22 November 2013

So who wants a pay cut?

| johnboy
Join the conversation
32

Government News has a story on plans at Health to offer demotions in an effort to get payroll down:

The Community and Public Sector Union (CPSU) has successfully sought to enter consultations with the Department of Health following confirmation that a range of voluntary workplace flexibility options – including reduced hours and voluntary demotions – have been put to staff as a way of cutting budgets and potentially reducing the need for redundancies.

The tactics by Health open a bold new front in the bid to reduce the staff costs in the Australian Public Service because they are likely to act as a frontrunner for similar initiatives in other departments.

Join the conversation

32
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

neanderthalsis said :

harvyk1 said :

If this was happening in the car industry, the building industry or any other industry that “real Australian’s” work in, we’d be seeing protests bringing the major cities to a stand still. Today Tonight and A Current Affair would both be running stories non stop, and yet because it’s “Canberra” this sort of uncertainty around peoples jobs is not only accepted, but encouraged….

It has, regularly and in many industry sectors. In 2008 especially, there were a number of negotiations between unions and employers at the start of the GFC to establish fliexible workplace options that allowed people to drop to part time, take a voluntary pay cut or go into a part time training arrangement but still keep their job. It does happen a lot in some industires, especially where there is peak demand followed by flat periods. The workforce opts to stay employed, albeit at reduced pay,because being employed is better being on the dole.

It is only really in the sheltered world (or perhaps sheltered workshop) that is the APS that the Jobs For Life mentality still exists…

Indeed I think Holden workers quite recently voted for a pay reduction. http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/holden-workers-at-the-company8217s-elizabeth-plant-in-adelaide-vote-yes-to-pay-freeze/story-fni6uok5-1226696051225

Okay a three-year freeze, but a pay freeze is a pay cut in real terms, so long as inflation is above zero.

Something people often forget is that when there is deflation (prices are reducing), pay should be reduced accordingly. There has at times been deflation in some developed economies since the GFC…

IP

neanderthalsis2:57 pm 24 Nov 13

harvyk1 said :

If this was happening in the car industry, the building industry or any other industry that “real Australian’s” work in, we’d be seeing protests bringing the major cities to a stand still. Today Tonight and A Current Affair would both be running stories non stop, and yet because it’s “Canberra” this sort of uncertainty around peoples jobs is not only accepted, but encouraged….

It has, regularly and in many industry sectors. In 2008 especially, there were a number of negotiations between unions and employers at the start of the GFC to establish fliexible workplace options that allowed people to drop to part time, take a voluntary pay cut or go into a part time training arrangement but still keep their job. It does happen a lot in some industires, especially where there is peak demand followed by flat periods. The workforce opts to stay employed, albeit at reduced pay,because being employed is better being on the dole.

It is only really in the sheltered world (or perhaps sheltered workshop) that is the APS that the Jobs For Life mentality still exists…

Aeek said :

steveu said :

IMHO There have been a number of IT firms rubbing their hands with glee well before the election, who were in talks with the the opposition about how they could get their slice of the pie.

Rather unfortunate for IBMgsa who were found to be, in QLD. worse than useless.

The big players are struggling, especially IBM and HP. Both suck very badly as places to work and have signed up low profit work to maintain market share, so the pressure is on to do more with less.

Some of the smaller firms are doing very well, though.

steveu said :

IMHO There have been a number of IT firms rubbing their hands with glee well before the election, who were in talks with the the opposition about how they could get their slice of the pie.

Rather unfortunate for IBMgsa who were found to be, in QLD. worse than useless.

MissChief said :

I hope the decision makers also consider what efficiencies might be gained by actually employing people. Imagine how much it is costing the Government to have DHS staff waiting 45 minutes just to speak to someone in their ICT section (let alone get their problem fixed which can take up to 4 weeks). In this instance, employing a few extra people to reduce wait times might actually save money. The same goes for outsourced work that could now be done cheaper, quicker and at a higher standard in-house.

Their solution to the IT problem will be to form “strategic partnerships” (you can’t use the o word anymore). They have been running the existing internal IT service into the ground (reduce resources, expand scope beyond what is reasonable etc) then sell it off as it isn’t performing, apply a open ended contract so you are begging the firm to take your money, and bingo. Consolidate IT across departments (now you had your chance to do that for the last 6 years they will say) giving a bigger slice of the market to the firm you are “partnering” with. Amazing we just got some instant savings from consolidation which will be part of profit for the firm that gets the work (the price will be just below the old operating costs of course, and hence it can be stated its cheaper).
Move existing it people to spaces where they can’t do their work they are skilled up for, they will eventually give up and go. It doesn’t matter where (ie what country) the service comes from as long as it’s cheap. Problem solved.

IMHO There have been a number of IT firms rubbing their hands with glee well before the election, who were in talks with the the opposition about how they could get their slice of the pie.

Nice isn’t it?

with Alan Jones spreading his particularly vile brand of fact-lacking stories, it wouldn’t be surprising if an uneducated segment of the public thought that “trimming the fat” was an excellent idea… I mean; a Dept of 1500+ earning FROM a staggering $135,000; that’d get the blood boiling…

The basic problem at Health (which was recognised well before the election) is the large ‘spare tyre’ of EL1s ( and in some cases EL2s) – about a third of all staff if some sources are to be believed. Severe cuts would have been necessary even if Labor had won. In addition, the creation of a centralised Grant Services Division has also reduced the need for staff in this area (Health, along with DSS, apparently have more grants than any other department and the management of grants was until now inconsistent between divisions and wasteful of resources).

Why are there so many EL1s? (1) Boomers and Xers creating career paths for themselves (2) ‘please don’t leave and take that EL1 you’ve just won – stay here and we’ll upgrade your existing job’ (3) grads being promised unrealistic promotions by their mid to late 20s.

Australia is a democracy, the Australian Public Service is not.

Woody Mann-Caruso10:26 am 23 Nov 13

I hope the decision makers also consider what efficiencies might be gained by actually employing people.

Please report to One National Circuit, Room 101 for rats re-education.

Jane Halton sounds like a hardline economic rationalism devotee – you know, offer higher pay to retain staff in the good times (when there is a lot of competition and good people get poached), and slash wages and staff when there is lower demand for staff, or an excess (even if contrived, as is occurring now).
While this sort of policy sounds good in theory, unfortunately it only seems to be applied to the underlings who do the actual work. I have observed over the years that the bigheads who apply such policies always seem to exempt themselves. It is rare to see politicians, corporate bosses etc cutting their own salaries to keep operations going. The whole shebang is just another way to keep the already privileged in their comfy positions of power and remind the hoi polloi who’s the boss.
I don’t see Ms Halton leading by example and volunteering to halve her annual salary to help keep the Department functioning.
Morale is not great anywhere in the APS at present, but it must be horrible in Health.
I am mortified on behalf of womankind about Ms Halton’s actions, given that it appears she thinks that you must completely lose any conscience you may previously have had, once you hit the echelons.

magiccar9 said :

Rollersk8r said :

Sure I’ll take a ~20% pay cut, just as long as the bank’s willing to waive 20% of my mortgage.

Proof of the self entitlement of the PS and those living beyond their means. An interesting person called in on radio regarding this topic (I think it could have been 666 yesterday). She stated that she wouldn’t take a pay cut because it would impact the lifestyle she was comfortable with.
I think many public servants need to sit up and pull their finger out and be more aware of what’s going on around them. Instead they sit by and complain about not being able to fill up their Mercedes or BMW SUV or not get their nails done each week.

Mmm, interesting but incorrect perception. As I park my bike in my departments basement I cannot remember seeing even one base model 1 series BMW let alone a SUV. There are lots of all sorts or normal cars.

Even the secretary (the man who answers to the minister if you don’t know) drives a Holden…….

People like you really need to get a grip.

nhand42 said :

magiccar9 said :

I think many public servants need to sit up and pull their finger out and be more aware of what’s going on around them. Instead they sit by and complain about not being able to fill up their Mercedes or BMW SUV or not get their nails done each week.

I think it’s amusing how easily the top 1% have managed to get “the poors” fighting over the table scraps. While the rich spend billions on lavish lifestyles, middle-class person A complains about middle-class person B’s choice of car, and they both think lower-class person C’s status in life is due to their drinking beer and smoking cigs instead of “working hard”.

Instead of trying to pull the rest of the middle-class into poverty with you, how about you start building the guillotine and we execute a couple of the rich? A society where the ratio in salary between the richest and the poorest is (say) 10:1 is far less toxic for everybody involved.

after all, the french revolution turned out well, didn’t it? what’s not to love?

zig said :

They should be trimming the dead wood and rewarding the workers who do their work anyway. Some people within the APS work their arses off to cover lazy sods.

sure but who gets promoted to positions where people decide who is dead wood? oftentimes the people who are more concerned with self-promotion than getting the job done properly. sure there are really good management and executives out there, but damn are they few and far between.

I hope the decision makers also consider what efficiencies might be gained by actually employing people. Imagine how much it is costing the Government to have DHS staff waiting 45 minutes just to speak to someone in their ICT section (let alone get their problem fixed which can take up to 4 weeks). In this instance, employing a few extra people to reduce wait times might actually save money. The same goes for outsourced work that could now be done cheaper, quicker and at a higher standard in-house.

magiccar9 said :

I think many public servants need to sit up and pull their finger out and be more aware of what’s going on around them. Instead they sit by and complain about not being able to fill up their Mercedes or BMW SUV or not get their nails done each week.

I think it’s amusing how easily the top 1% have managed to get “the poors” fighting over the table scraps. While the rich spend billions on lavish lifestyles, middle-class person A complains about middle-class person B’s choice of car, and they both think lower-class person C’s status in life is due to their drinking beer and smoking cigs instead of “working hard”.

Instead of trying to pull the rest of the middle-class into poverty with you, how about you start building the guillotine and we execute a couple of the rich? A society where the ratio in salary between the richest and the poorest is (say) 10:1 is far less toxic for everybody involved.

magiccar9 said :

Rollersk8r said :

Sure I’ll take a ~20% pay cut, just as long as the bank’s willing to waive 20% of my mortgage.

Proof of the self entitlement of the PS and those living beyond their means. An interesting person called in on radio regarding this topic (I think it could have been 666 yesterday). She stated that she wouldn’t take a pay cut because it would impact the lifestyle she was comfortable with.
I think many public servants need to sit up and pull their finger out and be more aware of what’s going on around them. Instead they sit by and complain about not being able to fill up their Mercedes or BMW SUV or not get their nails done each week.

I assume your boss only pays you enough for bread and water, and you expect nothing more?

Tetranitrate4:57 pm 22 Nov 13

magiccar9 said :

Rollersk8r said :

Sure I’ll take a ~20% pay cut, just as long as the bank’s willing to waive 20% of my mortgage.

Proof of the self entitlement of the PS and those living beyond their means. An interesting person called in on radio regarding this topic (I think it could have been 666 yesterday). She stated that she wouldn’t take a pay cut because it would impact the lifestyle she was comfortable with.
I think many public servants need to sit up and pull their finger out and be more aware of what’s going on around them. Instead they sit by and complain about not being able to fill up their Mercedes or BMW SUV or not get their nails done each week.

That’s ridiculous, how is living a lifestyle you can afford, but can’t afford if you take a substantial pay cut ‘living beyond your means’?
If you’re only in trouble when your ‘means’ are reduced by 20% or something, you’re not really living beyond them to begin with.

magiccar9 said :

Rollersk8r said :

Sure I’ll take a ~20% pay cut, just as long as the bank’s willing to waive 20% of my mortgage.

Proof of the self entitlement of the PS and those living beyond their means. An interesting person called in on radio regarding this topic (I think it could have been 666 yesterday). She stated that she wouldn’t take a pay cut because it would impact the lifestyle she was comfortable with.
I think many public servants need to sit up and pull their finger out and be more aware of what’s going on around them. Instead they sit by and complain about not being able to fill up their Mercedes or BMW SUV or not get their nails done each week.

10/10 spot on would read again etc.

Rollersk8r said :

Sure I’ll take a ~20% pay cut, just as long as the bank’s willing to waive 20% of my mortgage.

Proof of the self entitlement of the PS and those living beyond their means. An interesting person called in on radio regarding this topic (I think it could have been 666 yesterday). She stated that she wouldn’t take a pay cut because it would impact the lifestyle she was comfortable with.
I think many public servants need to sit up and pull their finger out and be more aware of what’s going on around them. Instead they sit by and complain about not being able to fill up their Mercedes or BMW SUV or not get their nails done each week.

Pitchka said :

WOW, and APS1 earning $77k… Nothing like a well constructed email totally f&&ked up with a stupid typo..

D’oH!

Ladies and gentlemen, one more reason to be a paid subscriber, the ability to go back and edit posts (I think?). Naturally I meant APS 6, Band 1.

Mothy said :

I’m just wanting to see detail – for example, my main question is whether, as with a redundancy, that part of your wage that is surplus to requirements is paid out.

To work an example, let’s demote an EL1 in the first band ($94,705p.a) to an APS1 in the first band ($77,067). Figures effective 1st July 2013 from the online enterprise agreement, page 64.

The department will save $17,638p.a. or $339.19 a week.

?

WOW, and APS1 earning $77k… Nothing like a well constructed email totally f&&ked up with a stupid typo..

HiddenDragon12:56 pm 22 Nov 13

watto23 said :

One of the car plants already had staff take a pay cut.
The public service needs to wake up and realise they are getting paid a bucket load more and on terms and conditions people can only dream of in the public sector.

For example getting annual pay rises is a rarity in many industries. The fact the public service has got them year on year and the private enterprise hasn’t means that when a public servant calls me a filthy rich contractor I feel like punching them in the head. I’m sure my company charges a lot for my services but I’m lucky to see a third of what they charge me out at.

+1 to the comment about annual pay rises – the apparent sense of righteous entitlement, and the absolute outrage at the prospect of anything less than CPI-plus for the annual adjustment, is something to behold. If people, egged on by their unions, price themselves out of the market, they shouldn’t be too surprised when unpalatable options are dished up. With the Budget looking bleak for the forseeable future, much more of this to come, I reckon.

zig said :

They should be trimming the dead wood and rewarding the workers who do their work anyway. Some people within the APS work their arses off to cover lazy sods.

Personally I find it a little ironic that the whole “we’ll cut numbers by natural attrition” bs means that managers, for the most part, can’t use the reduction of staff to toss the muppets.

Hopefully when it gets to involuntary redundancies someone will actually look critically at the people being fired and not just the desk they sit at that day.

Sure I’ll take a ~20% pay cut, just as long as the bank’s willing to waive 20% of my mortgage.

MightyJoe said :

So i take it Jane Halton is demoting herself? and the Band 3 / 2 and 1 SES will be leading by example?

DoHA staff could be so lucky

So i take it Jane Halton is demoting herself? and the Band 3 / 2 and 1 SES will be leading by example?

I’m just wanting to see detail – for example, my main question is whether, as with a redundancy, that part of your wage that is surplus to requirements is paid out.

To work an example, let’s demote an EL1 in the first band ($94,705p.a) to an APS1 in the first band ($77,067). Figures effective 1st July 2013 from the online enterprise agreement, page 64.

The department will save $17,638p.a. or $339.19 a week.

Using the severance benefit on page 53, where a voluntary redundancy would be paid at 2 weeks per year of service, of 4 weeks minimum and 48 weeks maximum, for that part of your employment made redundant can you receive a payout? i.e. $2,035.15 for a 3 year public servant, $4,070.31 for a 6 year, and so on.

?

zig said :

They should be trimming the dead wood and rewarding the workers who do their work anyway. Some people within the APS work their arses off to cover lazy sods.

+1…there are so many people who are overpromoted or just don’t do anything. I can name at least a dozen in my immediate work area who could be culled and it would probably enhance productivity.

One of the car plants already had staff take a pay cut.
The public service needs to wake up and realise they are getting paid a bucket load more and on terms and conditions people can only dream of in the public sector.

For example getting annual pay rises is a rarity in many industries. The fact the public service has got them year on year and the private enterprise hasn’t means that when a public servant calls me a filthy rich contractor I feel like punching them in the head. I’m sure my company charges a lot for my services but I’m lucky to see a third of what they charge me out at.

harvyk1 said :

If this was happening in the car industry, the building industry or any other industry that “real Australian’s” work in, we’d be seeing protests bringing the major cities to a stand still. Today Tonight and A Current Affair would both be running stories non stop, and yet because it’s “Canberra” this sort of uncertainty around peoples jobs is not only accepted, but encouraged….

Those industries haven’t seen menial/entry-level roles float up and up the scale, such that the bottom couple of rungs on the ladder are now scarcely in use at all. It would appear that a great many PS roles are now a couple of rungs higher than they used to be for no real change in performance. The lack of protest may suggest that the people involved also think this way.

No-one wants a demotion, of course. But it likely beats the alternative, and a hard heart says it’s probably warranted.

They should be trimming the dead wood and rewarding the workers who do their work anyway. Some people within the APS work their arses off to cover lazy sods.

If this was happening in the car industry, the building industry or any other industry that “real Australian’s” work in, we’d be seeing protests bringing the major cities to a stand still. Today Tonight and A Current Affair would both be running stories non stop, and yet because it’s “Canberra” this sort of uncertainty around peoples jobs is not only accepted, but encouraged….

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.