That's very hard to do without linking staff performance to the department/ bosses performance and that is even harder to do.
That's very hard to do without linking staff performance to the department/ bosses performance and that is even harder to do.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.
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.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.
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 ?
.
Sweet mother of This post will be deleted if not edited immediately why do people continue to trot out that rubbish?!Purple ,
Problem is { open market rate} dissolves into very poor incomes etc.
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.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 !
I love the way Unions take words and give them a different or selective meaning.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.
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.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.
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
Good point. The question "What is being measured?" had to be asked before it can be determined if people are performing.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.
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.
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.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.
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.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.
No reviews in the PS that I've ever seen or heard of. Doesn't happenI'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.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?