Do Public Servants have to give their name?

Vizzy · 14-08-2013 11:36pm

bgrizzley wrote: »

i hear Petersons in Dunlaoghaire repair them, (or it may be covered by warranty)

I rang them about a broken torch but the girl that answered the phone was rude and wouldn't give her name.
Had to fax the owner in the end but he wouldn't do anything cos I spelled Petersens with a small "p"

Carawaystick · 15-08-2013 12:06am

Ray Palmer wrote: »

The amount of incomplete documentation that comes in is amazing. People send in doctors letters without their PPSN like people are going to fill out the forms for them after figuring out what their PPSN is. I would say the vast majority of lost application fall into that category. They are just dumped as far as I know, the theory being simple fill out the form to apply if you don't you will apply correctly the next time and be in touch.

Given the very high level of functional illiteracy in Ireland, this smacks of elitism and hardly good service.

B.A._Baracus · 15-08-2013 3:58am

ash23 wrote: »

Or so they can make note of the advice they were given?

Are calls to public service offices recorded and monitored or is quality something we just shouldn't expect because it's public service?

There is a difference in between giving a first name and a full name.
For example I worked in 11850 years ago. Our opening line was "Welcome to 1150, [name] speaking, how may I help you?" .... That's professional, right?

But tell me why should I give my full name when someone asks over the phone?

minidazzler · 15-08-2013 4:11am

MadsL wrote: »

When was the last Civil Servant actually fired? Anyone know?

My buddy was literally on the absolute verge of being fired, when he made an agreement with his manager that he'd hand in his notice for 4 weeks paid leave along with the rest of his holiday entitlements. He was in Australia a week later, he had been planning to go anyway, but wasn't gonna give notice.... His first 3 weeks there were VERY well paid.

Kirby · 15-08-2013 4:35am

I don't deal with people on the phone if they don't give their full names. I give my name to whoever asks on the phone.....but some people don't. I've often encountered people who ring me representing different companies asking all sorts and refuse to give their names. I just hang up. Similarly, if I'm the one doing the ringing and the person on the other end wont give their name, I hang up and keep calling until I get somebody who will.

If people don't give their names, there is a reason. And it's not for "safety against nutters" as has been suggested. It's so they can act the bollox and get away with it.

They are hiding behind the anonymity of being a faceless person on the other end of the line. This enables them to say and act however they please and know that there won't be any blowback on them. Once they give out a name, they are accountable for what information they give out. This is the way it should be.

I'm not sure what the legalities behind Civil Servants not giving out their names OP........ but in future just don't deal with people if they don't give their names. They clearly have no confidence in what they are about to tell you anyway.

ash23 · 15-08-2013 7:19am

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

There is a difference in between giving a first name and a full name.
For example I worked in 11850 years ago. Our opening line was "Welcome to 1150, [name] speaking, how may I help you?" .... That's professional, right?

But tell me why should I give my full name when someone asks over the phone?

I did say first name or staff number if safety is an issue. Although, surely anyone working in an office has to sign letters and emails with their full name so I don't see the problem giving it over the phone.

When I give the company address I'll often get people asking me if that's where im from it where I live. People ask me if I have kids etc. Sometimes it's friendly and sometimes it's not. I decline to answer. But if someone states they aren't happy with what I am telling them or they think I'm being rude and want ti complain I give them my name. I have nothing to hide because I do my job. Im not perfect but im not incompetent either.

If people in the PS are worried about being accused unfairly then they should demand calls be recorded. It's there to protect the staff and the customer and makes complaints much easier to resolve.

Answering the phone with your first name in an office setting is good (and normal) practice.

Ray Palmer · 15-08-2013 9:56am

Carawaystick wrote: »

Given the very high level of functional illiteracy in Ireland, this smacks of elitism and hardly good service.

There are assistants for people with literacy issues. To say it is elitism is crazy. If you need help use the service.

OldNotWIse · 15-08-2013 10:00am

If they ask for your name and you think they're gonna compain about you...give them the name of someone you don't like. Simple.

Also, at a basic level. Someone calling and asking who they are speaking to? Eh...you called me :P

Ray Palmer · 15-08-2013 10:31am

ash23 wrote: »

I did say first name or staff number if safety is an issue. Although, surely anyone working in an office has to sign letters and emails with their full name so I don't see the problem giving it over the phone.

The person on the phone is not dealing with your claim the person who sends the letter is.

What use is the name of the person who answers the phone? They don't have any effect on your claim.

ash23 · 15-08-2013 10:55am

Ray Palmer wrote: »

The person on the phone is not dealing with your claim the person who sends the letter is.

What use is the name of the person who answers the phone? They don't have any effect on your claim.

The person on the phone is dealing with your query though. There is always a person higher in command but that doesn't absolve the groundfloor staff of their responsibility either. If someones job is to answer the phone and deal with queries about claims, then that is what they should do.

What use is the name? I've said a number of times why a person might want a name. Record keeping, to put in a detailed appeal with the times and dates and details of calls they made and information they were given. If they are told something then they might want to note the name of the person who gave them the information.
If the person they are dealing with is rude they might wish to complain about their professional conduct.

Yawns · 15-08-2013 12:15pm

woodoo wrote: »

There was a letter sent out to every medical card holder a couple of months ago to confirm if you still need the card. Maybe she didn't reply to that letter.

I never received a letter, have received a renewal card a couple of weeks ago. Just arrived in the post.

RobbieTheRobber · 15-08-2013 12:23pm

ash23 wrote: »

The person on the phone is dealing with your query though. There is always a person higher in command but that doesn't absolve the groundfloor staff of their responsibility either. If someones job is to answer the phone and deal with queries about claims, then that is what they should do.

What use is the name? I've said a number of times why a person might want a name. Record keeping, to put in a detailed appeal with the times and dates and details of calls they made and information they were given. If they are told something then they might want to note the name of the person who gave them the information.
If the person they are dealing with is rude they might wish to complain about their professional conduct.

Calls are recorded in most (if not all) public offices and so simply recording the time of the call would allow you to make a complaint.

Femme_Fatale · 15-08-2013 12:26pm

Kirby wrote: »

I don't deal with people on the phone if they don't give their full names.

What do you need their full name for?

If people don't give their names, there is a reason. And it's not for "safety against nutters" as has been suggested.

Oh but it is. Saying it isn't doesn't change that. I assume you've never been in a job dealing with the public over the phone.

It's so they can act the bollox and get away with it.

No, you assume it is.

Most of the time, people on the phones are not "out to get" those who call. This is just a paranoid, self-centred notion apropos nothing. Most of the time, people on the phones would prefer to be as helpful as possible, often for a fecking quiet life. It's not actually enjoyable having to give aggressive callers answers they don't want to hear, and is far more preferential to be able to make them happy and thus end the grief.

If a person is asked their full name for a good reason, they should give it. If the caller just wants it purely for the sake of being hostile and "keeping them in their place"... sorry, not a good enough reason. There is often no actual real need for it.

ash23 · 15-08-2013 12:27pm

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

Calls are recorded in most (if not all) public offices and so simply recording the time of the call would allow you to make a complaint.

So why not just give a first name also? I know when my supervisor is looking for a call it's makes his job about 6 times easier if he knows which of our calls he is looking for.

If you've a department of 50 people and half of them are on calls at any given time and half of those can be identified by gender.....that's still 12 calls a supervisor has to listen to in order to find the correct call.

camphor · 15-08-2013 4:50pm

true-or-false wrote: »

Why should she have to give you her name? People in her position probably get threatened with complaints and much worse every day. It would be unwise to give people her personal information.
?

She should give her name so that if the person she is dealing is given wrong information and appeals, the person responsible can be identified and corrective action taken. many public servants are not properly trained for their jobs and give people wrong information and then hide behind anonymity. Someone complains that they were told something wrong on the phone. It might have been one of 10 people. All of them say "it wasn't me". When John Boland was Minister for the Public Service in the 1980s, he made it mandatory for all public servants to give their names." At that time every tax inspector had the same name. Nobody knew who had decided what.

Ray Palmer · 15-08-2013 5:27pm

camphor wrote: »

She should give her name so that if the person she is dealing is given wrong information and appeals, the person responsible can be identified and corrective action taken.

I think this is where people are getting the facts wrong. The person on the phone can't do anything for you. The information they provide can't really effect your claim in any way. They pretty much tell you that you need to fill out the form and attach the correct documents and then it will be assessed.

The person on the phone isn't in any way going to effect your claim. I really can't think of what "wrong" information they can give that is any use on an appeal. They generally are going to direct you to the website and where to get the form. Other than that they may tell you your form has not been completed or received.

The only point of the name seems to be to complain.

ash23 · 15-08-2013 6:04pm

Ray Palmer wrote: »

I think this is where people are getting the facts wrong. The person on the phone can't do anything for you. The information they provide can't really effect your claim in any way. They pretty much tell you that you need to fill out the form and attach the correct documents and then it will be assessed.

The person on the phone isn't in any way going to effect your claim. I really can't think of what "wrong" information they can give that is any use on an appeal. They generally are going to direct you to the website and where to get the form. Other than that they may tell you your form has not been completed or received.

The only point of the name seems to be to complain.

Well that's not true. If I ring and ask "do I need to send original payslip" and am told no but then my claim is returned because I sent copies. Or if I ask for an update and am told it was never received. Or if I call and ask why my medical card has been rescinded and am told there is nothing I can do about it.....I might need the name of the person I was speaking to.

What you are saying is that ps workers who answer the phone provide no information and basically do nothing and can tell a person nothing of importance or relevance which simply isn't true.

Ray Palmer · 16-08-2013 9:37am

ash23 wrote: »

Well that's not true. If I ring and ask "do I need to send original payslip" and am told no but then my claim is returned because I sent copies. Or if I ask for an update and am told it was never received. Or if I call and ask why my medical card has been rescinded and am told there is nothing I can do about it.....I might need the name of the person I was speaking to.

Are you aware of any of those things happening yourself? It all sound completely made up and hypothetical.

You seem to think that somebody can solve all your problems over the phone. What can they do if they never received the forms? Nobody is going to tell you that there is nothing you can do about a rescinded medical card. They may tell you that you are no longer considered eligible or you never replied to a communication. You can apply again

ash23 wrote: »

What you are saying is that ps workers who answer the phone provide no information and basically do nothing and can tell a person nothing of importance or relevance which simply isn't true.

No I am saying they provide information by pointing you in the direction of where you need to go. They often send out the forms needed with the information required.

ash23 · 16-08-2013 9:51am

Ray Palmer wrote: »

Are you aware of any of those things happening yourself? It all sound completely made up and hypothetical.

You seem to think that somebody can solve all your problems over the phone. What can they do if they never received the forms? Nobody is going to tell you that there is nothing you can do about a rescinded medical card. They may tell you that you are no longer considered eligible or you never replied to a communication. You can apply again

I've called various public service numbers over the years with various queries. Tax, family income supplement, disability, illness benefit etc etc. Not always about a claim I have in, sometimes I have a query about a form I am sending in or about what I need to send with it or how I need to apply. I've had questions about tax credits or cut off limits. About whether the limits are gross or net. Thankfully the people I've spoken to have, for the most part, given their name (without having to be asked) and been very helpful.

No I am saying they provide information by pointing you in the direction of where you need to go. They often send out the forms needed with the information required.

As above.
Sometimes it's just a simple question. And it's their job to answer it.

Ray Palmer · 16-08-2013 10:00am

ash23 wrote: »

I've called various public service numbers over the years with various queries. Tax, family income supplement, disability, illness benefit etc etc. Not always about a claim I have in, sometimes I have a query about a form I am sending in or about what I need to send with it or how I need to apply. I've had questions about tax credits or cut off limits. About whether the limits are gross or net. Thankfully the people I've spoken to have, for the most part, given their name (without having to be asked) and been very helpful.

So the answer is yes completely made up. The PS did their jobs and having their name is of no advantage to you. So what is your point on insisting on the name and how does it help?

ash23 · 16-08-2013 10:09am

Ray Palmer wrote: »

So the answer is yes completely made up. The PS did their jobs and having their name is of no advantage to you. So what is your point on insisting on the name and how does it help?

Oh my god! You are being ridiculous!

Ok, few weeks ago I called revenue because my PAYE is a lot less than I was paying last year. I spoke to a lady who had a look and said all my tax credits seem to be in order and talked me through their calculations.
I asked her for her name and she gave her first name which I wrote in my diary along with the time and date of the call.

She was giving me advice. I was noting who gave me the advice and when, just on the off-chance that she was totally misinforming me and I'd end up with a massive tax bill at the end of the year.

I called the FIS office a couple of weeks ago because of a letter I got from them and spoke to a lady who advised me what I needed to do (it was regarding another claim I had for another benefit and the renewal of my FIS). She advised me what I need to do and what forms I need to fill in when the decision is made on my other claim. She told me where to send it and she gave me her name. I noted the information I was given.

It's not the MI5 that these people are working in. They do give advice and people are perfectly within their rights to expect that a person who is advising them would also give their name.

d9oiu2wk07blr5 · 16-08-2013 10:31am

Ray Palmer wrote: »

I think this is where people are getting the facts wrong. The person on the phone can't do anything for you. The information they provide can't really effect your claim in any way. They pretty much tell you that you need to fill out the form and attach the correct documents and then it will be assessed.

The person on the phone isn't in any way going to effect your claim. I really can't think of what "wrong" information they can give that is any use on an appeal. They generally are going to direct you to the website and where to get the form. Other than that they may tell you your form has not been completed or received.

The only point of the name seems to be to complain.

Oh so the point of public servants not giving their full name is because they believe that the only reasons claimants may be asking for their name is in order to complain....gotta :rolleyes:! Are public servants not taught de-escalation techniques, and if there's no substance to a complaint, what are public servants actually so afraid of?

Ray Palmer · 16-08-2013 10:35am

ash23 wrote: »

Oh my god! You are being ridiculous!

Ok, few weeks ago I called revenue because my PAYE is a lot less than I was paying last year. I spoke to a lady who had a look and said all my tax credits seem to be in order and talked me through their calculations.
I asked her for her name and she gave her first name which I wrote in my diary along with the time and date of the call.

She was giving me advice. I was noting who gave me the advice and when, just on the off-chance that she was totally misinforming me and I'd end up with a massive tax bill at the end of the year. .

Won't make any difference having her name. It is in your head that it will. You are wholly responsible for your own tax no matter what.

The thread was about a complaint about DSP about a specific complaint. They have a valid reason to withhold their name whether you think it is or not. The person on the phone was not being asked to give information but sort out somebody problem.

You are expanding and making up scenario that don't apply. That is a ridiculous and not relevant.

Kirby · 16-08-2013 10:42am

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

Oh but it is. Saying it isn't doesn't change that. I assume you've never been in a job dealing with the public over the phone.

You know what they say about people who assume?

You couldn't be more wrong. Every job I've had involved dealing with the public. In person, over the phone and by email. And in each instance, I gave my name because it's expected and common courtesy.

I'm sorry if you don't "see the need for it" but that's your issue. I've explained exactly why it's necessary. For the same reason that people act like complete morons on the internet when they are normally "sound" in real life. It's anonymity. It gives people the freedom to act like an idiot because there is zero consequences.

A lad beside me in a customer support centre called a client a "fag". There were over a hundred people in the office and when the pretty irate customer complained, they weren't able to figure out who had said it because he never gave his name and the extension was connected to six phones. That's real life experience of anonymity in action....not pie in the sky keyboard warrior talk from the likes of yourself.

When you give out your name, you are accountable for what you say, and what you do. And that's why it should be demanded.

Ray Palmer · 16-08-2013 10:57am

Kaliyah Tender Playwright wrote: »

Oh so the point of public servants not giving their full name is because they believe that the only reasons claimants may be asking for their name is in order to complain....gotta :rolleyes:! Are public servants not taught de-escalation techniques, and if there's no substance to a complaint, what are public servants actually so afraid of?

Violence.

You don't seem to be aware how often they are threatened in DSP

ash23 · 16-08-2013 11:04am

Ray Palmer wrote: »

Violence.

You don't seem to be aware how often they are threatened in DSP

How real is that threat though? I mean, I work in a call centre and I've been threatened. But what does the person actually know about me? They know where I'm located but sure, that's usually miles from them. They know my first name. Big whoop.

I've been threatened when I worked in shops and I still wore a name tag. Some of the most threatened people in the PS are nurses and doctors and porters.....yet they all wear ID and introduce themselves.

Also I find this laughable

Ray Palmer wrote: »

Won't make any difference having her name. It is in your head that it will. You are wholly responsible for your own tax no matter what.

The thread was about a complaint about DSP about a specific complaint. They have a valid reason to withhold their name whether you think it is or not. The person on the phone was not being asked to give information but sort out somebody problem.

You are expanding and making up scenario that don't apply. That is a ridiculous and not relevant.

when you also posted this

Ray Palmer wrote: »

You realise the PS lost employees and deals with more people than it did before. People coming into the offices are often very aggressive. I wouldn't do the job myself. Not many private employees dealing with claims have to carry an emergency response alarm when doing their job. They also don't deal with sexual offenders, junkies, recently released criminals etc... Often in small offices where if you were attacked you might not be found for a while.

Lovely job and they are all just waster really:rolleyes:

Either we are talking in general terms about the PS or we are talking about the medical card office which is a call centre environment where employees don't even see a person they are dealing with never mind dealing with sexual offenders, junkies etc.

Make up your mind and get back to me when you know what point you're trying to make.

d9oiu2wk07blr5 · 16-08-2013 12:54pm

Ray Palmer wrote: »

Violence.

You don't seem to be aware how often they are threatened in DSP

What, they're going to be attacked over the phone, and when they're in the front offices they're actually protected behind the security screens in most cases. Are you seriously suggesting that someone who refuses to give their name over the phone truly believes that the only reason the person may be asking them to identify themselves is because someone wants to make a complaint against them? Even if they do identify themselves, how likely is it that that person is going to treck in to some office god knows where to perpetrate violence on some individual that they don't even know what they look like? You do realise how paranoid that sounds? Like I said, DSP staff should be properly trained in managing the risk of violence in the workplace and it includes employing proper de-escalation techniques. Btw, they're not the only one's who are at risk of violence in the workplace, try frontline emergency services, and besides wearing name tags, we also identify ourselves if and when we're asked to do so.

Boombastic · 16-08-2013 12:58pm

The faceless public sector.

If you are confident you are doing you job properly, there is no reason not to give your name.

Oneiric 3 · 18-08-2013 5:06pm

Ray Palmer wrote: »

Violence.

You don't seem to be aware how often they are threatened in DSP

Any threatening behavior shown to a public servant is usually triggered off by them showing a complete lack of respect to the person or persons they are dealing with.

Yes, public servants are obliged to give you their full name if you ask for it. That doesn't mean to say that they will, and if they don't, ask to speak to their superior.

guinnessdrinker · 18-08-2013 5:08pm

Oneiric 3 wrote: »

Any threatening behavior shown to a public servant is usually triggered off by them showing a complete lack of respect to the person or persons they are dealing with.

How can you verify this assertion?

Femme_Fatale · 18-08-2013 5:14pm

guinnessdrinker wrote: »

How can you verify this assertion?

They can't.

Irrational people who threaten and attempt assault are the types who won't accept when the advisor is unable to give them what they want, and they pretend that the advisor is deliberately being unhelpful just... for no reason. It's an exceptionally paranoid and self absorbed way of thinking. If anything, when a customer is being psycho, an advisor would do anything to give them what they want, in order to end the harassment.

Oneiric 3 · 18-08-2013 5:14pm

guinnessdrinker wrote: »

How can you verify this assertion?

Having worked in the CIC, it was my job to know these things.

Oneiric 3 · 18-08-2013 5:23pm

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

They can't.

Irrational people who threaten and attempt assault are the types who won't accept when the advisor is unable to give them what they want, and they pretend that the advisor is deliberately being unhelpful just... for no reason. It's an exceptionally paranoid and self absorbed way of thinking. If anything, when a customer is being psycho, an advisor would do anything to give them what they want, in order to end the harassment.

It is more often than not the manner in which an 'adviser' tells somebody that their claim for whatever has not been accepted rather than the actual substances of what is being said that can drive people to lose their temper. And these people that do are very often left frustrated beforehand by a bad and dismissive service.

Femme_Fatale · 18-08-2013 5:29pm

Oneiric 3 wrote: »

It is more often than not the manner in which an 'adviser' tells somebody that their claim for whatever has not been accepted rather than the actual substances of what is being said that can drive people to lose their temper. And these people that do are were very often left frustrated beforehand by a bad and dismissive service.

And that's often because the customer is being obnoxious and aggressive in the first place and the advisor (no need for quote-marks) is having a difficult time staying chirpy.
You may be used to dealing with "I know my rights (not my responsibilities)" types but you can be sure you don't get the full story from them.

Not saying there aren't unhelpful advisors but they are a minority. Customer error and not wanting to hear the facts is not = poor service.

Oneiric 3 · 18-08-2013 5:39pm

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

You may be used to dealing with "I know my rights (not my responsibilities)" types but you can be sure you don't get the full story from them.
.

Interesting statement from someone who is so quick to defend the public service..

todders · 23-08-2013 12:57pm

Fine if they refuse to give their surname, I can understand that.

However, I don't see any reason why someone would not give at least their first name when asked ( Public or Private sector)

If they refuse, they obviously know they are n the wrong, simple as

juanchoja · 13-07-2022 10:11am

This may be late, but in case someone else Googles it like me, the answer is YES, they are required to give you their name, it's clearly stated in the Civil Service Code of Standards and Behaviour shown in Citizens Information https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/government_in_ireland/national_government/the_irish_government/the_civil_service.html, here is the link to the actual code, article 8.1:

8.1 Civil servants should:

always give their names to any member of the public with whom they are dealing, except where given a special exemption, for example, on security grounds and • ensure that members of the public are dealt with in a respectful manner.

Aisling(",) · 13-07-2022 12:49pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119330358#Comment_119330358

"this may be late"....this thread is 9 years old I'm guessing it might be a bit late!

13-07-2022 12:55pm

Civil Servants should give their name if requested.

Not sure if Public Servants have to, they may have different rules. (People who work for the HSE are Public Servants.

(Just realised its a resurfaced zombie thread).

Ray Palmer · 13-07-2022 3:02pm

Funny when 2 people entered a property, I manage, without permission and claimed they were Gardai I asked did they have to identify themselves. The response I got on the Gardai forum was "should" have identified themselves but don't actually have to. Code of conduct has no meaning. I rate that as a higher than some clerical officer not giving out their name over the phone.

New Home · 13-07-2022 7:32pm

Mod: The information requested by the op in 2013 has been given. Locking zombie thread.

Do Public Servants have to give their name?

Comments