Skip to content Skip to main navigation

News

Recruiting experts in
Accountancy & Finance

Pay rise for MLA’s

By johnboy - 23 June 2010 19

It’s a busy week in the Legislative Assembly.

Today Mr Stanhope has bravely announced a 3.25% pay ride for Members of the Legislative Assembly by the Remuneration Tribunal.

This is, handily enough, in line with what’s been offered to the ACT Public Servce:

“The 3.25% increase is in line with the wage offer being negotiated for other government employees, which equates to approximately 3.5% (2.5% wage offer plus a $650 sign-on bonus) and is broadly reflective of community standards.

“The base salary for an MLA is now $118,071 a year, while additional amounts paid to the holders of prescribed offices – Ministers and committee members- are unchanged as a proportion of the base salary.”

The Remuneration Tribunal also granted increases of 3.25% to executives and other public officials.

Last year the Tribunal increased the base rate of pay of Members of the Legislative Assembly by 1.5%.

Members of the ACT Legislative Assembly remain the second lowest paid politicians in Australia.

Cue the howling.

Legislative Assembly Pay

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

What’s Your opinion?


Post a comment
Please login to post your comments, or connect with
19 Responses to
Pay rise for MLA’s
Thumper 8:51 am 24 Jun 10

EL2s (Section heads) in the federal PS often earn more than MLAs.

I reckon that puts it in perspective.

rosscoact 8:15 am 24 Jun 10

Pays are set by the Remuneration tribunal not linked to CPI.

They got 1.5% last year, the PS got 2.5 or 3% by memory. Add them up and it’s about the same

taninaus 7:14 am 24 Jun 10

Gerry-Built said :

If I remember correctly from a previous topic, the MLAs already get annual CPI increases automatically…..

No the ACT Politicians salary is only set by the Remuneration Tribunal – they get whatever rise the RT decides is in line with market forces (as do the executives).

I agree with BD84 – the 3.25% is a per annum increase – the 2.5% is for 12 months and the $650 is to ‘technically’ cover the period that they aren’t giving back pay before July 1 2010 – it doesn’t equal the same as the politicians wage rise – it might equal 3.25% over the 15 month period it is covering but that doesn’t make it a per annum 3.25% that the RT awarded – and when you get above about an ASO5 it drops % wise anyway.

Gerry-Built 11:04 pm 23 Jun 10

If I remember correctly from a previous topic, the MLAs already get annual CPI increases automatically… the additional increase is (presumably) granted on top of *that* CPI increase; “in line with the wage offer being negotiated for other government employees” also seems to ignore the automatic CPI adjustment…

mcs 10:47 pm 23 Jun 10

Glad I wasn’t the only memeber of the ACTPS not impressed by the 3.25%=2.5% + $650 argument. What a load of absolute rubbish.

It makes me even more annoyed than I already am, because I am not eligible for the bonus (Have to have had 12 months service in the ACTPS and I don’t have that yet- but by the speed of negotiations I might have it before a deal is done lol!) The bonus thing is a scam anyway- just a way to try and avoid paying back pay to March for the pay rise and to scrimp a bit going forward.

bd84 9:58 pm 23 Jun 10

Spectra said :

The 3.25% increase is in line with the wage offer being negotiated for other government employees, which equates to approximately 3.5% (2.5% wage offer plus a $650 sign-on bonus)

Now I know I’m not the financial genius Stanhope is, but I don’t see how you can include a sign-on bonus (a one-off payment) in a comparison of annual salaries…you know, things that are paid on an ongoing basis. But then I guess that’s why I’m just a lowly pleb and he’s mayor of this town.

I’m glad there is another person out there that actually has a brain, by noting that the $650 “sign-on bonus” is a load of crap. You are 100% correct that the bonus does not mean a 2.5% payrise turns into a 3.25% payrise, it is still a 2.5% payrise. The base pay of staff will be only 2.5% higher and any future payrises will not include the $650. If 3.25% is a fair pay rise for members of the Legislative Assembly, the Government can afford the same pay rise to its own staff.

justin heywood 8:14 pm 23 Jun 10

Saying “The base salary for an MLA is now $118,071 a year” is a bit like saying the base salary for the APS is a $50,000 APS3 salary.

Stanhope’s salary is more than double the base rate, all ministers (5) get the base rate plus $78,000 (so does Zed) and most of the others seem to be entitled to additional salary of some sort. Is Katy Gallagher really worth more than $208,000.00 p.a. in the current market?

These are old figures mind.* Perhaps shaneb, who seems to know a lot about the workings of the Assembly, can enlighten or correct me. What is the average salary of members? How many are actually on the base rate?

*http://www.parliament.act.gov.au/members/index.asp?sortby=&profile=156&assembly=7#156

CraigT 7:08 pm 23 Jun 10

Coach – because we don’t *need* or *want* politicians.

Canberrans resoundingly said “NO” in the “Self-Government” referendum, because we didn’t want our town run by politicians – useless dogmatists who will do anything *but* run the town efficiently.

We saw Stanhope put Revolve out of business, expend vast amounts of time and money on the homosexual marriages irrelevancy, millions of $$$ on some refugee program all the while the basic services we actually need become more expensive and less responsive.

Why is Car Rego in the ACT almost double what it costs elsewhere?

The idiot politicans who run this town waste as much money as they possibly can hiring ever more bureaucrats and consultants who do *nothing* to provide the services our rates should be paying for.

trevar 6:47 pm 23 Jun 10

Coach said :

Am I the only one who thinks that way?

Probably not, and your reasoning is mostly sound, except that it would absolutely preclude the lower classes from running for office, which would be immoral. This way, we can pretend that getting elected is possible for anyone, while finding other means to keep the poor out of office…

Alien Fiend 6:10 pm 23 Jun 10

This surely begs the question……

How come they didn’t offer ACT pubes 3.25% when the agreement came up for renewal at the end of March? Would have saved loads of meetings and money and a three month wait for a pay rise (and a whole lot of nonsense statements about how we can’t afford it).

Like Spectra, I’m no financial wizz, but a one-off sign-on bonus of $650 for someone on $50k is not the same as it would be for someone on $90k.

There again – whatever they get paid – it’s still not enough to make me want to sit in that chamber and talk nonsense to those people.

Coach 5:24 pm 23 Jun 10

Who would want that job for $118,000.

It has to be the most thankless underpaid work in our community. You and your family are open to living in a fishbowl, with now privacy, constantly abused by all and sundry.

You get no credit for all the good work you do. You get the blame for everything.

Good luck to anyone who wants to live like that.

We complain about the standard of our politicians, but look what we pay them compared to our business leaders.

There are plenty of people who would do it for nothing, who have secure incomes from their own businesses, but who would not subject themselves and their family to the constant abuse our society and its media dishes out to our politicians.

Am I the only one who thinks that way?

shaneb 4:15 pm 23 Jun 10

The annual increase seems reasonable and is not far above general inflation, but the actual base salary for an MLA seems very low to me, don’t senior APS staff get paid significantly more for significantly less work? I wonder how much extra pay ministers receive for their duties? They seem to be required to regularly attend events on weekends and in the evenings.

Spectra 4:13 pm 23 Jun 10

The 3.25% increase is in line with the wage offer being negotiated for other government employees, which equates to approximately 3.5% (2.5% wage offer plus a $650 sign-on bonus)

Now I know I’m not the financial genius Stanhope is, but I don’t see how you can include a sign-on bonus (a one-off payment) in a comparison of annual salaries…you know, things that are paid on an ongoing basis. But then I guess that’s why I’m just a lowly pleb and he’s mayor of this town.

Holden Caulfield 3:32 pm 23 Jun 10

Well, it is a “pay ride” after all. 😉

pptvb 2:21 pm 23 Jun 10

Won’t the bus drivers love THIS?

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2017 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
www.the-riotact.com | www.b2bmagazine.com.au | www.thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site