Public service pay systems are undergoing radical change in many countries as a result of a severe squeeze on public spending and increased demands from citizens for increased services and more flexible provision. This article reviews the starting point for reforms in a number of European countries, highlighting the great diversity of organisation, and the priority given to central financial control over greater local management autonomy. A number of recent pay reforms are discussed in some detail, notably, measures to control the pay bill, comparability with private sector workers, greater responsiveness to local labour market pressures, and the spread of new management systems and performance-related pay. The diversity of reforms can be understood in relation to the organisational diversity of national public services but is also connected with differences in the perceptions of the need for reforms.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bach, S. and Winchester, D. ( 1994): Opting out of pay devolution? The prospects for local pay bargaining in the UK public services, British Journal of Industrial Relations, 32: 2, pp. 263-282.
2.
Blenk, W. ( 1987): Labour relations in the public service of the Federal Republic of Germany. in: Treu, T. (ed.) (1987): Public service labour relations: recent trends and future prospects, International Labour Office, Geneva.
3.
Bordogna, L. ( 1994): Pluralismo senza mercato: rappresentanza e conflitto nel settore pubblico, Franco Angeli, Milano.
4.
Dell'Aringa, C. ( 1991): La régulation des salaires dans le secteur public en Italie, in: Silvestre, J.J.
5.
Guilhamon, J. ( 1988): Les négociations salariales dans la fonction publique , Rapport au ministre de la Fonction Publique et des réformes administratives, Paris .
6.
Katz, H. ( 1993): The decentralisation of collective bargaining: a literature review and comparative analysis, Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 47:1, October.
7.
Keller, B. ( 1996): Between unification and Europeanisation: continuity despite discontinuities in public sector labour relations in Germany, paper presented at the Anglo-German Foundation conference on public service pay reforms in Britain and Germany, London School of Economics, December.
8.
Lawler, E.E. III. ( 1971): Pay and organisational effectiveness: a psychological view, Mc-Graw-Hill, New York.
9.
Luhmann, N. and Mayntz, R. ( 1973): Personal im öffentlichen Dienst. Eintritt und Karrieren,Anlagenband 7, Bericht der Studienkommission für die Reform des öffentlichen Dienstrechts, Baden-Baden.
10.
Marsden, D.W. and Richardson, R. ( 1992): The Motivational Effects of Performance Related Pay in the Public Sector, a case study of the Inland Revenue, Centre for Economic Performance, Working Paper, London School of Economics, London.
11.
Marsden, D.W. and Richardson, R. ( 1994): Performing for pay? The effects of 'merit pay' on motivation in a public service, British Journal of Industrial Relations , 32:2, pp. 243-262, June.
12.
Marsden, D.W. and French, S. ( 1997): A tale of two trusts: group and individual PRP in two trust hospitals', paper presented at the Centre for Economic Performance/Anglo-German Foundation conference on public service pay reforms in Britain and Germany, London School of Economics , 12/13 December 1996.
13.
Megaw (1982): Inquiry into civil service pay: report of an inquiry into the principles and system by which the remuneration of the non-industrial Civil Service should be determined, Chairman: Rt. Hon. Sir John Megaw. Cmnd 8590, HMSO, London.
14.
Meurs, D. ( 1991): La régulation des salaires dans le secteur public en France, in: Silvestre J . J.
15.
Milkovitch, G. ( 1991): Strengthening the link between pay and performance, Report of the Pay-for-Performance Labor-Management Committee, Office of Personnel Management, US, Washington DC.
16.
NAO (National Audit Office) (1989): Manpower planning in the civil service, Cm 398, HMSO, London.
17.
PMRS Review Committee (1991): Advancing managerial excellence, USOffice of Personnel Management, Washington DC.
18.
PTC (1996): Whatever happened to a national civil service? Research Brief No. 1, November, London.
19.
Reynaud, J.-D. ( 1975): Les syndicats en France, Seuil , Paris.
20.
Schager, N. ( 1993): An overview and evaluation of flexible pay policies in the Swedish public sector, in: Maguire, M. (ed.): Pay flexibility in the public sector, OECD, Paris.
21.
Seys, B. ( 1987): Accéder aux métiers: les marchés locaux, les marchés nationaux, Données Sociales 1987, Documentation Française, Paris .
22.
Silvestre, J. J. (ed.) (1991): La régulation des salaires dans le secteur public: essai de comparaison internationale: France, Grande-Bretagne, Italie, Rapport pour le BIT, Genève.
23.
Smith, R. ( 1979): Compensating wage differentials and public policy: a review, Industrial and Labor Relations Review, April.
24.
Stelluto, G. and Klein, S. ( 1990): Compensation trends into the 21st Century, Monthly Labor Review, February, pp. 38-45.
25.
Volker, P. ( 1989): Rebuilding the public service, Report of the National Commission on the Public Service, Chairman Paul A. Volker , Washington.
26.
Wood, R. ( 1991): Performance pay and related compensation practices , in: Australian state public sector organisations, PUMA Occasional Paper, OECD, Paris.
27.
Wood, R. and Maguire, M. ( 1992): Private pay for public work: performance-related pay schemes for public sector managers, PUMA, OECD, Paris.
