Should an element of competition be introduced to the civil service?

thebaldsoprano

I work in the private sector and like a lot of people, have had to take pay cuts. Now if we were to go on strike or anything like that, the competition would have the company where I work blown out of the water in a matter of weeks. We can put forward ideas to management on how to keep good staff or on other was to compensate us for the cut in pay, but understandably, anything potentially damaging to keeping us in the black is off the table.

Are there any ways to introduce some level of competition to the civil/public sector which would instill some sense of reality to them and their unions?

One way might be to have a percentage of private sector staff working at all levels of key civil/public service functions. Taking the passport office as an example, if some of the staff working there were employed by a private company, then that company would have the expertise to completely take over the running of it if it were needed. Obviously this would cause some disruption, which would give the unions some bargaining power - but not enough to hold the country to ransom. This arrangement could also keep some sense of reality on wages and performance of civil service workers. Obviously, it would be a complete non runner for some areas though.

Opinions good and bad or similar ideas would be welcome.

stevoman

is this going to turn into another "public service" bashing thread.

gandalf

I honestly think a private/public workshare idea would not work. It needs to be all or nothing. Some areas would be suited to outsourcing like the Passport Office or Motor Tax for example others wouldn't.

If the Government has ever been considering going down this route then the time is now to impliement it. Maybe using the Passport Office as the test bed and give the CPSU a wake up call in the process.

I welcome the fact we are now hearing FF TD's mention privatising sections of the PS, something that would have been unheard of a couple of years ago.

You see Blair you reap what you sow

Count Dooku

Of coarse yes
Because according to Karl Marx, without element of competition unionised workers in monopolies cold gain too much power and transform into labour aristocracy

problemchimp

thebaldsoprano wrote: »

I work in the private sector and like a lot of people, have had to take pay cuts. Now if we were to go on strike or anything like that, the competition would have the company where I work blown out of the water in a matter of weeks. We can put forward ideas to management on how to keep good staff or on other was to compensate us for the cut in pay, but understandably, anything potentially damaging to keeping us in the black is off the table.

Are there any ways to introduce some level of competition to the civil/public sector which would instill some sense of reality to them and their unions?

One way might be to have a percentage of private sector staff working at all levels of key civil/public service functions. Taking the passport office as an example, if some of the staff working there were employed by a private company, then that company would have the expertise to completely take over the running of it if it were needed. Obviously this would cause some disruption, which would give the unions some bargaining power - but not enough to hold the country to ransom. This arrangement could also keep some sense of reality on wages and performance of civil service workers. Obviously, it would be a complete non runner for some areas though.

Opinions good and bad or similar ideas would be welcome.

Yeah probably a good idea in some areas but a concern might be having public and private staff working side by side and bad feeling on both sides.I personally don't think the country is held to ransom by the passport office dispute but it certainly is not acceptable. maybe putting in private people at senior levels would be a start.

smokingman

An element of competition is good for a worker no matter where they work.
If you go into work just doing the same crap day in, day out with automatic salary increases then where the hell is the impetus to get good at your job and climb the ladder?...

thebaldsoprano

problemchimp wrote: »

Yeah probably a good idea in some areas but a concern might be having public and private staff working side by side and bad feeling on both sides.I personally don't think the country is held to ransom by the passport office dispute but it certainly is not acceptable. maybe putting in private people at senior levels would be a start.

There are some areas of the civil service that employ a good number of external consultants. One of my mates works in such an area and never mentioned anything about bad feeling, although I can see how it might happen in some areas.

But then again, if anyone were to kick up a fuss, there are lots of people on the dole who'd gladly replace them

The_Conductor

It depends on how you define competition.
Civil service posts only filled 1-in-6 vacancies since 2001 and none at all since the government embargo.
Further- all recruitment- all the way up to ASG is open to public competition- last time round there were over 800 applicants for each vacancy at junior level posts (3 years ago).

Ireland already has the smallest civil service per head of population in the OECD (contrary to what the media would have you believe). A lot of people simply don't know (and a lot of people also use the term civil service and public sector interchangeably- when the civil service is less than 8% of the public sector).

While I do not support the CPSU strike action- I do recognise that the vast bulk of their members actually qualify for one form of social welfare assistance or another- because of their low pay levels. If you were to benchmark their jobs against similar jobs in the private sector- they probably are considerably overpaid though.

The Irish social welfare system and indeed the minimum wage- are massive factors in destroying Irish competitiveness in general- both in the public and private sector. We cannot afford the bizzarely high minimum wage we have- nor the bewildering array of benefits on offer. Why should the lower paid public sector workers be benchmarking themselves against social welfare recipients- as the CPSU seem to be doing?

Contrary to popular belief- Ireland is *not* a wealthy country. The illusion of wealth we portrayed over the past 15 years was based on a property bubble. Most media commentators have not accepted this yet- and the politicians certainly haven't. Some ESRI commentators have- but they're not being listened to (yet.......)

So- sure, there should be an element of competition in the civil service- but perhaps if you want to recruit the very brightest and best- as happens by public competition- you have to accept that if their pay is viewed against excessive social welfare entitlements as a benchmark- that something has gone seriously wrong somewhere.........

dvpower

I can't see any good reason why much of the work done by the civil service couldn't be outsourced.

In my own area of work, I see many private companies outsourcing much of their administration to fulfillment companies. There are many advantages; costs are controlled, robust service level agreements, organisations can concentrate on their core competencies.

The only potential downside is that some of the work may end up going abroad.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

gandalf

smccarrick I assume a lot if not most of those countries in the OECD have large militarys that are supported by equally large defence departments which could skew the figures.

For example I didn't realise that the MOD in the UK was over 100,000 employees strong!

poppyvalley

why the hell didint you all join the Civil Service in the first place?

gandalf

poppyvalley wrote: »

why the hell didint you all join the Civil Service in the first place?

So I take it that you are against the OP's proposal then :rolleyes:

dvpower

poppyvalley wrote: »

why the hell didint you all join the Civil Service in the first place?

Why the hell can't we all compete for Civil Service work now?

Riskymove

deadtiger wrote: »

smccarrick I assume a lot if not most of those countries in the OECD have large militarys that are supported by equally large defence departments which could skew the figures.

no, that was taken into account

Riskymove

thebaldsoprano wrote: »

Are there any ways to introduce some level of competition to the civil/public sector which would instill some sense of reality to them and their unions?

there is limited competition in some areas, e.g. some local authoriteis still operate waste collection in competition with private firms

I can't see any good reason why much of the work done by the civil service couldn't be outsourced.

I can only imagine then, that you really dont understand the purpose of the civil service

while certain things like licence processing, passports etc could be privitised, certainly most of the civil service could not be

The government has provitised certain things in the public service, drivier testing, NCT, aer lingus etc and no doubt other things will follow

gandalf

Riskymove wrote: »

no, that was taken into account

Can you point me to those figures then? Please (just curious to read them)

The_Conductor

deadtiger wrote: »

smccarrick I assume a lot if not most of those countries in the OECD have large militarys that are supported by equally large defence departments which could skew the figures.

For example I didn't realise that the MOD in the UK was over 100,000 employees strong!

The military personnel are not classified as civil servants though- civil servants are the direct employees of government departments along with prison officers. No-one else. It does not include the Gardai, the teachers, the army, the HSE employees, employees in the semi states- etc...... It doesn't even include the employees or staff of the Houses of the Oireachtas.......

This is pretty consistent across the board in other countries. If we had a military akin (per capita) to the UK or other countries- our public sector numbers would be roughly 4% higher- our civil service numbers would however be unchanged.

This is what I meant by people using the term civil service and public sector interchangeably........

Riskymove

deadtiger wrote: »

Can you point me to those figures then? Please (just curious to read them)

OECD review of the irish Public Service Report 2008

The main finding of the OECD Report, Towards an Integrated Public Service, is that while the numbers employed in the Irish Public Service has increased significantly, such increases were from a relatively low-base, and general government employment in Ireland is relatively low among OECD countries. It is significantly less than the level of public employment in Norway, Sweden, France, Finland and Belgium.

gandalf

smccarrick wrote: »

The military personnel are not classified as civil servants though- civil servants are the direct employees of government departments along with prison officers. No-one else. It does not include the Gardai, the teachers, the army, the HSE employees, employees in the semi states- etc...... It doesn't even include the employees or staff of the Houses of the Oireachtas.......

This is pretty consistent across the board in other countries. If we had a military akin (per capita) to the UK or other countries- our public sector numbers would be roughly 4% higher- our civil service numbers would however be unchanged.

This is what I meant by people using the term civil service and public sector interchangeably........

That 100,000 figure is the civilian MOD figures they are providing admin to 240,000 Regular forces, 242,000 Regular Reserve & 42,000 Volunteer reserves. I assume they are the equivalent to the CS in the Dept of Defense here. If I am wrong apologies.

Dubh Geannain

Slightly OT but thought it'd be interesting to add the 3 largest employers in the world:

1. Chinese Army
2. Indian Rail
3. NHS

jasonb

I think competition wouldn't be a bad idea, but the first thing to bring in would be an element of accountability.

I've worked in the Public Sector for the last 7 years. I worked in the Private Sector for 8 years before that. Both had people who worked hard and well and people who didn't bother. The difference to me is that the Public Sector people who don't bother don't get into any trouble for it. The Private Sector workers who don't bother are told to get their act together or they'll be replaced.

Competition would need to have consequences. There's no point having competition if the person / department etc. knows that no matter how they do, there will be no consquences...

J.

Riskymove

deadtiger wrote: »

That 100,000 figure is the civilian MOD figures they are providing admin to 240,000 Regular forces, 242,000 Regular Reserve & 42,000 Volunteer reserves. I assume they are the equivalent to the CS in the Dept of Defense here. If I am wrong apologies.

well look at it this way, there are 100,000 admin staff in the MOD alone in the UK

there are about 33,000 people in the entire civil service here

The_Conductor

deadtiger wrote: »

That 100,000 figure is the civilian MOD figures they are providing admin to 240,000 Regular forces, 242,000 Regular Reserve & 42,000 Volunteer reserves. I assume they are the equivalent to the CS in the Dept of Defense here. If I am wrong apologies.

The Ministry of Defense in the UK is acknowledged to be the most overstaffed Ministry of all. Nonetheless- it numbers 81,000 civil servants, between its almost 400 sites- a reduction of 26,000 since 2005 and numbers are expected to fall to 75,000 by 2012 through non-replacement policies.

The civil servants in the Ministry of Defense are employed in the main in policy implementation and development, property management (the Ministry of Defense is one of the largest land owners in the UK and has several overseas properties too), and public procurement. Civilian MOD figures (another ~12,000)- are not classified as civil servants- they are temporary contract employees (normally with specific skillsets- such as in IT or similar).

97i9y3941

could always look at the difference between vhi/quinn health and HSE

Riskymove

Fred83 wrote: »

could always look at the difference between vhi/quinn health and HSE

er, why?

do you think Quinn health is a competitor of the HSE?

97i9y3941

well,money talks in this country,how often heard stories of people told they die unless they went private and cough up for treatment...

ixoy

Well of course it doesn't factor in pay in those numbers - if we have an average number on above-average pay then we have an above-average CS bill.

There's presumably different services offered in different countries (within the broad specifications) and then different levels of external contractors (numbers not here).

Riskymove

ixoy wrote: »

Well of course it doesn't factor in pay in those numbers - if we have an average number on above-average pay then we have an above-average CS bill.

the numbers are about size not cost

pawrick

smokingman wrote: »

An element of competition is good for a worker no matter where they work.
If you go into work just doing the same crap day in, day out with automatic salary increases then where the hell is the impetus to get good at your job and climb the ladder?...

just read this and I do agree to a certain degree, the idea of a promotion freeze in the Civil Service has had a bad effect - staff who aimed to do their jobs well and get promotion are now stuck in limbo with no foreseeable opportunity to try and gain promotion. I know a few people who are not long out of college or have been studying part time and then to be told no matter how well you do in your job we don't care. These are the people we should be allowing to move up the ranks and bring new thinking to the system. All out promotion bans make no sense and should be re thought.

Passport office could very easily be privatised and there are reasons for and against this - but the issue here is a pay dispute, if a private company had a pay dispute the same would happen...unless people want to outlaw unions and change our employment laws etc.????

thebaldsoprano

pawrick wrote: »

Passport office could very easily be privatised and there are reasons for and against this - but the issue here is a pay dispute, if a private company had a pay dispute the same would happen...

If proper competition were bought in, the same wouldn't happen because the company would go out of business. This could easily be arranged by having two or more companies providing the passport service. Having said that, this would only work for some areas, I'd much rather a public sector monopoly over a private sector one.

pawrick wrote: »

unless people want to outlaw unions and change our employment laws etc.????

I don't think anyone was advocating that.

miju

thebaldsoprano wrote: »

One way might be to have a percentage of private sector staff working at all levels of key civil/public service functions. Taking the passport office as an example, if some of the staff working there were employed by a private company, then that company would have the expertise to completely take over the running of it if it were needed. Obviously this would cause some disruption, which would give the unions some bargaining power - but not enough to hold the country to ransom. This arrangement could also keep some sense of reality on wages and performance of civil service workers. Obviously, it would be a complete non runner for some areas though.

believe it or not this has already been the norm for quite a while now in some areas of the PS

thebaldsoprano

miju wrote: »

believe it or not this has already been the norm for quite a while now in some areas of the PS

Care to elaborate?

buddy4711

Yes, please do.

miju

thebaldsoprano wrote: »

Care to elaborate?

As much as I'd like to no I cant but it DOES occur already within the PS

maninasia

thebaldsoprano wrote: »

If proper competition were bought in, the same wouldn't happen because the company would go out of business. This could easily be arranged by having two or more companies providing the passport service. Having said that, this would only work for some areas, I'd much rather a public sector monopoly over a private sector one.



I don't think anyone was advocating that.

Very very unlikely to have a strike in private business...how many have you observed recently? Plus, due to the sensitive nature of the business, the govt. could implement special rules on operation banning strikes etc.

thebaldsoprano

maninasia wrote: »

Very very unlikely to have a strike in private business...how many have you observed recently?

And even less likely if this company is in competition with one or more other companies.

maninasia wrote: »

Plus, due to the sensitive nature of the business, the govt. could implement special rules on operation banning strikes etc.

I doubt they'd need to, and another nice thing about competition is that it would likely eliminate the likes of a 'go slow', 'withdrawal of goodwill', 'work to rule' or similar.

Dannyboy83

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

It took me 3 years to do a simple 25minute driving test
(Failed first one on roundabouts in 2004, rebooked and had to cancel the next test as it fell on an exam date, finally on the third year I passed it.)

You could book and sit the Aviva 'Provisional Ignition Test' in 2 weeks (which I did and it reduce my premium by the equivalent amount as having a full license)

MagicSean

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

It took me 3 years to do a simple 25minute driving test
(Failed first one on roundabouts in 2004, rebooked and had to cancel the next test as it fell on an exam date, finally on the third year I passed it.)

You could book and sit the Aviva 'Provisional Ignition Test' in 2 weeks (which I did and it reduce my premium by the equivalent amount as having a full license)

But you're still on a provisional licence and require a full licence driver beside you so there's not much benefit other than the premium reduction.

Dannyboy83

k_mac wrote: »

But you're still on a provisional licence and require a full licence driver beside you so there's not much benefit other than the premium reduction.

Well, that was years ago now Thank God.

But yea, I regularly get comments from astounded Europeans about how Ireland is the only country in the EU where you can drive to the test on your provisional, fail your driving test and then just drive away home.:D

We also seem to lack a lot of the things I've seen in other countries such as P plates etc.

That said, I would take the Irish style of driving anyday over the driving I've seen in Italy, Eastern Europe etc.

The_Conductor

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

That said, I would take the Irish style of driving anyday over the driving I've seen in Italy, Eastern Europe etc.

Or Portugal (shudder.......)

prof_frink_2000

smccarrick wrote: »

Further- all recruitment- all the way up to ASG is open to public competition-

What? All the advertisments i've seen for grade 6+ have said minimum 5+ years experience in public administration, thats not open!

prof_frink_2000

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

That said, I would take the Irish style of driving anyday over the driving I've seen in Italy, Eastern Europe etc.

I recently spent 6 months working in spain and my god the sh*t i saw. Twice I saw people reverse up the motorway on ramp. Also in the 70s and early 80s the spainish built a lot of motorways without hard shoulders that are wide enough and 90degree on ramps.

Having said that I'd like to see us more more towards the Danish, German and Swedish quality of driving instruction. It can only save lives.

The_Conductor

prof_frink_2000 wrote: »

What? All the advertisments i've seen for grade 6+ have said minimum 5+ years experience in public administration, thats not open!

At the moment- there are several hundred (or even thousand) applicants for every single post advertised. Even a high level economics post recently had over 200 suitably qualified applicants. They can afford to be choosy as hell. Experience in public administration- does not necessarily equate with being a public sector employee- there are numerous acceptable qualifications in this area that are accepted as equivalent to required qualifications or experience.

I've applied for posts on publicjobs.ie in which the stated requirements had a minimum experience stipulation- and gotten through the exams and the interview process and made the panel.

More often than not they are very open to exploring other qualifications or experience that could be construed as equally relevant to the particular post.......

prof_frink_2000

smccarrick wrote: »

More often than not they are very open to exploring other qualifications or experience that could be construed as equally relevant to the particular post.......

Maybe in some areas, but not in IT. But to be fair there would be few interviewers that would really know what to look for in IT experts. Maybe i'm wrong in attacking the system, instead of changing the system why not add some private sector leaders to interview panels. How can someone who has worked in the public sector for a decade plus recognise a skillset that is modern in the private sector but none existent in the public sector. This problem also exists in the private sector, but to a lessor extent as private sector employees move companies more often.*

*personal observation - no data to support