# Public service pay scale



## Delboy (6 Apr 2017)

Whats the % rate for favourable assessments


----------



## Purple (6 Apr 2017)

Delboy said:


> Whats the % rate for favourable assessments


 Now now, we aren't allowed to ask those questions.  Just be glad we have all those "World Class"TM Public Servants. All shortcomings are the fault of politicians and "The System".


----------



## cremeegg (6 Apr 2017)

So after 18 months you get a €2,354 or 7.78928% pay rise.

The ludicrousness of this, for so many different reasons, tells us much about the public service in Ireland

I am just picturing the discussions that must have taken place to arrive at a 7.78928% value for the first increment.

What arguments must have been adduced to support 7.78929% and then the great case was made  for 7.78927%. How many slices of late night pizza were consumed, how many spouses got the call that this was to be another allnighter, before the high powered negotiating teams agreed to split the difference and settle on 7.78928%

Their dedication to balancing the needs of the staff, the demands of the public purse, and the need to deliver quality services to the great Irish public is a lesson to us all.


----------



## Leper (7 Apr 2017)

Right Cremegg, Payscales were introduced to keep wages down. A Nurse leaves university to work in a hospital.  The Nurse starts on Point 1 of the payscale and would progress up the payscale usually yearly.  The thinking behind this (I reckon) is that a nurse starting out deserves less wages than a nurse working in the hospital for 10 years. Therefore the need for payscales.

However, I agree with you and payscales of the start should be abolished (they are so low). It is the same for clerical officers. So I could argue that if there are ten points on the scales, it takes at least 10 years to reach the maximum of the grade. (Grinning to myself, if it takes five years of university to become a doctor, why does it take at least ten years to get a decent wage as a nurse or clerical worker?). There is of course some middle ground where you could start a nurse or clerical officer mid way up the table, but that would cost the tax payer.

Delboy asked a pertinent question i.e. what is the per centage rate for successful assessments? To be honest, I don't know, but I have seen Line Managers refusing increments because of under performance. 

And of course Purple threw in his tuppence worth:- Now now, we aren't allowed to ask those questions. Just be glad we have all those "World Class"TM Public Servants. All shortcomings are the fault of politicians and "The System".  Of course, you are entitled to and allowed to ask such questions. Nobody is hiding.


----------



## Purple (7 Apr 2017)

Leper, by all international comparisons State employees in Ireland are overpaid at the lower end of their pay scale and relatively underpaid at the top of their pay scale.
Drawing comparisons between a clerical officer or nurse and a doctor don't do anything for your argument either; doctors are more skilled and fewer people are capable of attaining the qualification so the market rate for their labour will always be higher. 
I do agree that pay scales are a nonsense as competence is not rewarded and incompetence and laziness are not punished. Nobody should ever get a cent extra simply because they are doing the same job for a year longer.   
Many people have asked questions about the gross incompetence of some of the people working in our Public Sector and Health Service and their unwillingness to just do their job to the most basic standards (like washing their hands when required in a hospital or not leaving and then reentering a sterile environment in the same clothes). The answer is always a wall of sound about "Front Line Staff" and just how wonderful and selfless they are and how none of it is their fault. If they grew up and grew a set they could be part of the solution.


----------



## Delboy (7 Apr 2017)

Was there not a report out a couple of years ago which showed that the annual reviews of Public Service employees was running at well over 90% favourable i.e. practically everyone got an increment increase.
I'll have a google for it later.

In my experience, I have never heard or seen anyone not getting an increment increase. It's not even a consideration, it's a given.

(My OP comes from another post where a new poster was asking how increments worked and were awarded as they had just joined the CS/PS- it got pulled!)


----------



## Deiseblue (7 Apr 2017)

Coincidently it was interesting to see the article in yesterday's Irish Times - " Satisfaction with public servants at record high ".
This latest in a series of official surveys shows that 87 % said service levels were mostly meeting or exceeding expectations.
This is the 7th such survey & 2000 adults were surveyed between January & February this year.
Always good to see factual based info instead of speculation.


----------



## Delboy (7 Apr 2017)

The first question I ask when I hear of survey/poll results is "who commissioned it"!"


----------



## Deiseblue (7 Apr 2017)

Ah that's just the cynic in you !

I thought that , as a public servant yourself , you would have been thrilled at such a public affirmation of public servants worth.


----------



## Delboy (7 Apr 2017)

I would be thrilled if it were true. But alas, I see no change around me. 
Services are still run firstly for the employees and secondly, for the public


----------



## Brendan Burgess (7 Apr 2017)

Delboy said:


> The first question I ask when I hear of survey/poll results is "who commissioned it"!"



"The general secretary of the [broken link removed], [broken link removed], said the survey, carried out for the department by Ipsos MRBI,was important for civil service bodies and provided valuable feedback for civil servants. He described the results as “very positive, but we are not complacent”."

An 87% satisfaction level is probably what you would expect. 

When it comes to the  Gardai or nurses or the Revenue or the Department of Social Welfare, the media and the public will almost only every raise the bad experiences.   There have been shocking stories about the Gardai recently.  But despite them, every day the Gardai are doing good work and it rarely gets reported.  Or it gets reported as in the arrest of a significant figure yesterday, but it's not told in a "Well done Gardai" sort of way. 

I would say that most people's interaction with the civil service is probably satisfactory.  But that does not mean that it's efficient. Nor does it mean that they are earning their money.  

How many civil servants get fired for not doing their job properly?  Does it ever happen? 

Brendan


----------



## Firefly (7 Apr 2017)

Brendan Burgess said:


> How many civil servants get fired for not doing their job properly?
> Brendan



Hi Brendan,

I haven't had a mind-bending experience in a while but just had one there!

Firefly.


----------



## Deiseblue (7 Apr 2017)

A hugely affirmative Ipsos survey for public sector workers - take a bow guys & gals.
One can only imagine the result if a similar survey was done on bankers , estate agents , financial advisors, solicitors , builders , plumbers et al !


----------



## Vanessa (8 Apr 2017)

All those professions and trades would receive 100% approval. They would never dream of ripping off their customers or provide shoddy service


----------



## Gerry Canning (18 Apr 2017)

Consistently over the years I have found public servants/public sector workers efficient and helpful . I cannot say that about  the vaunted private sector. Never have I been short changed or robbed by the public sector. . I also believe that their wage rates help to set a level that the much vaunted private sector are  forced to compete with, ie keeps private sector wages up ..
To my mind 87% is good,


----------



## Firefly (18 Apr 2017)

Gerry Canning said:


> Never have I been short changed or robbed by the public sector



You must be either unemployed or on a low wage. Every time I check my payslip I feel rightly fleeced I'll tell you!


----------



## Purple (18 Apr 2017)

Firefly said:


> You must be either unemployed or on a low wage. Every time I check my payslip I feel rightly fleeced I'll tell you!


Yes, I work every Thursday and Friday in indentured service to the State. The Egyptians used a similar method to dig irrigation channels and medieval aristocracy used it to build walls for their castles. Back then there was no paper money so the labour had to be direct. Now there is paper money so it is indirect but it amounts to the same thing.


----------



## Purple (18 Apr 2017)

Gerry Canning said:


> Consistently over the years I have found public servants/public sector workers efficient and helpful . I cannot say that about  the vaunted private sector. Never have I been short changed or robbed by the public sector. . I also believe that their wage rates help to set a level that the much vaunted private sector are  forced to compete with, ie keeps private sector wages up ..
> To my mind 87% is good,


I have found them good when I get to talk to the right person and if they are open. 
As for wages; anything that pushes them above the open market rate is bad for a country like Ireland which relies so much on international trade.


----------



## thedaddyman (19 Apr 2017)

My issue with pay scales is that increments are not seen by staff and unions as pay rises when in effect, that is what they are. I've no argument with a rise following a probationary period but anything else should be performance based and based on a companies/states ability to pay them.


----------



## Purple (19 Apr 2017)

thedaddyman said:


> My issue with pay scales is that increments are not seen by staff and unions as pay rises when in effect, that is what they are. I've no argument with a rise following a probationary period but anything else should be performance based and based on a companies/states ability to pay them.


That's very hard to do without linking staff performance to the department/ bosses performance and that is even harder to do.


----------



## thedaddyman (19 Apr 2017)

Purple said:


> That's very hard to do without linking staff performance to the department/ bosses performance and that is even harder to do.



Not necessarily. Take Bus Eireann as an example, if they firstly had the money to pay rises, and by that I mean at least breaking even and have a signed off budget to cover the costs for the next year and then have a robust SLA in place with the Dept of Transport around adhering to timetables, clean buses, number of customer complaints etc then you can put a structure in place around it. if they don't have the money and are failing to deliver, then no-one gets anything.

The bigger problem is that there is no real incentive for senior management to create and sign up to such a process since it would/could also cover themselves. Their incentive is not to break the mould since if they do, they run the risk of being out of pocket themselves


----------



## Deiseblue (19 Apr 2017)

thedaddyman said:


> My issue with pay scales is that increments are not seen by staff and unions as pay rises when in effect, that is what they are. I've no argument with a rise following a probationary period but anything else should be performance based and based on a companies/states ability to pay them.


Most importantly the employer does not consider increments as pay rises but rather service related emoluments which do not figure , from an IR point of view,  in pay negotiations. 
As far as I'm aware such increments in the Public service are subject to satisfactory performance,  perhaps someone in the PS would verify this or not !


----------



## Gerry Canning (19 Apr 2017)

thedaddyman said:


> My issue with pay scales is that increments are not seen by staff and unions as pay rises when in effect, that is what they are. I've no argument with a rise following a probationary period but anything else should be performance based and based on a companies/states ability to pay them.



I wonder if performance based works , didn,t our wrecking ball Bankers , performance base things ?

Purple ,
Problem is { open market rate} dissolves into very poor incomes  etc.


----------



## thedaddyman (19 Apr 2017)

Gerry Canning said:


> I wonder if performance based works , didn,t our wrecking ball Bankers , performance base things ?
> 
> .



A large chunk of the problem with bankers was short term bonuses and sales commissions, not pay rises. They were deliberately incentivized to get deals in in the short term and not with the long term interest of the bank or customer in mind


----------



## Purple (19 Apr 2017)

Gerry Canning said:


> Purple ,
> Problem is { open market rate} dissolves into very poor incomes  etc.


Sweet mother of This post will be deleted if not edited immediately why do people continue to trot out that rubbish?!
If people aren't getting paid enough they go and work somewhere else. If a sector isn't getting enough applicants then they aren't paying enough for the job as it stands. They can either make the job more attractive or pay more. We are not surfs or indentured servants; we can go and work wherever we choose.  
We have very high rates of welfare and a very high minimum wage. They act as a floor in the labour market as things stand. 
The best paid jobs out there are based on market rates. If you want to get paid more then make yourself more valuable. If you want to do a particular job but the pay isn't high enough for you then do a different job.


----------



## Delboy (19 Apr 2017)

Deiseblue said:


> As far as I'm aware such increments in the Public service are subject to satisfactory performance,  perhaps someone in the PS would verify this or not !


Nope, they're paid as a matter of course. Your performance doesn't come into play in anything other than a re-grade application or when going for promotion.
Individual performance doesn't even come into question when pay rises are dished out...you get the same as everyone else in your grade.


----------



## Purple (20 Apr 2017)

Deiseblue said:


> Most importantly the employer does not consider increments as pay rises but rather service related emoluments which do not figure , from an IR point of view, in pay negotiations.


I love the way Unions take words and give them a different or selective meaning.
_emoluments; a salary, fee, or profit from employment or office. _Wages in other words or, to be completely clear about it (more Union speak), it's pay. Emoluments are pay. They are pay that the Unionised management doesn't take into account hen talking about pay to the Unions.


----------



## Deiseblue (20 Apr 2017)

I'm afraid you are wrong - Increments are subject to satisfactory performance in the preceding year.
According to a PS management acquaintances if you receive a 1  in the performance management development system review then no increment.


----------



## Purple (20 Apr 2017)

Deiseblue said:


> I'm afraid you are wrong - Increments are subject to satisfactory performance in the preceding year.
> According to a PS management acquaintances if you receive a 1 or 2 in the performance management development system review then no increment.


According to that right-wing rag the Irish Times only 0.1 of 1% of Civil Servants didn't get their incremental pay rise in 2011. That's 30 out of 30,000. two thirds of them got a rating of 4 or 5 on a 1-5 scale. Source. 
Deise, the King had no clothes on.


----------



## Deiseblue (20 Apr 2017)

thedaddyman said:


> A large chunk of the problem with bankers was short term bonuses and sales commissions, not pay rises. They were deliberately incentivized to get deals in in the short term and not with the long term interest of the bank or customer in mind



The way pay for performance worked in Bank of Ireland was that employees were offered a contract with a base salary that was less than the Union negotiated incremental salary system.
You were then advised that dependant on performance a substantial bonus could be yours at year end which during the good years led to riotous celebrations on the day with many claiming to have doubled their salaries.
The unfortunate corollary of this was that morals & ethics simply went out the window & were replaced by buccaneering risk taking .
The area in which I worked dealt with high worth customers & when the recession hit the losses were devastating, an area that once had upwards of 200 employees now has less that 20 , obviously the rest were either deployed or availed of voluntary redundancy .
Pay for performance , in my experience , was an unmitigated disaster.


----------



## Purple (20 Apr 2017)

Deiseblue said:


> The way pay for performance worked in Bank of Ireland was that employees were offered a contract with a base salary that was less than the Union negotiated incremental salary system.
> You were then advised that dependant on performance a substantial bonus could be yours at year end which during the good years led to riotous celebrations on the day with many claiming to have doubled their salaries.
> The unfortunate corollary of this was that morals & ethics simply went out the window & were replaced by buccaneering risk taking .
> The area in which I worked dealt with high worth customers & when the recession hit the losses were devastating, an area that once had upwards of 200 employees now has less that 20 , obviously the rest were either deployed or availed of voluntary redundancy .
> Pay for performance , in my experience , was an unmitigated disaster.


Good point. The question "What is being measured?" had to be asked before it can be determined if people are performing.


----------



## Gerry Canning (20 Apr 2017)

Firefly .

I have been unemployed and on a low wage in my time .
I have also been subject in earlier years,  to much higher income taxes than we see now.

{fleeced} as against what ?
And what relevance is that  to Public Service pay scales ?

From what I understand , most Public Service people are neither overpaid or over compensated .
I have no doubt a better pay scale system could be enacted , but is the present system so bad ?.

thedaddyman.
{performance based on a companies ability to pay}
Sounds fair and indeed would be fair, if companies took very long views , reality is that companies don,t take long views , indeed maybe they shouldn,t , take the long view.
Public Servants have run from underpaid whilst the boom was on , to what appears overpaid now that the boom is bust .
I would bet that over a long time frame things balance out.


----------



## thedaddyman (20 Apr 2017)

Deiseblue said:


> The way pay for performance worked in Bank of Ireland was that employees were offered a contract with a base salary that was less than the Union negotiated incremental salary system.
> You were then advised that dependant on performance a substantial bonus could be yours at year end which during the good years led to riotous celebrations on the day with many claiming to have doubled their salaries.
> The unfortunate corollary of this was that morals & ethics simply went out the window & were replaced by buccaneering risk taking .
> The area in which I worked dealt with high worth customers & when the recession hit the losses were devastating, an area that once had upwards of 200 employees now has less that 20 , obviously the rest were either deployed or availed of voluntary redundancy .
> Pay for performance , in my experience , was an unmitigated disaster.



I absolutely agree but the issue here was that pay for performance was based on bonuses and commission, not on payrises. I recall siting in an office in a bank watching a bunch of property lenders heading out one Friday evening after doing a major deal. I wonder in hindsight how much that cost the bank and ultimately us.

And whilst the private sector bankers were going out celebrating, the public sector bankers in the Central Bank sat back, did little or nothing and still got their increments and partnership payrises.

Bankers bonuses has little or nothing to do with public sector pay rises. There needs to be an incentive for public sector workers to deliver better services and for incompetence and inefficiencies not to be rewarded. Guaranteed increments don't provide that incentive, all they do is reward doing the minimum to survive.


----------



## Deiseblue (20 Apr 2017)

I'm sorry but as I have pointed out increments are not guaranteed , they are based on staff reviews under the PDMS system & subject to satisfactory performance in the preceding year.
I know that relatively few fail to achieve the required grade which reflects the calibre of our public servants & perhaps goes a long way to see why official surveys have shown that 87% of the public surveyed state that they think Public Services mostly meet or exceed  expectations.


----------



## Ceist Beag (20 Apr 2017)

Deiseblue said:


> I'm sorry but as I have pointed out increments are not guaranteed , they are based on staff reviews under the PDMS system & subject to satisfactory performance in the preceding year.
> I know that relatively few fail to achieve the required grade which reflects the calibre of our public servants & perhaps goes a long way to see why official surveys have shown that 87% of the public surveyed state that they think Public Services mostly meet or exceed  expectations.


Deise I presume that your tongue is firmly in your cheek there - either that or your head is somewhere else! 99.9% achieving increments is as close to guaranteed as you will ever get.
Just out of curiosity, what percentage of those employed in the public sector have regular dealings with members of the public (i.e. teachers, nurses, gardai, librarians, etc.)? Also, as Purple said, what is being measured in order to know whether any of these are performing to expectations? All any of those surveys show is that front line public sector workers are perceived to be doing their job. There is absolutely no way members of the public would have any clue how these workers are performing against targets/expectations as we have no clue what those targets/expectations might be.


----------



## Purple (20 Apr 2017)

Ceist Beag said:


> Deise I presume that your tongue is firmly in your cheek there - either that or your head is somewhere else! 99.9% achieving increments is as close to guaranteed as you will ever get.
> Just out of curiosity, what percentage of those employed in the public sector have regular dealings with members of the public (i.e. teachers, nurses, gardai, librarians, etc.)? Also, as Purple said, what is being measured in order to know whether any of these are performing to expectations? All any of those surveys show is that front line public sector workers are perceived to be doing their job. There is absolutely no way members of the public would have any clue how these workers are performing against targets/expectations as we have no clue what those targets/expectations might be.


Poor old Deise has me on his ignore list (yes, that's a thing) as my posts upset him. If you want him to see my post linking to the details of who gets increments you'll have to quote it.


----------



## Deiseblue (20 Apr 2017)

Ceist Beag  , can you can provide me with an up to date report showing that 99.9 % of those who were to receive increments actually received them after the PDMS review?
You should be aware that the PDMS system changed in 2012 , now only those receiving a 3 or above receive increments.
Prior to that & contrary to generally accepted HR practice the Dept deemed that only those who got an abysmal 1 in their review didn't get an increment!
And yes I believe we are very lucky in having high calibre Public Servants


----------



## Delboy (20 Apr 2017)

Deiseblue said:


> I'm afraid you are wrong - Increments are subject to satisfactory performance in the preceding year.
> According to a PS management acquaintances if you receive a 1  in the performance management development system review then no increment.


No reviews in the PS that I've ever seen or heard of. Doesn't happen
Maybe in the CS but sure we know the fix that they are...wasn't it close to 100% got a mark high enough to ensure there was no issues?

edit - yes, I see the link above. 99.9% got a good review. Even Saddam Hussein couldn't achieve those type of election results


----------



## Leper (21 Apr 2017)

OK! Guys, let's do away with payscales in the Public Service and have the public servants negotiate their pay rate individually (with line managers who were once on my rate of pay) say every six months. Secondly, let's re-introduce another monthly assessment process. Then let's introduce a strict per cent fail rate (some contributors here are hung up on this). We will have a system of lower management grades (who themselves are on low payscales) clogging up the system with such assessments and making enemies (or friends) along the way.

Now, I'm thinking of a Line Manager calling me for assessment. "Right, Lep. I have to give you a "1," it's your turn for a kick in the behind, you see; so take it for the team as ya know, I've got to look good in my assessment procedure.  The increment ain't too much anyhow and with our tax laws, you won't be losing too much." Brilliant!- Lep is busting his butt to make others look good.  So, for my next assessment, I do as little as possible along with the other team members and inform the Line Manager to get his act together or he/she will have a team of disgruntled players who are sick of making low management look good. Nothing like shooting ourselves in the foot, as usual.


----------



## Ceist Beag (21 Apr 2017)

Deiseblue said:


> Ceist Beag  , can you can provide me with an up to date report showing that 99.9 % of those who were to receive increments actually received them after the PDMS review?
> You should be aware that the PDMS system changed in 2012 , now only those receiving a 3 or above receive increments.
> Prior to that & contrary to generally accepted HR practice the Dept deemed that only those who got an abysmal 1 in their review didn't get an increment!
> And yes I believe we are very lucky in having high calibre Public Servants


Deise, Purple provided a report showing the 99.9% in 2012. If things have changed since then as you suggest, is there any report showing that fewer now get increments? I'm commenting on the figures available to me so if you have something more recent I'm sure we would all be delighted to see how things have improved.


----------



## Firefly (21 Apr 2017)

Deiseblue said:


> I'm sorry but as I have pointed out increments are not guaranteed , they are based on staff reviews under the PDMS system & subject to satisfactory performance in the preceding year.
> I know that relatively few fail to achieve the required grade which reflects the calibre of our public servants



That's brilliant so it is


----------



## Deiseblue (21 Apr 2017)

With respect , Ceist Beag that report covered the year 2011 & in the 6 years since things have moved on considerably, it should also be noted that the report in question only refers to the Civil Service who comprise approximately 10% of the Public Sector.
I previously pointed out that the Dept. have changed the criterion for obtaining increments from an appraisal level of 2 to 3 , it is frankly staggering that only those who got an abysmal 1 were denied an increment .
On foot of the Croke Park Agreement the whole methodology of performance management was questioned & various changes seem to have happened across the Public Sector , for example a friend in the Impact Union tells me that the Civil Sevice have now moved to a 2 point rating system since 2016.
Unfortunately I cannot find any current reports but they should prove interesting when they surface in the media.
I'm not quite sure that performance management appraisals work in any case particularly in such a large sector that has been  embittered  from management down as a result of painful pay cuts & jobcuts , hopefully now that pay is being gradually restored with hopefully more progress to come in forthcoming negotiations with the various Unions & more jobs are added in addition to scrapping the extra hours things will improve .


----------



## Ceist Beag (21 Apr 2017)

As I said Deise, we can only comment on reports available to us but if, as you say, things have changed so that increments are now not handed out quite so easily and that there has to be evidence that workers are at least meeting expectations then that sounds like a step in the right direction and hopefully at some point soon there will be reports acknowledging this.


----------



## amtc (21 Apr 2017)

Not everyone in the public sector is employed on a payscale. I spent 8 years working there but paid off scale in the confidential pay roll. Performance management for bonus and increase.


----------



## Purple (24 Apr 2017)

Leper said:


> Now, I'm thinking of a Line Manager calling me for assessment. "Right, Lep. I have to give you a "1," it's your turn for a kick in the behind, you see; so take it for the team as ya know, I've got to look good in my assessment procedure.  The increment ain't too much anyhow and with our tax laws, you won't be losing too much." Brilliant!- Lep is busting his butt to make others look good.  So, for my next assessment, I do as little as possible along with the other team members and inform the Line Manager to get his act together or he/she will have a team of disgruntled players who are sick of making low management look good. Nothing like shooting ourselves in the foot, as usual.


How is that any different from the current system from the perspective of incentivising people to work hard or not to slack off?
New Zealand doesn't have collective bargaining or pay scales in the Public Sector. What way does their system work?


----------



## Purple (9 May 2017)

The report from the Public Sector Pay Commission is out. It says that the value of post '95 pensions is about an extra 12-18% of salary, when current contributions are taken into account. 
A report from Davy a few weeks back said that Public Sector Pay was 40% higher than that in the Private Sector and that education and skills differences only accounted for half of that differential. That report did not take into account the value of pensions. Therefore like for like Public sector employees are earning between 32% and 18% more than their Private Sector counterparts. If there is a case for paying them more then fine but let's start from a truthful position.


----------

