Public servants cleared for benchmarking awards

Payment of half of all 'benchmarking' pay awards due to the vast majority of Ireland’s public servants went ahead on 1 January 2004, following favourable rulings from a number of 'performance verification groups'.

The Public Service Benchmarking Body (PSBB) was set up in 2000 to 'benchmark' the pay of public sector workers against that of related private sector groups. The benchmarking system replaced a long established conciliation and arbitration scheme, which was based largely on a set of internal relativities. The PSBB reported in June 2002 (IE0207203N), with its pay awards varying from 2.5% to 25%. Most groups were clustered in the 8%-11% range, with teachers coming out best at 13%, nurses ranked in the middle at 8% and the police (gardai) close to the bottom on 4%. As part of Ireland’s social partnership process, the social partners agreed that 25% of the total award for each category should be paid on a backdated basis to 1 December 2001. A further 50% would be payable from 1 January 2004, while the final 25% would be paid from 1 July 2005.

In order to trigger the second and third phases of the total award for each employee category, five separate 'performance verification groups' (PVGs) were set up across the public sector to assess whether the employees concerned delivered 'industrial peace', as well as an agreed level of change and modernisation. All five PVGs reported in late 2003 and advised, with some caveats, that the payments should be made under phase two (IE0312201N).

There were two significant exceptions. First, over 30,000 teachers initially failed to reach agreement on a new 'customer-friendly' system for parent-teacher meetings. Subsequently, agreement was reached on the issue and the teachers can now expect payment. Second, prison officers have rejected a new working time system designed to eliminate excessive overtime. The result is that their second phase has been 'frozen' until this dispute is settled.

Typical of the approach adopted by each of the five PVGs was the position adopted by the civil service group. The civil service PVG reported that industrial peace had been observed and that 'significant progress' had been made in respect of agreed modernisation commitments. However, it was strongly critical of trade union resistance on commitments to agree more competitive, merit-based promotions.

The whole benchmarking exercise aroused considerable controversy and debate. The trade unions argued that benchmarking 'delivered' in four key areas, in that it: ended the old pay determination system; provided industrial stability; delivered ongoing modernisation; and allowed for specific service-related improvements. Critics, however, such as the economist, Jim O’Leary, who resigned from the PSBB before it issued its report, were less than impressed with the outcome. Mr O’Leary said that benchmarking 'is not accountable, transparent and, critically, is not market-led'.

The detailed pay information that was used by the PSBB was never made public. The PSBB stated that this was because the companies that agreed to provide the Body with details of their pay rates had insisted on confidentiality. However, critics of this lack of transparency in the report argue that there was no reason that aggregate figures could not have been published.

The next benchmarking exercise is expected to get under way in 2006, while the entirely separate pay review system (IE0103232N) for 'top people'- such as senior civil servants, politicians and the judiciary - may get started in 2005.