Public Service Costs - The Elephant in the Room


I suppose the obvious answer to that (although it is an argument I have some sympathy with) is that an inflation calculation which excludes accommodation cost is inherently deeply flawed. Accommodation costs account for 20-40% of an average household’s spending? If so, inflation is running at 2-4% for those renting, and something not far off that for those trying to buy (obviously I’m grossly simplifying - accommodation is inherently different from food/clothes/electricity in how lumpily it impacts on people).

Of course it would be cheaper to just build some damn accommodation, rather than handing out 6% pay rises, but we couldn’t be doing that for very good reasons such as mumble-mumble cough mumble



  1. Current Inflation 0.9% and rising (likely to be well above 1.0 by time increases start in 2018).
  2. The comparible per annum increase is not 6.6% but around 2% ish.
  3. An element is pay restoration in any case.
  4. No pay increases for almost 10 years.
  5. For many most goes in Tax anyway


FactCheck 2:
No one said any different - the headline stated “State employees offered average pay rises of 6.6% by 2020”


Technically correct but phrased in a way to deliberately demonise PS workers IMHO. The newspapers will always pick the largest number.


The best sort of correct :smiley:


At least that’s the PS Pay deal put to bed on here :slight_smile:


We could afford tax cuts if we were giving pay rises to the public sector. :smiley:


The award should be judged against *expected *inflation, which is cumulative about 5% over the period.

The settlement itself is not particularly generous. Most of the ‘temporary’ 2009 pension levy is now being permanently converted to an official pension contribution.

Lower grade staff will probably be back to where they were in 2008 real terms by 2019. Higher paid are still a good bit off.


Are you talking about net or gross pay?

If staff are so far behind, why is the public sector pay bill back to bubble-era levels despite lower numbers of staff?

Source: Public sector pay - Avoiding the mistakes of the past … 032017.htm


€20 million paid out in pensions, lump sums, and termination pay to former politicians in 2016
Full list of 385 politicians enclosed, and number one is **drumroll **
**1. Labour’s Emmett Stagg who received €247,231 after serving 29 consecutive years in the Dáil, as well as a spell as a minister.

  • lump sum worth €161,000,
  • termination sum €16,000
  • termination pay €35,815
  • a ministerial pension €15,683
  • TD pension of €18,296**
    :imp: :imp:

That’s just €20m for one year! Some republic we are.


This is inevitable in an election year. All TDs (whether they contest the election or not) get a ‘scrappage’ payment depending on length of service.

It is kind of equivalent to a redundancy payment. TBH it is hard to justify as most TDs don’t have problems finding employment outside politics. It is completely unjustifiable when a TD over 65 decides not to contest an election and moves straight onto a pension.


Lump sum revelation time again … -1.3391277


Dublin ‘allowance’ for public servants ruled out by Donohoe … allowance/


I find all that reporting nonsense. A consultant is on 250K. If he works 40 years he get a lump sum of 1.5 times salary, so 375K. Not news…


indeed its a headline grabbing non story, the lump the amounts together to make it even more scandalous, journalists writing this kind of drivel should be ashamed of themselves


Really :unamused:

It’s a story given the amounts are so large. There should be a cap on those pensions…1.5 times salary when your on 250k per year is a bit generous do you not think?


whether its 50k a year or 250k a year if thats what the formula is thats what the formula is,

its no more generous to one than the other relatively speaking, they are paid 250k a year for a reason.

im not saying the pension arrangements are good/bad or indifferent, but reporting on specific individuals because they happen to be higher earners is tabloid stuff.


I’m in the public service and we must pay for our own tea/coffee.

I’ve consistently contended that if we had free coffee stations on each floor some people would take them back to their desks and work more, rather than heading down to thecanteen for a long break. Thus more productivity for little outlay.

I enquired with a union rep before and was told management are afraid that if they allowed it, an FOI request would come in and say “Gov Dept spent 50K on free tea and coffee for staff over 10 years”…


Not saying this may not happen but I am 25 years in PS Orgs and I have never seen one. We pay for our own Tea/Coffee/Christmas Party etc.


this is the problem i think the press focus on the wrong things, and just pick what they think will outrage people,

when i was KPMG we had tea ladies with trolleys too and that couldnt be further removed from the PS