National Pay Agreements

[Roverstillidie]

a couple of questions to the anti-agreement people:

1: are you arguing that the private sectors conditions improve or the public sector joint the race to the bottom?

2: do you accept that the majority of public servants work for less money but more stability than their private sector equivalent?

what are you arguing? collective bargaining again? that will deliver what exactly?

[pete]

1: are you arguing that the private sectors conditions improve or the public sector joint the race to the bottom?

End Benchmarking as serves no purpose. There is no problem getting people to fill public sector jobs - they queuing up for especially peoploe try to leave Dublin.

2: do you accept that the majority of public servants work for less money but more stability than their private sector equivalent?

When you compare like with like there isn't a huge difference in pay levels. Public sector has by far better conditions & basically job for life which makes easier to budget for mortgages etc... For example teacher rates are not great compared with the private sector but only have 8 working months so unrealistic to have same rates.

what are you arguing? collective bargaining again? that will deliver what exactly?

End National collective bargaining. Pay levels decided on conpany by company basis.

[Roverstillidie]

End Benchmarking as serves no purpose. There is no problem getting people to fill public sector jobs - they queuing up for especially peoploe try to leave Dublin.
.

not sure what you mean here. feck all civil servants want to leave dublin, hence the decentralisation fiasco.
benchmaking is over pete. finito. done. mission accomplished. over and out. what you are arguing, im not sure? end an exercise thats already ended?


QUOTE=pete]
When you compare like with like there isn't a huge difference in pay levels. Public sector has by far better conditions & basically job for life which makes easier to budget for mortgages etc... For example teacher rates are not great compared with the private sector but only have 8 working months so unrealistic to have same rates.

End National collective bargaining. Pay levels decided on conpany by company basis.[/QUOTE]

peter, you have argued that the partnership model is useless because most the labout force are out of it anyway and have to negotiate themselves. so whats the problem? its not possible to have people in the dept of transport earning more than those is defence, so you need, by definition public sector collective bargaining.

i have worked in both public and private, in essentially the same job, and conditions are not better by and large in the public - the pension and job security aside. in my instance i got more money and leave in the private.

how do you propose the public sector negotiations would go?

you have picked up on the tail end of an anti-union campaign by IBEC and co and are trying to put an ideological spin where common sense should prevail.

[Macy]

There is another Benchmarking process. Benchmarking 1 remains the only objective and thorough comparison between the public and private sector, and indeed between public sector jobs. Biggest problem with benchmarking is the percentage increases rather than actual increases - and the resultant big skew for the top grades. The unions argued against this - it is IBEC and the Government that wanted it that way (and now they're giving out about the results). It would be cynical of me to suggest they wanted the percentage increases as their rates of pay are tied in to equivalent grades in the Civil service.

If people think that public sector pay will be less without national pay agreements, well as a public servant and union member I really hope you lobby against it as I'd be confident of getting a better deal without it and we can stop the sham of partnership too.

[rebs23]

a couple of questions to the anti-agreement people:

1: are you arguing that the private sectors conditions improve or the public sector joint the race to the bottom?

2: do you accept that the majority of public servants work for less money but more stability than their private sector equivalent?

what are you arguing? collective bargaining again? that will deliver what exactly?

I change my mind on thsi every couple of weeks!

This model of partnership goes way beyond just wage levels etc and we are looking at a new Benchmarking deal for Civil Servants which is not needed. There is no justification either statistically or any other way for more special increases in the Public Sector. Why not the same for the Public and Private Sectors?

There is no "race to the bottom"! Never before have so many Irish people earned so much and had so much oppurtunity! There may be issues about non compliance with wage rates but this is the exception not the norm. There will be extra protection for workers out of partnership but opinion polls etc would have ensured this anyway.

On other matters it means we have to negotiate the approval of the Trade Unions for every change that is needed to reform and change. The obstacles put in the way at the Health Service, Dublin Airport, Aer Lingus, Public Sector reformetc,etc all have to be negotiated endlessly with little actual change. The public through the ballott box have elected a government to carry out this reform yet a small number of people can seem to hold the country to ransom by refusing to change or even acknowledge the need for change so we can improve matters. I think that this constant refusal to accpept the democratic mandate of the people is wrong.

If we had no partnership model for a few years then we would not have to engage in this endless model of getting everyones agreement. This is the decision of the government now we'll engage in negotiations about how to implement that decision not negotiate the decision itself. It just holds everything up and as anyone who has worked in a highly unionised environment knows that is what the trade unions do hold up reform endlessly in some cases with castatrophic consequences.

[rebs23]

[QUOTE=Roverstillidie]not sure what you mean here. feck all civil servants want to leave dublin, hence the decentralisation fiasco.

Everyone knows Decentralisation was designed to fail. Lets pick a few towns where we need to get a few extra votes and promise them a nice juicy public sector department. Scatter it all over the country without consideration for the National Spatial Strategy, public transport strategy,infrastructure and coordination within the departments.
It was designed to fail!!
It's interesting that Cork and Galway cities, the two places most likely to be attractive for civil servants to relocate to were n't even selected for decentralisation!

[Dodge]

Nice you see you picked Cork there

[Macy]

This model of partnership goes way beyond just wage levels etc and we are looking at a new Benchmarking deal for Civil Servants which is not needed. There is no justification either statistically or any other way for more special increases in the Public Sector. Why not the same for the Public and Private Sectors?

But you're assuming that a new benchmarking process will lead to increases in public sector pay? You're prempting the result of a process that hasn't even started. If there is such a differential between public and private sector pay, a benchmarking process will prove this and they'll be at the very least no increases for the public sector. There's nothing in benchmarking that garantee's increases for public servants.

There is no "race to the bottom"! Never before have so many Irish people earned so much and had so much oppurtunity! There may be issues about non compliance with wage rates but this is the exception not the norm. There will be extra protection for workers out of partnership but opinion polls etc would have ensured this anyway.

No reason for IBEC to oppose increased regulation and increased inspections then. The only reason business is opposed to inspections is because they have something to hide. There is nothing extra for businesses to fear if they are playing by the rules.

On other matters it means we have to negotiate the approval of the Trade Unions for every change that is needed to reform and change. The obstacles put in the way at the Health Service, Dublin Airport, Aer Lingus, Public Sector reformetc,etc all have to be negotiated endlessly with little actual change. The public through the ballott box have elected a government to carry out this reform yet a small number of people can seem to hold the country to ransom by refusing to change or even acknowledge the need for change so we can improve matters. I think that this constant refusal to accpept the democratic mandate of the people is wrong.

The problem is that Government and in particular certain ministers go on solo runs, rather than negotiated settlements and consultation (Partnership?). Unions are the last to be involved instead of at the beginning, which leads to the defensive position. Hence the sham of the Partnership - a model we're supposed to be using in this country.

[pete]

I have friends who joined the public sector with sole purpose of getting a job outside Dublin. IT jobs can be sketchy outside Dublin but when you get one in the public sector have security of job for life. In the private sector if you lose a job in IT may not be many options locally.

I don't have access to the stats but i think figures came out on recent years showing no problem finding people to fill state jobs & that was the selling point for benchmarking.

If the public sector unions are concerned that their top brass are voting on big wages increases for themselves then they need to deal with democratically as more at the bottom than the top.

[Dodge]

I don't have access to the stats but i think figures came out on recent years showing no problem finding people to fill state jobs & that was the selling point for benchmarking.

Girlfriend works in this area. There were HUGE problems recruiting staff to civil/public service before benchmarking particularly to the skilled grades. Not too bad now but there's an embargo on recruitment now...

If the public sector unions are concerned that their top brass are voting on big wages increases for themselves then they need to deal with democratically as more at the bottom than the top.

Yeah but different unions for different grades in the civil service. Publivc Sector have a multitude too... As Macy said TD wages linked to higher grade salaries

[Macy]

Publivc Sector have a multitude too... As Macy said TD wages linked to higher grade salaries

And lest we forget, the Ministers have already benefitted from two rounds of benchmarking (despite Bertie blatantly lying about it when it happened). 1 round for their TD's salary linked with Civil Service benchmarking, 1 round for their ministers salary which was tied to the benchmarking for Secretary and Director Generals...

[pete]

Yeah but different unions for different grades in the civil service. Publivc Sector have a multitude too... As Macy said TD wages linked to higher grade salaries

Still though must be more people on the lower grades so they out vote the top grades? Surely you not suggesting the unions are not democratic?

[Dodge]

Out vote them on what?

[Macy]

Still though must be more people on the lower grades so they out vote the top grades? Surely you not suggesting the unions are not democratic?

Unions are democratic, unlike our Government where a couple of TD's gets you all the power . However, you vote on the whole deal, not individual aspects of it.

[Roverstillidie]

pete, they are in a different union.

[pete]

Isn't there a Central Committee...?

[rebs23]

Nice you see you picked Cork there

It's only the truth!!!

[Dodge]

Isn't there a Central Committee...?

Of what? Each grade (more likely to be two grades really) has their own completely separate union dealing with their members concerns. They may have some of the same goals but they have their own meetings with government/ministries etc... They'd never have an occasion to vote on anything