Government intervention always puts educational salary at a disadvantage
Thirty times in twenty years, the government has cut salaries in education and government. This results in a salary gap of 18 percent on the market, according to a report by the Ministry of the Interior. "The report painfully exposes the major paycheck," says AObchairman Liesbeth Verheggen.
Picture: Type tank
Twenty years ago, the reference model was introduced, a way to keep the salaries of education and government in line with the wage increase in companies. It seemed like a good idea: the Central Planning Bureau (CPB) keeps an eye on wage development, the government pays the average one-to-one to municipalities, police and school boards. With only one. There is a 'policy button'. The government can put pressure on this if it is short of money or if it feels that the wage rise in the market cannot be kept up.
Shorten
Cabinets of all colors have been happy to use that red stop button for the past twenty years. That leaves it out in the summer Reference Model Evaluation report see well. Eleven times, cuts were made due to not following the wage development in the market. Nineteen times because of the scrapping of the incidental wage increase, compensation for bonuses, extra increments or scarcity in the market. The result is that wages in education and government have lagged the market by 18 percent. In those twenty years, this amounts to 7 billion euros for both sectors together. In education, it is known that the zero line in the years 2010 to 2014 meant an extra backlog of 1,5 billion euros.
The CPB is not very keen on discounts, because too great a gap with the business community will eventually have to be compensated anyway if government and education want to recruit sufficient and good staff. Such a catch-up happened four times, but it never made up for the gap. Moreover, the CPB believes that cutting wages is too easy, so that the government does not opt for structural solutions to budgetary problems.
Be careful
In addition, there are more side effects. Due to the capriciousness of government intervention, employers, such as school boards, are extremely cautious about their salary expenditures. They hoard money in the good times because they fear they will fall short in bad times. That reduces the scope for increasing wages even more.
AObchairman Liesbeth Verheggen: "Let's just call it the great wage robbery. The idea is of course that this backlog will be made up, but that never happens completely."
"Let's just call it the big pay robbery," says AObchairman Verheggen. "The idea is of course that that backlog will be made up, but that never happens completely." And such recovery periods are immediately nullified: after the billion of the Teacher Covenant in 2008, the zero line followed between 2010 and 2014 with discounts of one and a half billion, where the AOb then constantly resisted.
Verheggen is surprised about the tone in the report. "It is very strange that the Home Office report says that using the red button is detrimental to employers, because they then have so much difficulty negotiating with the unions. Ridiculous that the government talks about wages in education and government, because it is the teachers, police officers and civil servants who lose purchasing power, the people who provide public services, the Ministry of the Interior should be concerned about, that the wage arrears are making working for the government unattractive. "
Operate
She finds it even more strange that the final conclusion of the evaluation is that the model functions relatively well. "Absolutely not, I would say. If AOb we have said time and again that the system needs to be adjusted, but because it is all a rather technical story, politicians do not seem to want to get started with it. They find that button easy. If the economy is bad, then go, they will cut salaries."
What we want is that education, just like healthcare, always follow the developments of salaries in the market one on one. Exactly as we believe the reference model was originally intended.
This tendency can be found in all government parties, says Verheggen. "From left to right, all parties have done it if they were in government or supported the coalition. They have butter on their heads, and the question is whether they want to improve their lives. What we want is that education just if the care, the developments of the salaries in the market, always follow one on one. Exactly as we believe the reference model was originally intended."
Government intervention salaries 1996-2016
| Incidental wage development 20 years | 19 times reduced |
| Contract wage increase 20 years | 11 times reduced 4 times increased |
| Result wages education and government 20 years |
Wage development education and government -18 percent compared to the market
Pay allowance 7 billion lower than market for government and education |
Source: Reference Model Evaluation Report, Home Affairs (July 2017)
