Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Sick Leave PQs ( Split out )

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    The best way to do that will make the situation worse and be politically unfeasible.... close the majority of the barracks around the country.
    Never happen and neither will the mission and taskings reduce
    "Are they trying to shoot down the other drone? "

    "No, they're trying to fly the tank"

    Comment


    • #32
      .Make deploying as an exercise troop or Mobile security for and exercise financially rewarding.
      No, thats paying you twice to do your job!!!! payment of allowances is where the issue lies in the whole public sector. Extra basic pay is warranted but if we continue down the road of paying allowances it gives the finanace people reason not to up the basic as the army will become based on productivity with certain people paid to do certain jobs, which it should never be about.

      Everyone trains for the basics hence everyone should do the basics.
      Covid 19 is not over ....it's still very real..Hand Hygiene, Social Distancing and Masks.. keep safe

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by trellheim View Post
        Never happen and neither will the mission and taskings reduce
        Then the guy at the bottom is always going to be screwed and might as well start looking for a job outside the organisation.
        Covid 19 is not over ....it's still very real..Hand Hygiene, Social Distancing and Masks.. keep safe

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by trellheim View Post
          Never happen and neither will the mission and taskings reduce
          I’m sure they said that in a number of towns around the country

          Originally posted by hptmurphy View Post
          No, thats paying you twice to do your job!!!! payment of allowances is where the issue lies in the whole public sector. Extra basic pay is warranted but if we continue down the road of paying allowances it gives the finanace people reason not to up the basic as the army will become based on productivity with certain people paid to do certain jobs, which it should never be about.

          Everyone trains for the basics hence everyone should do the basics.
          I remember hearing (probably early to mid 90s) that in the public/civil service the pay your (let’s say soldiers) sector was benchmarked (not against the private sector) against what Dept of Finance (or whoever it was) classed as a similar sector (let’s say ambulance men).

          I could be completely wrong in that because at the time I remember thinking it was absolutely stupid because no 2 jobs are the same.

          I would have previously been if the mind that allowances should be eliminated as far as possible and included in the line pay. I’m not saying that line pay should be kept as is but say that it should be increased to reflect the job (eg 1 duty a month). However, I’ve seen how that wouldn’t work.

          Maybe MSA should be got rid of and included in line pay but there could be tax, pension or other reasons why that isn’t a good idea.

          Comment


          • #35
            Then the guy at the bottom is always going to be screwed and might as well start looking for a job outside the organisation.
            That is exactly what is happening.


            Maybe MSA should be got rid of and included in line pay
            Because Civil Servants just think of basic pay equity - i.e. Soldier = Clerical Officer - or whatever - all public servants are equal - then you can't break this link.


            I'm reading Whitaker's biography at the moment and some space is devoted to parity maintenance like this
            "Are they trying to shoot down the other drone? "

            "No, they're trying to fly the tank"

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by hptmurphy View Post
              No, thats paying you twice to do your job!!!! payment of allowances is where the issue lies in the whole public sector. Extra basic pay is warranted but if we continue down the road of paying allowances it gives the finanace people reason not to up the basic as the army will become based on productivity with certain people paid to do certain jobs, which it should never be about.

              Everyone trains for the basics hence everyone should do the basics.
              I hear what you are saying but unfortunately that's not where we are at the moment so lets deal with the realities.
              Example: Cadet school looks for support for their exercises. Unit supplies Camp Guard and Mobile security.
              Camp guard man a guard room for 24 hrs.Warm,Dry,TV etc and get fed in a dining hall.
              MSG sit in a nissan in a forest for 24 hrs: Cold,cramped no entertainment,fed from a hot lock.
              Camp guard get duty money.MSG get NOTHING.

              Who has the harder job?? Now ask yourself.As a SNCO how do you motivate troops to go on MSG?? For the glory of working with the Cadet school?? 24 hrs plus away from home, poor living conditions and get nothing for it??
              No wonder lads are going flat.
              "Let us be clear about three facts. First, all battles and all wars are won in the end by the infantryman. Secondly, the infantryman always bears the brunt. His casualties are heavier, he suffers greater extremes of discomfort and fatigue than the other arms. Thirdly, the art of the infantryman is less stereotyped and far harder to acquire in modern war than that of any other arm." ------- Field Marshall Wavell, April 1945.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by hptmurphy View Post
                No, thats paying you twice to do your job!!!! payment of allowances is where the issue lies in the whole public sector. Extra basic pay is warranted but if we continue down the road of paying allowances it gives the finanace people reason not to up the basic as the army will become based on productivity with certain people paid to do certain jobs, which it should never be about.

                Everyone trains for the basics hence everyone should do the basics.
                Allowances is the only way ? of paying extra monies to a group in the public service, without starting off pay leapfroging

                Comment


                • #38
                  I remember hearing (probably early to mid 90s) that in the public/civil service the pay your (let’s say soldiers) sector was benchmarked (not against the private sector) against what Dept of Finance (or whoever it was) classed as a similar sector (let’s say ambulance men).

                  I could be completely wrong in that because at the time I remember thinking it was absolutely stupid because no 2 jobs are the same.
                  Pay is indeed graded based on what you do and what it is either equated to in the public or private service because in the past the public and civil service were seen as good paid jobs with defined pension benefits.

                  Benchmarking was intended to keep civil servants pay in line with jobs in the private sector because there was this illusion that the public service role would never change and therefore pay rises had no basis other than based on inflation. How wrong was that!

                  But thats where we are. The payment of allowances should have been discontinued with bench marking and each person should have had their own pay grade evalulated based on performance and productivity...except that won't work among service based jobs such as soldiers and Gardai because there isn't productivity to be had, so the allowances stayed to incentivise certain tasks, but the problem arose where the allowances became the sole remit of persons doing the job but everyone else wanted the money but not do the job.

                  So why do we have the case that newer entrants get shafted with all the shitty details...... ie the guys sitting in the Guard room as opposed to the guy sitting in the vehicle.... people now looking for extra payment to do what is their job.. ie to be available to carry out certain duties and not be expect to warrant extra payment.

                  Simple solution, average what each soldier makes individually over the year in extra payments for duties etc and pay him that amount as part of his basic wage and review on a bi annual basis. He now gets paid for everything he might be expected to do... and the guy who doesn't do it or put himself forward for duties gets nothing!
                  Last edited by hptmurphy; 4 January 2018, 12:16.
                  Covid 19 is not over ....it's still very real..Hand Hygiene, Social Distancing and Masks.. keep safe

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    The allowances system is good and effective. It facilitates the very uneven division of labour across the organisation.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      I'd take severe issue with that as it is deflecting from the appalling basic pay in the force.
                      "Are they trying to shoot down the other drone? "

                      "No, they're trying to fly the tank"

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Fantasia View Post
                        The allowances system is good and effective. It facilitates the very uneven division of labour across the organisation.
                        I work in the system that utilizes the Allowances system, its actually counter productive as it facilitates uneven division of labour . You are paid to do all thinks on the job spec when you take the job, why do you need to be paid extra to work.

                        In the case of persons carrying out duties etc, the method in which the duties are carried out is at fault. It should be a given that all people do duties and this is reflected in their annual salary as opposed to irregular individual payments that can upset tax free allowances etc. If you don't do duties you move to a different pay scale.

                        Those who participate are rewarded evenly and those who don't lose out. You do all of the job all of the time, not pick and chose what you want to do because it attracts premium pay.
                        Covid 19 is not over ....it's still very real..Hand Hygiene, Social Distancing and Masks.. keep safe

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by hptmurphy View Post
                          I work in the system that utilizes the Allowances system, its actually counter productive as it facilitates uneven division of labour . You are paid to do all thinks on the job spec when you take the job, why do you need to be paid extra to work.

                          In the case of persons carrying out duties etc, the method in which the duties are carried out is at fault. It should be a given that all people do duties and this is reflected in their annual salary as opposed to irregular individual payments that can upset tax free allowances etc. If you don't do duties you move to a different pay scale.

                          Those who participate are rewarded evenly and those who don't lose out. You do all of the job all of the time, not pick and chose what you want to do because it attracts premium pay.
                          Sticking with duties as an example as it is already under discussion ... there are people who will complete 1.5 duties a week and there are people who will do 1 duty a month. The division and nature if duties varies very differently by unit, location and rank.

                          I think fairly compensating the guy doing more than the next is the only way. Duties will never be evenly distributed so an allowance is the fairest way. Paying everyone as if they did 2 duties a month means the guy doing 6 gets screwed and the guy doing 1 or the guy doing none are laughing

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            So why do we have the case that newer entrants get shafted with all the shitty details...... ie the guys sitting in the Guard room as opposed to the guy sitting in the vehicle.... people now looking for extra payment to do what is their job.. ie to be available to carry out certain duties and not be expect to warrant extra payment.
                            The reason that the FNG does the shit detail is because the auld sweat has paid his dues and done the shit detail when he was the FNG.Same as every organisation worldwide.Seniority and service should be recognised.I am not going to detail a fifty year old Pte(Another days argument) who has decades of exercises under his belt to do a week living in a trench for a YO's course when I have a redarse 20 something barely out of training.
                            If I did it would be grossly unfair and also you have to ask the question.How does the young soldier gain experience if they don't pay their dues and go on the hard exercises the same way johnny auld seat did when he was 20?
                            The snag we have these days is that Snowflake redarse doesn't want to pay his dues and looks at johnny auld sweat and says to himself "how come he doesn't get the shit detail" and then goes flat. Johnny auld sweat then gets detailed to take up the slack.This is completely different mindset wise to when I was coming up as we realised were the Redarse and we knew what came with that.You paid your dues.
                            But thats training.
                            Duties are different.

                            Simple solution, average what each soldier makes individually over the year in extra payments for duties etc and pay him that amount as part of his basic wage and review on a bi annual basis. He now gets paid for everything he might be expected to do... and the guy who doesn't do it or put himself forward for duties gets nothing!
                            Not a bad solution but it has some flaws.There are people who CAN'T(as opposed to WON'T) do duties because through no fault of their own they have been medically downgraded.Under the current system they are down money in terms of duties missed but their basic stays the same.As I outlined earlier under the HRA/LRA2 they can't go on like that forever but if your system was brought in good people would be penalised and their families put under pressure even further.
                            I work in the system that utilizes the Allowances system, its actually counter productive as it facilitates uneven division of labour . You are paid to do all thinks on the job spec when you take the job, why do you need to be paid extra to work.
                            Again Murph you are comparing apples and oranges.It may not work in your sector but it does in ours.
                            In the case of persons carrying out duties etc, the method in which the duties are carried out is at fault. It should be a given that all people do duties and this is reflected in their annual salary as opposed to irregular individual payments that can upset tax free allowances etc. If you don't do duties you move to a different pay scale.
                            BSM's don't do duties.CS's do Should an BSM earn less than a CS?? Their are only X amount of Sgts with a Portlaoise Pln. That duty only comes around twice a year. Should the Sgts who CAN'T put themselves forward or are not selected be hammered through no fault of their own?

                            Those who participate are rewarded evenly and those who don't lose out. You do all of the job all of the time, not pick and choose what you want to do because it attracts premium pay.
                            Now that's baloney.There is such a thing as incentive in all types of employment. You want a really shit job to be done you need volunteers.No incentive no volunteers.Simple as.Why do you think Portlaoise and Overseas duties are oversubscribed usually?

                            Originally posted by Fantasia View Post
                            Sticking with duties as an example as it is already under discussion ... there are people who will complete 1.5 duties a week and there are people who will do 1 duty a month. The division and nature if duties varies very differently by unit, location and rank.

                            I think fairly compensating the guy doing more than the next is the only way. Duties will never be evenly distributed so an allowance is the fairest way. Paying everyone as if they did 2 duties a month means the guy doing 6 gets screwed and the guy doing 1 or the guy doing none are laughing
                            Exactly.But thats usually within the same rank.
                            In my callsign a Cpl will do more than a Sgt but less than a Pte on a monthly basis.This is down to the amount of various ranks needed on a daily basis for duty.
                            But my argument above was that two Cpls could do two duties each in a month.Both do a barrack guard each at home station. Then both are sent away to do a 24 hour duty in support of an exercise.One gets the camp guard and gets paid and the other gets an MSG and gets nothing. So both have done the same amount of duties but one is financially better off and had better working conditions.
                            The other is down money and had a to live in shit.Now whats his motivation next time exactly??
                            Last edited by apod; 4 January 2018, 20:43.
                            "Let us be clear about three facts. First, all battles and all wars are won in the end by the infantryman. Secondly, the infantryman always bears the brunt. His casualties are heavier, he suffers greater extremes of discomfort and fatigue than the other arms. Thirdly, the art of the infantryman is less stereotyped and far harder to acquire in modern war than that of any other arm." ------- Field Marshall Wavell, April 1945.

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X