That doesn't bother me because they'd have to move all the Indians to Ireland, in order to replace people in my profession. True to your nature, you make false assumptions about me.Quote:
Originally Posted by CollegeTillIDie
Printable View
That doesn't bother me because they'd have to move all the Indians to Ireland, in order to replace people in my profession. True to your nature, you make false assumptions about me.Quote:
Originally Posted by CollegeTillIDie
And you don't make any assumptions at all Peadar?
I'm better place to make assumptions about a sector that I've served for 8 years, than someone who has never met me, is to make assumptions about me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dodge
Relax, I was kidding...
Can someone point me those surveys which said public service pay less than private? I thought there were some links but did they get moved?
If we do not use average wages then surely need to compare like with like?
Public Sector Pay 20% higher than Private Sector
To claim that the public sector is top loaded with high earners is a ludicrous assumption as this suggests that no high earners in the private sector.Quote:
Public sector workers are becoming the new rich with average annual earnings of 46,000. More and more professionals are turning to the public sector for financial security and work life balance.
A report by Davy Stockbrokers last year found that public sector pay was, on average, about 20 per cent higher than private sector pay. The average public servant now earns more than 45,000 a year, compared to the average industrial wage of 31,000. And figures just released from the CSO confirm their annual earnings are just under 46,000.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pete
But thats exactly what your link shows!
These are all special cases. Also factor in TD's and particularly cabinet members.Quote:
Garda
1,132.75 a week
Prison officer
1,165.97 a week
Administrative civil servant
808.72 a week
Primary school teacher
821.38 a week
Secondary school teacher
1,000 a week
Defence forces
736.72 a week
I'm not sure what an administrative civil servant is supposed to be I.E. are they talking about all grades?
I have told you what CO's and EO's earn, and they are the majority of civil servants. As far as I'm concerned that ends the pay arguement. It is fact that the majority of people working in the civil service start out on 415 per week and over the course of 15 years will recieve incriments to bring them up to 672 per week.
An executive officer starts at 548 per week and can work up to 870 over 15 years.
However at the higher end of the service things are very different:
SECRETARY GENERAL 197,233
DEPUTY SECRETARY 157,786
ASSISTANT SECRETARY 116,462 122,095 127,732 133,367
If you doubt this you can email payscales@finance.gov.ie to hear it from the horses mouth.
ESRI Report (pdf)
I think we can all agree the ESRI an Independent Body so as unbiased we going to get. According to this report in 2003:
- Public pay was 39% higher per hour when compared graduate with 3 years experience.
- Even when compare gross monthly wages its 19% higher as private work 5 more hours per week than public.
- The wage differential is higher for women over men.
Can someone point me towards that civil service job site again?
Sending an e-mail to a civil servant can only yeild a biased response!Quote:
Originally Posted by BohsPartisan
Don't be ridiculous. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Peadar
Unbiased as we are going to get, but not unbiased, but anyway...Quote:
Originally Posted by pete
So can we take it you won't be using average pay comparisons again?Quote:
A simple comparison of average earnings in the two sectors can be misleading because of the underlying differences in the composition of the two sectors
So public sector workers are more qualified, so likely that they can be earning less like for like against private sector equivalents.Quote:
Over half of all public sector workers are in professional occupations compared to about 12% in the private sector, and about half of public sector workers have a third level qualification, compared to one quarter of private sector workers
The pay scale structure certainly restricts wage growth. Take for example accountancy - you'll get an extra increment for qualifying in the public sector, but in private industry you'll get a significant promotion. Or teachers and nurses for example, who have limited opportunity to move to different pay scales, especially in 3 years. 3 years is an extremely short time frame. Not really enough to take into account post graduate professional qualifications. Make it 10 years and then there would be merit to the study.Quote:
It should be acknowledged that our analysis is confined to the early stages of careers. As such, it tells us nothing about subsequent wage movements, and how the public sector wage gap may develop later in graduates career
Come on Macy. I was accused of using the same line about averages so I did my research & proved conclusively with numbers not opinions.Quote:
Originally Posted by Macy
The ESRI compared people with same experience, same education & found massive differences in pay. 39% higher wage per hour is massive. Even at gross salry 19% is huge. This just compares basic salary & does not include anything about perks etc... Is this not what you asked for? You cannot say public sector restricted by certain factors without mentioning the advantages - this is why the ESRI picked graduate with 3 years experience.
:confused:
I honestly never expected pay difference to be large & not know why so many people joining the public sector in recent years. I would not have thought about the public sector before but certainly would consider now.
What PERKS???Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete
Did you look at the pay rates I showed above? Yet you choose to ignore the FACTS again!
On that I was just making the point that even the ERSI say that average pay is a nonsense. They'd be better telling IBEC and media though I supposeQuote:
Originally Posted by pete
I've always argued there's advantages to working in the public sector - it's quality of life over pay. Certainly at my grade with my qualifications. I really don't think 3 years is enough of a timescale to prove this one way or the other tbh.Quote:
Originally Posted by pete
It isn't. I doubt you're within 3 years of graduation for starters, but go for it and see.Quote:
Originally Posted by pete
I would have thought i'd proven my immaturity by now. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Macy
Lads point to the independant reports that say Public Sector is less than Private Sector. Please post links from indelpendant analysis such as that from the ESRI, CSO etc, etc. You can't because it doesn't exist.
We have been asked to post links to back up points and arguments.
Heres a final quote on the issue from Industrial Relations News. I can't post a link because its subscription based magazine for those working in the field but its generally accepted that its very trade union friendly to say the least.
All trade union officials will also privately admit to this differential "on a like for like basis" and also that it is causing tensions within their own unions.
"New pay survey points to 40% public/private pay gap
TONY DOBBINS
A major new national pay survey by the Central Statistics Office suggests that public sector workers earn 40% more on average than private sector workers.
The finding in the CSO National Employment Survey 2003
The finding that public sector employees are, on average, much better paid than private sector employees, was also the conclusion in a study carried out by economist Jim OLeary and colleagues at Maynooth University in 2000. The authors concluded that the pay differential between public and private sector employees in the year 2000, in terms of average gross monthly earnings, amounted to 42% (see IRN 18/04).
BETTER QUALIFIED
However, the authors accepted that allowance should be made for the fact that public servants tend to be older, more experienced and better educated than employees in the private sector, on average. They also tend to work in more highly skilled jobs and in bigger establishments. But even taking this into account, public sector employees, in 2000, enjoyed a monthly earnings premium of almost 11%, it was argued.
And this was back in 2000, before the main chunk of the benchmarking pay hikes came on stream in January 2004."
Well one fact is that the Board of Directors of many private sector companies award themselves sick bonuses in good years well into six figures. This is at the same time as their workers are not that well paid.
The Department Secretaries and Higher level Civil Servants do not have those
when tax revenues are surprisingly buoyant.
Holy Cow :eek: I've just discovered this thread, and I can't believe some of the rubbish spouted by the private sector brigade. Civil servants are all useless dossers, while all private sectors workers are models of diligence, professionalism and dedication ? Do you really believe that nonsense lads. Cop on, please. The very fact that so many of the private sector warriors believe that civil servants pay no pension contributions just summed up your ignorance for me. ALL Civil Servants pay towards their pension. As someone sensibly pointed out, there are hard workers, and dossers, in both sectors, but I'll willingly put the standards of professionalism, dedication and ability of ANY department or section I've worked in (and yes, there have been a few before anyone asks:p ) up against anything the Private Sector has to offer. Contrary to the belief of all you little Michael O'Learys out there, Civil Servants have workloads, and deadlines, just like everyone else. (Plus, we have to put up with attitudes like those on display from some people here, not to mention remarks like "I pay your wages you know" - those immortal words were actually issued to me once believe it or not) One more point BTW, Peadar, you do realise that if you're working under contract for a Government Dept (which seems to be your situation unless I've read your posts wrong) that ultimately that's taxpayers money you're getting. For Shame, how can you live with yourself:D
(btw - I neither read or replied to this during working hours - far too busy)
The bench marking process was the biggest investigation carried out on a like for like basis. And it was criticised for not delivering enough by many public sector workers - hence the next round which may deliver no increase if like for like it's found that the public sector is better off. We've had the process that has proved our case, it's just the right wing and business organisations that haven't accepted it.Quote:
Originally Posted by rebs23
Well a fella from IBEC told me in the pub that they know it's a nonsense arguement and it's only a stick to beat unionised employments with.Quote:
Originally Posted by rebs23
:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by rebs23
It was argued, but not backed up by any stats, clearly. Well certainly none that they were confident enough to use.Quote:
Originally Posted by rebs23
I gave you actual pay rates. I gave you an email address for further info.Quote:
Originally Posted by rebs23
Secondly the ESRI is not "independant". It is an ideologically driven right wing "think tank"
I provided the best most unbiased report on like for like comparison & still the public service lobby move the goal posts.Quote:
Originally Posted by rebs23
You can provide rates of pay for Admin Secretarys but what is the equivalent roile in the private sector? Those grades make no sense to me either as same role does not exist in the private sector... :confused:
Public Service Managers (e.g. Garda Commissioner) now get bonuses just like in the private sector.
In your own biased opinion :pQuote:
Originally Posted by pete
you've lost me there Pete, what is an admin secretary?Quote:
You can provide rates of pay for Admin Secretarys but what is the equivalent roile in the private sector?
You provided some figures for various grades (i forget the names). I was just saying those grades & roles mean nothing to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by BohsPartisan
Clerical Officers - the majority grade in the CS, do most of the work. It varies a lot and ranges from public office duties to data entry to data extraction to IT support.
Executive Officer - lower middle management
Higher Executive Officer - Higher middle managaement
Again I'll ask for links to analysis, preferably from independant bodies. Back up your arguments with facts.
As for Bohspartisan claims that the ESRI are a right wing think thank. I got a good laugh out of that one.
Macy, Dodge, Bohspartisan you all work in the Public Sector and you all have a vested financial interest in clinging to an argument that Public Sector workers are worse off than those in the private sector because Benchmarking 2 is currently underway, but yet you can't back it up.
I am especially suprised at your arguments Bohspartisan as you are constantly preaching to us about the glories of a unionised workforce and the one area of the workforce that is highly unionised and militant (Public Sector)is clearly better off financially than the private sector where union density is down to around 20%, if that. Surely these stats prove your point!
I also cannot understand why you don't make the point that you get paid more because you are worth it! I know I do and would if anyone said it about me!:)
Maybe you work harder, maybe you are very productive...
1. There is no such thing as an independant body. All of them have vested interests.Quote:
Originally Posted by rebs23
2. I gave you hard facts.
3. The ESRI is driven by right wing economics (cut this, privatise that) therefore what I said is correct.
I've seen more lambs that are more militant than the leadership of my union.Quote:
I am especially suprised at your arguments Bohspartisan as you are constantly preaching to us about the glories of a unionised workforce and the one area of the workforce that is highly unionised and militant (Public Sector)
But it was backed up in Benchmarking 1, which was independent and saw increases in pay in the Public Sector to bring it in line with the Private Sector. It remains the only in depth study that has been done on Private v Public. If there is no wage gap or it's in favour of the Public sector Benchmarking 2 will show this.Quote:
Originally Posted by rebs23
Your ERSI study was a small group over a small period. You've nothing else except average comparisons that ERSI say are pointless
If that's true, then the private sector workers should re-organise and stop voting for right wing Governments. And you're deluded if you think the CPSU, PSEU and AHCPS (who essentially negotiate the pay scales for the whole public service) are militant.Quote:
Originally Posted by rebs23
Benchmarking was not an independant analysis but a bribe for public sector industrial relations peace. It was not backed up by any stats or figures and its deliberations and results were never published or made available to the public. As I have quoted earlier even Labour have called for a more thorough and transparent process for Benchmarking 1.Quote:
Originally Posted by Macy
It will be interesting though the results of Benchmarking 2 and whether it is more transparent and public.
The ESRI study was conducted at a time before a lot of the Benchmarking increases kicked in so the differentials as of now would be even greater.
As for being deluded well the only delusions in evidence in this thread is the consistant claim (unsubstantiated) that "on a like for like basis" Public Sector workers are worse off than their Private Sector colleagues.
Good point.Quote:
Originally Posted by rebs23
rebs23 can take the baton from here as i'm off to Davos so see if can exploit the masses a bit more... :p
btw can't believe the credibility of the ESRI is in question. They are not political & just as likely to produce report backing up the government of the time as criticising them...
That doesn't mean they don't have an agenda. Its not a party political agenda but its still ideologically right wing. Similar to the "Freedom Institute" or Magill magazine.Quote:
Originally Posted by pete
It's the guys without an agenda that you have to worry about. It amounts to indifference and that's worse, in my book!Quote:
Originally Posted by BohsPartisan
Not sure what agenda they have but are you suggesting all economists have an agenda because they support the market economy as opposed to a state market?Quote:
Originally Posted by BohsPartisan
Not all economists support the market economy. Most do and yes they have an agenda. That agenda lies in getting the best paying jobs by supporting the system. They are taught in school and university that this is the way things are, they are bound by the strict constraints of political economy. Their education is ideology driven therefore they are ideology driven. Their carreers have been built supporting this ideology. It is not in their interests to oppose it.
Trade Unions were not bound by Industrial Relations peace via Benchmarking -their bound to that by the national wage agreements. It remains the only in depth study that was done on the issue.Quote:
Originally Posted by rebs23
So you're standing by the claim that CPSU, PSEU and AHCPS are militant Trade Unions?Quote:
Originally Posted by rebs23
Public Sector is relatively militant compared to Private Sector workforce but yes I take the point about those unions.
As for your other point, Benchmarking was as a result of National Wage Negotiations, a process of negotiation between the Social Partners to ensure industrial realtions peace!
Yes, he has had to come down to a level of intelligence that an RTE producer would understand. Hence the constant mention of shopping and so on.Quote:
Originally Posted by pete
But I was delighted when last night he mentioned just how much of an economic aparthide the semi-state and public sector is and is being kept that way by Liberty Hall, who despite their platitudes about "Israel, Social Justice, Equality" and so on are only interested in keeping non family members out of their scam.
They Irish Ferries March of a few years back was without a doubt Ireland first national anti-foreigner rally. That was our own BNP mindset in action and it was all organised by the bearded ones of Liberty Hall/Labour Party. Hence why only 1% of the public sector in this country is non-Irish. It's a racist, protectionist, bigoted, greedy con job and we are paying for it.
This is not talked about enough and it is the biggest disgrace in modern Ireland. The union/Labour Party controlled public sector in this country is not only delivering horrifically bad quality public services for the riches lavished upon it by the private sector worker, but it is also undemocratic and Liberty Hall/SIPTU/ IMPACT/Labuor are determined to keep it that way.
They'll destroy this county's economy so "Deco's young lad can get a job at the airport" when he leaves school. It's all based on family bloodlines being financed by you and I.
So well done McWIlliams for pointing this out.
In my couple of years on foot.ie I've read some utter, utter bullsh1t ...but you sir have raised the bar. :oQuote:
Originally Posted by Boh_So_Good
So Loinel how do you explain the 1% of foreign workers in the public sector in a workforce were going on quarter the workers are immigrants?Quote:
Originally Posted by Lionel Ritchie
Are you going to tell me you have to named either Deco or Anto to drive a DART, or foreigners do not have the skills to handle baggage at Cork airport?
Or better still, the PPARS overruns are a traditional aspect of the civil service and to bring in foreign competent employees would somehow take away the rustic nature of generations of boiled cabbage raised civil servants?
Com'on we are all waiting to see how you can defend the astounding lack of diversity in the public sector without a "send them All Back " approach.
The Irish Ferries march was about sacking workers so they could employ people at way below the Irish Minimum wage. It was not about foreign workers, it was about the exploitation of foreign workers. Nothing the Union movement has done has been anti-foreigner; it has been anti-exploitation of foreign workers and the race to the bottom in wages and conditions. You are talking nonsense in your anti union rant that they are racist - it's quite the opposite and it's a lie spun by the right that maintaining wage rates and conditions of employment is somehow racist. It's about maintaining those rates and conditions for all workers, regardless of race, gender, religion. Perhaps you could get hold of a copy of The Liberty and read the campaigns and disputes around the country where SIPTU is fighting for foreign workers. You could maybe talk to the East European Organisers that SIPTU employ, read the many leaflets that are produced in multiple languages that inform foreign workers of their rights.
As for the public sector, any low level of immigrants is more to do with the age profile of the workers. The Public Sector, because of it's union penetration has equality policies above and beyond the legislation, not inspite of it. It's laughable to suggest that Unions have any influence in recruitment. You'd be better looking towards Government buildings for a group that is packing the Civil and Public Service with "their" men and women.
If that really was the gist of McWilliams programme last night, he really is at the bottom of the barrel - an economist race to the bottom maybe?
Low turnover of staff, and the public sector have fixed wage rates and no dodgy employers to exploit foreign workers like in many areas of the private sector.Quote:
Originally Posted by Boh_So_Good
Ever get the bus in Dublin or is that too working class for you?Quote:
Originally Posted by Boh_So_Good
I'm sure you know, being so knowledgable, that every aspect of PPARS from scoping to development to aborted implementation was outsourced to the private sector?Quote:
Originally Posted by Boh_So_Good
I repeat, low turnover of staff and no benefit from exploiting workers. Nothing to do with Union protectionism. If it ever existed anyway (if only would be one of my reactions given some of the fools that get recruited!). I'd say here, non irish recruits would be at least a quarter in the last few years. But that probably would be making little impression in the organisation as a whole where there isn't much turnover in mainly specialist positionsQuote:
Originally Posted by Boh_So_Good
Firstly are you a public sector employee/union member and how impartial are you in this debate?Quote:
Originally Posted by Macy
Secondly, Until European Labour Laws put an end to it, on CIE, Aer Lingus and An Post applications, there was a line which asked "what relative of yours currently works for CIE, Aer Lingus and An Post?". Most of the staff of these "companies" in 2007 were employed under this past bloodline arrangement.
Go over to RTE sometime, it's all uncles, sister, cousins, brothers and fathers in there from the senior production staff to the canteen.
Liberty Hall has taken the "jobs for the boys" concept to heights which Liam Lawlor would of never even dared to imagine. What Lawlor got in a brown envelope, the public sector trade union member in this country gets in partnership and benchmarking.
It's a sensational scam and one most Irish people seem oblivious to. But that'll change when the economy collapses and the few private sector workers who are still working (or not leaving for London, Boston etc) will be raped with 60% tax to pay for the semi-state and civil services benchmarking and their partnership economic aparthide scam - the same public sector who did nothing to create the Celtic Tiger, but played a massive part in its downfall.
The public sector is Ireland is mainly a self-serving, racist scam, a protection racket and does not work for the Irish society as a whole. We are being taxed to provide inter-generational employment for certain families all over the country. We need a Iron Lady in this country to privatise most of it and sack the ten of thousands of dossers in it.
Hence the Irish Ferries March, it was about making sure "Our young Frankie would have the job at the ESB waiting for him after his junior cert and no darkie or Pole gets it".
Any private sector worker in this country who supported that Irish Ferries march was a turkey voting for christmas. You might as well have took the money out of your savings account and handed to the SIPTU reps who were whipped up into a state of xenophobic hysteria and foaming at the mouth greed on that very telling day.
Oh and BTW I am VERY working class. This is another myth Liberty Hall tells us they represent the working classes. You would be hard pressed to find anyone in any public sector unions in this country who could be classed as "working class". Most of them are very well off.
So let's kill this this myth now that someone with a salary package and pension work 120K a year and an unsackable job for life is "working class" just because they work for a semi-state, vote Labour and a member of SIPTU shall we...
Anyways, this is way off topic so I'll leave it at that.