After declaring an end to croneyism fg and lab hire families

raymon

After declaring an end to croneyism , FG and lab tds hire their families

This is disgraceful

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/tds-break-pledge-by-giving-jobs-to-family-2667551.html

Frank Black

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose - as the French would say.

cardwizzard

Surprised they actually printed that considering, you are not allowed to slag FG with all the good work they are doing, ahem.:D

the groutch

it's just another to add to the list of broken election promises, not in the least bit surprised

Anyone surprised? Really?

Son Of A Vidic

Surely we didn't expect anything different from them did we? They are all the same, different names same shyte.

Nijmegen

How many times have we heard the following from a politician?

"I'm hiring people myself and I guess, as you know, there's more than myself that have hired people from within family realms," he said.

The "I'm not the only one at it," defence.

The lack of individual accountability shocks me, even though it probably shouldn't.

PatsytheNazi

Well now, don't tell me anyone is surprised . Snotty FF (FG) and the tail it wags, Labour, are already showing us what they are going to do for the next 4 years. They are fundamentally no different from FF, even in opposition they werer trying to outdo FF's policy's demamding the removal of stamp duty etc to add more fuel to the fire that was already way out of control.

PatsytheNazi

Appearently on Radio Kerry this morning Michael Healy Rae accused Joan Burton of being "involved in the worst kind of cronyism" in her attempts to remove him from the Board of the Citizens Information Bureau.

But then Daddy got Michael Healy-Rae to the board of the National Treatment Purchase Fund. And Rosemary Healy Rae go on the Criminal Injuries Compensation Tribunal?

Whatever was done to patch up this breakdown, there are no written records available, but by 2 February last, the day after the Dáil was dissolved, Healy-Rae wrote one last letter to the Taoiseach.

'I (am) writing you an urgent note and I am expecting to hear from you in the days ahead for the R569 road and the eastern Kenmare Bypass. I want this money ringfenced for these two projects,' the letter read.

There was correspondence from Government Buildings too, former Taoiseach Brian Cowen wrote to Healy-Rae last June with some good news.

'Following our recent discussions on the matter, I now wish to confirm that I have spoken to my colleague Ms Mary Harney... who has agreed to appoint Cllr Michael Healy-Rae to the board of the National Treatment Purchase Fund.

'I am sure that Michael will make a fine contribution to the workings of the board.' he wrote.

But for whatever reason it seems Michael Healy-Rae was never appointed to the NTPF Board.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0605/healyraej.html

The Gombeen state lives on and on and on...........

Liam Byrne

Sickening!

Betraying the faith and hope that the Irish electorate - myself included - had in them.

mikemac

PatsytheNazi wrote: »

And Rosemary Healy Rae go on the Criminal Injuries Compensation Tribunal?

I've no real issue with this. She is a barrister and qualified to do it.
She's qualified since 2003 and she has more experience then the chairperson of the tribunal

As for this though

Despite a Fine Gael pledge to end cronyism, Training and Skills Minister Ciaran Cannon has hired his wife as his secretary and his brother-in-law as one of his drivers.

The civilian driver's post comes with a ¿35,000 salary, and junior ministers are allowed to hire two drivers each.

So two drivers for every junior ministers so €70,000 each.
Some people need drivers like the Minister for Justice but this is crazy expenditure on the junior ministers

K_user

Got to love it

A year ago this story would have the media and the public up in arms, screaming about corrupt Politicians. That Ireland would never be right until FF where kicked out, crushed never to be seen again, and the righteous, honest, FG party were given their chance to show us all how it should be done...

As it turns out, same sh*t, different day. :rolleyes:

I wonder how many nurses, teachers or SNA's, could be hired for that €70,000 per junior minister?

I've said it before, its always easier to throw dirt from the oppositions side.

PatsytheNazi

mikemac wrote: »

I've no real issue with this. She is a barrister and qualified to do it.
She's qualified since 2003 and she has more experience then the chairperson of the tribunal

Ofcourse, she's the only person/barrister in the country suitable, it's not like she got the job because she's a Healy Rae relative, no, cronyism could never be the reason. After all, it is Ireland.

mikemac

But how do you manage a situation like this?

What if you're superb at your job, are you barred from every appointment or face the whispers every time?

She has three years more experience then the chairperson yet people see Healy Rae and instantly, mind made up on what happened here

StupidLikeAFox

Im gonna play a devils advocate here, and say that these appointments arent as bad as they are made out. All the appointments are got to do with the politicians personal team, people who have probably worked very closely with them on elections and in their constituency for a number of years. In effect they are picking people they know and trust.

In my view, cronyism involves putting people into jobs which they are unqualified for because of who they know. For instance, when Lowry and Jackie Healy-Rae were given the 3 positions on state boards to hand out to whoever they wanted.

These positions involve leading and managing semi state companies, and the semi-state company will be a success or it will fail depending on the appointees ability. If a guy appoints his wife as a secretary and she does a bad job, its only the politician who will fail.

These are not positions of responsibility, they are people who the politician wants to carry out some of the donkey work in his place, and as such its fair that the TD can choose who is representing him






Please dont hurt me

Nijmegen

ColHol wrote: »

Im gonna play a devils advocate here, and say that these appointments arent as bad as they are made out. All the appointments are got to do with the politicians personal team, people who have probably worked very closely with them on elections and in their constituency for a number of years. In effect they are picking people they know and trust.

In my view, cronyism involves putting people into jobs which they are unqualified for because of who they know. For instance, when Lowry and Jackie Healy-Rae were given the 3 positions on state boards to hand out to whoever they wanted.

These positions involve leading and managing semi state companies, and the semi-state company will be a success or it will fail depending on the appointees ability. If a guy appoints his wife as a secretary and she does a bad job, its only the politician who will fail.

These are not positions of responsibility, they are people who the politician wants to carry out some of the donkey work in his place, and as such its fair that the TD can choose who is representing him

I would say that any job paid for by the taxpayer should be put to fair and open recruitment.

PatsytheNazi

ColHol wrote: »

Im gonna play a devils advocate here, and say that these appointments arent as bad as they are made out. All the appointments are got to do with the politicians personal team, people who have probably worked very closely with them on elections and in their constituency for a number of years. In effect they are picking people they know and trust.

These positions involve leading and managing semi state companies, and the semi-state company will be a success or it will fail depending on the appointees ability. If a guy appoints his wife as a secretary and she does a bad job, its only the politician who will fail.

No the politician wouldn't fail, the vegetables will vote them in regardless.

Dannyboy83

It's terrible, but it's just garnish at this stage.
FG have betrayed those of us who voted for them.
There will be no reforms, they are going to try tax us into oblivion.

Is there anyone actually left to vote for ??? LOL!

thebman

It looks like we are going to realise our worst fears. A Sinn Fein government next time will be elected by many as the fat cats can't even abstain for 6 months.

FF and FG are failing us, looks like we are left with the crazies if no new political party turns up.

I see a increasing probability of a Libertas party running in the next election myself.

end a eknny

if a brother of mine got elected and didnt get me a job i would be well annoyed

Inverse to the power of one!

And yet there isn't enough stigma in the society to make them feel ashamed......funny how we used to be good at making single mothers and the vulnerable feel ashamed of themselves once upon a time.

Really....who...are...we?

Shea O'Meara

Of all the parties, I took a shine to Labour, mainly based on the genuine good works of the local Councillor and another from a neighbouring area. Sadly on a broader level I discovered the nepotism, (which is what I believe it to be as regards who gets the nomination, the public vote aside).
The then local FG Councillor, now T.D. flip floped on so many promises because the FG H.Q. said so, I lost count, then there was the nepotism as a sibling was nominated and secured the then vacant Council seat.
So all in all I couldn't claim to be suprised, nor did I hold out much hope on the sweeping changes we were promised ever seeing the light of day.

As regards jobs for the family and friends, I believe we'll have to live with it, but to be fair I'm sure there are some decent folk out there, (Joe Higgins comes to mind on the fair play stakes).
So for me, it wasn't a case of anybody but FFail, more the lesser of evils, with a coherent game plan for the nation, which still seems to be Labour/FG, so here's hoping:(

Shea O'Meara

thebman wrote: »

FF and FG are failing us, looks like we are left with the crazies if no new political party turns up.

I guess you mean Labour and FG.
Anyhoo, to be fair, if you want to talk crazy, the Ahern, Cowen, Lennihan era was pretty ****ing nutty, straight out of HitchHikers Guide to the Galaxy, moronic logic wise. I really think egotistical morons, with good patter, (at times) is our worst scenario, because people buy it.

the groutch

thebman wrote: »

It looks like we are going to realise our worst fears. A Sinn Fein government next time will be elected by many as the fat cats can't even abstain for 6 months.

might be coming sooner than you think, cracks already starting to appear in the FG/LAB coalition

Inverse to the power of one!

From: *****************
To: "info@labour.ie" <info@labour.ie>; "finegael@finegael.com" <finegael@finegael.com>
Cc: *****************
Sent: Tuesday, June 7, 2011 11:22 PM
Subject: The pledges made to the Irish people.

Hello,

I am writing to you in light of the information revealed today by the Irish Independent:
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/tds-break-cronyism-pledge-by-giving-jobs-to-family-members-2667551.html

My questions are simple:
Do you reject non-meritocratic practices in all their forms?
Will your respective parties enforce your pledges made to the Irish people?
Will you seek to pass legislation that will ensure that open and fair recruitment practices will be the only avenues for the procurement of ministerial staff in the future?
I look forward to your answers, and more importantly the actions your respective parties will undertake to ensure you live up to your election pledges.

Sincerely,
**** ****.

As easily done as a post to boards, and probably less effective.....
Still tho, how's about we do something different for a change round here, boards has the numbers....maybe make ourselves heard outside these hallowed grounds instead for once?

Go on! You know you want to.......

Inverse to the power of one!

Dear ********

Thank you for your email. Of course, Fine Gael believes in meritocracy, but often the best person for jobs such as the positions at issue may well be a family member.

Fine Gael is committed to honouring its pledges made to the Irish people.

All Ministerial staff are recruited fairly.

Regards,

Vincent Gribbin
Head of Internal Communication
Fine Gael Headquarters
51 Uppr Mount St, Dublin 2
01-6198422

AND THERE YOU HAVE IT!
Hiring without open interviews or having advertised the position is fair recruitment!
And often the best person for the job is a family member because we all know how families are like human resource pools.

I'm actually kind of in shock that they would reply in this manner!

Different from FF how?

And in reply:

From: **********
To: Vincent Gribbin <vincent@finegael.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 8, 2011 12:59 PM
Subject: Re: The pledges made to the Irish people.

Vincent,

Thanks for your reply. To wit:
"Of course, Fine Gael believes in meritocracy, but often the best person for jobs such as the positions at issue may well be a family member.
All Ministerial staff are recruited fairly."

If this may be the case, then shouldn't the family member be selected by known and proven recruitment practices as used in general society?

I fail to see the meritocratic points in failing to advertise and then recruit staff in an open manner only to select someone towards whom you cannot be unbiased against. Ministers may well have the right to recruit on a selective basis, but this does not make it either fair or meritocratic.

If you see things in a different light, and can communicate this to me, then I would be very interested in how pledges against Crony-ism and for meritocracy may be maintained when effectively nothing is being done by means of legislation or party actions to ensure these values.

Sincerely,
*********.

Sir Oxman

Constituency assistant - paid from the TDs already inflated salary

Parl. assistant - publicly funded, recruited from a panel of qualified people (screened), decided upon transparently by independent, professional recruitment specialists.

Junior minister drivers - same as parl. asst. or cut that wasteful crap out and tender a taxi service and use of trains so they can work while in transit (only when justified) Otherwise, use own transport and receive reasonable, audited expenses.

Just why is this so difficult to implement?

pow wow

That reply from them is utterly pathetic.

raymon

Inverse to the power of one! wrote: »

AND THERE YOU HAVE IT!
Hiring without open interviews or having advertised the position is fair recruitment!
And often the best person for the job is a family member because we all know how families are like human resource pools.

I'm actually kind of in shock that they would reply in this manner!

Different from FF how?

And in reply:

Dear inverse

That reply from Vincent Gribbin was shocking, . Not only does it show that nepotism is happening, but that it is officially sanctioned .

To go back to my original post , they promised an end to cronyism but then hired their families . My opinion of FG and labour is sliding rapidly.

I feel that we have been lied to and betrayed now .

later12

raymon wrote: »

That reply from Vincent Gribbin was shocking, . Not only does it show that nepotism is happening, but that it is officially sanctioned .

Where, in those short few lines, did you manage to read that? - direct quotes, please.

Inverse to the power of one!

Maybe not sanctioned later10, but most definitely tolerated as per the cop out:

but often the best person for jobs such as the positions at issue may well be a family member.

I don't sanction murder, but often it can be for the best.

raymon

later10 wrote: »

Where, in those short few lines, did you manage to read that? - direct quotes, please.

Head of internal communications says


"Of course, Fine Gael believes in meritocracy, but often the best person for jobs such as the positions at issue may well be a family member."

That is nepotism to me.

Thanks for your work as a moderator regarding the quote though ! Keep vigilant !

goat2

which one of them get the gold medal for hiring the most relatives

later12

raymon wrote: »

Head of internal communications says


"Of course, Fine Gael believes in meritocracy, but often the best person for jobs such as the positions at issue may well be a family member."

That is nepotism to me.

Ah right, then you have a different interpretation of nepotism than say... a dictionary would have.

pow wow

Likewise with FG's definition of 'best' in terms of a family member being the best candidate. Being the best in a one horse race makes you better than no-one.

beeftotheheels

The issue here strikes me as being partly to do with the roles themselves

In general I don't like the idea of any jobs being given on relationships rather than on merit.

However, having spent years in a private sector environment where assistants are used I would have to say that the very best assistants are the ones who don't put you on a pedestal, who organize you almost despite your protests, who know when to bother you and when to leave you alone, who realize you are snowed, walk up and demand a fiver to grab you a sandwich or get the sandwich and then demand the fiver without ever being asked. A really good assistant frequently becomes a good friend. Yes, in my line of work their ability to use powerpoint is also an advantage, but it is really not the key skill, the key skill is to support the person or people they work for.

So, if a TD has a relative who generally organizes him at home, who is used to his moods, his needs, interpreting what he says and what he wants then that could make them the best person for the job. Not least because in my opinion it often takes three months to determine whether your assistant is actually the assistant you want anyway, you have to be able to both like and trust your assistant for the relationship to work well.

If a TD has an eccentric disorganized relative then they should obviously not be given the job.

But where the key element of the job is the relationship with the TD then taking any existing relationship into account is actually the right thing to do.

For most political appointments, other than assistants, the existing relationship is not relevant to the role and so should not be a factor to be considered.

Duffy the Vampire Slayer

Literally every group in the Dail has done this.

later12

pow wow wrote: »

Likewise with FG's definition of 'best' in terms of a family member being the best candidate. Being the best in a one horse race makes you better than no-one.

I am not saying that the process is fair.

Nevertheless, the reply does not, as raymon suggested, show...

Originally Posted by raymon
... that nepotism is happening, but that it is officially sanctioned .

That is not an accurate or logical conclusion to draw from the communication as it was posted here.

raymon

later10 wrote: »

Ah right, then you have a different interpretation of nepotism than say... a dictionary would have.

No ..... incorrect again later10...... maybe you should try to buy a dictionary. Or your local library will have one .They are often helpful

Nepotism

Noun

Favoritism shown or patronage granted to relatives, as in business.

later12

raymon wrote: »

Nepotism
Noun

Favoritism shown or patronage granted to relatives, as in business.

Exactly. I fear the problem here is you seem to think that a genetic relationship precludes an individual from being the best candidate for a particular role.

What the individual in question, Vincent Gribbin, was saying was - and I quote, directly - "Fine Gael believes in meritocracy, but often the best person for jobs such as the positions at issue may well be a family member."

So go ahead and explain how this amounts to an "official sanctioning" of nepotism.

pow wow

later10 wrote: »

I am not saying that the process is fair.

Nevertheless, the reply does not, as raymon suggested, show...


That is not an accurate or logical conclusion to draw from the communication as it was posted here.

Which part of it are you taking issue with - that it's nepotism or that by turning a blind eye it's effectively sanctioned?

@beeftotheheels, I understand the sentiment but it's flawed, particularly where positions are publicly funded. One can't possibly know that someone is the best for the job when they have no idea or interest in who else is out there. In the UK these roles are regularly advertised publicly and I doubt MPs are at a disadvantaged because they aren't related to whoever they recruit.

later12

pow wow wrote: »

Which part of it are you taking issue with - that it's nepotism or that by turning a blind eye it's effectively sanctioned?

It may be nepotism, it may even be effectively sanctioned. However, it is a gross exaggeration to state that the email communication in question proves that it is either.

The email simply says that there are cases where a relative is the most suitable person for a position. Seems like a reasonable statement regardless of who makes it.

Now one might disagree with individual cases, but one could certainly not suggest that this email is proof that nepotism is officially sanctioned since, generally, for various reasons, it is conceivable that a relative might actually be the most suitable candidate for a particular role.

raymon

later10 wrote: »

Exactly. I fear the problem here is you seem to think that a genetic relationship precludes an individual from being the best candidate for a particular role.

What the individual in question, Vincent Gribbin, was saying was - and I quote, directly - "Fine Gael believes in meritocracy, but often the best person for jobs such as the positions at issue may well be a family member."

So go ahead and explain how this amounts to an "official sanctioning" of nepotism.

Please re read your posts , they don't make sense

StupidLikeAFox

pow wow wrote: »

One can't possibly know that someone is the best for the job when they have no idea or interest in who else is out there.

But surely when the main requirement for these positions is an extremely strong relationship and understanding of the politician, it should be the politician who gets to choose?

I mean what would the job description be? Surely you realise that someones personal assistant has to have a lot more skills than just being able to type.

I mean, look at what the fine gael guy said:

Thank you for your email. Of course, Fine Gael believes in meritocracy, but often the best person for jobs such as the positions at issue may well be a family member.

The "positions at issue" are not appointments to state boards or getting someone a job in the HSE, these positions require a deep understanding of the politician. A recruitment process would be inefficient, a waste of time and money when in actual fact, the TD himself knows the best person for the job already!

pow wow

I'd have to disagree. The simple fact is that unless there has been some kind of open recruitment (i.e. consideration of other candidates) one can't possibly say that these people are the most suitable people for the job, in all or any cases. Their appointment is down solely to who they are, not their suitability compared to anyone else. Now maybe FG know of one or two cases where some open recruitment was conducted and the family member was still 'most suitable' (equating to the 'some' cases referred to in the email), but I suspect this is in the extreme minority of the overall number who employ relatives.

I might not have used the enthusiastic language raymon used but I broadly agree with the assertion given the reply received from FG on the subject.

pow wow

ColHol wrote: »

But surely when the main requirement for these positions is an extremely strong relationship and understanding of the politician, it should be the politician who gets to choose?

I mean what would the job description be? Surely you realise that someones personal assistant has to have a lot more skills than just being able to type.

I mean, look at what the fine gael guy said:

The "positions at issue" are not appointments to state boards or getting someone a job in the HSE, these positions require a deep understanding of the politician. A recruitment process would be inefficient, a waste of time and money when in actual fact, the TD himself knows the best person for the job already!

We're all aware that the postholders do more than type - I don't think anyone has suggested anything to the contrary. Perhaps if all they did was type people wouldn't have such an issue with it. The depth of personal relationship you have with someone should never be the basis for securing a publicly-funded position, ever. The fact that you think it's the main requirement for a job like this blows my mind.

later12

raymon wrote: »

Please re read your posts , they don't make sense

No explanation raymon? Nothing on how this amounts to an "official sanctioning" of nepotism?

beeftotheheels

pow wow wrote: »

@beeftotheheels, I understand the sentiment but it's flawed, particularly where positions are publicly funded. One can't possibly know that someone is the best for the job when they have no idea or interest in who else is out there. In the UK these roles are regularly advertised publicly and I doubt MPs are at a disadvantaged because they aren't related to whoever they recruit.

Two points.

1. Hiring a good PA is notoriously difficult as it takes months to determine whether you can work together or not - hence the fact that it is often done through temps who get made permanent if they gel with their boss. If I was a Minister tomorrow who would I hire as my PA? My former PA, she's flipping fantastic, I'd give her a 9.5 out of 10. So what would be the benefit to me going through a hiring process in the hope of finding a candidate who might, potentially, in time, turn out to be a 10/10 when the likelihood is that I'd end up with a 3/10 who I'd have to get rid of or hobble along using? Waste of taxpayers money. In my time I've had 7 or 8 secretaries of whom 1 was fantastic, and 2 were really very good and the difference having a great PA and having an average PA is huge. I'm not saying you can't recruit a great PA, but if you have a really good PA already why discriminate against them because they are related to you? The role is all about the relationship, to be really effective you have to give them access to your email, to your voicemail, you have to trust them to not mention the drunken email your client sent in the middle of the night, you have to trust them to skip over the crying voicemail from your friend who's boyfriend just dumped her, you have to give them your credit card details so they can book your flights and hotels etc. Building up that level of trust takes time.

2. Using spouses as PAs was commonplace in the UK http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6888988.ece for precisely this reason, and I have to say that in relation to the role of PA only I do wonder whether this was a case of throwing babies out with bath water.

For other roles then it absolutely should be fair and open, but for the role of PA the relationship is the key.

pow wow

Is your former PA your wife/girlfriend/mother/sister? So I can respond you might also include how she was recruited in the first place.

beeftotheheels

pow wow wrote: »

Is your former PA your wife/girlfriend/mother/sister? So I can respond you might also include how she was recruited in the first place.

Nope, just a friend so technically if I were elected I could hire her without being accused of nepotism, but I would be accused of not having a fair and open recruitment process when spending taxpayers money.

She was recruited predominantly on the word of another colleague for whom she had previously worked and who said that she was fantastic. She had left him to travel, he'd replaced her.

I fully appreciate that at some stage she got a job through an open process, probably as a temp who was made permanent when it was clear how good she was, but I'm rating 1/8 former secretaries as fantastic, and including her 3/8 above average.

So 5/8 were average or below, and that ignores the very many temps over the years covering holidays etc who fell well below expectations.

Hiring a good PA is much more a mine field than hiring professional staff since it is so much less about objective things which can be put on a cv, and so much more about relationships.

pow wow

That's my point though - in most cases there is no open competition for these roles and being able to type/diary etc etc and being related to the TD is all you need. I'm not saying a family member would never be the most suitable for a role like that, but without open recruitment you could never possibly say that they were.

I don't think I'd share your opinion about the quality of a PA being based largely on the relationship they have with their employer over tangible skills (though they undoubtedly need an effective relationship) but we can agree to differ.