Can the Croke Park Deal really work (NOT PS flaming thread)

RichardAnd

Title says it all but I reiterate that whilst I have no doubts it will happen, I am not starting this thread simply to whinge about state employees.

Now then, to my point. We all know what the croke park deal means but as, apparently, the dead line of producing savings is drawing closer, I am beginning to wonder how real savings are possible. What do I mean by real savings? Well accountants and auditors are often very good as playing with numbers to produce a desired result that is not, in itself, untrue. Allow me to give an example of "false" savings.

A department has 100 staff members all earning 30k a year; a total wage bill of 3 million. Each of the staff is entitled to 25 days off in a a year so for its 100 staff, the department gets 22,700 buisness days of work in a year ((252-25) * 100). So, if we divide the total wage bill by the total number of work days, we arrive at the cost of a single one of those working days which here would be 132 euro approx.

But then, budget day arrives and suddenly, the money needs to be cut a little but because of the CP deal, our department can't cut wages or lay off staff, what to do then. Well we hire a clever accountant and there's plenty of them around .

We can't touch the wage bill so instead, let's reduce leave to 20 days a year for everyone. Thus, the department now gets a total of 23,200 buisness days of work from its 100 staff ((252-20) * 100). Divide the total wage bill, again unchanged from 3million, and the total cost of one day of work has fallen to 129 euro :eek:. The wage bill hasn't changed, the number of staff hasn't changed but I can show this to the department of finance and prove I have made a saving.

I just made that example up for this post. If I can do that, and I'm not an accountant, imagine what's possible with years of experience .

I really, really, do not want to see anyone loose their job but I honestly can not see how the CP deal will bring about the huge savings needed without pay cuts and redundancies. But at the same time, I want what is best for Ireland. I do often think upon the fact that the ECB and the IMF didn't insist on the CP deal being dismantled as part of the bail out so perhaps it has merit?

Please guys, serious discussion only. Ps flamers, go elsewhere.

Nody

The answer in short is no, it can't.

The long answer is any meaningful changes would require either:
1) Purchase better/cheaper/less - Unlikely to happen as it require great changes from bottom up including changes in organization layout and behaviour

2) Less use of consultants in all forms - Possible but unlikely to make a sustainable dent in the bill as they will always come back as exceptions on politicans request

3) Improving systems - Change the standard work set up and systems to support it - Anyone who's ever been through a big IS/work change knows it tends to fail horribly, and this is before we factor in it is the state we're talking about

4) Improve processes - Potential to free up working capital etc. by improving throughput (i.e. getting a passport will take 5 days instead of 5 weeks, numbers made up). Very hard to quantify most of these types of savings.

I could continue but in short the Park Croak deal can never work and will never work in reality. Even with perfect change management and full support from all staff, unions AND politicans I could not see it happen and in reality it is far worse.

What FF has done is simply kick the can down the road to the next government to let them be "the evil guys" and come to the rescue in a few years time and point out how they did their part. Cynical but true from my POV.

Gumbo

RichardAnd wrote: »

A department has 100 staff members all earning 30k a year; a total wage bill of 3 million. Each of the staff is entitled to 25 days off in a a year so for its 100 staff, the department gets 22,700 buisness days of work in a year ((252-25) * 100). So, if we divide the total wage bill by the total number of work days, we arrive at the cost of a single one of those working days which here would be 132 euro approx.

But then, budget day arrives and suddenly, the money needs to be cut a little but because of the CP deal, our department can't cut wages or lay off staff, what to do then. Well we hire a clever accountant and there's plenty of them around .

We can't touch the wage bill so instead, let's reduce leave to 20 days a year for everyone. Thus, the department now gets a total of 23,200 buisness days of work from its 100 staff ((252-20) * 100). Divide the total wage bill, again unchanged from 3million, and the total cost of one day of work has fallen to 129 euro :eek:. The wage bill hasn't changed, the number of staff hasn't changed but I can show this to the department of finance and prove I have made a saving.

I just made that example up for this post. If I can do that, and I'm not an accountant, imagine what's possible with years of experience .

but you havent really reduced the cost at all, not even a play with numbers shows that. the dept still require €3m per year to operate.

RichardAnd

kceire wrote: »

but you havent really reduced the cost at all, not even a play with numbers shows that. the dept still require €3m per year to operate.

I know, that was my point. All I did was fiddle with numbers to produce a result that, when taken alone, suggests a saving. As I said, I was aiming to show a false saving, not a real one.

Welease

I'm not sure the vast majority of people actually know what the CP is supposed to deliver... So in fairness to them, how can they deliver it?

Saving != Efficiencies.

Saving will be made, and the bulk I imagine will come from the cutting of necessary services (like front line contracted staff), and the movement of some staff from other agencies... The however, is unlikely to result in a more efficient public sector service across the board when the underlying problems still remain untackled.

Gumbo

RichardAnd wrote: »

I know, that was my point. All I did was fiddle with numbers to produce a result that, when taken alone, suggests a saving. As I said, I was aiming to show a false saving, not a real one.

i know that but even using your fake example, it still doesnt show a cost saving. the Government wont release a statement saying "we've reduced the cost per day from 134 to 129" as that will look like a paycut.

they should be publishing what each dept spends now and then show the savings made from each dept and cut where necessary.

i used Dublin City Council as an example some time ago that their pay and pension bill is self supporting and in 2010 only received €88m from government funding/Local Government Fund. they have reduced staff by approx 15% since Jan 2009 and are still not recruiting/replacing retired staff.

only a certain number of staff receive overtime payments and this has been reduced, allowances for car travel have been cut by 25% IIRC and alot of staff are being given time in lieu instead of payment for overtime hours worked.

theres more than likely more room for savings and the possibility that they could become 100% self funding i suppose.

i just hate to see a witch hunt and a blanket cut, i beleive cuts are necessary but to depts that are genuinely bloated and over spending.

Nody

kceire wrote: »

i just hate to see a witch hunt and a blanket cut, i beleive cuts are necessary but to depts that are genuinely bloated and over spending.

The problem lies in defining bloated and overspending though; everyone thinks their job is important and the cuts should be somewhere else instead. Due to this you get the blanket cuts which executed by high/mid managers mean they will not touch themselves first...

Brussels Sprout

I don't think the Croke Park deal was ever meant to work. I think it allowed the staus quo to be maintained for a few years longer. This was to the benefit of both the unions and the government.

Was the hiring embargo part of the CP deal? That in itself is completely unsustainable. Any system needs fresh recruits to keep it alive. What we have now is an aging and inefficient system that needs to be dismantled and rebuilt.

lol at thread title

Drumpot

The sad thing about the Croke Park deal is that a huge part of its eventual failure is mainly down to upper level managements refusal/inability to implement reform.

Is anybody not a bit miffed that the same useless , incompetent public servants high up in the HSE or advising in the department of Finance will be the same useless gits advising our next government . .

Accountability is not just required in politics, its required throughout the public service . .

thebman

Nody wrote: »

The problem lies in defining bloated and overspending though; everyone thinks their job is important and the cuts should be somewhere else instead. Due to this you get the blanket cuts which executed by high/mid managers mean they will not touch themselves first...

I don't think everybody thinks their job is important.

Nobody will admit their job isn't important when cuts are on the go though :P

jimmycrackcorm

My kids school recently sent our a letter saying that they were going to be implementing the extra hour a week due under the CPA. They were going to decide how to use it but it won't for teaching the kids an extra hour.

So no - the CPA produces a result but the result is useless.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

RichardAnd

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

My kids school recently sent our a letter saying that they were going to be implementing the extra hour a week due under the CPA. They were going to decide how to use it but it won't for teaching the kids an extra hour.

So no - the CPA produces a result but the result is useless.

This is what I illistrated in my example above. The CP deal seems to be enacting the idea of more work, same wage and numbers = savings. We;d get more bang for the buck (in theory) but we don't have the buck to begin with so this seems a moot exercise to me.

Twigster

I think when it comes to real cost savings and efficiencies there's not going to be any change unless it's forced on the unions, the likes of six months paid sick leave would be unheard of in the private sector but has not been mentioned as part of savings. Even if this was halved how much would be saved a year? Nothing is going to be surrendered easily and in fairness they've taken a big hit in wages, but the cp agreement wanted cost savings to guarantee jobs and wages. If only token savings are made what's the next step?

macannrb

In truth any deal where one party gives the other party something in return for a vague promise is destined to failure.

The government gave the unions assurance of no job or wage cuts until 2014, probably when FF reckon they will be back in power, and the union gave the government a vague promise to agree with reform. However unions seem to have kicked up a fuss over little things like 30minutes cashing cheque time which indicates that their promise is worth little.

What the CP was designed to achieve is probably the same as the purpose of monies FF/ goverment sent to SIPTU et al, and that is placate unions and buy their vote and precise time which to destroy the country in a way that the incoming government would have to fix it at a cost of their popularity. And the idea of another rainbow coalition falling apart is very real in the minds of FF strategists, and with a far lower popularity rating they FG and Lab have now. Remember they havent cut anything yet, but when they do, people on the dole or whatever service that is cut will be up in arms and blame the government of the day, not the government which caused the disaster.

So it seems to me that the purpose of not turning around the government finances including the out of control public sector happily fits into the FF plan.

Its very hard not to distingush public sector reform from party politics

rumour

RichardAnd wrote: »

Title says it all ..........

Please guys, serious discussion only. Ps flamers, go elsewhere.

NO

doc_17

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

My kids school recently sent our a letter saying that they were going to be implementing the extra hour a week due under the CPA. They were going to decide how to use it but it won't for teaching the kids an extra hour.

So no - the CPA produces a result but the result is useless.

Parent teacher meetings outside of school time, staff meetings outside of school time. More administrative work by teachers to reduce cost of middle management(no promotion). More use of teachers to cover classes for sick/absent teachers or teachers away at sport. more training done outside of school time.

Compuilsory transfers etc.

All this saves money to the excheuqer and means more direct contact between teachers and students. This is producing a saving