Kenny says Public Sector workers no longer have job security.

KDII

Jawgap wrote: »

Yeah, but according to @true, that's only for a 32 hr week, plus between holidays and sickies sure you'd hardly be there the rest of the time.........

True. Sure between all my nixers and planning how ill spend my whopper pension those 32 hours flllllly in

Jawgap

true wrote: »

........

However 22k a year is not bad, there are many others who would love that sort of money.

.........

You have clearly zero life experience.........if you were ever unfortunate enough to see the inside of an A&E or have someone close to you seriously ill, you'd realise how downright stupid it is to describe a nurse's salary of 22k as "not bad"...........I doubt very much if you would do what they do for twice or three times that.

maddragon

true wrote: »

It reminds me of the story of the german ambassador about 5 years ago telling the story of how the irish consultants thought 200k was "micky mouse money", while consultants in germany earned half that.

You must remember that well. He said it on the day of your communion.

Potential-Monke

I'm going to ignore absolutely everything posted by that muppet in this thread, he's just copying and pasting form the CP2 thread, and i've let me feelings (and disproved his posts) in that one. So, onto topic.

Flippant, unintentional or otherwise comment, Kenny is about to get lambasted. As many have said, who would do the frontline jobs without the security? I'm all for weeding out the useless, lazy idiots in the Public Sector, so long as he starts at the top, and gets rid of Howlin, Shatter and himself first.

Thing is though, how do you quantify the return of certain workers? Nurses/Doctors - You have to save x amount of lives/not kill x amount of people. Gardai - You have to give out x amount of fines/get x amount of criminals to court, etc. Firemen - You need to put out x amount of fires and save at least x amount of cats. Granted, it will be easier to get rid of those in office based environments, with actual targets, but for a lot of workers their work cannot be quantified.

Boombastic

How many cases did you work on?
What role did you play in each?


Based on performance, not outcome

Potential-Monke

Boombastic wrote: »

How many cases did you work on?
What role did you play in each?


Based on performance, not outcome

Ok, but how does that work for someone who deals with the administration side of Warrants (i'm using Gardai as a reference, as that's what i know). It's a massive job, one which is straight forward but tedious. And the same person is also doing the same thing with Summons. It can't be based on numbers, as one could be dealt with in 15 minutes, another could take a few hours, depending on the recipient.

I know what you're saying, but not every job within each service can be performance based. A lazy Garda could still do everything right, and within the legal timeframe, but not as fast as others, should they still be penalised even though everything was right?

Jawgap

Potential-Monke wrote: »

I'm going to ignore absolutely everything posted by that muppet in this thread, he's just copying and pasting form the CP2 thread, and i've let me feelings (and disproved his posts) in that one. So, onto topic.

Flippant, unintentional or otherwise comment, Kenny is about to get lambasted. As many have said, who would do the frontline jobs without the security? I'm all for weeding out the useless, lazy idiots in the Public Sector, so long as he starts at the top, and gets rid of Howlin, Shatter and himself first.

Thing is though, how do you quantify the return of certain workers? Nurses/Doctors - You have to save x amount of lives/not kill x amount of people. Gardai - You have to give out x amount of fines/get x amount of criminals to court, etc. Firemen - You need to put out x amount of fires and save at least x amount of cats. Granted, it will be easier to get rid of those in office based environments, with actual targets, but for a lot of workers their work cannot be quantified.

To be honest you don't need to be that sophisticated - there are several thousand positions in Agriculture, HSE Admin, Health and Energy & Natural Resources that are literally redundant because legislative changes or the decline in economic activity. Start with those.

Before you go beyond that, you need to seriuosly improve the PM&D System - it's pretty crap & very poorly implemented. Change it, put the middle and senior managers on 3 year contracts, if they don't implement the revised system get rid of them and promote the staff that will. Three years is plenty to prove yourself as an effective manager.

The Bishop Basher

Potential-Monke wrote: »

Ok, but how does that work for someone who deals with the administration side of Warrants (i'm using Gardai as a reference, as that's what i know). It's a massive job, one which is straight forward but tedious. And the same person is also doing the same thing with Summons. It can't be based on numbers, as one could be dealt with in 15 minutes, another could take a few hours, depending on the recipient.

I know what you're saying, but not every job within each service can be performance based. A lazy Garda could still do everything right, and within the legal timeframe, but not as fast as others, should they still be penalised even though everything was right?

Every job can be performance managed. It's obviously more subjective for some and that's where good management plays a role. For the example you mention above, take an average, apply a 20% improvement and you have your target. That target then shifts another 20% for the next performance review and so on. You can also add other targets like how they achieve their numbers, cost and efficency savings they identify, certifications achieved, projects completed etc ect. Do I assume from your post that these roles are not currently managed in this way ?

lomb

Saab Ed wrote: »

So public sector workers no longer have job security that normally comes with a public sector position. Does that suggest it should be reflected upwards in their pay given that the usual security of their position is now gone!

Saab Ed, how many people have you employed in your time in business in the private sector? I wouldnt hesitate to say none. Public sector workers are overpaid for the most part and are relatively poor at doing their jobs. Many of the jobs could be removed if things were automated and streamlined but there is no interest in doing any of those things.

Saab Ed

lomb wrote: »

Saab Ed, how many people have you employed in your time in business in the private sector? I wouldnt hesitate to say none. Public sector workers are overpaid for the most part and are relatively poor at doing theirhttp://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/kenny-hints-compulsory-redundancies-could-arise-if-no-agreement-on-public-service-pay-1.1371759?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitterjobs. Many of the jobs could be removed if things were automated and streamlined but there is no interest in doing any of those things.

You'll probably find there's someone, somewhere much better than you at your job. Everyone's replaceable. To generalize so broadly though is pure ignorance.

But just to get back to my original post, forget about the public sector/private sector efficiencies argument. My only question was what incentive there will no be to be part of the public sector while pay and job security are diminished.

Frank Black

Kenny spends the weeks leading up to the Union voting on CP2 telling public servants that if the deal is rejected the Government will make the €300m savings unilaterally regardless.
God, Enda is so strong and tough. I'm gald we have him as our leader during these difficult times.

CP2 gets rejected. Enda ****s himself and asks the Unions to have a think about it and get back to him in 2 weeks if they think there's any chance there's a basis for re-negotiation - even a little chance - please?

Enda's political handlers realise that Enda has made himself look like a complete pussy (again) and that he doesn't have the balls to make the kind of tough decisions that need to be made.

Solution - Enda needs to make a really, really tough statement - like Clint Eastwood in those Dirty Harry movies or something and tell public servants that he might be going to sack loads of them.

Everyone believes that Enda is really serious this time.




Christ, this is embarassing.

Jawgap

lomb wrote: »

Saab Ed, how many people have you employed in your time in business in the private sector? I wouldnt hesitate to say none. Public sector workers are overpaid for the most part and are relatively poor at doing their jobs. Many of the jobs could be removed if things were automated and streamlined but there is no interest in doing any of those things.

Let's not forget that it was the private sector banks who brought us to this position - a light regulatory touch contributed significantly, but the banks, like a lot of other private interest groups, lobbied significantly for the regulatory system that was in place. I can't ever recall them criticising 'light touch' regulation before 2009?

I've lost count of the number of times we have had consultants (nice suits and no imagination) through our place, usually on high three figure daily rates, and their work has been mediocre at best. Generally, they interview us, harvest our ideas then write up a report repeating our ideas back to us and charge us royally for the process.

Relative to these I'm underpaid. Relative to my opposite numbers in the private sector in the regulatory environment where I practice I'm paid a comparable salary, with better holidays but zero other benefits in terms of professional fees, expensed car and health insurance.

The quality of work I see in the private sector varies hugely - from the excellent to the dangerously shoddy. My experience also tells me that a disproportionate amount of the shoddy work comes from solely Irish undertakings - Irish staffed local offices of international undertakings are pretty good, but local businesses seem to practice a "sure-it'll-be-grand" philosophy.

Is there waste in the PS? - yes.

Is there scope for efficiency improvements? - absolutely there is for huge efficiency gains, especially in back office operations.

Should there be contracting out? - definitely, there's plenty of scope for it, but in my experience contractors should be sourced internationally, or at least local operations should come in with international partners.

And for info, I've worked in both. I started in the private sector (2 years Ireland, 2 years in the US and about 8 in the UK/EU) than public sector (11 years).

I'd also wonder why "if I'm relatively poor at doing my job" why the team that was six in 2010, is now three - one retired and two were poached - out of the remaining three we've all had job offers dangled in front of us in the last 18 months.

Birroc

Frank Black wrote: »

Kenny spends the weeks leading up to the Union voting on CP2 telling public servants that if the deal is rejected the Government will make the €300m savings unilaterally regardless.
God, Enda is so strong and tough. I'm gald we have him as our leader during these difficult times.

CP2 gets rejected. Enda ****s himself and asks the Unions to have a think about it and get back to him in 2 weeks if they think there's any chance there's a basis for re-negotiation - even a little chance - please?

Enda's political handlers realise that Enda has made himself look like a complete pussy (again) and that he doesn't have the balls to make the kind of tough decisions that need to be made.

Solution - Enda needs to make a really, really tough statement - like Clint Eastwood in those Dirty Harry movies or something and tell public servants that he might be going to sack loads of them.

Everyone believes that Enda is really serious this time.

Christ, this is embarassing.

I think this is exactly right. Enda and the rest of the spineless government haven't the balls to make any tough decisions. Is it 5 years now and we are still borrowing €1,000,000,000 a month to pay for our social welfare and public sector!?

Pappa Charlie

Birroc wrote: »

I think this is exactly right. Enda and the rest of the spineless government haven't the balls to make any tough decisions. Is it 5 years now and we are still borrowing €1,000,000,000 a month to pay for our social welfare and public sector!?

What about the money we put into private sector banks, it would be handy if we had it to go towards services, but no! hammer the ordinary citizen, Richie Boucher's pay is a perfect example of where this governments priorities are and who's easier to target. Private sector got us into this mess! The Irish private sector is by and large not competitive without the silly Anglo money that was being thrown about by builders! But hang it all on the public sector!

true

Birroc wrote: »

I think this is exactly right. Enda and the rest of the spineless government haven't the balls to make any tough decisions. Is it 5 years now and we are still borrowing €1,000,000,000 a month to pay for our social welfare and public sector!?

You hit the nail on the head there. Its actually more than that we have to borrow each and every month to pay for our social welfare and public sector, but your point is a good one.

Pappa Charlie wrote: »

What about the money we put into private sector banks...

what about, what about , what about-ery. Remember that the private sector banks were supposed to have been controlled and regulated by the public sector regulator, dept of finance and public sector Central bank. That is what they were well paid to do. ....but they failed. Then the public sector ( the government is part of the public sector as it is paid by the state too ) put monety in to the banks / bailed them out - which it should not have done. It was advised by dept of finance officials and the central bank - more public sector.

Frank Black

Pappa Charlie wrote: »

What about the money we put into private sector banks, it would be handy if we had it to go towards services, but no! hammer the ordinary citizen, Richie Boucher's pay is a perfect example of where this governments priorities are and who's easier to target. Private sector got us into this mess! The Irish private sector is by and large not competitive without the silly Anglo money that was being thrown about by builders! But hang it all on the public sector!

Ah, yes - the old 'what about'.
There's far too many people who have no idea of the difference between debt and deficit. They are separate issues - you can't just suggest that they money that went into bailing the banks should go on public services instead (well, you did actually, but that's not how it works). In fact if we did what you suggest we'd be in a far worse situation than we are now with an even higher deficit.

Pappa Charlie

Frank Black wrote: »

Ah, yes - the old 'what about'.
There's far too many people who have no idea of the difference between debt and deficit. They are separate issues - you can't just suggest that they money that went into bailing the banks should go on public services instead (well, you did actually, but that's not how it works). In fact if we did what you suggest we'd be in a far worse situation than we are now with an even higher deficit.

Let's just forget about the bail out money into private sector banks so, I'm saying that if we didn't have that burden then we would have flexibility to invest in jobs and easy austerity and pay for the public sector, you weren't on here in 2005 whinging about public sector pay, you didn't give a rats ass because you were in the good times but now you want someone to blame because your section of the private sector collasped because it couldn't compete when the silly money was gone!

Birroc

Pappa Charlie wrote: »

Let's just forget about the bail out money into private sector banks so, I'm saying that if we didn't have that burden then we would have flexibility to invest in jobs and easy austerity and pay for the public sector, you weren't on here in 2005 whinging about public sector pay, you didn't give a rats ass because you were in the good times but now you want someone to blame because your section of the private sector collasped because it couldn't compete when the silly money was gone!

Public sector pay and pensions were benchmarked upwards when we had a huge budget surplus fueled by cheap credit and junkie banks.
Now that we have a huge budget deficit, public sector pay and pensions need to be benchmarked downwards. Before you say the public sector has already been cut, the answer is clearly not enough. And we haven't a notion of paying for all those generous public sector pensions the way we are stacking the national debt (but Enda and the useless pricks all around him don't care about that because they will be long gone). 1,000,000,000+ a month --> when will it be paid back??

Jawgap

Richie got a pay rise - well let's see if he's worth it. The figures all from BoI's own investor relations site.

Shareprice is held up as the ultimate arbiter of executive performance. Richie Rich took over the big seat in BoI just over 4 years ago.......

Here's how the stock has performed the other lines refer to the aggregated performance of banking stocks and the FTSE100.

On the day he took over shares in BoI were trading at 35c each, today they are trading at 17c each. The bank is carrying pre-tax losses of over €2 billion.

Again, in principle I'm not against wage cuts, but there's a lot more to be cut from people who can better afford and deserve it before you get cutting the wages of people who actually perform in their jobs.

Sunny Dayz

Maybe cutting job security is the next step in making the public sector (in particular certain sections of it) more cost effective.

Budgets still have to be met, we are not out of the recession by a long shot.

The government has tried to control the public pay packet by voluntary redundancies, pay cuts and recruitment freezes. But there are still inefficiencies and wastage in the sector. What is the point in the tax payers money paying the wage of someone who is ineffecient in their job. Is it not common sense that if you are cr#p at your job you should be shown the door? There is no incentive there for many public sector workers to actually do a good job (bar those who are actually passionate about their work). Why should they, they are going to be paid either way.

If job security is cut from the public sector, the wheat is sorted from the chaff and we may be left with a more efficient public sector system... Is that not what we want??

Frank Black

Pappa Charlie wrote: »

Let's just forget about the bail out money into private sector banks so, I'm saying that if we didn't have that burden then we would have flexibility to invest in jobs and easy austerity and pay for the public sector, you weren't on here in 2005 whinging about public sector pay, you didn't give a rats ass because you were in the good times but now you want someone to blame because your section of the private sector collasped because it couldn't compete when the silly money was gone!

I'm confused, you want to forget about the bail out money, but continue to try to rope it into the discussion in the next sentance.

And you're sadly mistaken if you think I want public expenditure cut because I want 'someone to blame'.
I'm just blessed with an ability to recognise that borrowing at our current rate to fund our expenditure is unsustainable.

And who exactly, is my section of the private sector competing against? Don't get that bit at all.

rizzlerazzle

Looks like the divide and conquer tactics to distract are certainly working..

instead of concentating on the worker bees..why aren't they buzzing together to sting the fat cat?

Pappa Charlie

Frank Black wrote: »

I'm confused, you want to forget about the bail out money, but continue to try to rope it into the discussion in the next sentance.

And you're sadly mistaken if you think I want public expenditure cut because I want 'someone to blame'.
I'm just blessed with an ability to recognise that borrowing at our current rate to fund our expenditure is unsustainable.

And who exactly, is my section of the private sector competing against? Don't get that bit at all.

Part of the failure of the economy was that when the **** hit the fan many of our private sector jobs were not able to be sustained as they were not competitive internationally, thank god for agriculture based business and the multi nationals but outside of that many businesses were not at the races when the silly money went!

Birroc

Pappa Charlie wrote: »

Part of the failure of the economy was that when the **** hit the fan many of our private sector jobs were not able to be sustained as they were not competitive internationally, thank god for agriculture based business and the multi nationals but outside of that many businesses were not at the races when the silly money went!

Yes but the silly money is still being borrowed (1,000,000,000 a month) to pay salaries, pensions and welfare. How many private sector companies are borrowing money to pay their salaries, pensions and expenses?

Son Of A Vidic

Saab Ed wrote: »

Kenny says Public Sector workers no longer have job security.

Should such threats surprise us, after all, this is Fine Gael. And it would seem that their Blue Shirt/fascist tendencies are on the rise again.

alastair

Birroc wrote: »

Yes but the silly money is still being borrowed (1,000,000,000 a month) to pay salaries, pensions and welfare. How many private sector companies are borrowing money to pay their salaries, pensions and expenses?

You realise there's a difference between running a state and running a company, yeah? You also recognise that those companies are benefitting from the services that the state borrowings support.

No argument that current national debt/borrowing levels can't be sustained, but the notion that a state can be run like a business, or has anything much in common, is misguided.

Frank Black

alastair wrote: »

You realise there's a difference between running a state and running a company, yeah? You also recognise that those companies are benefitting from the services that the state borrowings support.

No argument that current national debt/borrowing levels can't be sustained, but the notion that a state can be run like a business, or has anything much in common, is misguided.

I haven't seen anyone suggest that a State should be run exactly like a business - sounds like a straw man argument to me.
But what is wrong with the notion of the State reducing it's borrowing requirement by cutting the public sector pay bill through salary reductions or redundancies?
And while private busniess may benifit from State supports, they also contribute through providing employment, empoyer PRSI, commercial rates, tax on profits. development levies, etc.

alastair

Frank Black wrote: »

I haven't seen anyone suggest that a State should be run exactly like a business - sounds like a straw man argument to me.

Originally Posted by Birroc

Yes but the silly money is still being borrowed (1,000,000,000 a month) to pay salaries, pensions and welfare. How many private sector companies are borrowing money to pay their salaries, pensions and expenses?

What's that then?

Frank Black

alastair wrote: »

Originally Posted by Birroc



What's that then?

Somone drawing a parallel between how a private company would react to a gap in income vs expendature and how the State is reacting to the same circumstances.

Bit different than suggesting that a State should be run in the same way as a private business.

Seeing as you've already agreed that the current situation is unsustainable - what's your problem with the suggestion that the State should reduce its expenditure.

alastair

Frank Black wrote: »

Somone drawing a parallel between how a private company would react to a gap in income vs expendature and how the State is reacting to the same circumstances.

Bit different than suggesting that a State should be run in the same way as a private business.

Seeing as you've already agreed that the current situation is unsustainable - what's your problem with the suggestion that the State should reduce its expenditure.

My problem (already clearly stated) is with suggesting that the best way to run a business has anything to do with the best way to run a state. They have completely different dynamics and intentions.