, which we (not me personally) foolishly agreed to. As I said, I never agreed with benchmarking or the national pay agreements for those reasons. People have to pay mortgages, pay the rent, pay bills, buy food - which is sky rocketing in price, pay for transport - which is rising in cost weather you drive or use public. No pay rise now and these scraps later in the year will not make up for that. You can make all the arguments you want about the supposed fairness of the review or whatever but that won't put food on the table or pay the bills and that is the bottom line for civil servants just the same as it is for private sector workers.Have you heard about secondary inflation?
Wages can't always rise to meet price increases.
I presume as a socialist you would use price controls to stop that happening, but in the capitalist world we live in we'd end up with hyperinflation.
Can anyone tell me what flexible working conditions are? What is increased productivity? Is this just meeting & exceeding yearly objectives?
In the private sector my job is benchmarked against the market. When there was the IT downturn at the start of this century I was lucky to have a job but also had 3 year pay freeze. When times picked up wages rose so able to get pay increases above inflation. Benchmarking is good for the public sector as means they will get cut of the action when wages rising (last few years) but also means when wage rises low in the market will at worst get increases in line with inflation. Seems to be a fairly good deal when add job for life, defined benefit pension, career breaks etc...
BohsPartisan
18/01/2008, 9:52 PM
Civil servants have job security & very little chance of losing their jobs due to laziness or incompetence. In the real world, you work hard, you get promoted & you earn more. It’s a lie to say people on less than 30K are going to get nothing. I’d have no issue with civil servants getting more money, if it was linked to productivity. I’m awaiting news from three different departments, since November. If you call in to any public desk, at a government department, there’s no sense of urgency, to look after the customers. I’m not saying all civil servants are lazy, but it seems highly inefficient.
Have you tried ringing a customer service desk in the private sector? (By the way the switch in our department is run by a private company! And on that note we deal with consultants on a regular basis and one consultancy firm gets paid thousands for doing something I am personally able to do. Not only that but once these firms get their contracts they don't give a cr@p how quickly they do it or how well they do the job. And the thing is they'll get their contracts renewed because higher management don't have to deal with them in their day to day work. And there-in lies the problem.
As for productivity, it is. We do PMDS which is a performance assessment. If you get less than a certain level you don't get your increment. Its a rubbish system though I have to say but thats not our fault, we didn't introduce it. You see any inefficiencies that exist in the civil service are institutionalised and generally they are handed down from the top. This makes the ordinary civil servants job harder. How do you judge performance on that basis? How do you justify senior civil servants who are responsible for the whole situation getting lucrative pay-rises?
And for the record you can get fired in the civil service. It was one of the concessions we gave away for the joy of benchmarking!
ORA -
As a Socialist I would not use price controls as that is only tinkering with the market. I would take the commanding heights of the economy into democratic public ownership and then shoot anyone who looked at me ****-eyed! :p
Saint Tom
19/01/2008, 11:19 PM
Have you tried ringing a customer service desk in the private sector? (By the way the switch in our department is run by a private company! And on that note we deal with consultants on a regular basis and one consultancy firm gets paid thousands for doing something I am personally able to do. Not only that but once these firms get their contracts they don't give a cr@p how quickly they do it or how well they do the job. And the thing is they'll get their contracts renewed because higher management don't have to deal with them in their day to day work. And there-in lies the problem.
As for productivity, it is. We do PMDS which is a performance assessment. If you get less than a certain level you don't get your increment. Its a rubbish system though I have to say but thats not our fault, we didn't introduce it. You see any inefficiencies that exist in the civil service are institutionalised and generally they are handed down from the top. This makes the ordinary civil servants job harder. How do you judge performance on that basis? How do you justify senior civil servants who are responsible for the whole situation getting lucrative pay-rises?
And for the record you can get fired in the civil service. It was one of the concessions we gave away for the joy of benchmarking!
ORA -
As a Socialist I would not use price controls as that is only tinkering with the market. I would take the commanding heights of the economy into democratic public ownership and then shoot anyone who looked at me ****-eyed! :p
While Bohs Partisan you always fight your corner well, you miss the point on this issue. Cant blaim the whole of foot.ie for the current government, if anything we are far from a representative sample of Irish voters. But constant defence of inefficiencies in public services is a recurring theme of your debate.
BohsPartisan
20/01/2008, 8:34 AM
While Bohs Partisan you always fight your corner well, you miss the point on this issue. Cant blaim the whole of foot.ie for the current government, if anything we are far from a representative sample of Irish voters. But constant defence of inefficiencies in public services is a recurring theme of your debate.
From my experience as a civil servant, most of the people there do their job and do it well. They work as hard as people in any private sector job I've done. The "inefficiencies" that exist are symptoms of bureaucracy which is by its nature inefficient. Most sections in the service would have slack time. I have times of the year when I am not busy. However for the rest of the year I do some very important work. What are you going to do to fix that? You need civil servants. You need people doing that work for the state to function.
As I pointed out before, we've had to deal with the imposition of some new "work practices" that simply do not work and make things more inefficient.
My job is made considerably more difficult by the imposition of some of these practices, not on me directly but upon other sections that provide vital services to what I do. The other main source of inefficiency that I deal with on a daily basis is the private company that some of our work is outsourced to even though the skills exist in our section to do that work. All these inefficiencies are handed down form the government and the senior civil servants - they who got their big fat pay rises while already earning big bucks.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.