[Dodgy stats/Indo] "Huge levels of absenteeism still tolerated in the public sector"

green123

Huge levels of absenteeism still tolerated in the public sector.

" Nearly one-third of the workforce was on sick leave every day during August "

taken from this article :
http://www.independent.ie/lifestyle/health/sacked-health-staff-appeal-dismissal-as-5000-fail-to-turn-up-at-work-every-day-29874051.html

i thought we were supposed to have refrom in the public sector ?

why is this allowed to go on in the public sector ?

[MOD]The article is based on questionable use of statistics, and the OP doesn't clarify that.[/MOD]

ardmacha

I'd say this is probably an example of Indo bollix. More likely one third were on leave of all sorts, true of many organisations in August. The best weather was in July in any case.

woodoo

Yeah have you any sources that can be relied upon.

Godge

green123 wrote: »

Huge levels of absenteeism still tolerated in the public sector.

" Nearly one-third of the workforce was on sick leave every day during August "

taken from this article :
http://www.independent.ie/lifestyle/health/sacked-health-staff-appeal-dismissal-as-5000-fail-to-turn-up-at-work-every-day-29874051.html

i thought we were supposed to have refrom in the public sector ?

why is this allowed to go on in the public sector ?

The article doesn't make any sense.

"Nearly one-third of the workforce was on sick leave every day during August in the HSE's administrative office for Dublin and Midlands hospitals."


This would suggest an absentee rate of 33%.

Yet the same article quotes official figures as 4.83% in August.


This is one for the stupid journalism thread.

sarumite

Godge wrote: »

The article doesn't make any sense.

"Nearly one-third of the workforce was on sick leave every day during August in the HSE's administrative office for Dublin and Midlands hospitals."


This would suggest an absentee rate of 33%.

Yet the same article quotes official figures as 4.83% in August.


This is one for the stupid journalism thread.

I think you have misread/misunderstood the article. The author cherry picks the worst performing areas of the PS to get the 1/3 abseentism but the 4.83% was the national average rate of the PS as a whole. the noteworthy point from the article in terms of abseentism is that the target of 3.5% is being missed which the author doesn't mention until halfway down the first page. It is a poorly written article thought, that is for sure. Then again, its the indo so expectations should be low.

Dannyboy83

The article is certainly confusing.

The fact that 3 people were fired and that absenteeism has dropped by 33% would seem to demonstrate that it's not being tolerated.

I would imagine the absentee rate is always going to be higher in customer facing roles anyway, which I'd imagine a much higher proportion of public service jobs are.

It seems to me like they are making progress.

Vizzy

Also, according to the article 91.92% of the sick leave is certified( i.e. by a doctor)
Don't know how much more "verified" it can be.

tayto lover

The Indo ??
'nuff said.

mikemac1

Very badly written article, just all over the place

Hesh's Umpire

It's the Indo so it doesn't really qualify as journalism.

Yellowblackbird

You think that it is conceivable that at any point in history one in three persons employed by the state was unfit for work?

OP you need to be reformed. Ha ha.

ardmacha

Why do people tolerate and even venerate the Indo? The quality of work in the Indo is below that of the worst part of the PS.

marienbad

ardmacha wrote: »

Why do people tolerate and even venerate the Indo? The quality of work in the Indo is below that of the worst part of the PS.

You base this on ??

Jawgap

People who are surrounded by sick people every day get sicker more often than people who are surrounded by generally healthy people?..........


............who'd have thunk it:rolleyes:

Vizzy

marienbad wrote: »

You base this on ??

The article above, to start with:)

marienbad

Vizzy wrote: »

The article above, to start with:)

So it is just opinion then ?

sarumite

Jawgap wrote: »

People who are surrounded by sick people every day get sicker more often than people who are surrounded by generally healthy people?..........


............who'd have thunk it:rolleyes:

Most people with infectious diseases tend to go their GP rather than a hospital. I am not justifying the stupid article, but hospitals tend to primarily treat non-infectious illness (cancers, kideny/liver problems etc) or other acute medical issues (broken bones, heart attacks, strokes).

Silentcorner

marienbad wrote: »

You base this on ??

The Indo is either loved or hated...this is a news organisation, it shouldn't be that polarizing, there simply isn't the same passion of hatred for any other news outlet in this country, maybe RTE, you have to ask yourself why?

For instance, you know when you are picking up a red top you are getting a particular standard of journalism, the Indo/Sunday Indo are tabloid in quality but dressed up as broadsheet, it is a lie...the content of the papers are tabloid in nature, the people who buy this rag are simply incapable of spotting this or take pleasure in reading tabloid like content.

In short, if you wish to present an argument you may as well quote the Sunday World...or a wino on the street...

ardmacha

marienbad wrote: »

So it is just opinion then ?

Yes, the article is just opinion, it makes no effort to present accurate information.

marienbad

ardmacha wrote: »

Yes, the article is just opinion, it makes no effort to present accurate information.

How so, lot of facts in there . Is it a case of not liking the facts and just shooting the messenger perhaps ?

mathepac

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

The article is certainly confusing.

The fact that 3 people were fired and that absenteeism has dropped by 33% would seem to demonstrate that it's not being tolerated.

I would imagine the absentee rate is always going to be higher in customer facing roles anyway, which I'd imagine a much higher proportion of public service jobs are.

It seems to me like they are making progress.

Imagine all you want, like you seem to imagine they are making progress. They have missed their own very generous target for maximum absenteeism (private industry figures + 50%) again.

The article states that absenteeism is evidently rife in back-office jobs and that client-facing staff have lower absenteeism rates.

The badly written article then waffles on how this increases the need for agency staff. This is nonsense as none of the HSEs employ agency staff for clerical / admin work. They don't even backfill for holidays or maternity leave these days,

"However, it could not explain why so many office-based staff in particular have such high levels of non-attendance throughout the year.Those working in the provision of medical and dental services have had consistently low levels of absenteeism while categories such as management, administration and general support staff have remained consistently high.

The knock-on effects are lost productivity and a higher bill for agency staff who have to be employed to maintain vital services. The cost of agency staff in the HSE rose to €23.6m in August, up from €20.8m in June."

miju

mathepac wrote: »

"However, it could not explain why so many office-based staff in particular have such high levels of non-attendance throughout the year.

That's easily explained in six words "Croke Park and Haddington Road Agreements".

Think people are going to suffer large pay cuts, massive change in terms of employment and not feel sick. Contrary to popular belief PS is underpayed and overworked so why not take off an extended fully paid break now and then

Jawgap

sarumite wrote: »

Most people with infectious diseases tend to go their GP rather than a hospital. I am not justifying the stupid article, but hospitals tend to primarily treat non-infectious illness (cancers, kideny/liver problems etc) or other acute medical issues (broken bones, heart attacks, strokes).

I think if you look at the HSPC data on Hospital Acquired Infections and Healthcare Associated Infections, you'll get a better idea of how prevalent infections and diseases are in our hospitals. Also HIQA's reports give a good indication of hospital hygiene or the lack of it.

Someone might go in with a broken arm, but it doesn't mean they - or their carers - won't be impacted by the reservoirs of infection found in most hospitals.

ardmacha

marienbad wrote: »

How so, lot of facts in there . Is it a case of not liking the facts and just shooting the messenger perhaps ?

Data is not information. The Indo routinely presents facts in a selective way with misleading commentary to misdirect the reader.

Hotblack Desiato

mathepac wrote: »

Imagine all you want, like you seem to imagine they are making progress. They have missed their own very generous target for maximum absenteeism (private industry figures + 50%) again.

Probably because of long term absentees on unpaid or pension rate absences who in reality are never going to return to work and should be retired on ill health grounds (and could be financially better off as they'd then be able to claim SW. Pre-1995 staff who are still employed, even if receiving almost nothing in sick pay, can't.)

It only takes one or two people absent for 500 or 1000 days to significantly increase the average absence in a workplace.

In the private sector they would have been fired long ago and so would be dependent on the taxpayer anyway.

marienbad

ardmacha wrote: »

Data is not information. The Indo routinely presents facts in a selective way with misleading commentary to misdirect the reader.

Of course data is information ! Have you any 'data' showing the selective and misleading way it is used - other than you don't agree with it ?

Silentcorner

marienbad wrote: »

Of course data is information ! Have you any 'data' showing the selective and misleading way it is used - other than you don't agree with it ?

A number of years ago, after a module of a journalism conference was dedicated to the treatment of Limerick in the irish press, the indo declared Limerick to be the murder capital of europe, they based it on the fact there was 7 murders over a 12month period, the murder rate in urban areas is the amount of murders per 100,000 people, this according to the Indo gave Limerick a higher rate than Glasgow...they continually repeated this mantra, it caused a lot of damage to an already damaged name...the only problem is the official (meaning the only figure that can be used for statistical reasons) population of Limerick is 52,000. The 7 murders they referred to were not even murders (some were manslughters) and they occurred over a couple of juristictions.

Comparing a murder rate of a city the size of Limerick to that of Glasgow/London/Paris etc is simply scurrilous...ie There have been 2 murders in Ennis over a 12 month period, pop 25,000, this give Ennis a higher murder rate than most European cities...which is simply an outrageous statement.

It was the most astonishing abuse of Stats or facts I have ever witnessed, the fact that is did damage to the city was simply in keeping with the wider Limerick narrative within Irish media, ie publish/highlight as many negative issues as is humanly possible while ignoring the same issues elsewhere (which is why there was a module dedicated to it in the journalism conference)

Sorry for going off topic but you did look for an example...there are many many more

marienbad

Silentcorner wrote: »

A number of years ago, after a module of a journalism conference was dedicated to the treatment of Limerick in the irish press, the indo declared Limerick to be the murder capital of europe, they based it on the fact there was 7 murders over a 12month period, the murder rate in urban areas is the amount of murders per 100,000 people, this according to the Indo gave Limerick a higher rate than Glasgow...they continually repeated this mantra, it caused a lot of damage to an already damaged name...the only problem is the official (meaning the only figure that can be used for statistical reasons) population of Limerick is 52,000. The 7 murders they referred to were not even murders (some were manslughters) and they occurred over a couple of juristictions.

Comparing a murder rate of a city the size of Limerick to that of Glasgow/London/Paris etc is simply scurrilous...ie There have been 2 murders in Ennis over a 12 month period, pop 25,000, this give Ennis a higher murder rate than most European cities...which is simply an outrageous statement.

It was the most astonishing abuse of Stats or facts I have ever witnessed, the fact that is did damage to the city was simply in keeping with the wider Limerick narrative within Irish media, ie publish/highlight as many negative issues as is humanly possible while ignoring the same issues elsewhere (which is why there was a module dedicated to it in the journalism conference)

Sorry for going off topic but you did look for an example...there are many many more

Far be it for be to defend the Indo - but it is no better or no worse that most newspapers . It just gets tiresome particularly here on boards that the stock response 'it is just the Indo'' is used as a substitute for any kind of argument.

You see it here and in the recent ESB thread . Rather the just shooting the messenger why not answer the issues raised - which is do we have an absentee problem in the public sector ?

As for your example - was it editorial , comment , what and can you provide a link please . I am from Limerick and I'd be interested in seeing it.

gctest50

Silentcorner wrote: »

Comparing a murder rate of a city the size of Limerick to that of Glasgow/London/Paris etc is simply scurrilous....

..............the indo declared Limerick to be the murder capital of europe, they based it on the fact there was 7 murders

Thats why you use rates ?

Limerick has a ratio of over seven homicides per 100,000 population, according to CSO data, while Glasgow recorded just over five killings per 100,000 of its population.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/limerick-is-now-the-official-murder-capital-of-europe-26439858.html

A total of 153 sexual offences were recorded in Limerick City and County in 2012,
up 18 per cent on 2011 figures and twice the national average for such offences.

http://www.limerickpost.ie/2013/06/20/limerick-has-highest-rate-of-sexual-offences/

woodoo

gctest50 wrote: »

Thats why you use rates ?

You need to do it honestly though. If some ballygobackwards village has one murder one year then represented in murder per 100,000 stats it would be the murder capital of ireland.

gctest50

But they were very "honest" though :

Limerick has a ratio of over seven homicides per 100,000 population, according to CSO data, while Glasgow recorded just over five killings per 100,000 of its population

The only bit of massaging of the figures may be if they were the area the Gardai covered and presented otherwise - afaik Limk Gardai cover a bit of Clare and so on

This is probably a better way to present things

A total of 153 sexual offences were recorded in Limerick City and County in 2012,
up 18 per cent on 2011 figures and twice the national average for such offences.

goose2005

Nearly one-third of the workforce was on sick leave every day during August in the HSE's administrative office for Dublin and Midlands hospitals.

How many work in the office? If there were 7 employees and 2 were out sick you could say this.

woodoo wrote: »

You need to do it honestly though. If some ballygobackwards village has one murder one year then represented in murder per 100,000 stats it would be the murder capital of ireland.

Exactly. Similarly, you could say that Grenada were the best sporting nation in the world because they had nine Olympic gold medals per 1,000,000 people

sarumite

woodoo wrote: »

You need to do it honestly though. If some ballygobackwards village has one murder one year then represented in murder per 100,000 stats it would be the murder capital of ireland.

why? If you extrapolate the data using proper regression analysis and allowing for some assumptions (assume a certain linearity in terms of the variable you are measuring) and enough data poin, it possible to deduce a statistically significant number.

ardmacha

sarumite wrote: »

why? If you extrapolate the data using proper regression analysis and allowing for some assumptions (assume a certain linearity in terms of the variable you are measuring) and enough data poin, it possible to deduce a statistically significant number.

But murders are so infrequent that you never have enough data points. That is the point.

But in general there is also great sloppiness with geographic units.

Godge

sarumite wrote: »

I think you have misread/misunderstood the article. The author cherry picks the worst performing areas of the PS to get the 1/3 abseentism but the 4.83% was the national average rate of the PS as a whole. the noteworthy point from the article in terms of abseentism is that the target of 3.5% is being missed which the author doesn't mention until halfway down the first page. It is a poorly written article thought, that is for sure. Then again, its the indo so expectations should be low.

There is no 1/3 absenteeism. The article does not show it.

However, the article, as similar articles makes no distinction between the treatment of long-term illness in the private sector vis-a-vis the public sector.

Up until now, if you had cancer, or a heart attack or a serious car accident, in the public sector you either got six months paid leave or one years' paid leave, depending on which part of the sector. This is the sign of a generous but compassionate employer and pushes up dramatically the type of stats the Indo relies on.

You can have a view on whether it is better for an employer to look after seriously ill staff or whether people should be abandoned by their eployer but that is your choice,

sarumite

ardmacha wrote: »

But murders are so infrequent that you never have enough data points. That is the point.

But in general there is also great sloppiness with geographic units.

If you are looking at the murder rate, the number of murders is the variable. Therefore whether you have 1000 murders or 0 murders, its still one data point.

sarumite

Godge wrote: »

There is no 1/3 absenteeism. The article does not show it.

However, the article, as similar articles makes no distinction between the treatment of long-term illness in the private sector vis-a-vis the public sector.

Up until now, if you had cancer, or a heart attack or a serious car accident, in the public sector you either got six months paid leave or one years' paid leave, depending on which part of the sector. This is the sign of a generous but compassionate employer and pushes up dramatically the type of stats the Indo relies on.

You can have a view on whether it is better for an employer to look after seriously ill staff or whether people should be abandoned by their eployer but that is your choice,

From the article

"Nearly one-third of the workforce was on sick leave every day during August in the HSE's administrative office for Dublin and Midlands hospitals."

My view is that the government legislates on what it believes is the appropriate level of sick leave an employer should offer. An employer can choose to offer additional sick leave entitlement than what the government suggest as a perk of employment.

Jawgap

The really interesting thing in the article is this quote

Nearly one-third of the workforce was on sick leave every day during August in the HSE's administrative office for Dublin and Midlands hospitals.

I presume the reporter is referring to the "Dublin Midland Hospital Group" (7 hodpitals) rather than some mythical admin office for all hospitals in Dublin and the Midlands (20/21 hospitals) - which is interesting because no such office exists!

There is no office covering 'Dublin and Midlands hospitals' and the DMHG was only configured in September - the process of recruiting a CEO for that (and other groups) is ongoing.

Difficult to see how people could be absent from jobs or posts they've yet to be appointed to!

woodoo

sarumite wrote: »

From the article

"Nearly one-third of the workforce was on sick leave every day during August in the HSE's administrative office for Dublin and Midlands hospitals."

My view is that the government legislates on what it believes is the appropriate level of sick leave an employer should offer. An employer can choose to offer additional sick leave entitlement than what the government suggest as a perk of employment.

I'm surprised you have taken these figures at face value. They are absolute rubbish. Someone at the Indo is taking the piss or someone is taking the piss out of them.

sarumite

woodoo wrote: »

I'm surprised you have taken these figures at face value. They are absolute rubbish. Someone at the Indo is taking the piss or someone is taking the piss out of them.

:rolleyes:

sarumite wrote: »

. It is a poorly written article though, that is for sure. Then again, its the indo so expectations should be low.

marienbad

Jawgap wrote: »

The really interesting thing in the article is this quote



I presume the reporter is referring to the "Dublin Midland Hospital Group" (7 hodpitals) rather than some mythical admin office for all hospitals in Dublin and the Midlands (20/21 hospitals) - which is interesting because no such office exists!

There is no office covering 'Dublin and Midlands hospitals' and the DMHG was only configured in September - the process of recruiting a CEO for that (and other groups) is ongoing.

Difficult to see how people could be absent from jobs or posts they've yet to be appointed to!

Why does everyone discuss/dismiss the source of the story and offer no alternative ? Easy enough to verify surely.

Jawgap

marienbad wrote: »

Why does everyone discuss/dismiss the source of the story and offer no alternative ? Easy enough to verify surely.

It is easy to verify - just identify the address of the office mentioned ("the HSE's administrative office for Dublin and Midlands hospitals") and I'll bang in the FoI request (and pay for it).

Jawgap

It took a few minutes, but I found out where she got the stats from - and by the way I don't work for the HSE or in the HSE, nor am I a 'trained' journo....

They come from pg40 of the National Performance Assurance Report for September

The "HSE's administrative office for Dublin and Midlands hospitals" is the Network Office Dublin Midlands Hospitals which recorded an absenteeism rate of 29.82% in August 2013.

In September the same office recorded an absenteeism rate of 13.4% and in July it was 26.33%.

All this absenteeism was recorded against the category "Management Admin".

I'm guessing it's a small office and one person was off sick until the middle of September.

Incidentally, the table of data lists and ranks about 120 HSE locations according to their absenteeism performance - aside from the Network Office Dublin Midlands Hospitals, every other location, with one exception was less than 10%.

Did somebody say statistical outlier........

Gumbo

Jawgap wrote: »

It took a few minutes, but I found out where she got the stats from - and by the way I don't work for the HSE or in the HSE, nor am I a 'trained' journo....

They come from pg40 of the National Performance Assurance Report for September

The "HSE's administrative office for Dublin and Midlands hospitals" is the Network Office Dublin Midlands Hospitals which recorded an absenteeism rate of 29.82% in August 2013.

In September the same office recorded an absenteeism rate of 13.4% and in July it was 26.33%.

All this absenteeism was recorded against the category "Management Admin".

I'm guessing it's a small office and one person was off sick until the middle of September.

Incidentally, the table of data lists and ranks about 120 HSE locations according to their absenteeism performance - aside from the Network Office Dublin Midlands Hospitals, every other location, with one exception was less than 10%.

Did somebody say statistical outlier........

You should contact the sindo with your report and offer to correct their mistakes.

woodoo

Jawgap wrote: »

It took a few minutes, but I found out where she got the stats from - and by the way I don't work for the HSE or in the HSE, nor am I a 'trained' journo....

They come from pg40 of the National Performance Assurance Report for September

The "HSE's administrative office for Dublin and Midlands hospitals" is the Network Office Dublin Midlands Hospitals which recorded an absenteeism rate of 29.82% in August 2013.

In September the same office recorded an absenteeism rate of 13.4% and in July it was 26.33%.
W
All this absenteeism was recorded against the category "Management Admin".

I'm guessing it's a small office and one person was off sick until the middle of September.

Incidentally, the table of data lists and ranks about 120 HSE locations according to their absenteeism performance - aside from the Network Office Dublin Midlands Hospitals, every other location, with one exception was less than 10%.

Did somebody say statistical outlier........

It's outrageous that they would mess with stats like that just to have a kick at the public service. That paper is a disgrace.

marienbad

Jawgap wrote: »

It took a few minutes, but I found out where she got the stats from - and by the way I don't work for the HSE or in the HSE, nor am I a 'trained' journo....

They come from pg40 of the National Performance Assurance Report for September

The "HSE's administrative office for Dublin and Midlands hospitals" is the Network Office Dublin Midlands Hospitals which recorded an absenteeism rate of 29.82% in August 2013.

In September the same office recorded an absenteeism rate of 13.4% and in July it was 26.33%.

All this absenteeism was recorded against the category "Management Admin".

I'm guessing it's a small office and one person was off sick until the middle of September.

Incidentally, the table of data lists and ranks about 120 HSE locations according to their absenteeism performance - aside from the Network Office Dublin Midlands Hospitals, every other location, with one exception was less than 10%.

Did somebody say statistical outlier........

How can you take the indo up on their accuracy or otherwise and then go ''guessing'' yourself ?

The story is the level of absenteeism and even your analysis shows it was '' less than 10%''

Why must we always shoot the messenger instead of addressing the issue ?

Vizzy

marienbad wrote: »

How can you take the indo up on their accuracy or otherwise and then go ''guessing'' yourself ?

The story is the level of absenteeism and even your analysis shows it was '' less than 10%''

Why must we always shoot the messenger instead of addressing the issue ?

Difference is that Jawgap is not a journo(and has even been so kind as to tell us) yet he can get the info and present it factually.
Neither is Jawgap trying to sell newspapers on the back of some "soundbite" type of article without clarifying how many managers were actually absent in August.
Surely even you will appreciate that the system(any system) will not continue to operate indefinitely with 33% less staff.

Jawgap

marienbad wrote: »

How can you take the indo up on their accuracy or otherwise and then go ''guessing'' yourself ?

The story is the level of absenteeism and even your analysis shows it was '' less than 10%''

Why must we always shoot the messenger instead of addressing the issue ?

There are 120 HSE locations.

There is 12 months of data.

That yields 1,440 data points.

They took a single data point and pretty much used that as the basis for a story on absenteeism in the HSE. The journo didn't even have the courtesy to normalise the data to ensure as transparent a picture as possible was presented.

Absenteeism is a problem in the HSE - and misrepresenting the facts won't help deal with it if it causes attitudes to entrench.

....and maybe the messenger should be "shot" when they get the message so very deliberately wrong?

marienbad

Jawgap wrote: »

There are 120 HSE locations.

There is 12 months of data.

That yields 1,440 data points.

They took a single data point and pretty much used that as the basis for a story on absenteeism in the HSE. The journo didn't even have the courtesy to normalise the data to ensure as transparent a picture as possible was presented.

Absenteeism is a problem in the HSE - and misrepresenting the facts won't help deal with it if it causes attitudes to entrench.

....and maybe the messenger should be "shot" when they get the message so very deliberately wrong?

This is just more avoidance - is there or is there not an absenteeism problem in the HSE in particular and the Public Service in general .

Do we agree the answer is yes there is and it is a serious one.

A newspaper highlighted this issue and all we do is discuss how well or badly they do so and miss the issue itself.

It just smacks of the ''teach the controversy'' strategy and nothing more.

Now back to the Op - why are such levels of absenteeism still tolerated .

ardmacha

The Indo could have highlighted absenteeism by accurately using data in a way respectful of small populations and policy differences. But presented with this opportunity the Indo preferred a rant, a policy shared by many (but not all) posters here.

This is why you have to fear for this country, despite all that has happened there is still no willingness to look at policies as driven by facts, not stereotypes.

sarumite

ardmacha wrote: »

The Indo could have highlighted absenteeism by accurately using data in a way respectful of small populations and policy differences. But presented with this opportunity the Indo preferred a rant, a policy shared by many (but not all) posters here.

This is why you have to fear for this country, despite all that has happened there is still no willingness to look at policies as driven by facts, not stereotypes.

What the indo did was to selectively choose their stats to suit their argument. They are hardly unique in that respect. In my opinion many on here taking the moral high ground and throwing metaphorical stones are doing it from a metaphorical glasshouse.