Don't go on strike

jprender

Following snip, I see a lot of talk in relation to public servants contemplating going on strike/blue flu.


I really don't think that this will do the country or the public servants any good.

phasers

Oh OK then

conbre

if you seen my payslip you might have a different view, and they might be hitting us again.
i understand that the country is fcuked, but so are a lot of us,

jprender

Cool, glad that's sorted.

thought that would be much tougher.


Road to recovery, here we come !!

solice

jprender wrote: »

Following snip, I see a lot of talk in relation to public servants contemplating going on strike/blue flu.


I really don't think that this will do the country or the public servants any good.

Do you see a lot of talk of unions indicating they would go on strike or are actual people saying it?

I hate the unions

jprender

solice wrote: »

Do you see a lot of talk of unions indicating they would go on strike or are actual people saying it?

I hate the unions

A bit of both.

I had a read of the Emergency Services thread earlier and there was a lot of talk of a "blue-flu".


It wont solve anything imo.

DeVore

Then tell your unions that you DONT want them to strike over civil service job cuts.

You cant have it every way you want and still balance the budget. Cut the dead wood middle management from the HSE and many other civil servant jobs. Dont back the big wigs when their outrageous pay gets cut. Let your unions know this and let the government know this.

Otherwise they are going to keep snipping and snipping from across the board because the numbers simply dont stack.

DeV.

BroomBurner

This is all heresay. There has been no talk of strikes from my union anyway, or the CPSU so far as I know.

Don't forget, this report is just a list of suggestions. The government are still out of the Dail, so they're not going to even look at enacting any of it until Sept/Oct.

ilovelamp2000

DeVore wrote: »

Then tell your unions that you DONT want them to strike over civil service job cuts.

You cant have it every way you want and still balance the budget. Cut the dead wood middle management from the HSE and many other civil servant jobs. Dont back the big wigs when their outrageous pay gets cut. Let your unions know this and let the government know this.

Otherwise they are going to keep snipping and snipping from across the board because the numbers simply dont stack.

DeV.

Yup.

My limited experience of the civil service is there are way too mid level managers, doing next to nothing and earning too much. The rank and file don't earn much so it would be ridiculous to hit them again.

BroomBurner

Rosco1982 wrote: »

Yup.

My limited experience of the civil service is there are way too mid level managers, doing next to nothing and earning too much. The rank and file don't earn much so it would be ridiculous to hit them again.

What would you call a mid level manager in the Civil Service?

What grades would come under this title?

Can you provide statistics to prove that there are too many "mid level" managers (i.e. ratio of management to staff)?

ilovelamp2000

BroomBurner wrote: »

What would you call a mid level manager in the Civil Service?

What grades would come under this title?

Can you provide statistics to prove that there are too many "mid level" managers (i.e. ratio of management to staff)?

Can you read what I posted ?

"In my experience"

I worked in an office where there were 3 HEO's, 5 EO's, 5 CO's , 2 Legal Clerks, 3 law clerks.

I'd class EO's in the lower management level, HEO and AP - mid management.

I think there was a ridiculous level of overstaffing at management levels in that section. Obviously not all sections are like this, but there were certainly far too many EO's and HEO's in the organisation as a whole.

P. Breathnach

Rosco1982 wrote: »

Can you read what I posted ?

"In my experience"

I worked in an office where there were 3 HEO's, 5 EO's, 5 CO's , 2 Legal Clerks, 3 law clerks.

I'd class EO's in the lower management level, HEO and AP - mid management.

I think there was a ridiculous level of overstaffing at management levels in that section. Obviously not all sections are like this, but there were certainly far too many EO's and HEO's in the organisation as a whole.

Not all EOs and HEOs are managers. One thing in which the civil service takes some pride (in my view, with an element of mistake) is that its members are generalists, and can be assigned to different types of duty. A HEO might be a manager, or might not, depending on the task.

irish_bob

jprender wrote: »

Following snip, I see a lot of talk in relation to public servants contemplating going on strike/blue flu.


I really don't think that this will do the country or the public servants any good.

doing the country harm is of no concern to them

BroomBurner

Rosco1982 wrote: »

Can you read what I posted ?

"In my experience"

I worked in an office where there were 3 HEO's, 5 EO's, 5 CO's , 2 Legal Clerks, 3 law clerks.

I'd class EO's in the lower management level, HEO and AP - mid management.

I think there was a ridiculous level of overstaffing at management levels in that section. Obviously not all sections are like this, but there were certainly far too many EO's and HEO's in the organisation as a whole.

I have no problem with you commenting on the exact office that you worked in. However, to believe that one office is going to represent every other is ludricous, which is how your initial statement came across. If I were to do that, I would be blindly believing that every office in the Civil Service is efficiently run, well managed and with a dedicated staff. Maybe they are, I couldn't possibly say, and I'm not short-sighted enough to believe that my one office is representative of the overall service.

ilovelamp2000

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Not all EOs and HEOs are managers. One thing in which the civil service takes some pride (in my view, with an element of mistake) is that its members are generalists, and can be assigned to different types of duty. A HEO might be a manager, or might not, depending on the task.

I'm aware of that but each HEO, and EO had management repsonsibilities in the office.

It was absolutely ridiculous, nothing ever got done.

irish_bob

BroomBurner wrote: »

I have no problem with you commenting on the exact office that you worked in. However, to believe that one office is going to represent every other is ludricous, which is how your initial statement came across. If I were to do that, I would be blindly believing that every office in the Civil Service is efficiently run, well managed and with a dedicated staff. Maybe they are, I couldn't possibly say, and I'm not short-sighted enough to believe that my one office is representative of the overall service.

the difference being roscos experience is more indicitive of what many people have witnessed in the civil service , your example is not widely supported from various ancedotes and actual reports

BroomBurner

irish_bob wrote: »

the difference being roscos experience is more indicitive of what many people have witnessed in the civil service , your example is not widely supported from various ancedotes and actual reports

No, Irish Bob, Roscos experience is of ONE office. My experience is of ONE office. Neither of us can talk extensively of the work capability and rate of the civil service as a whole.