Civil Service - What makes up a 41 hour week?

pow wow

I don't want to ring and look like a muppet, so, does anyone know what combination of days/hours make up a 41 hour week? I haven't been able to come up with one so far (using all combinations in my head) and have only worked 35 hour weeks before.

Thanks.

PeakOutput

9am-6pm with 45mins for lunch??? think thats pretty much 41 hours

is that what you meant?

pow wow

Yeah thanks a million. No matter how hard I tried I couldn't get a combination that totalled 41 hours!

stepbar

ellscurr wrote:

Yeah thanks a million. No matter how hard I tried I couldn't get a combination that totalled 41 hours!

45 min lunch in the civil service!!! More like an hour and a 20 minute coffee break before lunch too....

You dont have to come in till 10am but you must do 8hrs.

And then theres the flexi time too. I knew one person who used to have 2 months off every year because she used to work up 11hrs in the month and got a day and a half off in lieu. The civil service, it's a great little institution we have.....

RainyDay

stepbar wrote:

And then theres the flexi time too. I knew one person who used to have 2 months off every year because she used to work up 11hrs in the month and got a day and a half off in lieu. The civil service, it's a great little institution we have.....

And your problem with this arrangement is?

PeakOutput

RainyDay wrote:

And your problem with this arrangement is?

jealousy obviously

ballooba

RainyDay wrote:

And your problem with this arrangement is?

Probably that he is paying your wages.

ixoy

I'd imagine that his problem is that it's something we all want - I know I do - but can't because it's not economically viable for private companies. To compensate though we get lower wages and less job security so it balances out. Oh wait..

It can be very frustrating though to watch. I work alongside civil servants but employed as a private contractor. The difference in work ethics and hours is unreal at times. It's also simpler stuff like the way tea breaks are done (I've seen morning "tea" breaks often last 30-45mins and nobody's clocking out for those).

I would of course join them, but they contract out most of the IT work (not all) so we're all scrabbling to get the few that are left over...

stepbar

PeakOutput wrote:

jealousy obviously

O obviously.... :rolleyes: How could I be jealous of a job, that will in the end, suck the life out of you. If you're young, the Civil Service is not for you. Having spent three months there one summer, it was plenty thanks very much. In fact I was so intrigued with the carryons, that I done my thesis on the civil service. Not wanting to bore you with all the detail but if the civil service was "put out to grass" (so to speak) it wouldnt last long. Its overstaffed and their work methods are outdated. But hey sure dont worry, its only mine and your taxes that are paying for it :rolleyes:

Madge

stepbar wrote:

And then theres the flexi time too. I knew one person who used to have 2 months off every year because she used to work up 11hrs in the month and got a day and a half off in lieu. The civil service, it's a great little institution we have.....

It's not like the person got extra days holidays :rolleyes:
They did overtime and worked up the hours. Perhaps it wasn't explained to you properly.

stepbar wrote:

How could I be jealous of a job, that will in the end, suck the life out of you.

I think it's what you make it. There's plenty of scope for moving around to different sections and getting promoted. Furthermore I guess it depends on your viewpoint. I know I'd prefer a career where I have job security, don't have any stress, don't have to go begging for a pay rise, and don't have a mean boss annoying me every day.

stepbar wrote:

If you're young, the Civil Service is not for you. Having spent three months there one summer, it was plenty thanks very much. In fact I was so intrigued with the carryons, that I done my thesis on the civil service. Not wanting to bore you with all the detail but if the civil service was "put out to grass" (so to speak) it wouldnt last long. Its overstaffed and their work methods are outdated. But hey sure dont worry, its only mine and your taxes that are paying for it

Sounds like you have sour grapes.

stepbar

Madge wrote:

It's not like the person got extra days holidays :rolleyes:
They did overtime and worked up the hours. Perhaps it wasn't explained to you properly.

Ok lets put it another way; if there was 11 hours extra work then fair enough but I can safely say that vast majority of those extra hours were spent on coffee breaks and fags or catching up on "de bit of gossip".......

Madge wrote:

I think it's what you make it. There's plenty of scope for moving around to different sections and getting promoted. Furthermore I guess it depends on your viewpoint. I know I'd prefer a career where I have job security, don't have any stress, don't have to go begging for a pay rise, and don't have a mean boss annoying me every day.

Sounds like you have sour grapes.

Not at all, im quite glad I didnt stay in the Civil Service because, as I've said it would suck the life out of any ambitious person. But everybody to their own I suppose.

RainyDay

ballooba wrote:

Probably that he is paying your wages.

Seems unlikely that Brian Cowen would be posting on boards. He pays my wages - no-one else. I don't claim to pay the wages of every bank employee just because I'm a bank customer, or every car production line working just because I buy a car. Indeed, I could claim to pay my own wages, as I pay taxes too of course. But that would be a rather silly claim, as would the claim for any other taxpayer to be paying my wages.

ixoy wrote:

I'd imagine that his problem is that it's something we all want - I know I do - but can't because it's not economically viable for private companies. To compensate though we get lower wages and less job security so it balances out. Oh wait..

It can be very frustrating though to watch. I work alongside civil servants but employed as a private contractor. The difference in work ethics and hours is unreal at times. It's also simpler stuff like the way tea breaks are done (I've seen morning "tea" breaks often last 30-45mins and nobody's clocking out for those).

I would of course join them, but they contract out most of the IT work (not all) so we're all scrabbling to get the few that are left over...

Mmmm - sounds like somebody got a PFO letter in response to an attempt to get into the public sector. Sorry to hear that you couldn't make the grade, but not everyone can make the demanding standards required. Don't expect anyone to take your gripes seriously when you are scrabbling to get a public sector job.

Having worked in both the private sector and the public sector, I can confirm there is no general difference between work ethics. There are slackers on both sides, and busy people on both sides. There are really smart people on both sides and really dumb people on both sides. If you see staff who are abusing their positions, why not report them to their HR department?

stepbar wrote:

O obviously.... :rolleyes: How could I be jealous of a job, that will in the end, suck the life out of you. If you're young, the Civil Service is not for you. Having spent three months there one summer, it was plenty thanks very much. In fact I was so intrigued with the carryons, that I done my thesis on the civil service. Not wanting to bore you with all the detail but if the civil service was "put out to grass" (so to speak) it wouldnt last long. Its overstaffed and their work methods are outdated. But hey sure dont worry, its only mine and your taxes that are paying for it :rolleyes:

General claims of 'overstaffing' and 'outdated work methods' will not be taken seriously. A 3-month summer job did not give you a broad view of the entire civil service or the people who work there. If you are foolish enough to draw generalised conclusions from your brief experience, you certainly wouldn't make the grade in the public sector.

Sundy

stepbar wrote:

And then theres the flexi time too. I knew one person who used to have 2 months off every year because she used to work up 11hrs in the month and got a day and a half off in lieu. The civil service, it's a great little institution we have.....

Id say thats rubbish flexi time is not that flexible. From any of my friends in the civil service/councils the most days off per month is two. It more likely there working term time or some other arrangement like that.

ixoy

RainyDay wrote:

Mmmm - sounds like somebody got a PFO letter in response to an attempt to get into the public sector. Sorry to hear that you couldn't make the grade, but not everyone can make the demanding standards required. Don't expect anyone to take your gripes seriously when you are scrabbling to get a public sector job.

I never applied for the public service. The work we're contracted out for isn't done by the public service. That's why it's contracted out. It's when we all look over at the (comparatively) easy ride that they have that we wonder about the difference in work practices.

Also I've been told that the overtime/time-in-lieu standards for civil servants is very attractive (open to correction, but a HEO gets a full day off in lieu for just working a partial day at the weekend for example). They're the sort of benefits that just aren't given in private practice and there's no real requirement for them other than strong unions having got them.

General claims of 'overstaffing' and 'outdated work methods' will not be taken seriously. A 3-month summer job did not give you a broad view of the entire civil service or the people who work there. If you are foolish enough to draw generalised conclusions from your brief experience, you certainly wouldn't make the grade in the public sector.

Really? Because perhaps the fact that some people are seen idle (by which I mean reading magazines at their desks) or taking long tea breaks is a hallucination that I'm having?
Is it over-staffing then? Or is it that certain work practices need to be altered (I know of an example where someone was told to cut down on their work output because it was showing up the rest of them).

stepbar

RainyDay wrote:

General claims of 'overstaffing' and 'outdated work methods' will not be taken seriously. A 3-month summer job did not give you a broad view of the entire civil service or the people who work there. If you are foolish enough to draw generalised conclusions from your brief experience, you certainly wouldn't make the grade in the public sector.

You're either deluding yourself or burying your head in the sand. In the social welfare office I worked in, they didnt even use email!!!!! or have proper PC's. Dumb terminals with keyboards. 1980's stuff. No intranet or internet access. The amount of paper involved made me squirm. Duplication was widespead. Clear division of labour. The IT system used merely recorded information which was all down on paper. I could go on and on. As I've said, I was so intrigued that I done my thesis on it. In fact I worked it out, the work that 5 levels of people done took 3 days to do. This work could have been done in a hour by 2 levels. All because every piece of work is clearly demarked. Now I think you'll find that the dept of social welfare is one of the most important government depts. To say it's a shambles is an understatement. Dont get me wrong, there are other depts that do a great job (e.g Revenue) and who use technology to streamline and improve processes. However, in general the civil service is overstaffed and there's plenty of opportunity to reduce numbers and streamline services.

Finally to say I wouldn't make the grade in the civil service is laughable. I'd piss all over the civil service and have done so in the past. For your information, I work for the one of the biggest banks on this island. Out of 2000 graduates who applied for my grad programme, 10 got the job. I was one. So don't give me that crap.

run_Forrest_run

RainyDay wrote:

Mmmm - sounds like somebody got a PFO letter in response to an attempt to get into the public sector. Sorry to hear that you couldn't make the grade, but not everyone can make the demanding standards required. Don't expect anyone to take your gripes seriously when you are scrabbling to get a public sector job.

Very funny
Seriously, about 'making the grade', I wonder how many people in the public sector have friends/relatives working there before they got the job??? When it comes to the public sector the old adage "It's not what you know but who you know" certainly applies.

I have reliably heard of CVs handed in with Post-Its on em with little notes mentioning the relative who works in some department in the public sector...jobs for the boys.

parsi

LOL .. I have heard the same said about the banks & the bigger consultancy firms. It seems to be commented on more for jobs that are perceived to have security - no-one whispers tales about someone getting a job in Dunnes in a similar fashion...

warrenaldo

Not a hope any of that friends/relatives crap happens. Maybe it used to be all public sector jobs now are done by the public appointments. The have set procedures and rules. and all is open to Freedom Of Information act - which is called upon quite a lot.
I worked in the private sector for a few years - and it was not bad. Money was better but work was harder.
I moved into civil service and it is a lot easier - work is mch more intresting. And flexi time is great. You work up 1 and 1/2 days off in the month and you must take them in the next month.

There are some dossers who chance their arm - and there are people who work extra hours but dont get paid. like anywhere.

Civil Service is NOT that easy to get into. Especially at the high grades like AO and HEO. Thousands of people apply for these jobs and only a handfull make it - its purely based on tests - not who you know.

Sposs

warrenaldo wrote:

I worked in the private sector for a few years - and it was not bad. Money was better but work was harder.
I moved into civil service and it is a lot easier

I think that statement sums it up for everyone working in the civil service, anyone with an ounce of ambition usually leaves quick smart, i know a very smart guy that worked in the civil service for a lot of money, he quit after six months for a lower paying job as he was so bored.

warrenaldo

when i say its a lot easier - i mean by hours working. I have a lot more time off to spend with family and friends. The civil service is lower paying. But it has a lot more prospects in the future.
One of my main reasons for joining was the fact that in 10/15 years i will have got 1/2 promotions and be fairly high up getting paid very good money.

I believe in private its less structured so less jobs at higher up levels.

Plus since starting in the civil service - its pretty common knowledge that few people leave. Maybe at CO level they do. But in general - People dont leave.

Sposs

That's nonsense , the benefits of the private sector are that if your good enough , you can get 10 promotions in 10 years.

1/2 promotions in the space of 10/15 years???

Why would they leave, you can't get fired and you keep getting promotions for just being there.

warrenaldo

depends what sector you work in. I worked in IT - 3 promotions and i was at the top of my field as a project manager. Now it would take 10 -15 years and i would get my annual raise also.

Im not saying the benefits of the private sector are not good.

They are - but the people who get those benefits are the ones who work HARD - but in the extra hours.

Benefits of the private sector are better but you have to work a lot harder for them.

Civil Service has better holidays, work practices. Even gives you flexi time.
If i stay late i get paid for it. Private sector it was expected of me - no extra pay(And i know thats the case in many private sector roles).

I see the benefits of the pricvate sector if you are GREAT at what you do and are willing to work hard. But personally i prefer civil service - i took at big pay cut to enter and im glad i did. I have much better social situation now.

run_Forrest_run

warrenaldo wrote:

when i say its a lot easier - i mean by hours working. I have a lot more time off to spend with family and friends. The civil service is lower paying.

what are U smoking?? Civil service is very well paid due to benchmarking and sure if the public sector want a little top up they can just down tools and go on strike as usual. I know people who are teachers and are earning more money then people in the IT sector, both with the same amount of experience.

hermit

run_Forrest_run wrote:

Very funny
Seriously, about 'making the grade', I wonder how many people in the public sector have friends/relatives working there before they got the job??? When it comes to the public sector the old adage "It's not what you know but who you know" certainly applies.

I have reliably heard of CVs handed in with Post-Its on em with little notes mentioning the relative who works in some department in the public sector...jobs for the boys.

You're an idiot. Please don't post comments full of opinionated lies like that.

The civil service and indeed the broader public service have open competition recruitment processes. You MUST do exams, You MUST do interviews. No other way in on a full time basis. Check out publicjobs.ie and apply for the next civil service role that comes up and you'll that "post-its" wont get you too far.


Not sure what magical mystery land your "reliable sources" come from but they ain't in modern day Ireland!!

RainyDay

stepbar wrote:

You're either deluding yourself or burying your head in the sand. In the social welfare office I worked in, they didnt even use email!!!!! or have proper PC's. Dumb terminals with keyboards. 1980's stuff. No intranet or internet access. The amount of paper involved made me squirm. Duplication was widespead. Clear division of labour. The IT system used merely recorded information which was all down on paper. I could go on and on. As I've said, I was so intrigued that I done my thesis on it. In fact I worked it out, the work that 5 levels of people done took 3 days to do. This work could have been done in a hour by 2 levels. All because every piece of work is clearly demarked. Now I think you'll find that the dept of social welfare is one of the most important government depts. To say it's a shambles is an understatement. Dont get me wrong, there are other depts that do a great job (e.g Revenue) and who use technology to streamline and improve processes. However, in general the civil service is overstaffed and there's plenty of opportunity to reduce numbers and streamline services.

Did the research for your thesis go as far as having an interview with the Head of IT of DSFA to understand their IT strategy, the resources available to them, the priority areas for attention etc etc. You don't see the big picture when you are doing summer work in the trenches.

Yes of course, there are things that could be improved and automated in every public sector organisation. Just like there are many opportunities for improvement in every private sector organisation. One swallow doesn't make a summer.

stepbar wrote:

Finally to say I wouldn't make the grade in the civil service is laughable. I'd piss all over the civil service and have done so in the past. For your information, I work for the one of the biggest banks on this island. Out of 2000 graduates who applied for my grad programme, 10 got the job. I was one. So don't give me that crap.

I guess your graduate programme application didn't include basic English ('I done my thesis'). Like I said, this just wouldn't make the grade in any public sector office.

run_Forrest_run wrote:

Very funny
Seriously, about 'making the grade', I wonder how many people in the public sector have friends/relatives working there before they got the job??? When it comes to the public sector the old adage "It's not what you know but who you know" certainly applies.

I have reliably heard of CVs handed in with Post-Its on em with little notes mentioning the relative who works in some department in the public sector...jobs for the boys.

Absolute rubbish. The public sector has the most open & transparent recruitment procedures, with all paperwork subject to FOI. Any interview panel that I've seen had at least 3 people, usually from 2-3 different organisations who independently score and rate all interviewees. 'Jobs for the boys' just doesn't happen.

In fact, many private sector organisations have formalised their 'job for the boys' approach with 'refer a friend' bonus schemes, so I think you are looking the wrong direction for 'who you know' type schemes.

Sposs wrote:

I think that statement sums it up for everyone working in the civil service, anyone with an ounce of ambition usually leaves quick smart, i know a very smart guy that worked in the civil service for a lot of money, he quit after six months for a lower paying job as he was so bored.

Yet again - absolute rubbish. The public sector has many of the brightest and best in the country. I've moved to the public sector after 20+ years in private sector roles, and I can confirm that there is little difference in the quality of the people. There are some really, really smart people on both sides, and a few really dumb people on both sides.

ixoy

I guess your graduate programme application didn't include basic English ('I done my thesis'). Like I said, this just wouldn't make the grade in any public sector office.

For starters, it's bad form to correct someone's spelling in a post. Secondly, you're surely kidding, right? I've seen some good documentation and I've also seen utterly appalling stuff written up by HEOs. The sort of stuff that was full of inaccuracies, spelling mistakes from someone in their position for years. And they're not an isolated case.

In fact, many private sector organisations have formalised their 'job for the boys' approach with 'refer a friend' bonus schemes, so I think you are looking the wrong direction for 'who you know' type schemes.

That's quite a different thing. All that is is to try and get a wider pool of talent to choose from. No guarantees whatsoever, especially in the bigger private companies where you couldn't make such connections anyway.
However, I do believe that the majority of civil service jobs are fairly entered into nowadays.

There are some really, really smart people on both sides, and a few really dumb people on both sides.

Agreed, of course. What I feel is that it's far easier to get away with being poor in the civil service and keep your job and pay-scaled increase than in the private sector. Conversely, it can be harder to climb the ladder if you're ambitious.

My biggest gripe is the "woe is us" attitude struck by many civil servants who want to be paid equivalent to a private sector position (which they are nowadays, and better often) and yet not want to give up the cushy benefits that they enjoy that most private sector firms don't give (good flexi-time, great overtime rates, long breaks, term time, job security, guaranteed pay increases, etc). It's having a cake, eating it, and then wanting to pig out on all the creams, buns, cakes, and flans in sight.

stepbar

RainyDay wrote:

Did the research for your thesis go as far as having an interview with the Head of IT of DSFA to understand their IT strategy, the resources available to them, the priority areas for attention etc etc. You don't see the big picture when you are doing summer work in the trenches.

It's not hard to understand their strategy, there is none!!!!. Anyhow, the Head of IT wouldnt talk to me. It says it all really. Cloak and dagger stuff in the DSFA. Lucky enough I was able to talk to a few people I knew, who in turn knew other people.

RainyDay wrote:

I guess your graduate programme application didn't include basic English ('I done my thesis'). Like I said, this just wouldn't make the grade in any public sector office.

O dearie me.... an oversight on my part. So sorry indeed..... Petty so and so. :rolleyes:

Making the grade? What are you on about? Making what grade :rolleyes: The civil service is certainly nothing that I aspire to. Can I question why, after 20 years in the private sector, did you feel the need to move to the public sector? Could it have been that you weren't "making the grade" yourself?

parsi

run_Forrest_run wrote:

I know people who are teachers and are earning more money then people in the IT sector, both with the same amount of experience.

Is that supposed to be some sort of metric ? Is it even a valid comparison ?

run_Forrest_run

parsi wrote:

Is that supposed to be some sort of metric ? Is it even a valid comparison ?

well what was the valid comparison/matrices used when benchmarking was established?

run_Forrest_run

hermit wrote:

You're an idiot. Please don't post comments full of opinionated lies like that.

The civil service and indeed the broader public service have open competition recruitment processes. You MUST do exams, You MUST do interviews. No other way in on a full time basis. Check out publicjobs.ie and apply for the next civil service role that comes up and you'll that "post-its" wont get you too far.


Not sure what magical mystery land your "reliable sources" come from but they ain't in modern day Ireland!!

modern day Ireland?? Many of the work practices and levels of efficiency in public sector roles are a far cry from modern day Ireland..come into the private sector to see how modern day Ireland operates clown.

BostonB

The major difference between private and public sectors is the unions. The advantage is better working conditions the disadvantage is it can be harder to get things done with a union involved. Its not very useful to make sweeping generations about the private or public sectors. As you can have bad and good pucblic sector dept/organsiations and public companies etc. I've worked between them both and you get a wide range of good and bad in both sectors. Often places are understaffed and underfunded, and you have to take that into account. You get inept and inefficient people in both sectors.

The_Conductor

ixoy wrote:

Agreed, of course. What I feel is that it's far easier to get away with being poor in the civil service and keep your job and pay-scaled increase than in the private sector. Conversely, it can be harder to climb the ladder if you're ambitious.

Its actually far easier to be fired, for any of a long list of shortcomings, these days in the civil service than it ever was. You do not necessarily get your annual salary increment (which in the lower grades comes to around 1k payrise per annum- not anything to get overly excited about)- under PMDS and the other performance management tools civil servants (other than clerical staff represented by the CPSU) are monitored on an ongoing basis and will only get their increment if its deemed warranted by both their supervisor and their supervisor's supervisor- along with Personnel who will knock it down if you go over a set number of days sick leave. Re: sick leave- for grades other than CPSU- Saturdays and Sundays are counted- so if you are absent on a Friday or a Monday- thats 3 days sick leave- and requires certification by a doctor.

Re: Climbing the ladder- its actually easier to apply for a promotion as a member of the public, in the civil service, than it now is for a civil servant. A lot of the higher ranking promotions (over EO level and up to and including Department Assistant Secretary level) have specific ratios guaranteed to open public competition. Only a very small proportion is now by internal competition (which now includes a series of written examination along with structured interviews and presentations in front of panels).

ixoy wrote:

My biggest gripe is the "woe is us" attitude struck by many civil servants who want to be paid equivalent to a private sector position (which they are nowadays, and better often) and yet not want to give up the cushy benefits that they enjoy that most private sector firms don't give (good flexi-time, great overtime rates, long breaks, term time, job security, guaranteed pay increases, etc). It's having a cake, eating it, and then wanting to pig out on all the creams, buns, cakes, and flans in sight.

In most government departments overtime has to be officially sanctioned in advance- there is no automatic overtime for people. For the most part- paid overtime may not exist- staff, depending on the terms of their contracts (and most staff employed since 1996 have details contracts) are encouraged to take time-in-lieu instead of trying to claim overtime.

Flexitime is good, yes, but its a privilege, not an automatic right, and can be withdrawn or modified without notice to suit business needs. People assume they have automatic right to turn up at 10AM and go home at 4PM (providing they make up their hours)- quite simply they do not.

Long breaks- I'm not sure where you're working, most of us here have a mug of coffee at ours desks. We have to be available to deal with any situations as they arise.

Term time- once again, is a privilege rather than a right. Only those with children of a school going age, or an infirm parent who they intend to care for, are entitled to apply for term time. Term time is unpaid leave of a specified duration. Depending on the business needs of a section/division in many cases term time may be refused, or curtailed to suit work requirements. Termtime is a particular bone of contention in the civil service, particularly among single people or those without children, who inevitably are not eligible to apply for it. Also- as its unpaid- a lot of parents quite simply cannot afford to take termtime, even if it were sanctioned.

Job security- with decentralisation, there are loads of people under the age of 35 giving up their civil service jobs and joining the private sector instead. The civil service is almost 64% female and 68% over the age of 50........

Pensions - Since 1996, all new starts pay full PRSI contributions and are expected to claim the state contributory old age pension (as everyone in the country is entitled to). Their civil service pensions they are contributing to (it is a contributory scheme) when mature are reduced by the amount of the state old age pension. If for some reason they are not entitled to claim the state OAP- they really could be destitute.

Guaranteed pay increases- Nothing is guaranteed. Its all subject to compliance with modern working practices. Pay increases under the current national agreement (to which a lot of private companies are also subscribed) entitled "Towards 2016" are currently about 2% below the rate of inflation- so actual purchasing power is being erroded, regardless of pay increases or not.

Its all swings and round-abouts. Some things are better in the private sector (such as the holidays for example- an EO, which is graduate recruitment in the civil service now that recruitment at AO level has been all but abondoned, is entitled to 21 days annual leave, rising to 22 days after 5 years service and 23 days after 10 years service) some or better in the public sector. Unfortunately degrees of job security in both the civil service and the private sector are both a lot lower nowadays than they were in the past.

I personally have worked for several years in the private sector (as an IT consultant/Technical Specialist), as a contractor in the public sector and more recently as a civil servant. It very much is a case of everyone thinking the grass is greener on the other side of the fence. The pay in the private sector and contracting was very good. But one job I was permanent in was outsourced to India, and another my contract simply wasn't renewed. On the other hand- its mayhem in the summer and at christmas in the civil service- if sections allow staff with children to take extra unpaid leave to be with their families. The older single unmarried people bear the brunt of the civil services "family friendly" policies.......

hermit

run_Forrest_run wrote:

modern day Ireland?? Many of the work practices and levels of efficiency in public sector roles are a far cry from modern day Ireland..come into the private sector to see how modern day Ireland operates clown.

Yeah and many of the worke practices and efficiency levels in the private sector are also a far cry from modern day Ireland. Every sector in the economic climate has both good operators and bad ones. To say the public sector is inefficient its work practices are out of date is simply wrong.

Check out the economic environment of every parcel of each of the sectors before you post rubbish!

ixoy

smccarrick wrote:

Its actually far easier to be fired, for any of a long list of shortcomings, these days in the civil service than it ever was.

In practice, do firings occur? I was related one story from a friend in the Central Bank (which is, admittedly, public and not civil service) whereby guys are asleep, snoring at their desks and don't seem to get fired (I've seen video footage of it and all).
Complaints are made, but not heeded because of either protection from unions or the person's work is deemed irreplacable.

Re: sick leave- for grades other than CPSU- Saturdays and Sundays are counted- so if you are absent on a Friday or a Monday- thats 3 days sick leave- and requires certification by a doctor.

Well that's standard amongst most companies, no? Surely though, you'd be "better" on the Saturday and not require a cert?

Re: Climbing the ladder- its actually easier to apply for a promotion as a member of the public, in the civil service, than it now is for a civil servant. A lot of the higher ranking promotions (over EO level and up to and including Department Assistant Secretary level) have specific ratios guaranteed to open public competition. Only a very small proportion is now by internal competition (which now includes a series of written examination along with structured interviews and presentations in front of panels).

I've heard that, and I'll readily admit that advancement doesn't appear easy in the civil service.

Do you believe though that the most qualified always get it? I've seen many examples of managers who barely seem to know how to do their job whilst more adept people below struggle. Admittedly, it's something that applies to all walks of life but it seems more prevalent in the civil service.

For the most part- paid overtime may not exist- staff, depending on the terms of their contracts (and most staff employed since 1996 have details contracts) are encouraged to take time-in-lieu instead of trying to claim overtime.

Is time-in-lieu 1-hour off for hour worked or does it work different? I'm given to understand that one hour overtime on a day when someone wouldn't be working could entitle them to an entire day off. I stand open to correction and maybe it's particular to certain levels.

Flexitime is good, yes, but its a privilege, not an automatic right, and can be withdrawn or modified without notice to suit business needs. People assume they have automatic right to turn up at 10AM and go home at 4PM (providing they make up their hours)- quite simply they do not.

Okay, but that assumption must exist based on a history or a majority doing it? I certainly see many people here stroll in around 10AM and/or leave around 4.

Long breaks- I'm not sure where you're working, most of us here have a mug of coffee at ours desks. We have to be available to deal with any situations as they arise.

Nearly all the civil service desks are empty as I write this and have been for the last half hour. "Tea break" time.

Job security- with decentralisation, there are loads of people under the age of 35 giving up their civil service jobs and joining the private sector instead. The civil service is almost 64% female and 68% over the age of 50........

Correct me if I'm wrong though, but doesn't decentralisation guarantee a job? And aren't there provisions built in for those who don't want to move - that they can relocate to a similiar job somewhat close by? Which is different to the lack of job security in the private sector.

Guaranteed pay increases- Nothing is guaranteed. Its all subject to compliance with modern working practices. Pay increases under the current national agreement (to which a lot of private companies are also subscribed) entitled "Towards 2016" are currently about 2% below the rate of inflation- so actual purchasing power is being erroded, regardless of pay increases or not.

Has anyone ever failed to comply with modern working practices? I seem to recall they're very loosely defined.
As to the pay increases - yes, they can be a mixed blessing. However the guaranteed nature of them is very useful for something like getting a mortgage (as is the aforementioned job security), which is a great side benefit of the civil service.

Do you feel that there are different attitudes endemic to civil service? Many of the retirement mails I see are from people who've been 40 years in the job. Private sector employees are far less likely to maintain such commitment. I get the feel there's a certain "comfort zone" in the civil service, that you can cruise on by for your life with relatively little hassle.
You don't go rocking the boat or trying to bring in new concepts (as outlined above). Again, I'm basing it on what I've seen which is obviously one department within one arm of the civil service but it seems backed up by others I've been told by others working in the sector

Good post though - enlightening stuff, thanks!

RainyDay

ixoy wrote:

That's quite a different thing. All that is is to try and get a wider pool of talent to choose from. No guarantees whatsoever, especially in the bigger private companies where you couldn't make such connections anyway.

It's not quite different at all. How is sending in a CV via 'refer a friend' different to sending in a CV with a post-it note? Not that I believe the post-it story, mind you?

ixoy wrote:

Agreed, of course. What I feel is that it's far easier to get away with being poor in the civil service and keep your job and pay-scaled increase than in the private sector. Conversely, it can be harder to climb the ladder if you're ambitious.

No pay-scaled increase unless you reach the appropriate level on the PMDS system. I've met 2 people at Assistant Secretary General level in recent months who both look to be about 40. Their salary scale starts somewhere over €100k. Ambitious people will do well in the public sector.

ixoy wrote:

My biggest gripe is the "woe is us" attitude struck by many civil servants who want to be paid equivalent to a private sector position (which they are nowadays, and better often) and yet not want to give up the cushy benefits that they enjoy that most private sector firms don't give (good flexi-time, great overtime rates, long breaks, term time, job security, guaranteed pay increases, etc). It's having a cake, eating it, and then wanting to pig out on all the creams, buns, cakes, and flans in sight.

The 'woe is us' attitude is no different to the 'woe is us' attitude from IBEC, or the farmers, or the Irish Bankers Federation, or the taxi drivers, or SFA/ISME or any other self-interest group.

ixoy wrote:

Nearly all the civil service desks are empty as I write this and have been for the last half hour. "Tea break" time.

Isn't it a bit rich that you're moaning about them being off on tea-breaks when you are skiving on boards.ie? Are my taxes paying for you to post on boards?

stepbar wrote:

It's not hard to understand their strategy, there is none!!!!. Anyhow, the Head of IT wouldnt talk to me. It says it all really. Cloak and dagger stuff in the DSFA. Lucky enough I was able to talk to a few people I knew, who in turn knew other people.

Way of the mark. They have their IT strategy. They are simply too busy to spend time explaining it to a summer temp. It is reassuring to note that the IT guy was too busy to waste his time with you. So you have based your conclusions on 3rd-hand gossip, rather than the facts of the situation, and you expect us to take your gripes seriously?

stepbar wrote:

Can I question why, after 20 years in the private sector, did you feel the need to move to the public sector? Could it have been that you weren't "making the grade" yourself?

My rationale for moving was quite simple. Having become a father, I wanted to spend more time at home and less time at work. So I took a 35% pay cut, and I'm spending about 1/3rd less hours at work. I've never been happier. I still work hard. I still leave early and get home late when required. I've just realised that there are more important things in life than money.

stepbar

RainyDay wrote:

Way of the mark. They have their IT strategy. They are simply too busy to spend time explaining it to a summer temp. It is reassuring to note that the IT guy was too busy to waste his time with you. So you have based your conclusions on 3rd-hand gossip, rather than the facts of the situation, and you expect us to take your gripes seriously?

As I've said I did a thesis on the subject. You don't get good marks from 3rd hand gossip alone....... I take you haven't done a thesis because you wouldn't be taking the tone you are at the moment if you had. Anyhow, why would I waste my time explaining the suitation to you? You clearly haven't a clue.

yabadabado

on the hours worked/flexi time issue- civil service hours are 6.57hrs a day 34.45 a week and 139hrs a month.u do not have to do 6.57 every day you can do more one day less another as long as at the end of the 4 week period u have done 139 hrs.anything over this time is called flexi time so if u do 3.30hrs extra in the four weeks u can take a half day off in the following 4 week period.6.57hrs for a day and 10.30 for a day and a half and the most u can carry forward is 11.30 hrs any more will be lost.u can start anytime between 8.30 and 10.00(some offices 8.00) and finish anytime from 4.00 till 6.30(some offices 7.00)lunch is from 12.30 till 2.30 its up to the individual as to how much they take but u must take at least an hour(if u only clocked out and in for 10mins it will auto take 30mins off u.plus 2 tea breaks 20mins each no clocking for these

BostonB

While I don't agree with everything Rainyday says, his comments, are much closer to my (admittedly few years) experience of the public service than those of stepbar. Where I work has a mix of good and bad, just like anywhere else I've worked in the private sector. My own office is very progressive compared to other places I've worked previously (private or public sector). We're snowed under with a workload beyond our resources. It really comes down to the people themselves, and the specific manager.

Flexi time means you do the same hours, you can just be flexible when you do them. Its a double edged sword though, if you are late say 15mins one day, you have to make that 15mins back another day. You just can't write it off as a late. Do a short day one day then you'll have to do long day to make it back. You have to do it within office working hours too. Typically 8-6. I think its a great system, it makes people more aware of their hours, and they work much harder on their time keeping. Its exist (and doesn't exist for some people) in both the private and public sectors.

parsi

stepbar wrote:

I take you haven't done a thesis because you wouldn't be taking the tone you are at the moment if you had. Anyhow, why would I waste my time explaining the suitation to you? You clearly haven't a clue.

Is this going to descend into an "I have a thesis you don't " discussion ?

The Civil Service is an easy target because of its openness - salary scales are published, overtime is published and its easy to criticise. Private sector jobs don't have published rates so folk find it harder to be able to say to private sector incompetents "hey my Sky sub is paying your exhorbitant wages" because they don't know what their wages are.

Some folk like the security of the Civil Service along with its defined structure. Some folk chafe at that same defined structure which means that you can't get a promotion or significant rise soley by impressing your direct supervisors.

I think that there is often an element of jealousy at play (otherwise why would people criticise availability of flexitime etc?). This is probably because (outside of the banks) the Civil Service staff are negotiated for by large unions which can wrest significant concessions and which can ensure that all members benefit. If private sector employees were more unionised (and less of an everyman for himself) then they would probably feel somewhat happier. I suppose an example would be in France and Germany where industries like cars, steel are fully unionised and deals are worked out on an industry basis rather than per employer - in these cases all employees would be able to get benefits like term time etc and not be left at an individual employer's mercy.

stepbar

parsi wrote:

Is this going to descend into an "I have a thesis you don't " discussion ?

Read the message again parsi.

The_Conductor

stepbar wrote:

Read the message again parsi.

Whatever about Parsi reading your message- I did and was not amused.
Contrary to your assumptions- you would be very surprised at the number of highly educated people who choose to work in the civil service for a number of reasons, personal and otherwise.
I hold 2 undergrad degrees and one postgrad degree, two of which were done in the evening and weekend while working fulltime. I have done 3 thesis, and worked my butt off for peanuts for professional experience for a year for one of my degrees. Preaching about whether you have done thesis, on the civil service or on any other subject matter, cuts no ice with me.

S.

nesf

stepbar wrote:

As I've said I did a thesis on the subject. You don't get good marks from 3rd hand gossip alone....... I take you haven't done a thesis because you wouldn't be taking the tone you are at the moment if you had. Anyhow, why would I waste my time explaining the suitation to you? You clearly haven't a clue.

Having written a thesis on a subject, or having published academic papers on a subject doesn't make you an authority or automatically right about a topic. Please tone it down and don't try and use your thesis to "batter the opposition into silence".

parsi

stepbar wrote:

Read the message again parsi.

I did. My comments still stand.

I haven't completed a thesis (completed sounds better than "done") but did complete a Final Year Project ( subject was Der Fuhrerprinzip ) if that counts ? And a bit like smcarrick I have 2 degrees - one fulltime and one part-time but don't see them as giving me any more (or less ) authority than anyone else in this discussion (unless it veers madly towards the cult of the outsider ... ).

Newaglish

I think he was referring to the fact that he has completed a thesis on a fairly similar topic, not implying that he is more educated!

RainyDay

stepbar wrote:

As I've said I did a thesis on the subject. You don't get good marks from 3rd hand gossip alone....... I take you haven't done a thesis because you wouldn't be taking the tone you are at the moment if you had. Anyhow, why would I waste my time explaining the suitation to you? You clearly haven't a clue.

It may surprise you to note that most civil servants at PO level or higher would have masters degrees or higher. It is almost funny that you seem to believe that your brief period of summer work and your glorious thesis (and no access to the Dept's actual strategy) gives you some amazing insights into the workings of the Dept, over and above those who have spent years working on these issues. Get real. Why don't you post your thesis here, given that you're so convinced about the value of it?

GoneShootin

stepbar wrote:

As I've said I did a thesis on the subject. You don't get good marks from 3rd hand gossip alone....... I take you haven't done a thesis because you wouldn't be taking the tone you are at the moment if you had. Anyhow, why would I waste my time explaining the suitation to you? You clearly haven't a clue.

What the **** has a thesis got to do with anything. Come down off you're high horse and debate the post, not the poster.

ixoy

RainyDay wrote:

It's not quite different at all. How is sending in a CV via 'refer a friend' different to sending in a CV with a post-it note? Not that I believe the post-it story, mind you?

I don't personally believe that, but then I'm not in a small company so the HR company hasn't a clue who I am and probably wouldn't treat referrals any more highly than other CVs. Still, as I've said, I don't believe it will happen in the civil service now because all the recruitment is done through a central body - right?

No pay-scaled increase unless you reach the appropriate level on the PMDS system. I've met 2 people at Assistant Secretary General level in recent months who both look to be about 40. Their salary scale starts somewhere over €100k. Ambitious people will do well in the public sector.

That or they've over-payed That's a joke, btw....

The 'woe is us' attitude is no different to the 'woe is us' attitude from IBEC, or the farmers, or the Irish Bankers Federation, or the taxi drivers, or SFA/ISME or any other self-interest group.

True but the sheer size of the civil service interest group affects the country. Look at the furore by the threat raised of renegotiating the national pay agreement in light of inflation ratse (because raising wages across a huge swathe of the country will really help inflation... but that's another topic).

Isn't it a bit rich that you're moaning about them being off on tea-breaks when you are skiving on boards.ie? Are my taxes paying for you to post on boards?

Most of these posts are written up whilst waiting for compilations, etc. They don't take 45 mins or so...

Way of the mark. They have their IT strategy. They are simply too busy to spend time explaining it to a summer temp.

I'd certainly believe this. I know the department I'm in certainly have a dedicated IT strategy and it's quite progressive too for the most part. It may not seem it if you're there only for a couple of months but a bit longer and it might have been more apparent.

hawker

stepbar wrote:

45 min lunch in the civil service!!! More like an hour and a 20 minute coffee break before lunch too....

You dont have to come in till 10am but you must do 8hrs.

And then theres the flexi time too. I knew one person who used to have 2 months off every year because she used to work up 11hrs in the month and got a day and a half off in lieu. The civil service, it's a great little institution we have.....

I'm afraid you are talking rubbish. What this girl took during the summer was more than likely 'term time' which is actually unpaid leave.

As for the coffee break, it's 20 mins and everyone worker is entitled to a morning coffee break.

GoneShootin

hawker wrote:

everyone worker is entitled to a morning coffee break.

Not so. A worker is entitled to so much time off during the day per hours worked - but not strictly entitled to a "morning break" - thats just the convention

run_Forrest_run

let me clear up the Post-it thing, the candidate going for the job did not put the Post-It on the CV, one of the interviewees did to leave a note for another person who would be viewing the CV to let them know how the candidate is known. sorry for not getting back sooner, I was BUSY working in the private sector.

Santa Claus

smccarrick wrote:

I hold 2 undergrad degrees and one postgrad degree, two of which were done in the evening and weekend while working fulltime. I have done 3 thesis, and worked my butt off for peanuts for professional experience for a year for one of my degrees. Preaching about whether you have done thesis, on the civil service or on any other subject matter, cuts no ice with me.

S.

Did you get any of these degrees while working in the public service ?

A friend of mine is finishing a degree in Geology that was fully paid for by the civil service (and he works in social welfare so it is absolutely useless to his current job). Most private sector companies will only pay for a degree if you can show how it would benefit you in doing your job!

Also, he didn't have to anything to say that he will stay for X number of years after he finishes his degree so is free to leave when he wants !