Irish Political Pay: You don’t always get what you pay for
Calvin posted this on Dec 26th 2007 at 22:49 under Career Moves Column, Politics, Writing
"Working it" column published in the Career Moves section of The Evening Echo on 17/12/2007
For most of us the old adage “you get what you pay for” will certainly hold true this Christmas. There are exceptions of course, but by and large if we pay more for something it’s reasonable to expect better quality, more refinement or additional features in return for the extra cash. It stands to reason, doesn’t it?
In the private sector the same thing holds true for salaries – in any given field market forces dictate that the better your experience, training and performance the more your services are worth to your employer. Generally if you want the best people you have to offer them the best package, and broadly speaking the more you’re prepared to pay the higher the calibre of employee you’re likely to attract.
That’s in the private sector. When you enter the murky world of public sector pay you can throw the “get what you pay for” argument out of the proverbial window. It seems that the concept of having fair and equitable pay linked to levels of performance and job competency – concepts that have dictated wage increases for the vast majority of us for some time – is something our elected representatives are non too keen on. Given their track record I guess that’s hardly surprising.
Hence the ongoing hullabaloo surrounding the now “deferred” pay rises of government ministers. Following widespread public outcry at the news that the Teoseach and his colleagues were set to receive monster pay increases over the next few years, the government have chosen to do the decent thing and “defer” the increase until late 2008 – they’ll still receive the same bumper pay-rise and benefits, it will just kick in a year later instead.
The government, as is so often the case, were damned whatever they decided to do: accept the pay-rise and they’re “out of touch” with public opinion, listen to public opinion and reject the pay hikes and they’re accused of an embarrassing “climb down” or “U-Turn”. “Hypocrites” cry opposition parties either way, but somehow you just know that things would be exactly the same if roles where reversed.
Personally I’d have no problem with paying Government ministers salaries equivalent to high-level executives in the private sector if it meant we were getting the best people for the job. The problem is that we’re patently not. When it comes to government ministers, you only have a very limited pool of resources to choose from. You can’t go out and “head-hunt” the best candidate for the job, because you have to pick someone who’s been elected through the political system, and who also happens to be a member of the governing coalition. In other words you’re recruitment process is severely hobbled before it even starts.
The most talented and experienced individuals in any given field are, by and large, reaping the rewards their expertise can command in the private sector. Companies are happy to pay big bucks, as long as they get the performance to match. The reverse, of course, is also true: where the market is dictating salaries if you pay peanuts you get monkeys – elsewhere, it seems, they end up costing substantially more.
