FG's Plans to cut the Public Service to cost 1 Billion

rodento

Taken from the Indo

Anyone know how exactly they plan to get the money from:rolleyes:

Fine Gael plan to spend a staggering €1bn cutting 30,000 workers from the public sector payroll.
The party said it wants to protect vital front-line services provided by doctors, nurses, teachers, gardai and local authorities but that it will not enforce lay-offs.
Fine Gael said back office savings would allow it to hire about 2,500 new teachers, compared to last year's staffing levels, to maintain pupil-teacher ratios.
Richard Bruton, enterprise spokesman, said it was about rewarding effort and innovation while penalising waste and inefficiency.
"The reality is quite stark: if we do not make savings in our public sector, then all staff will end up with their pay being hit or their taxes being hiked," Mr Bruton said.
"We simply cannot go on with the system the way it is.
"We believe we can save over €5bn, or €1 in €10 spent by public bodies, by confronting waste, duplication and inefficiency."
However, the party admitted the back office redundancy plan would leave a new government footing a massive lay-off bill.
Party leader Enda Kenny said he did not want to be tied to a figure but said it was in the region of €1bn, based on the cost of last year's redundancy programme in the Health Service Executive (HSE).
Fianna Fail claimed the price tag had exposed Fine Gael's "election gimmicks".
The proposal calls for 145 quangos, State bodies and companies to be abolished, the HSE to be dismantled and a third of all civil service staff to be cut.
Mr Bruton said services would also be streamlined by creating three divisions to handle the public's needs but reduce bureaucracy in the Single Public Entitlement Service, Business Inspectorate and Licence Authority.
Fine Gael said the reforms would cut payroll numbers by 10pc, or 30,000, over four years.
Mr Bruton said it will be achieved through normal retirements and voluntary redundancies in back office services.
He said in practice an additional 4,500 admin jobs in the public service, State agencies and quangos will go over the next four years.
"Fine Gael has already committed to not increasing income tax rates, bands or allowances for all workers," Mr Bruton said.
"In order for us to deliver on this commitment we must make savings across the system. If those savings are to be made we are absolutely committed to protecting the frontline service providers."

Lawrence1895

And they still promise us to create new jobs? Am I a bit stupid now? Or is this sheer hypocrisy now? :mad:

Pete_Cavan

Lars1916 wrote: »

And they still promise us to create new jobs? Am I a bit stupid now? Or is this sheer hypocrisy now? :mad:

They want to get rid of 30,000 public servants because these are jobs which cost the government money (because they pay them). There are thousands of middle management and admin staff in the public service. FG want to remove these from the payroll because they cost us money but do very little in return.

FG want to invest money in infrastructure that will allow people to create jobs. NewEra plans to invest in water, energy and broadband, which every business in the country needs, will allow existing businesses to expand and new businesses to start up.

I favour FGs stimulus over that offered by the other parties because FG want to spend money building infrastructure that will allow jobs to be created in other sectors. Other parties stimulus packages are based on building schools and hospitals. These types of infrastructure do not create sustainable jobs because they are only construction jobs which rely on state funding which cannot last (the teachers and nurses jobs generally exist already).

Lawrence1895

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

They want to get rid of 30,000 public servants because these are jobs which cost the government money (because they pay them). There are thousands of middle management and admin staff in the public service. FG want to remove these from the payroll because they cost us money but do very little in return.

FG want to invest money in infrastructure that will allow people to create jobs. NewEra plans to invest in water, energy and broadband, which every business in the country needs, will allow existing businesses to expand and new businesses to start up.

I favour FGs stimulus over that offered by the other parties because FG want to spend money building infrastructure that will allow jobs to be created in other sectors. Other parties stimulus packages are based on building schools and hospitals. These types of infrastructure do not create sustainable jobs because they are only construction jobs which rely on state funding which cannot last (the teachers and nurses jobs generally exist already).

Well, that might be a good solution, though I have some problems to believe, that it would be that easy to allocate those 30000 to other jobs. Somebody who is used to work in public service might find it hard to adapt to a new work environment, I suppose.

liammur

rodento wrote: »

Taken from the Indo

Anyone know how exactly they plan to get the money from:rolleyes:

Fine Gael plan to spend a staggering €1bn cutting 30,000 workers from the public sector payroll.
The party said it wants to protect vital front-line services provided by doctors, nurses, teachers, gardai and local authorities but that it will not enforce lay-offs.
Fine Gael said back office savings would allow it to hire about 2,500 new teachers, compared to last year's staffing levels, to maintain pupil-teacher ratios.
Richard Bruton, enterprise spokesman, said it was about rewarding effort and innovation while penalising waste and inefficiency.
"The reality is quite stark: if we do not make savings in our public sector, then all staff will end up with their pay being hit or their taxes being hiked," Mr Bruton said.
"We simply cannot go on with the system the way it is.
"We believe we can save over €5bn, or €1 in €10 spent by public bodies, by confronting waste, duplication and inefficiency."
However, the party admitted the back office redundancy plan would leave a new government footing a massive lay-off bill.
Party leader Enda Kenny said he did not want to be tied to a figure but said it was in the region of €1bn, based on the cost of last year's redundancy programme in the Health Service Executive (HSE).
Fianna Fail claimed the price tag had exposed Fine Gael's "election gimmicks".
The proposal calls for 145 quangos, State bodies and companies to be abolished, the HSE to be dismantled and a third of all civil service staff to be cut.
Mr Bruton said services would also be streamlined by creating three divisions to handle the public's needs but reduce bureaucracy in the Single Public Entitlement Service, Business Inspectorate and Licence Authority.
Fine Gael said the reforms would cut payroll numbers by 10pc, or 30,000, over four years.
Mr Bruton said it will be achieved through normal retirements and voluntary redundancies in back office services.
He said in practice an additional 4,500 admin jobs in the public service, State agencies and quangos will go over the next four years.
"Fine Gael has already committed to not increasing income tax rates, bands or allowances for all workers," Mr Bruton said.
"In order for us to deliver on this commitment we must make savings across the system. If those savings are to be made we are absolutely committed to protecting the frontline service providers."

Give €1bn less to anglo would be 1 way.

sollar

Lars1916 wrote: »

Well, that might be a good solution, though I have some problems to believe, that it would be that easy to allocate those 30000 to other jobs. Somebody who is used to work in public service might find it hard to adapt to a new work environment, I suppose.

I worked in both the public and private sector... if anything the public service has a faster pace of work.

rodento

The question is how can they afford this huge infrastructural projects and odd billion to get rid of 30000 people from the public payroll

Is the plan one thats takes over 5 years to implement...

Sir Oxman

liammur wrote: »

Give €1bn less to anglo would be 1 way.

That 750million pissed away to subordinated bondholders of Anglo last week would have come in handy.

tails_naf

sollar wrote: »

I worked in both the public and private sector... if anything the public service has a faster pace of work.

We see these kinds of comments all the time - but on it's own it gives an incomplete. The PS is big, 300k employees cover a LOT of different departments - it's equivalent to the population of a big city!

It's like saying, I worked in Cork and Dublin, and if anything cork has a faster pace of work. Does that mean that everyone in cork works faster than everyone in Dublin?

To qualify the statements, without getting into bashing on either side - here are some facts.
- There ARE inefficiencies in both public and private sectors.
- There are some very hard working public sector employees - I know first hand as I'm related a few of them, and I see what they do day in day out.
- There are also some very lazy public sector employees - second hand accounts here, but all from those same people who work there.
- Of course the private sector has this too - but the difference in the private sector is job performance =~ salary increases and promotions, and if your job becomes redundant, so do you.

The last point is the one that galls most private sector people.

Some of the accounts of PS problems -
- Consultant who runs a remote office - always taking sick days, often close to holidays - out of the office shopping regularly, last in first out of the office, online shopping, and takes up none of the slack in busy times even though she is highlighy qualified in the area. Now, this behaviour is hated by all employees (all PS themselves of course), but this consulatant will never, and worse, can never be fired. She'll get her defined promotions and increments, etc. And is prob on well over 100K.

- workers who part of their job is to inspect certain things (don't want to give the department away, naturally), knows some colleagues (most) who explicitly choose to inspect premises on opposite sides of the county on a given day, to maximise mileage. Even though reviews of practices have said inspections should be concentrated to minimise mileage, they are ignored, and manager has no incentive to enforce (again he will be paid the same either way, will be promoted and will get increments - so why would he rock the boat in the office). End result: lots of extra mileage payouts (tax free), and useless manager.

- Part time PS worker who is not a manager, but knows she can't really be fired. Takes total advantage of her part time status and while she claims 20 hours a week, colleagues have watched this and have seen her claim toil for this and that, and prob spends no more than 10 hours a week in her office, and most of that is not working. Again, her colleagues have to take up the slack - but this kind of behaviour is damaging to morale. But she will never be fired.

- Not to mention the 5,000 admin / middle management (not front line) employees the ESRI identified were no longer needed in the HSE when the health boards were merged. This is for the HSE alone.

So FG only want to get a 10% more efficient PS. I believe this is totally possible, but there has to be a cull, not of front line, but of the bad apples and middle management. That is where most of the waste is.

Scofflaw

Does the Indo know no shame at all? It takes a special kind of arithmetic to look at ongoing savings of €5bn with an up-front cost of €1bn, and claim that such a plan will "cost €1bn!!!".

amused,
Scofflaw

[Jackass]

rodento wrote: »

Taken from the Indo

Anyone know how exactly they plan to get the money from:rolleyes:

Probably from the 5 billion they'll save from the public sector wage bill by making the cuts :rolleyes:

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Killer Pigeon

Hmmm, Enda even has the tint of ginger in his hair;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=okHGCz6xxiw

rodento

rodento wrote: »

Taken from the Indo
Anyone know how exactly they plan to get the money from:rolleyes:

[Jackass] wrote: »

Probably from the 5 billion they'll save from the public sector wage bill by making the cuts :rolleyes:

If only life where so simple, how can we make another 4 billion cuts this year on top of the 4 billion cuts made last year and the 4 billion due next year if we have to borrow over a billion to pay for this:rolleyes:

You also have to factor in the effects on the tax take after remove 30000 people from it and also the effects on the local ecomanies when there payroll is removed from local spend

Pete_Cavan

rodento wrote: »

If only life where so simple, how can we make another 4 billion cuts this year on top of the 4 billion cuts made last year and the 4 billion due next year if we have to borrow over a billion to pay for this:rolleyes:

You also have to factor in the effects on the tax take after remove 30000 people from it and also the effects on the local ecomanies when there payroll is removed from local spend

Unless these people are paying 100% of their wages back in tax, removing them from the public payroll will result in a net reduction in expenditure for the exchequer.

Vizzy

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Unless these people are paying 100% of their wages back in tax, removing them from the public payroll will result in a net reduction in expenditure for the exchequer.

Nice to see that FG are going to "cull" all the slackers in the public service at last:rolleyes:
And they are going to do it by "natural wastage" only i.e no compulsory job cuts !!

Well thats nice of them

I hope that they realise that as long as they push that agenda that all the "above average slackers" will leave at the earliest opportunity and leave the real dross behind !
I presume also that they know that their objective of culling people will have the very effect that they hope to avoid( loss of front line services)because the vast majority of the public servants work in the front line i.e lower paid Gardai,nurses,roadworkers etc,and when they retire/leave it has to have an effect on services.
Maybe FG would be satisfied with a lesser standard of sevice,bad and all as it is at the moment !!!

Red Actor

[Jackass] wrote: »

Probably from the 5 billion they'll save from the public sector wage bill by making the cuts :rolleyes:

The sums are bad with the FG. 10% reduction in workforce will lead to 25%+ reduction in wage bill. I wonder do FG believe that the 145 quango squash will lead to these cuts...

Pete_Cavan

Red Actor wrote: »

The sums are bad with the FG. 10% reduction in workforce will lead to 25%+ reduction in wage bill. I wonder do FG believe that the 145 quango squash will lead to these cuts...

Not all public servants are paid the same amount. If you got rid of 10% of the highest earners you reduce the wages bill by a higher proportion. FG want to protect front line jobs which are generally no higher paid jobs. They want to get rid of the disproportionate number of managers and directors who seem to nothing only collect their obscene salaries for no real work.

d'Oracle

I believe this is just pie in the sky.

If it is to happen, it will take a lot more than one Dail.

keithcan

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

There are thousands of middle management and admin staff in the public service. FG want to remove these from the payroll because they cost us money but do very little in return.

How do you know this about the 'they do very little' statement?

Red Actor

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Not all public servants are paid the same amount. If you got rid of 10% of the highest earners you reduce the wages bill by a higher proportion. FG want to protect front line jobs which are generally no higher paid jobs. They want to get rid of the disproportionate number of managers and directors who seem to nothing only collect their obscene salaries for no real work.

If we use the HSE as a typical high paid public body then this article suggests that the vast majority are under 100k.
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/health/2011/0208/1224289253959.html
for 30,000 to be paid 5bn they would have to average about 150k each.

Or to look at it the other way - 270,000 remaining will get 11bn or about 40k each. Garda, nurses and teachers who make up the bulk of the public sector are paid above this level so it doesn't add up that the claimed savings can be made.

wannabe27

Red actor as a member of the public sector I can assure u I am not getting 40000 a year, I got €192 in my cheque last week! And I think I speak for most of the public sector workers!!

keithcan

It'd be great if the public sector was straightforward in how it's structured and how pay rates are set out. If it was, it'd feed into a lot of simplistic statements that are masquerading as perceptive comment. But it just isn't that simple.

IMO, here's a couple of points that are important -

a lot of 'frontline staff' get ok salaries (in fact, quite good when compared with e.g. N.Irl) but notably, there are often significant allowances attached to these posts too (e.g. Gardai, Prison Officers, Fire Sevice, various medical/health service posts). There is a job to do for the sake of getting a handle on the cost of these posts to seek to get these allowances 'mainstreamed' - they contribute significantly to the overall cost of the public sector. It is likely that future recruitment to such posts where atypical hours apply will have conditions applied that there is a decent basic salary which covers the staff for the atypical hours, without a load of allowances on top of the salary. It will be much harder to get that reform for the existing staff. The Prison Officers and Nurses unions are some of the strongest in the State and they can always call on the 'we're the frontline staff' line that goes down well in some circles and seems to stifle reasoned debate.
Most of the much-maligned 'admin' staff don't get these allowances and generally, don't have the access to overtime that might be a feature of the 'frontline' posts. However, again by comparison with international norms, many admin staff get quite decent pay, although as with all public servants, there have been significant pay cuts in last 18months
There is a small group of people paid from the public purse who appear to have escaped the pay cuts applied to others in the public sector and who are on extraordinarily high salaries: these are the Chief Execs and very senior people in the semi-state sector. It is really surprising that these situations have not been modified.