Fury as most civil servants awarded zero pay increases

[Ringo]

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/st...586-qqqx=1.asp

[pete]

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?



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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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...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]

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]

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.

[Ringo]

You sound like an old lady "it seems very fair". Repeat.

Does this seam fair?
http://archives.tcm.ie/irishexaminer...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]

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.

[pete]

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]

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!

[Saint Tom]

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!

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]

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.