No, that's not paid for by most people, public or private.
€720 a month.
Public sector pay rise
- Thread starter Sunnysoutheast
- Start date
- Status
Not in the SME sector, which is where most people work.
By international standards our senior Public Servants are under paid and our lower level public servants are over paid. Most lower level roles in the public sector, such as data entry and administrative positions, would be classified as semi-skilled in the private sector. The combined pay and pension value should be calculated at an hourly rate basis for comparison. Things like paid sick leave, longer holidays, a shorter working week, flexitime, job security and guaranteed pay increases in the form of Increments should be factored in as well.
Yes, and that is part of the overall remuneration package. If I get €80k a year and my employer puts an additional €10k into my pension then I'm actually getting paid €90k a year.
Absolutely, which is why a pay cut which also reduced the pension of retired teachers would have been much fairer than the pension levy.
That said a pension of €30k a year isn't bad. Remember that they'll get a tax free €90k lump sum as well. If you've no mortgage and no dependents €600 a week isn't bad, especially if your partner has a pension as well.
No reference to the tax-free lump sum of 1.5 times annual salary, of course! And would you (or they) regard Cornmarket as a disinterested adviser in such matters?
I have just looked up a recent salary cheque and worked out my pension contributions. Total per fortnight is €311 including pension contribution, 1.5 % spouses and children's levy and additional superannuation contribution. Working this out assuming a 31 day month my pension contribution per month is €689.35. Not that far off the figure you suggest.
I was referring to the annual pension. The 1 1/2times tax free lump sum is of course a benefit which will accrue to those to manage 40 years service. The average length of service of a UK teacher is now 13 years so I can't see many lasting the pace here to collect the full amount. I agree totally about Cornmarket not being a "disinterested advisor" however the entitlement of those on the single service career average pension scheme is quite low when you exclude the state pension to which most would be entitled on the basis of PRSI contributions alone.
The 1.5% spouse and Children's Levy should be deducted and do remember that you're not paying enough to fund your standard contributory PRSI old age pension either and neither are most private sector employees.
There's 4.2 weeks in a month so multiply your fortnightly contribution by 2.1 and you get €653.10. I presume you're not including your PRSI contribution in that.
Nobody who works for 13 years will fund their personal pension. If people choose to move to different jobs that's their own business.
It is compulsory (even for those without a spouse or a child!) so shouldn't be deducted.
Last edited:
I didn't suggest this. I was referring to the fact that you have to provide 40 years service to the state to get the benefit of a lump sum one and half times your salary.
Even the reduced amount is a lot more than most commentators think public servants pay although I am at the top of my pay scale. I am not including my PRSI contributions. Those on the single scheme pay less ASC as their pension entitlement is much reduced.
Sunnysoutheast
Registered User
- Messages
- 65
Just wondering how much will teachers pre-2013 but post 1995 get per annum for their pension?
Any source for that? Find that hard to believe.
The CSO indicates 66% of workers have pension coverage. Of those who did not, 45% "never got around to it", a further 3.2% felt that other sources offer a better return for investment. So close to 50% of those people (assuming they are all private sector) choose not to engage with pension benefits.
Pre 1995: pension = (years service)(1/80) = 50% of final salary
Post 1995, but not in Single PS scheme: pension is in theory the same, but made up of PRSI State Pension + lower work pension = 50% of final salary
That includes State employees.
61.7% of that 66% has defined benefit pensions so they were in the State Sector or were part of the small contingent in areas such as Banking or in the so-called "commercial" semi-State sector who still enjoyed those pensions. Every employer of a reasonable size is obliged to provide a pension scheme but they are certainly not obliged to top it up. That's the point I was making. If you have a source to show that most companies in the SME sector top up the pensions of their employees then I'll certainly stand corrected.
Sure, that's always been the case. You hardly expect people to have to work for less than 40 years do you?
Which is why I note the lack of meaningful comparisons in the thread. I find the standard 'public v. private sector' comparisons disingenuous. It makes no sense given the diversity of roles/skills, non-commercial approach and size to compare to the private sector dominated by SME's whose activities (broadly) bear no similarity to the State sector at all?
A more meaningful comparison, for example, might be the staff in the Attorney Generals Office compared to one of the major law firms/consultancies (pay per hour might be skewed there!) or auditors in C&AG's office vs. industry, trades people etc. Averaging across the entire sector in meaningless. Grand for employment policies etc., but working conditions?
What the CSO shows, assuming those who don't have a pension are in the private sector, 50% have no interest in a pension, so have no opportunity to avail of an employer contribution even if it was available.
It was your claim, that they don't top up
I don't have a source to substantiate my suggestion that employers pay some sort of pension contribution at higher levels of salary e.g. >€60k. Agreed that the CSO does not show if an employer contribution was made or not.What we can glean from the CSO is that increasing age is correlated with increased salary is correlated with increasing pension coverage. I find it very hard to believe, that large organisations akin to parts of the state sector, do not pay pension contributions.
I agree. I've noted a number of times that the State's liability for standard contributory pensions is just as big, or maybe bigger, an issue as the pensions of those it employs. This is especially the case since the extra pension contributions were introduced after the financial crash.
Again I agree. The figures suggest that Public Servants are significantly under paid at the top end and overpaid at the bottom end.
Saying that they have "no interest" is a bit disingenuous.
Okay, so you have an unsubstantiated opinion and so do I. In the absence of pints maybe we should leave it there.It was your claim, that they don't top up
I agree but I didn't say that. I said that in the SME sector where most of the private sector works it would be unusual for pensions to be topped up. I also didn't mention salary, or pay since most people aren't paid a salary. A hair dressers salon isn't going to top-up pensions. A small factory or warehouse isn't going to top up pensions. A café isn't going to top up pensions. Those are the sort of places most people work.
On the broader issue or the wage expectations of lower level unskilled or semi-skilled Public Sector employees performing clerical and administrative work; they should be at the same level as a receptionist in the factory or a warehouse employee who handles shipping documents. They should be significantly below a tradesperson, someone who has decision making responsibilities or people who do hard manual or dangerous work. Comparisons should be made based on hourly rates and those rates should include the value of pension entitlements.
The level of educational attainment that the person has is irrelevant unless it relates directly to the job they have. A clerical officer with a Masters in Classical Studies should be paid the same as a clerical officer of equal skill and competence with a Junior Cert.
It's ridiculous that a teacher should expect to be paid the same as a Bricklayer.
It's even more ridiculous that someone in a semi-skilled State Sector office job with excellent holidays, paid sick leave, short hours and generally excellent T's & C's should expect to be paid the same as a Bricklayer.
Perhaps it would be better to say "cannot afford" to put money away for pensions for those in precarious lower paid employed in the private sector. However there is a cohort of workers who simply don't bother putting money away for their pensions and expect the state to provide. They are generally the same people who will moan about the "gold-plated" pensions of state workers. Public and civil servants have no choice but to contribute towards their pension from day 1 of their employment regardless of their income level. The proposed "auto-enrolment" scheme for all workers needs to be fast tracked to ensure pension coverage for the majority of the population in the decades ahead.
- Status