Tis the PS managers fault .. not the PS unions fault

Tora Bora

The intrepid Pat Rabbitte, has pointed the finger a PS management for the mess that is the public service. Apparently they didn't listen closely enough to the unions.

Rabbitte alleges negligence by public service managers


A senior Government minister has accused management in the public service of being 'guilty of negligence' and profligate during the boom.
Speaking this morning, Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources Pat Rabbitte was critical of the past record of public service management.
“The management has been guilty of negligence in the past in the public service in my view,” he told RTÉ's Today with Pat Kenny show.
Describing the reaction of management to union initiatives as "backward", Mr Rabbitte said they failed to implement changes proposed by the unions during the boom years which could have saved money.
“There have been opportunities during the boom - even opportunities when the unions were proffering changes that might profitably be made and management in the public service were backward in coming forward.”
The Cabinet is today expected to sign off on a major review of spending across all Government departments in a move which could lead to a significant reduction in the number of so-called quangos.
In addition to discussing plans by Minister for Public Expenditure Brendan Howlin for the comprehensive spending review, the special meeting of the Cabinet this evening is also expected to consider proposals to sell off State assets on foot of a report by economist Colm McCarthy.

The new spending review will involve a root and branch examination of expenditure in Government departments and agencies, and will also set out options on how services can be provided in the future.

Sources have suggested that, in addition to quangos, the new spending review could look at the local authority system and, in particular, at reforms which were recommended last year, including a sharing of management functions between different bodies.
Mr Rabbitte said the Government will need co-operation from management if it is to implement the future changes. However, he said he was concerned at previous shortcomings, adding that the failure of public service management to implement changes in the past "worries" him.
“I can’t see how any Minister can effectively implement the kind of changes and restructuring and reorganisation … that are needed unless he gets the co-operation of those across the whole belt of the service who are expected to manage," he said.
Mr Rabbitte said it would be "very difficult" for the Government to implement changes if those in management "don’t come to the table and do their job".
He said it was apparent from some of the "fault lines" that are now being exposed in the system that management has not always "efficiently" managed resources.
The Minister said he was concerned at the "alarming" increase in recent years in the use of consultants. While this belied an "unwillingness to make a decision", Mr Rabbitte said the use of consultants was largely because serving ministers were "afraid" to make decisions.
"That’s a different matter from going into the market place to get the kind of technical or other professional consultancy advice that one needs in order to make the decisions in a complex modern day public service,” he added.
Meanwhile the Irish National Teachers' Organisation (INTO) said primary teachers were delivering more than a million additional hours under the Croke Park agreement. INTO general secretary Sheila Nunan said the Croke Park deal was effectively "giving the State more than a thousand teachers for no cost."

Ms Nunan said at the same time, the State was cutting up to 700 primary teaching jobs from the system. "Primary teachers have stepped up to the mark in terms of Croke Park. Everyone in a primary school is doing more for less."

The INTO said there were fewer teachers teaching more children and delivering a better service and there was "no slack to pick up in primary education."

Ms Nunan also said primary schools were implementing redeployment procedures which would pose huge challenges for many existing teachers. She also said the union had greater flexibility in management duties and agreed revised disciplinary procedures.

danbohan

Tora Bora wrote: »

The intrepid Pat Rabbitte, has pointed the finger a PS management for the mess that is the public service. Apparently they didn't listen closely enough to the unions.

Rabbitte alleges negligence by public service managers


A senior Government minister has accused management in the public service of being 'guilty of negligence' and profligate during the boom.
Speaking this morning, Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources Pat Rabbitte was critical of the past record of public service management.
“The management has been guilty of negligence in the past in the public service in my view,” he told RTÉ's Today with Pat Kenny show.
Describing the reaction of management to union initiatives as "backward", Mr Rabbitte said they failed to implement changes proposed by the unions during the boom years which could have saved money.
“There have been opportunities during the boom - even opportunities when the unions were proffering changes that might profitably be made and management in the public service were backward in coming forward.”
The Cabinet is today expected to sign off on a major review of spending across all Government departments in a move which could lead to a significant reduction in the number of so-called quangos.
In addition to discussing plans by Minister for Public Expenditure Brendan Howlin for the comprehensive spending review, the special meeting of the Cabinet this evening is also expected to consider proposals to sell off State assets on foot of a report by economist Colm McCarthy.

The new spending review will involve a root and branch examination of expenditure in Government departments and agencies, and will also set out options on how services can be provided in the future.

Sources have suggested that, in addition to quangos, the new spending review could look at the local authority system and, in particular, at reforms which were recommended last year, including a sharing of management functions between different bodies.
Mr Rabbitte said the Government will need co-operation from management if it is to implement the future changes. However, he said he was concerned at previous shortcomings, adding that the failure of public service management to implement changes in the past "worries" him.
“I can’t see how any Minister can effectively implement the kind of changes and restructuring and reorganisation … that are needed unless he gets the co-operation of those across the whole belt of the service who are expected to manage," he said.
Mr Rabbitte said it would be "very difficult" for the Government to implement changes if those in management "don’t come to the table and do their job".
He said it was apparent from some of the "fault lines" that are now being exposed in the system that management has not always "efficiently" managed resources.
The Minister said he was concerned at the "alarming" increase in recent years in the use of consultants. While this belied an "unwillingness to make a decision", Mr Rabbitte said the use of consultants was largely because serving ministers were "afraid" to make decisions.
"That’s a different matter from going into the market place to get the kind of technical or other professional consultancy advice that one needs in order to make the decisions in a complex modern day public service,” he added.
Meanwhile the Irish National Teachers' Organisation (INTO) said primary teachers were delivering more than a million additional hours under the Croke Park agreement. INTO general secretary Sheila Nunan said the Croke Park deal was effectively "giving the State more than a thousand teachers for no cost."

Ms Nunan said at the same time, the State was cutting up to 700 primary teaching jobs from the system. "Primary teachers have stepped up to the mark in terms of Croke Park. Everyone in a primary school is doing more for less."

The INTO said there were fewer teachers teaching more children and delivering a better service and there was "no slack to pick up in primary education."

Ms Nunan also said primary schools were implementing redeployment procedures which would pose huge challenges for many existing teachers. She also said the union had greater flexibility in management duties and agreed revised disciplinary procedures.

no doubt about it with pat rabbite and friends in control of this country their is only one way things can go , and its not up ! .

mari2222

Does he know what belied means?

Tora Bora

Red Ruari, now taking on the teachers. Seems like it's the labour ministers in government who are flexing a bit of muscle:p

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2011/0411/breaking40.html

Quinn warns teachers on savings


Pay cuts for teachers could be back on the agenda unless the Croke Park Agreement delivers real savings, Minister for Education Ruairí Quinn has signalled.
In echoing a similar warning from Minister for Communications Pat Rabbitte, the education minister said everyone realised that tangible savings must be achieved under the deal.
He said discussions with the teachers unions ahead of the Easter conferences would be focusing on the necessity to implement Croke Park. For his part, he was happy to co-operate with constructive proposals to achieve the necessary additional productivity and savings. But everyone, he said, realised, what needed to be done.
The Croke Park deal promises no pay cuts and redundancies until 2014 in return for modernisation measures and productivity gains. The Cabinet will meet tonight to consider how savings might be achieved in each department.
Mr Quinn said he expected the Department of Education would be asked to make savings.
Last week, a Department of Finance briefing document expressed alarm at the slow pace of savings in the education department. To date, the agreement has managed to yield savings of €39 million from a total education budget of close to €9 billion.
Mr Quinn said today: “The country is in a very difficult state and we are not in control of our sovereignty. The reality is that on a fortnightly basis we have to meet the targets set by the IMF-EU and it is only when we meet these targets that the ECB will lend us money for the next fortnight which allows us to pay teachers, garda and other public servants. That’s the reality of where we are."
Asked about the proposed cull of Government quangos, Mr Quinn said he had "no preconceptions" in relation to the dozen of so quangos in the education area. Last month, an Irish Times survey showed average salaries of up to €70,000 per year in some of these quangos.
Mr Quinn was speaking as the results of a new literacy initiative showed encouraging results in disadvantaged schools.

Head The Wall

So they have saved 39 million out of 9 Billion. That's 0.43%, come on lads we're nearly there

But seriously if all depts are like this it looks like we'll knock around 250 Million from our deficit. When this is added to the 300 million Net reduction in the Public Sector Pay and pensions bill since 2007 it shows that nothing near what is needed has been achieved and what about the supposed 1 Bn wage cut in one of the recent budgets. That's a pure sham, they are giving it straight back in increments, tax free lump sums to retirees and their pensions

dan_d

If Ruairi Quinn's actions are as good as his words, I'll be mightily impressed.
Interesting take on who he's pointing the finger at in the PS. A fair point, and one that's not often made.Food for thought.

Head The Wall

There's more than finger pointing needed to sort out this mess, we'll see has he got the cajones to follow through

ardmacha

the agreement has managed to yield savings of €39 million from a total education budget of close to €9 billion.

This is bollix, it seems to be based on the idea that a similar amount of saving should be made everywhere regardless of the situation. I am not saying that this is a reasonable or unreasonable amount of saving, but there needs to be basis for saying that particular expenditure is appropriate or not. For instance, if the number of children at schools had gone up, then education spending might reasonably have increased.

This "same cut everywhere" approach will eviscerate efficient sections while inefficient ones will have no problem making big savings. Then if the retards aren't making enough savings they'll cut everyone's wages by the same amount, whether they made changes or not or whether their section is efficient or not.

But seriously if all depts are like this it looks like we'll knock around 250 Million from our deficit.

Education is never going to give big savings as there is already a fairly close connection between workload and staff numbers, as the frontline staff are connected to the presence of students. Substantial savings should come from moving around admin staff and refining admin procedures to reduce the need for staff.

As for the general proposition that PS management is at fault that is bleedin' obvious. You only have to look at the differing performance of different sections, who have the same union agreements but different management. I'll bet that if you look at local authorities there is a substantial difference between the best one and the worst one. Those in charge of the worst ones I would redirect to street cleaning duties and those in charge of the best ones I would put in charge of these regional amalgamations.

macannrb

dan_d wrote: »

If Ruairi Quinn's actions are as good as his words, I'll be mightily impressed.

Thats very true

cajones needed! indeed

But the tone has been set by Labour with Rabitte, Howlin and Quinn as opposed to gilmore which is interesting.

I wonder will there be any follow through or is this just positioning on Labours part

Head The Wall

ardmacha wrote: »

This is bollix, it seems to be based on the idea that a similar amount of saving should be made everywhere regardless of the situation. I am not saying that this is a reasonable or unreasonable amount of saving, but there needs to be basis for saying that particular expenditure is appropriate or not. For instance, if the number of children at schools had gone up, then education spending might reasonably have increased.

This "same cut everywhere" approach will eviscerate efficient sections while inefficient ones will have no problem making big savings. Then if the retards aren't making enough savings they'll cut everyone's wages by the same amount, whether they made changes or not or whether their section is efficient or not.



Education is never going to give big savings as there is already a fairly close connection between workload and staff numbers, as the frontline staff are connected to the presence of students. Substantial savings should come from moving around admin staff and refining admin procedures to reduce the need for staff.

As for the general proposition that PS management is at fault that is bleedin' obvious. You only have to look at the differing performance of different sections, who have the same union agreements but different management. I'll bet that if you look at local authorities there is a substantial difference between the best one and the worst one. Those in charge of the worst ones I would redirect to street cleaning duties and those in charge of the best ones I would put in charge of these regional amalgamations.

What you have said is irrelevant as we have a massive deficit and the savings have to be made somewhere, at the end of the day around 80% of the education budget is spent on wages so the lions share is going to have to come from there.

macannrb

Head The Wall wrote: »

What you have said is irrelevant as we have a massive deficit and the savings have to be made somewhere, at the end of the day around 80% of the education budget is spent on wages so the lions share is going to have to come from there.

I think this is the unfortunate fact. Particularly when literacy rates are dropping amongst the most vunerable

ardmacha

What you have said is irrelevant as we have a massive deficit and the savings have to be made somewhere, at the end of the day around 80% of the education budget is spent on wages so the lions share is going to have to come from there

Fine then.
Why not simply reduce the number of students in third level to 2000 levels or even 2004 levels, since GNP is at 2004 levels? The country cannot afford more than that.

sarumite

deleted

thebman

ardmacha wrote: »

Fine then.
Why not simply reduce the number of students in third level to 2000 levels or even 2004 levels, since GNP is at 2004 levels? The country cannot afford more than that.

They will introduce fees to cover the difference for third level most likely.

sarumite

ardmacha wrote: »

Fine then.
Why not simply reduce the number of students in third level to 2000 levels or even 2004 levels, since GNP is at 2004 levels? The country cannot afford more than that.

I would say that economy of scale might kick in. As university are underfunded as it is, cutting funds through a reduction would further degrade the quality of degress being issued. If a university needs a instrument to teach, they can use the same instruments to teach 100 students as they could teach 75 students, however the cost of the instrument stays the same aand therefore cost per head rises.

Personally I am in favour of bringing back full fees for all first year students and perhaps reduced fees beyond that. Too many 18 y/o Students (who afterall adults) see the 1st year as a doss and many don't care about dropping out as it doesn't have any financial reprecussions on them.

murphaph

ardmacha wrote: »

This is bollix, it seems to be based on the idea that a similar amount of saving should be made everywhere regardless of the situation. I am not saying that this is a reasonable or unreasonable amount of saving, but there needs to be basis for saying that particular expenditure is appropriate or not. For instance, if the number of children at schools had gone up, then education spending might reasonably have increased.

This "same cut everywhere" approach will eviscerate efficient sections while inefficient ones will have no problem making big savings. Then if the retards aren't making enough savings they'll cut everyone's wages by the same amount, whether they made changes or not or whether their section is efficient or not.



Education is never going to give big savings as there is already a fairly close connection between workload and staff numbers, as the frontline staff are connected to the presence of students. Substantial savings should come from moving around admin staff and refining admin procedures to reduce the need for staff.

As for the general proposition that PS management is at fault that is bleedin' obvious. You only have to look at the differing performance of different sections, who have the same union agreements but different management. I'll bet that if you look at local authorities there is a substantial difference between the best one and the worst one. Those in charge of the worst ones I would redirect to street cleaning duties and those in charge of the best ones I would put in charge of these regional amalgamations.

You seem to be saying that the dept of education should be let away with only saving 39m and the 20 odd billion should be found elsewhere, but you see the government has an income of about 30bn in total, so if education can only yield a saving of 39m then ALL OTHER PUBLIC SERVICES will have to be halved on average.

We are really back to square one and that is that the wages of teachers and other public servants will have to be cut. This pathetic saving from the dept of education will be repeated across the board, of that I have no doubt and then the pressure really will come on the government to start cutting jobs/pay in the PS.

There is no way the IMF/EU are going to keep lending to us unless we start hitting targets for our deficit.

ardmacha

You seem to be saying that the dept of education should be let away with only saving 39m and the 20 odd billion should be found elsewhere

,

I didn't say that. I said that the saving of 39m can only be regarded as adequate or inadequate when the component factors are properly analysed.

but you see the government has an income of about 30bn in total,

That's not true. That's the government's tax revenue. To also take an example, if an Irish educational institution takes in a load of Chinese students, it makes revenue. But tax revenue does not go up. The institution might incur some cost in doing this (much less than the revenue) and you'll be ranting on here about increasing costs.

We are really back to square one and that is that the wages of teachers and other public servants will have to be cut.

There will be some celebration here when that happens. Schadenfreude as you teutons would say.

then the pressure really will come on the government to start cutting jobs/pay in the PS.

At some point the government will have reached the end of doing more with less and will have to do less with less. People are obliged to go to school, not much less can be done here, but administration needs to be simplified and rationalised and things eliminated so that less people can do it.