Croke Park 2 - dead before it gets voted upon

The_Banker said:
Im not a fat cat union boss and I am a member of a union. I believe it is essencial that there is a strong union movement.

So, I am a waster?

Thats a big leap.
Click to expand...

You just need to believe in yourself, leave the herd behind and rise to the top.

OK - maybe I was a bit OTT in the original statement - but the essential point is that talented people dont need unions, good people are a scarce commodity in any economy in any country at any time, so why do you subscribe to a system that penalises you for the sake of subsidising those that wont pull their weight.

As regards 'good people are always a scarce commodity' - you might say what about all the architects and solicitors - I'll bet you they wont spent the rest of their lives unemployed, they didnt get where they were without brains & effort, that will get them back working eventually - you cant keep a good man down.
 
According to Dan O'Brien in today's Irish Times:

"...public sector workers, despite having suffered net income reductions, have, on average, retained a large part of the gains from bubble-era pay increases.
The average gross pay packet in the public sector* was €63,305 last year, down by €1,300 from the peak registered in 2009. But it remains well up on the €58,170 paid in 2007 just as the bubble burst"

So even though cuts have been made, wages are still higher, on average, than they were at the height of the boom..
 

A bit OTT !

You underestimate yourself .
 
I have just visited the IMPACT website and glanced through the additional harsh details that are being put to its membership for acceptance/rejection. I cant believe that a trades union prepared this document; even the government could not have presented worse.

I feel IMPACT will have a lot less members within a few weeks.
 
RonanC said:
But how many of the 30,000 are still entitled to/or qualify for increments?
Click to expand...

19,710 in 2012 of 31,618 civil servants ( 63% ) - the majority of whom are lower paid workers.

Obviously Celebtastic's figure of 99.9 % includes VAT !
 
Thanks for that

The headline, I think, instructive:
"Nearly two-thirds of civil servants in line for pay increase this year"

It gives the lie to all this guff about "pay freezes"
 
celebtastic said:
Thanks for that

The headline, I think, instructive:
"Nearly two-thirds of civil servants in line for pay increase this year"

It gives the lie to all this guff about "pay freezes"
Click to expand...

On the bright side we have managed to bring the percentage receiving increments down from your 99.9% to 63% - you really are going to have to stop exaggerating/inventing statistics , it has gone beyond tiresome !
 
Deiseblue said:
On the bright side we have managed to bring the percentage receiving increments down from your 99.9% to 63% - you really are going to have to stop exaggerating/inventing statistics , it has gone beyond tiresome !
Click to expand...

And that percentage is dropping fast every year considering no promotions or recruiting.
 
celebtastic said:
Thanks for that

The headline, I think, instructive:
"Nearly two-thirds of civil servants in line for pay increase this year"

It gives the lie to all this guff about "pay freezes"
Click to expand...

You don't appear to understand what an incremental payscale means, or are choosing not to - as a result it's you who is talking guff.

Paying someone in accordance with their existing contract and not increasing the salary scales is a pay FREEZE.

Not paying someone an increment which under their contract they are entitled to (subject to satisfactory performance), is a pay CUT. i.e. the effect of the action is that the individual is being paid less than their contract of employment states they should be paid - that is the very definition of a pay cut surely?

Not honouring the contracts of PS workers is only going to result in the people who actually have real-world marketable skills/experience jumping ship - the dead wood that the PS bashers believe is causing all of the inefficiencies will stay on to the bitter end. That's what you get when you use a blunt instrument to perform delicate surgery.
 
celebtastic said:
You are quite right - the figure is 99.9%:



http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0726/330750-civil-servants-to-face-tougher-performance-ratings/

Disgraceful really.
Click to expand...

Yet again you are using statistics incorrectly. A significant number of staff would not be getting increments due to being at the top of the scale already, staff get two long service increments after having reached the top of the scale, after 3 years and then 5 years (could be wrong on the latter).

However, the numbers not getting 1 or 2 is a disgrace.
 
To clarify what the statistics mean/where they come from: the numbers originally came from a Dail question. The question asked about performance ratings, not increments awarded/denied.

http://debates.oireachtas.ie/dail/2012/06/26/00132.asp

This showed that of the 77% of civil servants who had their assessment completed (about 23,000, my calc), only 0.1% (about 23, my calc) of them scored a 1 which is the level at which an increment is denied. Various news outlets than made up some stats of their own by applying the 0.1% to the whole population of civil servants (30,000) to come up with the number, 30, of civil servants who were denied increments. This (news outlets) calculation ignored a couple of things: (a) the 23% of people who didn't have assessments, (b) the fact that not every civil servant is eligible for an increment every year because of long service/top of scale issues and (c) the possibility of grade differences in an increment-eligible year vs a non-eligible year.

So 30 increment denials is not a correct number (actual is likely to be lower...) but it is correct to state that 0.1% of those assessed got a 1 on their assessment - and so 99.9% got a 2 or above (the qualifying level for an increment if the employee is eligible in that year).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register