Labor offers 9pc pay rise to Canberra federal public servants, sparking CPSU fury

[u/Smokey_84]

https://www.afr.com/politics/federal/union-fury-over-labor-s-9pc-pay-rise-offer-to-public-servants-20261013-p615ao

Public servants have already vowed to vote down a pay offer from the federal government, risking months more of bargaining and threats of protest.

The government on Tuesday proposed a 9 per cent pay rise for federal public servants over three years.

The offer includes a 3.2 per cent rise from March 2027, followed by 3 per cent in 2028 and 2.8 per cent in 2029.

It’s above projected inflation of 2.8 per cent in 2026-27 and 2.4 per cent in 2027-28, according to the Reserve Bank of Australia’s latest forecasts.

But the offer did not meet the union’s claim for a 5 per cent annual rise, the Community and Public Sector Union national secretary, Rebecca Fawcett, said.

“CPSU members have been clear from the beginning of these negotiations: they want to see pay that keeps up with the cost of living, which recognises the essential work they do every day,” she said.

The union, the largest in the public service, wanted a 15 per cent pay increase and was willing to forgo some conditions for it, but the government ruled that unrealistic.

Australian Services Union branch secretary Jeff Lapidos, who represents Australian Taxation Office workers, said employees would overwhelmingly vote to reject the pay offer.

“This is a pay offer that holds ATO employees in contempt,” he told AAP.

Lapidos said the union would ask the Fair Work Commission to determine the pay rise if the government did not return with a “realistic” offer, but ruled out industrial action.

The proposal includes realigning salary advancement increments across the public service so that, when an eligible employee progresses to the next salary point in their range, that increase will be at least three per cent on top of the annual pay rises.

Chief negotiator Alison Stott, who has been meeting with union representatives since July, said the offer would increase pay consistency across the public service.

“This pay is part of an overall package of conditions. These are preliminary positions within this package, not agreed outcomes,” she said.

“Bargaining is continuing, and we will keep working with unions and individuals.”

Finance Minister Katy Gallagher said the offer would deliver fairer and more consistent pay and conditions across the public service.

“In a constrained fiscal environment, this is a fair and affordable offer that provides pay rises totalling nine per cent over three years, with additional increases of up to 1.5 per cent for some employees in lower-paying agencies,” she said in a statement.

Agencies will have to finance the pay rise from within their existing budgets, which are indexed to inflation each year.

[u/DiverWeak7678]

People keep claiming the public service is over grown while ignoring the hiring freezes and reliance on outsourcing in the past - which cost exorbitant amounts, didn't retain corporate knowledge, and benefited big private firms that avoided their tax obligations. Based on objective, international standards the APS isn't too big compared to population and tax rates, and its operates efficiently (particularly in the face of increasing demands from government while funding is cut). There are useless people in every workplace but the APS performs essential services that can't be sent into the private sector because they're inherently unprofitable.

A pay rise in line with CPI isn't impossible, its just super easy to target public servants for savings.

[u/Large-Cap-2411 → u/DiverWeak7678]

It is not necessarily correct to say that outsourcing has ridiculous costs. Per hour they might be higher, but a labour hire for six months costs money for six months. A permanent employee becomes a permanent financial obligation after that six month need has been fulfilled, a liability that runs into several millions should they choose to stay on for years.

[u/DiverWeak7678 → u/Large-Cap-2411]

That's true but hour to hour, labour hire is more expensive and most people (on average!) work in the public service for 11 years, total, and 2 to 4 in any particular department. Some departments were paying contractors for 5 years, which means they absolutely paid more than hiring someone permanent would have cost.

[u/Large-Cap-2411 → u/DiverWeak7678]

You've got two different metrics there though. I generally agree that if we're paying a contractor for 5 years, something has gone awry. But the vast majority of engagements are short term. You have used the average for a public servant, but the outlier for the contractor.

Taking the lower end of an EL1's pay at $125k, plus the 30% of on-costs standard for a public servant = ($125k+$37,500) x 11 years ------ $1.78 MILLION dollars per staff member. That number would outstrip the cost of all but the most expensive contractors even at the 5 year mark, letalone the average contractor engagement.

Now of course, hopefully that staff member went on to deliver some value after the point of their initial engagement. But that value is never independently re-assessed, they just cannot be fired. So, it is really not true to say as a cover all that contractors/consultants cost more than public servants even on a one for one basis.

[u/DiverWeak7678 → u/Large-Cap-2411]

Happy to take your point there. But the period of hiring freeze I was referring to, the work HAD to be done, was going to need to be done into the future, yet departments were not allowed to hire ongoing staff to do the work. So instead, there was a combination of a revolving door of contractors, forcing increased costs into training as well as the labour hire expenses, and long term contractors who did the work for years, to the point that newer staff didn't even realise they were labour hire.

The spike in hiring ongoing staff is a reflection of needing to correct this period - even with the labour hire ended, the work still needs to be done and removing the hire freeze let departments appropriately scale up. The APS is still under resourced compared to international standards.

[u/Large-Cap-2411 → u/DiverWeak7678]

I think there is nuance there. “The work had to be done” doesn’t imply permanency. Several instances of the growth are built around reforms. Even if that requires a surge, it’s a surge for 2-3 years for design and implementation, but now we have all these extra staff without well-considered roles

I know less about our position relative to the planet, but a quick look had us about middle of the pack?

All of which brings us to now. Public servants understandably (like anyone) want payrises. But in a high-inflation environment, providing it would not just be unpopular for the government, but tangibly worsen inflation for all other Australians because the permanent staff is larger than it might otherwise have been.

[u/Wehavecrashed → u/Large-Cap-2411]

A permanent employee can be tasked with something else after six months!

[u/Large-Cap-2411 → u/Wehavecrashed]

Of course, which I’ve acknowledged above. But that work is not planned for or optimised to that employee. And we’ll have to find it whether the APS needs it or not. The contractor, is long gone.

[u/Hot_Construction9967 → u/Large-Cap-2411]

i’m struggling with this. Do you think the APS can’t or doesnt forward plan work 6+ months in advance? Or that a contractor will write up one thing in 6 months that’s set and forget, never reviewed or updated or touched again by any permanent employee? Or that the APS is full of a bunch of lesser Ken’s who only have one skill/ role/deliverable like their job is just “document”?

[u/DiverWeak7678 → u/Hot_Construction9967]

Yeah, a lot of APS staff are employed as "generalists" - while there are specific jobs like lawyers, medical professionals, educators etc that require particular qualifications/training, a lot of APS either work across fields or inadvertently specialise on the job, and can still be effective across different roles. They get moved around a lot, between surge work, being MOG'ed, internal restructures, project changes etc.

I understand there are useless people in every sector, but I honestly don't know any APS staff who don't have more than enough work to do at all times...

[u/Large-Cap-2411 → u/Hot_Construction9967]

I know the APS can and does plan more than 6 months in advance. But it also has a limited capability to scale down or flex its workforce to changing priorities. That staff member that remains will be given a job - any job - regardless of whether it is why they were hired, what they are good at and passionate about, and whether there was another Australian that might have done it better.

I do not think the APS is full of a bunch of "lesser Ken's". Someone described a reliance on outsourcing as costing 'an exorbitant amount'. I pointed out that in many use cases, that is incorrect relative to hiring a permanent employee for the type of work outsourced staff are typically engaged for.

The majority of the APS is full of competent people. That doesn't mean they're the right people at the right time.

[u/Hot_Construction9967 → u/Large-Cap-2411]

I think part of being a competent employee is being able to identify your own strengths and apply them to any job you’re given though, as well as the awareness to know where you need additional training/guidance to fill in the gaps

For example, was a dance teacher for 3-6yo for a while, then moved to being a waitress at a french fine dining restaurant. On face value, those two are completely different, but looking closer at my own skills, i’ve got some core things down; Able to be on my feet for extended periods, resilient and able keep my cool under pressure, i can provide an enjoyable customers experience so they want to come back again, problem solving and issue management, etc.
Did i need some training here and there to fill in the gaps, like pairing wines? yeah for sure. But it’s not like I was completely unsuitable and out of my depth because suggesting what wine to have with escargot wasn’t related to teaching kids how to point their toes that. Neither jobs were my passion but i was still excellent at both.
Similarly, in the private sector, both customer facing and back end, i’ve been asked to jump into a new team, or help out on different work when they’re busy or understaffed. And I’ve seen contractors and consultants in the APS do the exact same thing depending on the business areas needs.
Do I agree there should be a better way of addressing and rectifying underperformance? Sure, but not at the expense of conditions for everyone else who largely are incredibly capable, adaptable and resilient in the face of constant change.

[u/Large-Cap-2411 → u/Hot_Construction9967]

I think we're now talking about slightly different things. My point was that in the long term a permanent employee is vastly more expensive than a labour hire.

I've no doubt ppl are adaptable as you say - the difference is for a labour hire, the taxpayer isn't on the hook when they prove not to be.

On that last point, we agree there should be stronger performance management in place. But I am curious how that is "at the expense" of everyone who "largely are incredibly capable, adaptable and resilient in the face of constant change".

My point is precisely that being unable to fire the bad eggs for poor performance LIMITS the wages of the majority doing the right thing. If you're never going to be a poor performer, it shouldn't worry you that people can be fired for poor performance. But you might be excited at the prospect that a more efficient organization will allow for better pay.

[u/Hot_Construction9967 → u/Large-Cap-2411]

I don’t think we are tbh. My example was a bit out there but that’s was just so I don’t give too much info on reddit.

You suggested that part of the reason that labour hire is a smarter move, at least in terms of cost, is because if you hire a permanent employee for the same 6 month project a labour hire or consultant would’ve been brought in for, after those 6 months the permanent APS employee moves onto work they were specifically hired for, experienced in or passionate about and basically no longer able to bring that same level of value to return on that investment.
What i’m saying is that just because the work an employee is moved onto isnt exactly aligned to their previous duties, their passions or every single existing skill they have, it doesn’t mean they’re completely incapable of doing that new work in a meaningful and valuable way in terms of the investment of taxpayer money.
I think a lot of the skills necessary for corporate/office jobs and the knowledge you build by being a permanent employee are a lot more transferable than your position is acknowledging.
Also, there’s a lot of work during and beyond that 6 month mark that requires permanent resourcing that I don’t think is being taken into account. If permanent employees are hired, the org gains and retains the skills and knowledge required to deliver and maintain that thing. This it won’t have to invest money, time and resourcing every 1-4yrs to procure, onboard, set up access, establish and manage contracts, and track deliverables for more labour hire to review that policy, fix that system or update that assessment.

Edit to say that the “at the expense” part of my previous comment is literally just because of the post you decided to bring this up on.

[u/Large-Cap-2411 → u/Hot_Construction9967]

Quick note, I didn't bring this up. An earlier poster said that labour hire costs 'exorbitant' amounts, and I just demonstrated that is not true when presented universally.

I agree with you that a lot of skills are transferrable. There will be risk in either direction. The point is that under the current settings, using labour hires allows Government to have a shot at delivering something without an ongoing liability. In your scenario - hiring a permanent employee - many things have to go right consistently, year-in, year-out, for the role to be good value.

And even where that might occur, it will not be because it was planned that way. A *permanent* resource allocation is made based on a *temporary* identified need/business plan.

And where I said we're talking about different things, I meant the discussion around wage increases - more permanent staff = less pay rise to go around.

[u/ARX7 → u/Large-Cap-2411]

Until you have contractors full time in positions they managed to have made permanent.

[u/Large-Cap-2411 → u/ARX7]

Then they are not a contractor, they're a public servant? And in that instance, the public service likely found them exemplary and kept them? As opposed to the huge inertia behind keeping someone that started as a permanent FTE.

[u/SirSteelBuns]

This needs to be reframed. 9% over three years is not a pay rise. 3% per year, beneath official CPI of 4% this year, is a 1% pay cut or pay reduction per year.

It would help to start using correct terminology, when discussing pay "offers". Not just with APS / federal bargaining but more widely. If you are not getting 4% this year, you are getting a pay cut, not a pay rise. Simple as that. And no, no one is going to be happy to take a pay cut, again. What does that say about the value of your work? "keep going, we will pay you less for the same effort". Year after year. Same story. Work more or the same for less. If this doesn't incite striking I'm not sure what will.

[u/SkySpecial4512 → u/SirSteelBuns]

And there’s no miracle coming to CPI, it’ll be above 3% next year too. Signing up to this would be tantamount to 2 years of pay cuts, at least.

[u/Wehavecrashed → u/SkySpecial4512]

It'll get voted up because most CPSU members are old timers and don't want to wait two years to get a pay rise that isn't meaningfully higher.

[u/Mildebeest → u/SirSteelBuns]

Additionally, the headline is deliberately misleading and divisive. By putting "Canberra" in the title, it's invoking the whole bubble/out of touch argument.

Federal Public Servants are located all over Australia. In every capital city and in lots of regional areas. They're your relatives, friends and neighbours that are being asked to take a pay cut during a cost of living crisis.

[u/sevinaus7 → u/SirSteelBuns]

And further to include the literal ask of working more for no extra pay.

In addition to the pay cut, they want me to work an extra 45min a week.

Fark.right.all.the.way.off.

[u/ImReadingYourShit → u/sevinaus7]

Extra 45 a week? Lol

[u/sevinaus7 → u/ImReadingYourShit]

9 min a day, 5 working days a week.

45 min a week.

39 hours a year.

An extra week for nothing.

[u/Lilyq77 → u/sevinaus7]

Another perspective is that many public service agencies have had standard hours that are 9 minutes longer a day than your agency for many years without better conditions.

[u/Independent-Tone5362 → u/Lilyq77]

Cos ATO employees bargained for them.

[u/sevinaus7 → u/Lilyq77]

Pay, usually the pay is better. That was the trade off. That was "bargained" and "agreed" to years ago. Has a compounding effect.

So already working for less pay and now get to give more time for nothing in return.

[u/Independent-Tone5362 → u/sevinaus7]

A little tiring having to explain it to the ignorant

[u/Candid_Fisherman3731 → u/sevinaus7]

Trtca private sector role then champ!

[u/sevinaus7 → u/Candid_Fisherman3731]

I've worked private; up until recently, I'd say I was getting 2 unsolicited contacts a week about joining private firms (which indicates to me how shit it is out there right now).

I could do that, again.

But I really believe in serving the public and quite frankly, I'm good at it.

All of the things that governments deliver don't just materialise out of thin air, government staff help make it happen.

The problem with not paying civil servants enough is the good ones eventually leave because they can earn more and then delivery of government projects suffers and then folks complain when, if you just paid folks a reasonable wage, the good ones will stay.

The government taking advantage of altruistic folks can only go so far -- I can't pay my bills with my belief in serving the public and making the country a better place.

[u/Wehavecrashed → u/Lilyq77]

I will be a little pissed off if the main fight this round of bargaining is to keep ato employees clocking off 9 minutes early.

[u/No-Departure-3047 → u/Wehavecrashed]

I will be a little pissed off if the main fight this round of bargaining is to keep ato employees clocking off 9 minutes early. from taking an effective pay cut via increased hours with no equivalent financial compensation.

Fixed it for you.

[u/Wehavecrashed → u/No-Departure-3047]

No you don't need to fix it for me. It was accurate already.

ATO employees getting a 9 minute early mark is not something we should be focusing on over negotiations that affect all staff.

[u/sevinaus7 → u/Wehavecrashed]

It was negotiated years ago.

It shouldn't even be a point of discussion. (Which is hopefully your point.)

We need to recognise this as a dog whistle that's trying to distract us from things that should be nutted out.

[u/lifetimer → u/sevinaus7]

We need to all reject this offer as a collective.

[u/ImReadingYourShit → u/sevinaus7]

I can only concede your frustration on this point in that there’s less opportunity incentive.

But 9 minutes extra a day is nothing. What are your base hours?

[u/No-Departure-3047 → u/ImReadingYourShit]

Would you sacrifice a week of annual leave, then?

Just sign it away for no money in return?

[u/ImReadingYourShit → u/No-Departure-3047]

I work about 3-4 hours extra per week.
I do get some flexibility to leave early/have a day off here and there but on average this is at about a 10:1 rate.
(Have edited the above to make my point clearer. Initially it was purely added for discussion’s sake, but apparently people would rather fixate on that part and weaponise it while failing to see the broader point I’m making).

I get in anywhere between 15 minutes to an hour early daily and occasionally stick around 15-30 minutes late. On the rare occasion, I might stay back an hour. I also live on my own and thus have nobody to carry the housework for me, yet I do fine with this extra effort, and it has paid off too.

Complaining about 9 minutes a day is not helpful, in fact damaging to the case you’re all seeking to make, and it’s honestly rather juvenile.

I’m not even sure how you liken 9 minutes extra per day to losing a week of annual leave. Apples to pears comparison. Close, on the surface, but fundamentally not the same.

Comment edited to be slightly more palatable and perhaps a few might actually realise that things could be worse.

[u/sevinaus7 → u/ImReadingYourShit]

Maths makes this not ridiculous; something from your reply indicates this isn't a strong suit.

You get to leave whenever you want, but that's not how it is for many (if not the majority) of people.

[u/ImReadingYourShit → u/sevinaus7]

Part of my point is that I make this much effort and survive just fine.
My leaving early is maybe once every 2-3 months.
If I couldn’t get the flexibility, I mightn’t do the same effort, but I’d certainly not be complaining about 9 minutes extra per day.
I get in 15 minutes early as the bare minimum and that would be the case even without the flexibility, and the odd 5-15 minutes staying back.

[u/SikeShay → u/ImReadingYourShit]

Interesting you're ok eating a turd sandwich for your boss.

Try calculating your salary in hourly terms averaged over a whole year when considering unpaid overtime

[u/No-Departure-3047 → u/ImReadingYourShit]

I could technically leave just about whenever I want,

I worked a private sector job that let me do this too, because they weren't logging my hours. The benefit was having short days whenever you wanted (within reason). The downside was working hours of overtime with no recognition, whether it be extra pay or TOIL. Wasn't something that impacted me, but it was a problem for plenty of others in the department who worked overtime regularly and wanted their efforts to be acknowledged.

I get paid days off without using annual leave, and it’s not even in my employee agreement.

How many employers do you think offer something like this? Probably next to none, I'd imagine.

Whinging about 9 extra minutes per day is actually just ridiculous.

Says the person who has admitted freely that they work a job thar for all intents and purposes rewards slacker behaviour.

I’m not even sure how you liken 9 minutes extra per day to losing a week of annual leave. Apples to pears comparison. Close, on the surface, but fundamentally not the same.

Boy, howdy, you're not the brightest bulb in the box, are you?

Imagine you're late for work 9 minutes and your employer puts a mark against your name for a 9 minute defecit. Imagine that happens five days a week. How much of a defecit do you accrue after showing up 9 minutes late every day for a week?

How much of a defecit is that if it happens every single working week in the year?

If your employer says to you at the end of the year "you owe me a week of work to make up for the defecit, and you're not getting paid for it," do you reckon you'd accept that, or do you reckon you'd tell them to go jump?

You sound like a privileged twat, frankly. I cannot imagine anyone being this wilfully dense.

On the other hand, your employer must be happy because they could basically take $9 out of your pocket every day you go to work and you wouldn't even notice, because apparently you don't know how to do math.

[u/ImReadingYourShit → u/No-Departure-3047]

Hahaha mate I work in a field directly relevant to all of this talk and I do a pretty fkn good job of it by all accounts.

I just think whinging about 9 minutes a day is insane.
I’m all for strong public service but the people in this thread whinging about 9 minutes a day are really not doing any favours to the image of public servants being lazy (which I don’t tend to agree with, but am being challenged on my position here).

The rest of my points were to show that you’re whinging about a minor amount of additional effort.
The amount of time I get in lieu is a fraction of the extra efforts I put in. But nonetheless they payoff. Some of us actually want to build a future with their effort today, knowing the economic uncertainty that lies ahead.
If everyone in public service took this mentality, productivity would be up and so would your pays, along with national finance health.

If your base hours at 9-5:30 then I would have said nah fuck that 9 minutes, but I don’t think anyone answered me.

The AL argument is irrelevant because AL is a different matter and working 9 minutes extra per day has nothing to do with use of your entitlements.

[u/No-Departure-3047 → u/ImReadingYourShit]

If everyone in public service took this mentality, productivity would be up and so would your pays, along with national finance health.

Bullshit.

The AL argument is irrelevant because AL is a different matter and working 9 minutes extra per day has nothing to do with use of your entitlements.

Your repeated inability to grasp the concept and the comparison casts a hell of a lot of doubt on your claims of "doing a pretty fkn good job" at work, but I'm guessing your job has nothing to do with basic maths or concepts surrounding it.

If your base hours are 7:21 and you do 7:30 (as most people do), you rack up 9 minutes of flex immediately.

If you do that every week you clock 45 minutes of flex. Do that every week, and you will have a week of flex time you can use - which functions just like annual leave, since you are too dense to understand this point thus far.

If you choose not to work that 7:30 every week, then it's 45 minutes per week back in your pocket, which works out over a year to be a week of your own time you didn't have to spend at work.

If your base hours are increased to 7:30 then they've got an extra week worth of hours out of you just by virtue of that increase.

And if they haven't increased your salary, you're doing that extra work for no extra pay.

The rest of your points fell flat because you don't understand the fundamental issue, whether you're choosing not to or you're just actually that dense, I don't know.

It's not about people whining about 9 extra minutes, it's about organisations that sacrificed pay increases to maintain that benefit. Those organisations are now being asked to abandon that benefit and receive no pay increase to compensate for it.

If you crunch the numbers down to a $ per hour of your salary, being asked to work extra hours for no extra pay means you take a cut to your hourly rate.

I hope to christ you don't work anywhere near numbers, because I've seen less ineptitude and stupidity in two decades of work than you've displayed in this comment thread.

[u/Smooth-Television-48 → u/ImReadingYourShit]

MyReadingIsShit. There fixed your username so it's accurate.

9mins a day is 39hours a year. Math isnt hard.

Also if you want to volunteer your time for free then thats up to you to do. It doesnt give you any (moral or otherwise) platform to grandstand from. Even if you think it does, I get in 4 hours early everyday and stay back 4 hours as well so my platform is higher than yours which makes my opinion count more (by your reasoning otherwise why mention it) and I say you're wrong in just about everything you said.

[u/ImReadingYourShit → u/Smooth-Television-48]

Good one mate haha.
Smooth-brain-0-braincells. I fixed your username haha!

39 hours a year is 0.4% of your time. No, math is not hard.
But apparently unpacking a point that is mildly unfavourable for public sector redditors is hard, even despite it being in agreement on the rate offer being insufficient.

It’s funny you talk about volunteering your time. Even if I worked bang on the set hours I’d still have longer days than you lot.

The reason I put in extra time is for the investment which has proven worthy.

The point of me raising the extra time I put in was that you’re going to live and be just fine having to work 9 extra minutes while maintaining a higher AWE than most Aussies (private sector cohort) and still less hours.

The fact that you’re all so fixated on the 9 minutes is actually damaging to the case for rate increases but don’t let me get in the way of your self-defeating attitude.

[u/Smooth-Television-48 → u/ImReadingYourShit]

That was too much for my poor koala brain to read. I did notice you're still fixated on the 9 minutes.

Such a shame I work harder than you so I'm right and you're wrong about, well, everything.

7h30m is 102% of 7h21m...see how that 2 isnt a 0.4. (Sorry for the hard math)

But one day if you try hard you might get a little win under your belt. We believe in you, you future champ!

[u/itsonlybarney → u/SirSteelBuns]

Isn't it more like pay less, but expect more??

[u/donaldson774 → u/SirSteelBuns]

Exactly, I think we need to strike. Maybe if we all joined the private sector that would show them. We would all thrive in the private sector, hardened public servants are the best hires. Then we'll see real productivity

[u/neirboca → u/SirSteelBuns]

What about after tax? Its like 2%

[u/CollectionNo901 → u/SirSteelBuns]

Yeah, it’s ridiculous for the headline to say 9% when that’s actually spread over 3 years.

[u/someguywhoiscoolish → u/SirSteelBuns]

Aps has too many stuff , they've over hired and gotten less budget then they assumed. The can't offer too many redundancies as they are too expensive. Making people quit on their own is the best option, shitty pay offers is the key to that

[u/Mantaup → u/SirSteelBuns]

Is the median take home pay increasing by CPI too? No.

[u/Crosso221]

2.8% in 2029 is utterly insulting

[u/AusPublicService-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

While discussions on policy and governance are welcome, avoid promoting or endorsing any political party or agenda. Keep discussions non-partisan and focused on the APS as an institution.

[u/reijin64 → u/Crosso221]

It’s more than what the corporate sector are getting and have gotten for a long time. Changing jobs is the way.

[u/No-Departure-3047 → u/reijin64]

What's the base rate of pay in corporate, on average?

[u/reijin64 → u/No-Departure-3047]

Depends on the role, sector, specialisation.

I've long said for technical or any STEM role, really - the APS thinks you're another generic APS6 and you'll be underpaid, and this in particular is why people leave and go to private, or contracting, and any skilled capability is never retained.

And often enough those skills are needed to lead key design decisions an organisation needs and needs to make consistently. Or.... you can rely on outsourcers that are happy to take a pay check and just let you keep making mistakes because they can only lead a horse to water.

[u/Darmop]

It’s not even 9% for the agencies who are also expected to work an extra week a year with zero compensatory payrise.

[u/Massive-Wallaby4911 → u/Darmop]

Due to compounding it's not quite 3%, about 2.91%. I think I understand why they are giving a lowball offer.

[u/outgrabed → u/Massive-Wallaby4911]

Due to compounding it's 9.27% over three years

[u/Massive-Wallaby4911 → u/outgrabed]

That's only if it's annualised at 3%, but the reported raise is 9% nominally.

[u/outgrabed → u/Massive-Wallaby4911]

It's reported at 9% so people don't go 3.2 + 3 + 2.8 ≠ 9.3, but in reality it's 1.032 X 1.030 X 1.028 = 1.0927. This is confirmed in the pay offer excel workbook.

[u/CaptainSharpe → u/Darmop]

So you’re also fighting for the other agencies to get shorter work days too, right?

[u/Saluted → u/CaptainSharpe]

Yes?

[u/5kOfflane2kSupport → u/CaptainSharpe]

Didn’t those agencies start on 7:21 and gave up their 9 minutes for extra benefits?

[u/Equivalent-Wealth-63 → u/5kOfflane2kSupport]

The "extra benefits" was merely a justification for the standard pay rise at the time. The negotiation teams didn't even try to hide that any pay rise at all had to come at a productivity that included the extra 9 minutes.

In other words, just the same as being suggested here.

[u/CaptainSharpe → u/5kOfflane2kSupport]

Which extra benefits did they receive and still have?

[u/5kOfflane2kSupport → u/CaptainSharpe]

Defense force gave up their 7:21 for Christmas shutdown.

[u/CaptainSharpe → u/5kOfflane2kSupport]

Don’t other areas have normal hours and a Christmas shutdown off? Or do they use up annual leave for it?

[u/5kOfflane2kSupport → u/CaptainSharpe]

Not sure.
DYOR

[u/CaptainSharpe → u/5kOfflane2kSupport]

I mean, I'm not the one defending unspecified conditions for unspecified conditions.

[u/Smooth-Television-48 → u/CaptainSharpe]

Nah, most agencies don't get the same period

[u/Smooth-Television-48 → u/CaptainSharpe]

Christmas shut-down mostly

[u/No-Departure-3047 → u/CaptainSharpe]

Yes, why shouldn't they? I thought that was the whole point of APS wide bargaining, lift everyone up to the same level, not lift some up and push others down.

[u/CaptainSharpe → u/No-Departure-3047]

Doesn’t work like that because some agencies and dept have their own negotiations and bargaining. That’s why agencies and dept have different pay rates etc 

[u/No-Departure-3047 → u/CaptainSharpe]

Weren't we trying to move away from that though?

[u/Smooth-Television-48 → u/No-Departure-3047]

And they can. But you can't just extend someone's salaried hours by 2% without paying them any extra. If you want to make it all the same you have to gross up everything first.

[u/CaptainSharpe → u/No-Departure-3047]

You’d think so

[u/brisvegasdreams]

The APS is already suffering because it’s increasingly uncompetitive with state governments. I’ve knocked back jobs with Depts I’ve previously worked for due to their inability to match my current salary. For those calling for industrial action - do it! I was part of industrial action during Work Choices - public servants can actually strike you know.

[u/Mathuselahh → u/brisvegasdreams]

There was industrial action 10 years ago at departments like DIBP. Didn't do much at all, unfortunately.

[u/Smooth-Television-48 → u/brisvegasdreams]

public servants can actually strike you know.

Some can. But the ability to, and how and when, strikes can be done can be controlled and/or strongly influenced by the government. It's not really a level playing ground when they dictate that your strikes can't make an impact.

[u/Mclovine_aus]

Will not accept this offer, just offer a pay rise equal to CPI each year. Do that in perpetuity so we can waste less money on all the bargaining nonsense.

[u/riamuriamu]

CBA just agreed to 13%, so I think the APS can do better.

[u/Bandit72 → u/riamuriamu]

I vote no to every proposal put forward. They can ALWAYS do better.

[u/allyerbase → u/riamuriamu]

Very hard to make the same arguments comparing APS to private sector full stop, let alone one of the most profitable businesses in the country/world.

[u/Agile-Cash8761 → u/allyerbase]

Spot on.

[u/OrazioZ]

Absolutely disgusting worker bashing headline lol, 9% over THREE YEARS is nothing.

[u/Excellent_Sign4515]

Why would anyone vote for a deal that doesn't keep up with CPI increases

[u/4us7 → u/[deleted]]

I get it. You have a low paying job or you work a tough job, and is angry that the government workers, who seemingly doesnt do anything important as far as you know, gets paid more or just as much as you do.

Im telling you here that you are focusing your energy wrong. You should be focusing on your industry not paying you enough, not supporting other industries to pay less to their workers.

A wage increase less than CPI is an effective wage decrease. And there is no end to this long trajectory of high CPI due to factors beyond our nation's control. That is a fact, and all workers should strive for pay that at least keeps up with inflation.

[u/Young_Lochinvar → u/[deleted]]

The rate of productivity growth has declined but productivity overall is still growing.

Public service being ‘too big’ is  debateable. In 2008 the APS was 0.75% of the population, in 2024 it was 0.68%. That’s a decrease in Commonwealth public servants per capita.

Meanwhile the main employment growth areas have been Health/Age Care/Disability Care and Defence. The first box is largely demographically driven - more older people require more care. But if you want to decrease defence personnel you can make your pitch.

[u/tell-the-king → u/[deleted]]

Who gets over 100k for shuffling corro in the public sector? Please provide examples and be specific

[u/Wehavecrashed → u/tell-the-king]

Someone crap at the top of the APS6 band could be doing this.

[u/shamberra → u/[deleted]]

Really enjoy life in the crab bucket don't you?

[u/Ab-Adam]

It honestly sounds like it’s time for us to go on strike for a week just to show them how useless they are without the men and women who run this country for real

[u/Ab-Adam → u/Ab-Adam]

Say maybe we do a walk out at 10 am on Monday the 26 of October and just send them a message I mean nurses ambos and police didn’t get the pay rise just by having a chat but I’m just saying

[u/Wehavecrashed → u/Ab-Adam]

You're a member of a union right?

[u/the_pigeon_overlord]

Even the official "inflation rates" of 2.8% in 2026-27 and 2.4% in 2027-28 are a fucking LAUGH. We really are being treated like fools.

[u/Just-Championship578 → u/the_pigeon_overlord]

What, you don’t trust the RBA with forecasting?

[u/No-Departure-3047 → u/Just-Championship578]

If the RBA are trustworthy, the APSC can put their money where their mouths are and offer a cost of living increase.

[u/WonkyWheels]

2.8% hints at where their predicting the economy will be.

[u/CassiusCreed → u/WonkyWheels]

Tell em they're dreamin.

[u/International-Ad391 → u/CassiusCreed]

They can bugger off to Bonnie Doon.

[u/iss3y → u/WonkyWheels]

Not if stagflation continues the way it's been going

[u/ScreamHawk → u/WonkyWheels]

Good thing their forecast this year was accurate huh?

[u/ImReadingYourShit → u/ScreamHawk]

Are you talking about forecast which was made before Mossad reminded Trump about the photos and sold him stories of ‘nuclear dust’?

[u/No-Departure-3047 → u/ImReadingYourShit]

Trump is still going to be in power next year, unless they know something we don't.

[u/ImReadingYourShit → u/No-Departure-3047]

Beyond the scope of my comment.

Forecasts will continue to adjust towards next year as the picture becomes clearer. That is normal.

[u/ScreamHawk → u/ImReadingYourShit]

what on earth?

[u/ImReadingYourShit → u/ScreamHawk]

Lol

[u/fivefivedavid → u/WonkyWheels]

So good that we barely need a pay rise.... right guys?

[u/dodgy_beard_guy]

If they want to promote the payrises to CPI then why not make the payrises in alignment with CPI? Just write that into the agreement.

[u/4us7 → u/dodgy_beard_guy]

Probably because that would mean the government have then have to pay between 12 to 20 percent payrise over 3 years, for largely factors outside its control. Meanwhile, this makes it hard for the union to sell exactly what they bargained for since they would have no concrete outcome in dollar figures in the short term.

Thus, union and government usually compromise and agree on a wage rise over several years. If there is a CPI specific adjustments, it has a cap, to prevent the government suffering major blowouts from a bad year.

[u/mokoufn]

Really hard to look at this deal and see a future for myself in the aps in the next 5 years. No concrete technical specialist pathway, wages below CPI, using the lowest common denominator for proposed shared conditions. Where is the respect, let alone the commitment to making the APS into an employer I could plan future careers around?

[u/lifetimer → u/mokoufn]

Exactly. How does the crap pay offer and reduction of conditions make the APS the employer of choice.

[u/someguywhoiscoolish → u/mokoufn]

Don't bank on the technical specialist thing. I've been banging that drum since about 2008 It ain't happening

[u/silkin]

Absolutely insulting

[u/wade23]

Id spit at this offer.

[u/No_Mercy_4_Potatoes]

Is there a way for me to piss over the offer from APSC?

[u/AngryAngryHarpo → u/No_Mercy_4_Potatoes]

Join the union and vote no. 

[u/No-Departure-3047 → u/AngryAngryHarpo]

I did that last time, it didn't do squat.

What's next?

[u/No_Mercy_4_Potatoes → u/AngryAngryHarpo]

That doesn't give me the option though.

I want to look at the chief negotiator in the eye while pissing on her offer at the same time. The fucking audacity to offer anything below 12% is getting to me.

[u/Expert-Bumblebee5000 → u/No_Mercy_4_Potatoes]

Nominate yourself as a bargaining representative, you can attend in work time and you'll get the chance to speak to the Chief "Negotiator" directly

[u/alexi_b → u/No_Mercy_4_Potatoes]

Every employee has the right to nominate as an independent bargaining representative to bargain for themselves, but I’m not sure if it’s too late for that now or not…

[u/jack_55 → u/No_Mercy_4_Potatoes]

Leave the APS

[u/No_Mercy_4_Potatoes → u/jack_55]

Will you get better pay if I leave the APS? Or are you one of those APSC shills?

[u/jack_55 → u/No_Mercy_4_Potatoes]

No - you probably can't get a better paying job outside the APS however.

[u/No_Mercy_4_Potatoes → u/jack_55]

First year FIFO workers earn more than most APS workers. So I probably will.

Are you in the APS? Or are you one of those morons who think APS needs to give a fuck about their opinion cause they pay tax?

[u/jack_55 → u/No_Mercy_4_Potatoes]

Do you have a skillset for a FIFO worker, or assume you will beat out the thousands of other applicants applying daily.

Unskilled FIFO bar manager/labour will make 100k in Perth at the moment.

Yes I am in the APS, too many people being paid 6 figures to manage an email inbox.

[u/SHITSTAINED_CUM_SOCK → u/jack_55]

I came from FIFO to work at the APS. A lot of APS people I work with have a skillset that matches requirements for FIFO roles (most importantly: having a pulse).

It's the lifestyle that's hardest- not the skillset.

[u/No_Mercy_4_Potatoes → u/jack_55]

So you want to pass over higher pay for yourself, just so the "inbox managers" don't get it either?

[u/jack_55 → u/No_Mercy_4_Potatoes]

I'm overpaid for what I do & i am all for excepting the offer, because its probably as much as we're going to get in this fiscal environment

[u/Smooth-Television-48 → u/jack_55]

Then quit and stop being a drain on the country?

Or tell them to lower your role level.

[u/PsychologicalCan2122]

Above projected dumbass what’s actual inflation right now. Mentally challenged articles now days.

[u/RagingRhino-AUS]

If you look at the last 3 years of actual inflation versus the RBA forecast they are like 7% off! So don't try to sell me this is based off their numbers if you don't baseline their accuracy.

[u/ImReadingYourShit → u/RagingRhino-AUS]

When did CPI hit 10-11%?

[u/RagingRhino-AUS → u/ImReadingYourShit]

I am referring to the 3 year variance of their predictions each year vers actual. Ie the 3 year forecast they are using to justify this offer, if you look at previous similar predictions and map them to actual rates, over the total of the last 3 years they are way off. Hence their accuracy is means one can't simply use their figures without taking into account the variances.

[u/Smooth-Television-48]

“This pay is part of an overall package of conditions. These are preliminary positions within this package, not agreed outcomes,” she said.

Yeah.... conditions like making staff work longer for free and cutting leave entitlements.

Wtf is wrong with these people

[u/NAFOfromOz]

RBA offered 9.5% over 3 years https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2026/oct/01/rba-denies-staff-a-pay-rise-that-keeps-up-with-inflation-just-hours-after-interest-rate-rise

[u/Redamazona]

The thing that really pees me off is in the last round, CPSU rolled over with very little teeth and refused to consider much in the way of serious negotiation or strike action to go for what employees really wanted. I remember sitting in one of those 'information' meetings and providing verbal feedback based on discussions with the majority of people in the teams I worked with who were all for any form of action. Many of them (including myself) went through the whole drama between 2014- 2017, so we knew what it might mean. However the reps response "that doesn't reflect the feedback and we dont think we can really push this further this round." Several of my colleagues ended CPSU membership and moved to ASU because of it. But didn't substantiate that claim. I don't have enough faith in CPSU to push past their own agenda. I am a member, but I'm considering moving to ASU.

[u/ratstatz → u/Redamazona]

The CPSU are pathetic in comparison to the ASU

[u/Independent-Tone5362 → u/ratstatz]

Agree. ASU was better...but even that CPSU can't say yes to this one. 9% less 2.4% with the increased work hours. 6.6% over 3 years

[u/Rugby_Viking]

This is pretty much inline with what I expected. The government arent going to budge on this so good luck if it gets voted down. It will get delayed until the middle of next year at a minimum if that happens, much like what happened around 8-10 years ago during that bargaining round.

[u/United_Mango5072 → u/Rugby_Viking]

What was the outcome 8-10 years ago

[u/Rugby_Viking → u/United_Mango5072]

Long delays to pay increases for some agencies. I cant remember exactly but I think some waited over 2years.

[u/lifetimer → u/Rugby_Viking]

3 years for Services Aust, tax also had long delays

[u/Beginner45678 → u/lifetimer]

Ato had 3 years of zero

[u/Zeffyb0509 → u/Rugby_Viking]

100% agree. I dont think its that bad. We've gotta read the room. ABF fought and didnt get a payrise for 8 years.

[u/FunkyColinMiller]

I'd be okay with the 9 per cent of they did more around redundancy protections, payouts, and retraining and redeployment. Budget and economy is an utter mess, and with AI being rolled out by an exec who adore it, I think job security is more important than pay (you don't get paid if you don't have a job).

[u/Smooth-Television-48]

How about they make it "the highest of official inflation or wage growth figure + 2%" each year. When we've finally caught back up to inflation they can drop the +2%

[u/lifetimer → u/Smooth-Television-48]

Or realistically 1% percent over inflation for each year. Im not unrealistic, inflation sucks and i definitely do not want to give a reason for the RBA to increase mortgage rates again, but it needs to at least be more than inflation

[u/lifetimer → u/lifetimer]

And let's see what the RBAs forecast for CPI will b when they update their rates on 3 Nov

[u/Simposity]

the unions would be striking and marching in the streets if the liberals made this offer.

instead it’s yeah we tried, back to work now

[u/No-Departure-3047 → u/Simposity]

instead it’s yeah we tried, back to work now

This is what they did last round, too. Fought back and then when the offer was pretty much the same but with a 0.9% sign on bonus tacked on they called it a day.

CPSU is a joke.

[u/Wharfie98]

CPI should be the base and 1% above

[u/General_Top_6556]

CPSU fury? They need to talk to more people.

[u/TheLittleQuietCrow]

Sparking CPSU fury?
The article is titled union fury and you’ve mentioned two unions here in your write up, including comments from the ASU branch secretary. The fury in this seems to be more so from ASU?

[u/No-Drive72]

Labor can get farked!

[u/NoMix5094]

Ahaha to bad your labor party does not have a decent union like the FSU. CBA just caved to the union ahead of their AGM due to planned industrial action.

[u/AusPublicService-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

While discussions on policy and governance are welcome, avoid promoting or endorsing any political party or agenda. Keep discussions non-partisan and focused on the APS as an institution.

[u/backwards-hat]

Has anything else been said about squaring up leave entitlements and pay as was mentioned initially? I haven’t seen anything about it since the formal offer

[u/AdventurousDay3020]

Still more than the ADF was given and the APS can use their union as reps.

[u/Mclovine_aus → u/[deleted]]

What good will that do, the EBA is now and the greens are not in power.

[u/Jet90 → u/Mclovine_aus]

When it comes time to vote I'm suggesting people vote for someone who wants a fair payrise. It's a step in the right direction. If nothing changes, nothing changes.

[u/AusPublicService-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

While discussions on policy and governance are welcome, avoid promoting or endorsing any political party or agenda. Keep discussions non-partisan and focused on the APS as an institution.

[u/Smooth-Television-48 → u/AusPublicService-ModTeam]

Ugh bot moderation...clearly not endorsing them

[u/AusPublicService-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

While discussions on policy and governance are welcome, avoid promoting or endorsing any political party or agenda. Keep discussions non-partisan and focused on the APS as an institution.

[u/Horror_Vehicle239]

Work in the private sector. Got 2.8 percent. Many got less. Why should you be different?

[u/JustOnStandBi → u/Horror_Vehicle239]

Why should you have to take a pay cut? Join your union.

[u/lifetimer → u/Horror_Vehicle239]

Yes, but imagine u can try and negotiate the better deal one on one with your employer, which is exactly what we are trying to do. There have been years where some departments got no increases for 2 to 3 years, including over COVID. This hasn't happened just once but several times.

[u/WestAdvantage6373 → u/Horror_Vehicle239]

They're basically getting the same. 9% is over 3 years.

[u/Acceptable-Cold9798]

Not sure what you guys expect when the federal gov is broke and looking at a $1 trillion dollar debt. Get ready for mass redundancies like the private sector did this year.

[u/Expert-Bumblebee5000 → u/Acceptable-Cold9798]

Sign me up!

[u/byedesign11 → u/Acceptable-Cold9798]

Be prepared to work harder for less. Like everyone else

[u/NoResponsibility8773]

ADF got 3%.

[u/Hewballs → u/NoResponsibility8773]

ADF is irrelevant. They can't negotiate. Plus they get so many benefits and allowances that their base pay is only a part of their renumeration package, it doesn't paint the entire picture.

Though this is the exact tactic Government bargainers use to try to sell the APS low-ball. "The ADF are only getting 3%, you think you're better than the military???"

[u/NoResponsibility8773 → u/Hewballs]

They can't negotiate because they're busy actually working. Enjoy your flex day tomorrow lol

[u/AngryAngryHarpo → u/NoResponsibility8773]

Your realise that APS employs as astounding number of ex-ADF staff right?

[u/Hewballs → u/NoResponsibility8773]

Hilarious, witty and original

[u/AngryAngryHarpo → u/NoResponsibility8773]

No, they got 9. 

It’s 9% over 3 years, not 9% outright in one year. 

[u/NoResponsibility8773 → u/AngryAngryHarpo]

No they didn’t. They got a 1 year agreement for a 3% increase in November.

[u/AngryAngryHarpo → u/NoResponsibility8773]

So… basically the same as the first year APS raise.

If it’s a 1 year agreement.. it will get negotiated again in another year, correct? 

So comparing ADF’s 3% for one year to APS 9% over 3 is still a bad faith comparison. 

[u/NoResponsibility8773 → u/AngryAngryHarpo]

Well it’s not - I’ve read plenty of comments about how 3.2% this year is a slap in the face etc after a bumper year of inflation.

Well, it’s better than the ADF.

[u/AngryAngryHarpo → u/NoResponsibility8773]

So what if it’s better than the ADF?

The ADF negotiations have nothing to do with APS negotiations and the ADF’s payrise should not be considered some sort of reasonable ceiling for what APS negotiations might end up as. 

It sucks the ADF didn’t get more - but it’s not going to make me meekly accept a shitty payrise because it’s slightly better than someone else’s shitty pay rise. 

[u/AdventurousDay3020 → u/AngryAngryHarpo]

It doesn’t get “negotiated”. A MAJ in Canberra will punch some numbers that make the government happy and it gets approved. And the last three year “pay rise” (23-25) they got was also still under inflation

[u/No-Cryptographer9408]

Australia is this weird uneeded public servant paradise. Why so many of them ? The most of any country in the world isn't it ?

[u/FrostyDiscount2951]

Especially the public service there not that productive

[u/Stunning_Release_795]

Anything that creates less public service workers is fine by me

[u/Nifty29au → u/Stunning_Release_795]

Show me on the doll where they hurt you.

[u/owencrisp → u/Nifty29au]

Probably on their dole payment.

[u/LiveReplicant → u/Stunning_Release_795]

Ok get ready for ppl not to be able to get through to Centrelink and other essential services for hours longer than