Decentralisation

Macy · 02-07-2007 02:55PM

Seanies32 wrote:

He does have a point, State agencies wouldn't have the same experience on decentralisation as has been pointed out here they are not the Civil Service.

State Agency employee's are employed by those individual agencies. This was originally done to give these employee's lesser terms and conditions than true Civil Servants. It is the Department of Finance that should've realised this when they drew up the plan (and to be fair, there is evidence that the Civil Servants did point this out, but were ignored by McCreevy and Parlon). Cowen's had how many years now to deal with this issue? They haven't even tried to address it with talks with the unions. Infact the Department of Finance doesn't even recognise SIPTU (the main union in the State Agencies involved) for negotiation purposes, so there isn't even the mechanism to directly talk to that Union as things stand!

It also ignores that many of the state agencies already have a presence around the country. For example, in FAS 2,100 of the staff are already based outside of their Head Office. BIM would have regional area offices. Bus Eireann employee's would be based around the country.

NewDubliner · 02-07-2007 07:57PM

I was watching 'The week in politics' last night.

Willie O'Dea successfully maintained the government smokescreen and neither RTE nor FG asked any really hard questions, they just hadn't done their homework. Value for money & effect on efficiency are now forgotten as the government juggernaut rumbles on.

O'Dea scored a sneaky point by insisting that the moves were entirely voluntary without mentioning the promotion embargo and imminent white-walling of many Dublin specialists.

BostonB · 02-07-2007 09:13PM

I think decentralisation will happen slowly, but it will happen. In 10yrs for now it will be seen for the white elephant it is.

NewDubliner · 02-07-2007 10:50PM

BostonB wrote:

I think decentralisation will happen slowly, but it will happen. In 10yrs for now it will be seen for the white elephant it is.

I disagree that it will be seen as a 'white elephant'. In 10 years time, everyone will have forgotten what the project's goals were, some people will have moved job from Limerick to Listowel, others from Cahirciveen to Killarney and it will be declared a 'great success' and 'far-sighted'. But, in 10 years time, people will be paying more tax and public services will be worse than now. Everyone will blame the public service workers.

In 10 years time, the government will probably be campaigning to move people out of their on-off houses and out of their SUVs and back to the cities where economies of scale will make it easier to provide public transport, water, sewage, broadband, health, social and electricity services.

NewDubliner · 27-08-2007 07:31PM

From RTE:

This could have implications for the proposed banishment of all Civil Service IT workers from Dublin.

Court rules on FÁS decentralisation plans
Monday, 27 August 2007 17:29

The Government's decentralisation programme has suffered a significant setback as the Labour Court ruled that State agency FÁS cannot make promotions conditional on the recipient being prepared to relocate from Dublin.

Staff at the state agency had taken industrial action in protest that the introduction of the so-called 'promotions clause'.

In his recommendation, Labour Court Chairman Kevin Duffy said that staff applying for promotions had the right to be judged on suitability and merit alone.
Advertisement

He said that if staff exercised their right not to move to Co Offaly, they would be denied access to promotions to which they could normally aspire.

He said that given the importance of career progression for those involved, such a state of affairs is incompatible with any reasonable notion of voluntarism.

The Labour Court acknowledges that similar promotion clauses were introduced in the civil service but says there is a difference of scale between employment in the civil service and individual state agencies.

There is also a greater possibility of interdepartmental transfers in the civil service.

eigrod · 27-08-2007 08:07PM

Will be interesting how this ruling will be applied to Confined Inter-Departmental Promotion Competitions on the Civil Service side which have had this stipulation attached to it also, although the ruling stated that the scale of the Civil Service makes it different to State Agencies.

Looks like it's the death knell for the scheme on the State Agency side anyways.

The_Conductor · 27-08-2007 08:59PM

eigrod wrote:

Will be interesting how this ruling will be applied to Confined Inter-Departmental Promotion Competitions on the Civil Service side which have had this stipulation attached to it also, although the ruling stated that the scale of the Civil Service makes it different to State Agencies.

Looks like it's the death knell for the scheme on the State Agency side anyways.

Latest Dept. of Agriculture Internal HEO ICT competition states that successful candidates have to sign up to 3 years in Portlaoise, which may be proceeded by lengthly stays in Maynooth and Backweston, Co. Kildare. Wonder does the current ruling have any bearing on this?

NewDubliner · 27-08-2007 09:10PM

smccarrick wrote:

Latest Dept. of Agriculture Internal HEO ICT competition states that successful candidates have to sign up to 3 years in Portlaoise, which may be proceeded by lengthly stays in Maynooth and Backweston, Co. Kildare. Wonder does the current ruling have any bearing on this?

It could have the effect of exposing the double standard that ICT staff are supposed to be general service in every way except when the government realises that they're actually quite valuable specialists and that various people have been tagged as 'IT' so as to try and ensure their essential skills are not lost in the decentralisation churn.

eigrod · 27-08-2007 10:19PM

The whole process is at a very interesting crossroads now. With Parlon gone, is there any other scapegoat out there willing to grasp the ****ty end of this stick now ? Can't see anyone in the Green Party doing so, given that they called for it to be scrapped in their pre-election manifesto.

Time for Departmental Sec Gens, who clearly are against this since day 1, to start putting a bit of pressure on their Ministers as it's making for very difficult working environment in many departments for staff who want to move but can't be certain that they will and for staff that don't want to go at all.

BostonB · 27-08-2007 10:29PM

I get the impression that the Govt pretty much feel they have a free hand to do anything they want now. All the promises, corruption, failing to deliver in so many area's. But still get voted in. Why not keep not keep decentralization rolling.

Liam Byrne · 28-08-2007 12:02AM

BostonB wrote:

Why not keep not keep decentralization rolling.

:eek: Waaah! Spelling it like that, I almost thought we'd all be moving to the U.S. for jobs (which could actually be the case if the mismanagement of the country continues :rolleyes: )

BostonB · 28-08-2007 12:18AM

Its some spelling check thingy in Firefox. Defaults to US.

MG · 28-08-2007 07:56AM

It's interesting comparing decentralisation to the Shannon AL contraversy. It seems to me that the lobby behind thwarting decentralisation is far more powerful than the Shannon lobby but gets far less attention. In fact, the media seem to be very much behind the Trade Union lobby against decentralisation.

Specifically on the Labour Court recommendation, it seems correct that promoton should be based on ability rather than location (another days debate - does promotion happen on merit in the Civil service????). However, surely the consequence of this, and unfortunately the way it has always been, is that in reality one has to stay in Dublin to get promotion and therefore the whole process actually is location dependant.

The_Conductor · 28-08-2007 08:16AM

MG wrote:

It's interesting comparing decentralisation to the Shannon AL contraversy. It seems to me that the lobby behind thwarting decentralisation is far more powerful than the Shannon lobby but gets far less attention. In fact, the media seem to be very much behind the Trade Union lobby against decentralisation.

Specifically on the Labour Court recommendation, it seems correct that promoton should be based on ability rather than location (another days debate - does promotion happen on merit in the Civil service????). However, surely the consequence of this, and unfortunately the way it has always been, is that in reality one has to stay in Dublin to get promotion and therefore the whole process actually is location dependant.

You aren't allowed to apply for promotion in the civil service unless 1) you've been in your current grade for a specific length of time, 2) your sickness and leave record are exemplary, 3) your annnual appraisal is above a certain level, 4) you sit written tests on aptitude, numerical ability and verbal reasoning, 5) you submit to a structured interview, 6) You must give a presentation to an interview panel of scenarios relevant to the promotion you are applying for.......

If you manage to clear 1-6 above, you 'may' be placed on a promotion panel (then again you may not). I'd like someone to say that merit is not involved there.......

Edit- in the current situation, one has to agree not to stay in Dublin in order to get a promotion (irrespective of whether or not they are currently in Dublin). There is no case at present where you can be in Dublin and intend to stay in Dublin- and still go for promotion- so its the opposite of what you are suggesting. The Dublin based people have been hung out to dry. Mind you- the civil service is not based in Dublin- over 2/3 of civil servants are outside the greater Dublin region- so the current scheme suits them fine- and the unions don't really care, as it benefits more people than it screws......

S.

NewDubliner · 28-08-2007 05:57PM

MG wrote:

........the media seem to be very much behind the Trade Union lobby against decentralisation.

It think this is inaccurate. There is no anti-decentralisation lobby.

There are many people who oppose the wasteful spending represented by the current scheme.

There are many different kinds of people who oppose it, from motorists who'll suffer from increased traffic congestion caused by it, people whose taxes will increase, those who will suffer from diminished services and finally, the staff whose careers and family lives will be ruined.

Firetrap · 29-08-2007 12:00AM

No, I don't think there's a lobby either. To be honest, I don't think people who aren't directly affected by decentralisation give it any thought at all. It is nice to see a setback like the FÁS one though :cool: I wonder will any TD take up the mantle of Tom Parlon (who?) and try to convince all and sundry that it really is a great idea to move to Dungarvan/Clonakilty/Hackballscross

The problem with decentralisation is that no political party will have the guts to call it off for fear of invoking the ire of the natives of the towns earmarked for decentralising departments. I'm sure that privately a lot of Fianna Fail TDs know it's a dead duck and that they bit off more than they could chew but they're never going to admit that.

NewDubliner · 29-08-2007 07:34AM

Firetrap wrote:

I wonder will any TD take up the mantle of Tom Parlon

Tom Parlon was special, it would be hard for anyone to be as unconvincing as him. But I think Willie O'Dea and Michael O'Cuiv are in the running. Both have the 'screw Dublin and give us the jobs' attitude.

MG · 29-08-2007 07:57AM

smccarrick wrote:

You aren't allowed to apply for promotion in the civil service unless 1) you've been in your current grade for a specific length of time, 2) your sickness and leave record are exemplary, 3) your annnual appraisal is above a certain level, 4) you sit written tests on aptitude, numerical ability and verbal reasoning, 5) you submit to a structured interview, 6) You must give a presentation to an interview panel of scenarios relevant to the promotion you are applying for.......

If you manage to clear 1-6 above, you 'may' be placed on a promotion panel (then again you may not). I'd like someone to say that merit is not involved there.......

It'sinteresting that the first criterion you mention is length of service. As I said that's another day's debate.

smccarrick wrote:

Edit- in the current situation, one has to agree not to stay in Dublin in order to get a promotion (irrespective of whether or not they are currently in Dublin). There is no case at present where you can be in Dublin and intend to stay in Dublin- and still go for promotion- so its the opposite of what you are suggesting. The Dublin based people have been hung out to dry. Mind you- the civil service is not based in Dublin- over 2/3 of civil servants are outside the greater Dublin region- so the current scheme suits them fine- and the unions don't really care, as it benefits more people than it screws......

S.

If you read my post, you will see that I agree with the Labour COurt recommendation that decouples promotion and leaving Dublin. The point is that to achieve promotion now, are you almost effectivelty oblioged to stay in Dublin? You mention that 2/3 of civil servents are outside the greater Dublin region ( I'll take that as being correct, I've never been able to find that out), but would it be fair to say that the higher grades (i.e. promotion opportuinities) are primarily based in Dublin?

MG · 29-08-2007 08:04AM

NewDubliner wrote:

It think this is inaccurate. There is no anti-decentralisation lobby.

There are many people who oppose the wasteful spending represented by the current scheme.

There are many different kinds of people who oppose it, from motorists who'll suffer from increased traffic congestion caused by it, people whose taxes will increase, those who will suffer from diminished services and finally, the staff whose careers and family lives will be ruined.

I have to disagree, though I will say that they are far more subtle than the Shannon lobby. Effectively, the unions & public representatives in Dublin are doing exactly the same as in Shannon by opposing relocating job outside of their area.

The public service unions are lobbying hard against it because their members don't want to move house etc. Very few people against it oppose it because it is "wasteful", they oppose it because it doesn't suit them. Unfortunately the debate about decentralisation has rarely touched on the public good.

Personnally, I'd decentralise all the jobs to Belfast and unite the Shannon & Dublin lobbies

Hotblack Desiato · 29-08-2007 01:36PM

MG wrote:

It'sinteresting that the first criterion you mention is length of service.

Unlike years ago, it's not a criterion, it's a prerequisite. Usually two years in your present grade is requried, but service longer than that does NOT gain you anything. On the contrary, there have been several age discrimination cases lost by government departments who failed to give staff with high seniority a fair crack at promotion.

The point is that to achieve promotion now, are you almost effectivelty oblioged to stay in Dublin?

No, although the scatter-gun approach to decentralisation will mean that in future, staff serving in the regions who wish to be promoted will have to be prepared to move to another location (other than Dublin).

You mention that 2/3 of civil servents are outside the greater Dublin region ( I'll take that as being correct, I've never been able to find that out)

It IS correct, just something the anti-Dublin crowd keep very quiet about.
There are Social Welfare, Revenue, Garda, Fas, etc. etc. offices all over the place.

but would it be fair to say that the higher grades (i.e. promotion opportuinities) are primarily based in Dublin?

Only really at assistant secretary level (i.e. 2 or 3 levels below the Minister)
and above. Probably less than 100 people in the country across all government departments. You have to have a capital somewhere :rolleyes:

Hotblack Desiato · 29-08-2007 01:43PM

MG wrote:

Effectively, the unions & public representatives in Dublin are doing exactly the same as in Shannon by opposing relocating job outside of their area.

That's rubbish, the only union really opposed to decentralisation is SIPTU and they represent only a handful of civil servants, if any (they are stronger in the state agencies like Fas however.)

The actual civil service unions - CPSU are in favour, PSEU "neither for nor against" officially but in practice in favour (doing little on behalf of their Dublin members) and the AHCPS, representing senior grades and by far the smallest of the three is opposed, but mainly on the grounds of waste of money.

The public service unions are lobbying hard against it

I categorically assure you, the civil service unions are doing no such thing.

Very few people against it oppose it because it is "wasteful", they oppose it because it doesn't suit them. Unfortunately the debate about decentralisation has rarely touched on the public good.

There are many good reasons to oppose the present programme... does it matter which one you concentrate on? They're all valid.

I must have read by now well over a hundred articles in the various national newspapers about the waste of money and damage to public services that this programme is bringing.

NewDubliner · 29-08-2007 05:21PM

This is the editorial from the 'Examiner'. Totally ignores the cost and benefit issues and insinuates that the selfish staff should go wherever they're told for the 'greater good'. I think there's still quite a bit of Cork begrudgery in the (Cork) Examiner.

Decentralisation fiasco - Proposal doomed to sit in dust

THE Labour Court ruling that FÁS cannot make promotion conditional on staff being prepared to move to the training body’s proposed new headquarters in Birr, Co Offaly, is the final nail in the coffin for the Government’s decentralisation policy.

Announced on December 3, 2003, during a budget speech by then finance minister Charlie McCreevy, with his customary bluster and dismissive sabre rattling, the policy has been consigned to the back of the bottom drawer in the Government’s must-do filing cabinet.

Decentralisation’s demise is a pity. It is not the only good idea languishing in that dusty hospice for ambition — but condemned it most certainly is.

Any doubts about the status of the proposals can be put aside after even a fleeting glance at the official Government decentralisation website. It was most recently modified on October 16 — almost a year ago — an urgency reflected in the fact that the site admits it has had fewer than 850 visitors.

This urgency is infectious as the Public Appointments Service website decentralisation news update was last amended in September 2006.

Though as much a strategy to win the recent election as a realistic proposal, Mr McCreevy ignored imperatives outlined in spatial strategy policy, undermining that essential process in a profound way.

So what went wrong? Did Mr McCreevy overestimate the appetite of civil servants and the employees of State agencies for an alternative to life to the one they led in Dublin; for a life of blackberry picking, nights of amateur drama productions in windy parish halls and intermediate football? Did he underestimate the grip the charms of the capital and easy access to third-level education had on those he wished to transfer?

What he — and the Taoiseach who must have given his blessing — did underestimate was the opposition of those expected to move from Dublin.

Equally, Mr McCreevy overestimated his capacity to deliver despite bringing the flexibility of a contortionist to the definition of what decentralisation actually was.

The Public Appointments Service tells us that more than 10,500 civil and public servants applied to relocate. The website tells us that movement of staff within and between departments and offices continues with more than 2,100 staff “already assigned to posts which will decentralise”. This all sounds dandy but remember the site was last updated in September 2006.

All of this is a pity and once again shows our way of doing business in an archaic and poor light. Decentralisation — essentially an excellent and inevitable idea — has fallen on the notion of job ownership.

Those employed in the positions considered suitable for decentralisation believed — and were vindicated by the Labour Court — that the jobs were their personal property and not a function of public service, a function of how this society manages and sustains itself.

They believed that their rights outweighed the rights of the society that employs them to try to evolve in a sustainable way.

Self-interest has won the day but, once again, any criticism must be severely qualified by the acceptance that the notion of the greater good has been consigned to a place far more remote and dusty than even the very back of the bottom drawer in the filing cabinet.

However, the sorry episode has provided some light relief for the workers in the private sector. More used to seeing jobs decentralised — without any negotiation — to Bangalore rather than Banagher and unfamiliar with the comforts and security offered by the Labour Court, they can only wonder: how do they get away with it?

Victor · 29-08-2007 05:42PM

Lets move the Examiner Sports Desk to Kilkenny.

Firetrap · 30-08-2007 11:04PM

Interesting. Have they hit a brick wall when it comes to moving staff in state agencies?

Govt cannot force State agency staff - Cowen
Thursday, 30 August 2007 22:54

The Minister for Finance, Brian Cowen, has accepted that the Government cannot force public servants to leave Dublin by making promotions conditional on decentralising to the regions.

Mr Cowen was responding to a Labour Court recommendation which criticised the State training agency, FÁS, for introducing a so-called 'promotions clause' into future employment contracts.

FÁS staff were told they would only be eligible for promotion if they were prepared to move to Birr, Co Offaly.
Advertisement

Labour Court chairman Kevin Duffy said decentralisation of State bodies cannot be handled in the same way as the civil service because of the difficulty of staff transferring to a different agency if they chose to stay in Dublin.

He also recommended that effecting decentralisation on a voluntary basis can best be achieved by identifying realistic alternative career options for those who do not want to move.

Mr Cowen said that each State agency and its parent department would now have to take account of the Labour Court ruling.

He said the Government accepts the recommendation of the Labour Court, and believes it reflects concerns previously expressed by the Decentralisation Implementation Group.

The Tánaiste has asked his Department to engage with the unions representing staff in the State agencies generally to establish how progress can be made on this aspect of the Labour Court recommendation.

Mr Cowen went on to stress that decentralisation was progressing 'well' in the civil service.

He said that approximately 40% all civil service posts due to relocate are already filled, and he estimated that around 2,000 of these posts will have moved to their new locations by the end of the year.

Hotblack Desiato · 31-08-2007 02:24PM

Firetrap wrote:

Interesting. Have they hit a brick wall when it comes to moving staff in state agencies?

Yes, definitely.

Also bear in mind that the 40% of civil service posts which have been filled, have mostly been filled by staff already working outside of Dublin.

In effect, it's a very expensive game of musical chairs where people shift from one provincial post to another one slightly closer to their home. Very few people will be moving their home, the so-called economic benefits for these towns do not exist.

At least one recent newspaper article specified "maintaining property prices" as a supposed benefit of decentralisation, how is that a benefit for local would-be first time buyers?

The hard questions left unanswered, as ever, are how they are going to fill the provincial vacancies left by "decentralisers", and what is going to happen to the surplus Dublin staff.

The_Conductor · 31-08-2007 03:03PM

Irish Times poll of the day today is: Should the government proceed with its Decentralisation plans? Its almost amusing reading the comments.......

http://scripts.ireland.com/polls/breaking/index.cfm

NewDubliner · 31-08-2007 06:14PM

smccarrick wrote:

Irish Times poll of the day today is: Should the government proceed with its Decentralisation plans? Its almost amusing reading the comments.......http://scripts.ireland.com/polls/breaking/index.cfm

Interesting that while the majority vote is in favour, the comments are mostly negative. Typical of a situation where the proponents can't produce any rational arguments in favour of the current scam/scheme. But they still want it.

K-9 · 01-09-2007 01:40AM

There is absolutely NO reason, other than those afore mentioned, to spread government human resources all over the map especially when their past record shows they have been up and running smoothly and efficiently in Dublin for decades.

Plenty of good reasons given but thats the worst!

Anyway, I think decentralisation is one of those issues that people are not going to agree on. In a way as posted on the poll site it is similar to Aet Lingus and Shannon. Not exactly the same reasons of course, but the staff in the airport are quite similar to staff in the decentralisation programme. There are interesting similarities.

Profit comes into the Aer Lingus debate but it shouldn't necessarily be the main concern for decentralisation. They wouldn't want to move even if the plan was to move the hub to Dublin. Its a tough situation but on this thread every poster in the last few months seems to be anti decentralisation and aren't going to be turkeys voting for Xmas!

NewDubliner · 01-09-2007 08:38AM

Anyway, I think decentralisation is one of those issues that people are not going to agree on.

This because the 'pro-decentralisation' lobby refuses to engage in rational, fact-based debate and constantly move the goalposts when each argument is challenged and discredited.

Profit comes into the Aer Lingus debate but it shouldn't necessarily be the main concern for decentralisation.

This is shifting the goalposts. One of the main planks of the government's argument has been that its scheme would lead to reduced costs.

Schuhart · 01-09-2007 10:41AM

MG wrote:

Unfortunately the debate about decentralisation has rarely touched on the public good.

This is true - the debate is always debated as a HR issue. Its all about whether the staff want to move or not. When you reflect on it, that's actually irrelevant. If the State saved money by sending people to Urlingford, then the public interest would be to send them to Urlingford whether they wanted to go or not. If (as is actually the case) it costs a squad of money to shift people out of Dublin and there's no discernable benefit other than a load of fat County Councillors getting their mugshot in the local paper at the opening of the new offices, then clearly we should not do it even if the staff were chomping at the bit.

MG wrote:

It's interesting comparing decentralisation to the Shannon AL contraversy. It seems to me that the lobby behind thwarting decentralisation is far more powerful than the Shannon lobby but gets far less attention.

I'd suggest reflecting on this again. The Shannon lobby managed to stunt Irish aviation for decades, all for the sake of a packed payroll in Clare. The massive cost inflicted on the nation for this modest gain strikes me as evidende of considerable influence. They even managed to get Government to lobby against Open Skies - which is really flat-earth stuff.

On the other hand, decentralisation is like Fianna Fail's Iraq war. Whatever political gain or objective they were trying to achieve has long vanished in the mist. However, despite being a very obviously costly and pointless policy, they cannot reverse it. If there was a coherent anti-Decentralisation lobby with influence, the Government would have rowed back the minute McCreevy got EU Commissioner. Alternatively, they'd do it right now to allow the dust to settle before the next election. Instead, they are scrabbling around trying to send some fecker to somewhere West of Maynooth at any price rather than admit they should just never have published such a daft scheme in the first place.

The Heathrow slots moving from Shannon is actually the first time a West of Ireland lobby has been comprehensively told to feck off. I've a feeling this is simply because the Northern card trumps the Western card. Belfast now carries more political weight than Shannon - unsurprisingly.

Decentralisation

Comments