Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

UK Govt. cul 600,000 PS Jobs. Should we follow?

Options
2

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    TheInquisitor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,530 ✭✭✭TheInquisitor


    OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »
    Thats my point. The temporary staff were not hired to help out at a busy time, they were hired as a cheaper alternative to the overtime arrangement.

    In any environment if you cut wages and eliminate overtime and then hire temporary staff to do that overtime you will have war. In a unionised environment where its done without consultation its double the war.

    Now if this is the result of a handful of staff working to rule, what will 1/4 of public sector staff being fired result in?

    If it happens every year at that time of year why the hell would ye need to be consulted?


  • Options
    #33
    OhNoYouDidn't
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭OhNoYouDidn't


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    I should bloody well hope so. That's exactly the sort of efficiency improvement that's required across the public service.

    Yeah, worked a blinder, didn't it....


  • Options
    #34
    OhNoYouDidn't
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭OhNoYouDidn't


    TheInquisitor wrote: »
    If it happens every year at that time of year why the hell would ye need to be consulted?

    But in previous years it was in addition to overtime. This year it was a replacement for. Completely different dynamic and a change in work practices that are moody under partnership.


  • Options
    #35
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,791 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »
    Yeah, worked a blinder, didn't it....
    No, the unions scuppered it. Not to worry, we'll just keep borrowing from the next couple of generations to pay those overtime bills.


  • Options
    #36
    ixoy
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 17,988 Mod ✭✭✭✭ixoy


    OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »
    Yeah, worked a blinder, didn't it....
    No it could have worked a blinder if there had been co-operation towards the idea of making budgetary savings. I imagine these are exactly the sort of savings that will be required to be made under the Croke Park agreement. Overtime is a big wage bill and overtime should not be taken for granted or as a right.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    kippy
    Registered Users Posts: 18,394 ✭✭✭✭kippy


    Cutting certain roles and jobs - yep, totally agree.
    There are numerous levels of nonsense in the public sector.
    You could start at the top and cut the amount of boards, directors, assistant directors and indeed the matrix management system in general.
    Lots of managers in most places with very little "power" or "foresight".


  • Options
    #38
    OhNoYouDidn't
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭OhNoYouDidn't


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    No, the unions scuppered it. Not to worry, we'll just keep borrowing from the next couple of generations to pay those overtime bills.

    So why do it in conflict with the unions? We have a partnership process where unions have dropped pay and changed work practices. Use that.

    Finance picked a fight and got a slap for their troubles.

    Any approach involving temporary staff has to be workable. Life isn't as simple as internet chatrooms.


  • Options
    #39
    OhNoYouDidn't
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭OhNoYouDidn't


    ixoy wrote: »
    No it could have worked a blinder if there had been co-operation towards the idea of making budgetary savings. I imagine these are exactly the sort of savings that will be required to be made under the Croke Park agreement. Overtime is a big wage bill and overtime should not be taken for granted or as a right.

    Agreed. But when a system, like the passport office, functions on overtime as a result of a hiring freeze, don't act all surprised when problems emerge when overtime is cut.

    Its incredolous to me that people are shocked and stunned when they don't get whatever public service they want as efficiently as last year after savage cuts.


  • Options
    #40
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,791 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »
    So why do it in conflict with the unions? We have a partnership process where unions have dropped pay and changed work practices. Use that.
    Yeah, because partnership has been so effective in curbing the public sector pay bill.


  • Options
    #41
    OhNoYouDidn't
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭OhNoYouDidn't


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    Yeah, because partnership has been so effective in curbing the public sector pay bill.

    It got the Croke Park deal through...

    Like it or not, we have a quasi legal mechanism for industrial relations issues in the public sector which has seen strikes fall to a minuscule amount. The mechansism was ditched in the passport office case and there was unrest.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    ixoy
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 17,988 Mod ✭✭✭✭ixoy


    OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »
    Agreed. But when a system, like the passport office, functions on overtime as a result of a hiring freeze, don't act all surprised when problems emerge when overtime is cut.
    But you agree that it can function equally as well under a different arangement if people are co-operative?
    Its incredolous to me that people are shocked and stunned when they don't get whatever public service they want as efficiently as last year after savage cuts.
    What's incredulous to others is the reluctance to change or work towards change at a pace faster than glacial, especially with an ever-worsening economic crisis. I think a lot of the change that's happened so far has been badly implemented (agreed) but I also don't think there's been any support by the PS/CS towards the alternative (job cuts).


  • Options
    #43
    Lu Tze
    Registered Users Posts: 3,495 ✭✭✭Lu Tze


    OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

    Its incredolous to me that people are shocked and stunned when they don't get whatever public service they want as efficiently as last year after savage cuts.

    What shocks me is people cut the amount of work they are doing by half, as a work to rule, and are still getting paid the same.


  • Options
    #44
    Het-Field
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,350 ✭✭✭Het-Field


    OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »
    No doubt all you blaming our small and efficient public sector are the same ones whining that there is now a queue at the passport office due to cutbacks. I can only imagine the explosion when there are less Gardaí, nurses, firemen, bin collections etc.

    The public sector is not, and never was, the problem.

    While not untrue, you're statement is incorrect.

    It is part of the problem, and without reform, and cuts it will continue to be an archaic monster, which is losing money hand over fist.

    Again, it is easy to use examples such as guards, and nurses in an atempt to reject attempts to cull the public sector. When most speak of reform and cuts, the are talking about middlemen in agencies, they are talking of cuts in QUANGO, and the abolition of limbs of the public sector which have outgrown their usefulness.

    In the boom years we have overseen vast expansions of the public sector, and the crazy Benchmarking ii. It may not be the problem, but the public sector is part of it.


  • Options
    #45
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,791 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »
    Like it or not, we have a quasi legal mechanism for industrial relations issues in the public sector which has seen strikes fall to a minuscule amount.
    ...and the public sector pay bill soar to an unsustainable level. Was it worth it?


  • Options
    #46
    OhNoYouDidn't
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭OhNoYouDidn't


    ixoy wrote: »
    But you agree that it can function equally as well under a different arangement if people are co-operative?

    Yes. But yet again the issues in the public sector are not the frontline staff, they are senior management who can't achieve meaningful change keeping the stakeholders on board.
    ixoy wrote: »
    What's incredulous to others is the reluctance to change or work towards change at a pace faster than glacial, especially with an ever-worsening economic crisis. I think a lot of the change that's happened so far has been badly implemented (agreed) but I also don't think there's been any support by the PS/CS towards the alternative (job cuts).

    I disagree. The rank and file public sector worker is flexible. The rigidities are structural and thats not their fault.

    Why would the PS support job cuts? Turkeys. Christmas.


  • Options
    #47
    Lu Tze
    Registered Users Posts: 3,495 ✭✭✭Lu Tze


    OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »
    The rank and file public sector worker is flexible. The rigidities are structural and thats not their fault.
    Like cooperating with temporary seasonal staff?


  • Options
    #48
    OhNoYouDidn't
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭OhNoYouDidn't


    Lu Tze wrote: »
    Like cooperating with temporary seasonal staff?

    They have done in previous years and other sections do so...


  • Options
    #49
    IrishTonyO
    Registered Users Posts: 2,321 ✭✭✭IrishTonyO


    OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »
    Thats my point. The temporary staff were not hired to help out at a busy time, they were hired as a cheaper alternative to the overtime arrangement.

    In any environment if you cut wages and eliminate overtime and then hire temporary staff to do that overtime you will have war. In a unionised environment where its done without consultation its double the war.

    Now if this is the result of a handful of staff working to rule, what will 1/4 of public sector staff being fired result in?

    The temporary staff are hired every year just before Easter. And you seem to think that CPSU members are entitled to overtime, they are not.


  • Options
    #50
    Lu Tze
    Registered Users Posts: 3,495 ✭✭✭Lu Tze


    OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »
    They have done in previous years and other sections do so...

    I was seconded into a PS office for a year as a consultant. They are inflexible. Anytime somebody wanted a work practice changed, there had to be some form of compensation or else nothing was happening.

    Threats that the unions would get involved, was something that management wouldn't push against, as they themselves were in a union, and it was not the done thing (at the time).

    Cooperation was minimal. Or agreement was reached up front, and the work just wasn't done. And the problem here was there was no stick to beat them with, everything had to be incentivised to get them to do their job.

    I have worked in other PS offices as well (briefly), and it was the same. Maybe i just got unlucky. That said, some very talented individuals working in there, with motivation, trying to change things. It made no difference, they were in the vast minority.


  • Options
    #51
    kippy
    Registered Users Posts: 18,394 ✭✭✭✭kippy


    Lu Tze wrote: »
    I was seconded into a PS office for a year as a consultant. They are inflexible. Anytime somebody wanted a work practice changed, there had to be some form of compensation or else nothing was happening.

    Threats that the unions would get involved, was something that management wouldn't push against, as they themselves were in a union, and it was not the done thing (at the time).

    Cooperation was minimal. Or agreement was reached up front, and the work just wasn't done. And the problem here was there was no stick to beat them with, everything had to be incentivised to get them to do their job.

    I have worked in other PS offices as well (briefly), and it was the same. Maybe i just got unlucky. That said, some very talented individuals working in there, with motivation, trying to change things. It made no difference, they were in the vast minority.
    Id be in agreement in general with that summation although the minority is increasing somewhat, only not fast enough and a lot of the minority get in the bad books with the staff that are very agaisnt change.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    Sleepy
    Registered Users Posts: 24,149 ✭✭✭✭Sleepy


    OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »
    Thats my point. The temporary staff were not hired to help out at a busy time, they were hired as a cheaper alternative to the overtime arrangement.
    And that's how efficient organisations work. Over-time is an arrangement whereby when requested staff work over and above their normal hours for short periods of time. It is not now, nor has it ever been, considered good practice for extended periods. I'm fully aware that some unionised workers in the PS are guaranteed a certain amount of "over-time" per week in their contracts but in the real world, this is simply a guarantee that the employee will be over-paid for part of their normal duties.
    In any public sector or union controlled environment if you cut wages and eliminate overtime and then hire temporary staff to do that overtime you will have war. In a unionised environment where its done without consultation its double the war.
    FYP

    In the real world where people have salaries rather than entitlements, most of us don't get paid for overtime. It's just considered part of your contract
    that extra hours will be provided where they're necessary. True, some low skilled professions that are paid by the hour involve an over-time rate but that doesn't make it right there either.

    Paying staff for their presence during set times rather than for their performance during the working year is bad practice.

    Now if this is the result of a handful of staff working to rule, what will 1/4 of public sector staff being fired result in?
    The rest being glad they have jobs and starting to do some work?

    To be fair, I'm encountering more individuals in the Public Sector who are starting to show an appetite for cost-saving mechanisms (probably because they're the smart ones who realise that if the savings aren't found in the business processes, they'll be found in their pay cheques) but the PS unions (and lets face it, the unions represent little else in Ireland) seem to be doing their level best to thwart any sensible contributions from their members...


  • Options
    #53
    OhNoYouDidn't
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭OhNoYouDidn't


    IrishTonyO wrote: »
    The temporary staff are hired every year just before Easter. And you seem to think that CPSU members are entitled to overtime, they are not.

    Entitlement is a strong word. Having it cut and seeing temporary staff brought in is a red rag to a bull anywhere.


  • Options
    #54
    Sleepy
    Registered Users Posts: 24,149 ✭✭✭✭Sleepy


    They should never have had it in the first place!


  • Options
    #55
    OhNoYouDidn't
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭OhNoYouDidn't


    Sleepy wrote: »
    And that's how efficient organisations work. Over-time is an arrangement whereby when requested staff work over and above their normal hours for short periods of time. It is not now, nor has it ever been, considered good practice for extended periods. I'm fully aware that some unionised workers in the PS are guaranteed a certain amount of "over-time" per week in their contracts but in the real world, this is simply a guarantee that the employee will be over-paid for part of their normal duties. ...

    Why is overtime a long term thing in the public sector? Because they are understaffed and management need to request them to do so. Why are they understaffed? Because of the hiring freeze. Which is back to the original point. How is it going to work with LESS staff and no overtime? Its not. So those calling for up to 1/4 reduction in numbers and not expecting a 1/4 decrease in productivity are on la la land.
    Sleepy wrote: »

    In the real world where people have salaries rather than entitlements, most of us don't get paid for overtime. It's just considered part of your contract
    that extra hours will be provided where they're necessary. True, some low skilled professions that are paid by the hour involve an over-time rate but that doesn't make it right there either.

    Paying staff for their presence during set times rather than for their performance during the working year is bad practice....

    But in the real world we get paid more.

    And the bad practice is that of management, not the frontline workers.

    Sleepy wrote: »
    The rest being glad they have jobs and starting to do some work?...

    So now nurses, teachers etc do no work?
    Sleepy wrote: »
    To be fair, I'm encountering more individuals in the Public Sector who are starting to show an appetite for cost-saving mechanisms (probably because they're the smart ones who realise that if the savings aren't found in the business processes, they'll be found in their pay cheques) but the PS unions (and lets face it, the unions represent little else in Ireland) seem to be doing their level best to thwart any sensible contributions from their members...

    I don't disagree that the PS unions can be their own worst enemies at times, but the problem is that its management who are meant to find the cost cutting mechanisms and improve processess, not the clerical officers who got walloped much harded recently.

    I have worked in the public sector and every single issue was mid to senior management not understanding what was going on and refusing to sign off on changes.


  • Options
    #56
    OhNoYouDidn't
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭OhNoYouDidn't


    Sleepy wrote: »
    They should never have had it in the first place!

    Overtime?

    Then hire the right number of staff and remove the need.

    How can you cut numbers, eliminate overtime and have the same level of service? Pointedly no-one has answered that


  • Options
    #57
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,791 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »
    But in the real world we get paid more.
    In the real real world - out here in the private sector - we don't.
    I have worked in the public sector and every single issue was mid to senior management not understanding what was going on and refusing to sign off on changes.
    Have you never, not even once, met a public servant below middle management level that didn't pull their weight? Do you feel that every single public servant is working hard to earn their pay?


  • Options
    #58
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,791 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »
    How can you cut numbers, eliminate overtime and have the same level of service? Pointedly no-one has answered that
    Have everyone work efficiently.


  • Options
    #59
    OhNoYouDidn't
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭OhNoYouDidn't


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    In the real real world - out here in the private sector - we don't.

    I left the public sector for the same job in the private for double the money. I lost job security and took on more hours - that was my choice.

    But if you reckon you would get paid more in the public sector, why aren;t you there?
    oscarBravo wrote: »
    Have you never, not even once, met a public servant below middle management level that didn't pull their weight? Do you feel that every single public servant is working hard to earn their pay?

    Of course I have. But I have met loads in the private sector that don't too.


  • Options
    #60
    OhNoYouDidn't
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭OhNoYouDidn't


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    Have everyone work efficiently.

    Its that simple is it? Crime will fall if less Gardaí are more 'efficient'. We will all live longer if less nurses are more 'efficient'. Kids won't be as thick if less teachers are more 'efficient'. The backlog in the courts will clear up if less clerks are more 'efficient'?

    Do people honestly believe some of the tripe they post?

    I'm not disputing that changes can't be made and better practices found, but pull the other one. Bells etc.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    DrumSteve
    Registered Users Posts: 10,799 ✭✭✭✭DrumSteve


    rightwingdub wrote: »
    600,000 proposed redundancies is only 10% of the public sector in the UK ,they should be looking at 1.5 million redundancies.

    If 10% of the PS were made redundant in Ireland that would only be 36,000 jobs, there needs to be at least 90,000 redundancies in the public sector in Ireland.

    Guards need to be cut to 11,500 put them all on a 45 hour week
    Army 7,000
    Civil service needs to be cut to 26,000
    Nurses need to be cut to 32,000 from over 40,000 at the moment.

    are you seriously suggesting cutting front line staff?


Advertisement