An Bord Snip Nua

[micls]

They want to reduce special needs assistants even more? There's already a cull ongoing.

You can't decide that all kids should be integrated and then leave them to drown in a normal classroom...

[passinginterest]

I'd say the 20% cut in children's allowance and 5% in social welfare will cause some controversy. A lot of very vauge pie in the sky talk through the whole document, no genuine suggestions as to how the cut in public service numbers will be achieved. Lots of suggestions about merging agencies which logistically will prove to be a nightmare and will probably take years to implement, the realtionships between some of those they want to bring together would be fairly vauge too.

Some suggestions about restructuring of pensions and ousourcing of payroll and corporate services, such as IT. I missed the bit about the pay cut as I was reading through, apparently they've suggested 10%.

My initial reaction to it all was it could be worse.

[Macy]

They called for reverse benchmarking rather than any salary cut, and referenced the higher renumeration body. I don't have a problem with that as I said earlier in this thread against slash and burn nonsense. My main issue would be the suggestion of benchmarking against other countries - only if they also take into account cost of living in those countries too and other benefits such as childcare, truly free education etc that most developed countries enjoy.

They said staff reductions could be achieved through natural wastage and the existing schemes. The career breaks could get more if they reopen it - it didn't really give people much time to apply by the time the circulars had gone out, particularly in the wider public service.

[Angus]

Some excellent posts here but let's get a few things straight

There are many in the public service who operate effectively and skilfully and professionally, for reasonable salaries

There are many however who, through no fault of their own, have a job of no value or a job manufactured for them because of de fact redundancy

There is a staggering degree of waste - read the FAS report or any C+AG report

There is a "sanction free" environment - there is no penalty for screwing up, except for cosmetic shifting about titles and jobs and departments

The public service as a body is a mess, overstaffed, abysmally managed, chronically inefficient, notwithstanding the talents and professionalism of many people

This is the fault of the cosy cartel between successive governments, unions and "social partners". Hiring unqualified people into the PS has been an unemployment management measure for years

This report will hurt many decent professional people but I am sorry to say that is a necessary price to pay for the chaotic environment in which this monster operates.

Classically on the same day (and of course this is deliberate !!) that we have IMPACT and SIPTU talking up the abilities of the HSE, we see the Leas Cross report which talks about criminal negligence in Leas Cross and spectacular negligence in terms of oversight of key functions.

Now on the flip side, let's also drop the private sector pretence. yes many people have lost their jobs but equally many firms contain crap staff and crap managers. It is clearly easier to get fired in the private sector but still comparatively difficult.

Unfortunately the public service has a duty to spend the publics money effectively and are supposed to operate to a higher standard - it is precisely for that reason that they get better pensions, longer holidays and enjoy employment protection

[Macy]

There is a staggering degree of waste - read the FAS report or any C+AG report

There is a "sanction free" environment - there is no penalty for screwing up, except for cosmetic shifting about titles and jobs and departments
You can basically tie it down to a few, politically well connected managers as what happened in FAS, and the lack of proper penalty. If it was ordinary workers they would've been long gone - because contrary to the misconception it isn't a sanction free environment.


This is the fault of the cosy cartel between successive governments, unions and "social partners".
It's the fault of Government. Shifting the blame to the "social partners" is just an FF tactic, that too many have brought into. There are agreed procedures for making changes, that would ultimately lead into the Labour Court. If they haven't bothered their hole to propose changes how is that the fault of the unions/ workers?


Hiring unqualified people into the PS has been an unemployment management measure for years
At what level and what jobs and in what employments? That really wouldn't be my experience at all.

[reder]

At what level and what jobs and in what employments? That really wouldn't be my experience at all.

At all levels of all the sectors I have ever dealt with. Also, those who I know personally who work or have worked in the sector have commented on this. It is staggering to hear some of the goings-on in public sector bodies. One friend of mine worked in the public sector for a few months between finishing university and travelling for a year and did nothing, literally. He filled out a few in-house surveys and spent the rest of his time twiddling his thumbs. He got the job via a family member also but nepotism is not confined to the public sector. It is rife through all sectors in this country.

However, I do think people are being overly unfair towards public sector staff. For me, there is an equal level of ineptitude in the private sector. Personally, I have encountered countless people, some in positions of serious responsibility, who, in my opinion, were completely out of their depth and obtained their position as a result of loyalty as opposed to ability.

[Mr A]

Good post Angus, but like Macy says I wouldn't agree with the bit about hiring unqualified people into the public service as policy.

I work in the private sector and listen to incessant attacks on the public sector- but in my experience the many people I know working in the latter work very hard and are anything if overpaid. It also true to say that the vast majority of the utterly useless plonkers I've come across have been in the private sector.

[passinginterest]

As Mr A and Macy have pointed out it's an excellent post Angus but not without it's flaws. There's certainly a high degree of wastage and mis-management in the wider public service, and a chronically poor use of resources in places. A lot of improvements have been made in recent years, with more and more performance management checks being introduced, the PAS has also helped to remove the nepotism and rewarding of ineptitude that was prominent in the past.
Procedures to deal with underperformance and dismissal have also been developed, certainly within the Civil Service, and maybe more in some Departments than others, a number of staff have been dismissed from my Department in the last six months and while it is a long process that has to be followed to the letter it is used and it is effective.

[Macy]

At all levels of all the sectors I have ever dealt with. Also, those who I know personally who work or have worked in the sector have commented on this. It is staggering to hear some of the goings-on in public sector bodies. One friend of mine worked in the public sector for a few months between finishing university and travelling for a year and did nothing, literally. He filled out a few in-house surveys and spent the rest of his time twiddling his thumbs. He got the job via a family member also but nepotism is not confined to the public sector. It is rife through all sectors in this country.
As you said yourself, what you describe is nepotism, not a policy to manipulate the unemployment figures by hiring unqualified people, which is what Angus claimed.


while it is a long process that has to be followed to the letter it is used and it is effective.
There are so many checks and balances to ensure that there isn't political intereference and political sackings. Whilst there is political interference in appointments (certainly in the wider public sector), I know of direct examples of Ministers exerting enormous pressure on individuals who wouldn't break procedures for the benefit of their cronies. I've no doubt with a straight hire and fire policy they would've been gone for doing their job properly. It's a long process not because of the unions (as is portrayed), but because our politicians can't be trusted, and so that the integrety of the public service is upheld.