5,000 Redundancies sought at HSE

maninasia · 02-11-2010 03:57AM

dotsman wrote: »

Not a HSE support staff myself, but my understanding is that the "support staff" are the back-end staff "supporting" the services - HR, IT, Legal, general management, marketing, PR etc. Probably a lot of job roles/titles that do very little for the overall running of things.

The whole organisation needs to be reviewed and cuts made in a logical common-sense manner, I am sure that some support staff are vital to smooth running of the organisation. It doesn not make sense to target one area in particular.

maninasia · 02-11-2010 04:00AM

Paddy Samurai wrote: »

Yeah sounds like people due to retire next june,will get another two years salary lumpsum if they go six months early...before end of year.Does'nt make sense really.:(

Or have I got it wrong?.

That's messed up but I am afraid it is possible, simply because the government will be desperate to get the salary count down quickly to 'show' they are doing something. They have backed themselves into a corner with their dilly-dallying and refusal to deal with the situation as it arose and the country suffers again as a result.

sdanseo · 02-11-2010 04:02AM

FINALLY.

>120,000 people work in the HSE IIRC as public servants, that's nearly 5% of the population and about 10+% of all workers! Ridiculous.

Once read a Joke about a boat race between the HSE and NHS:

The HSE and the British NHS decided to have a competitive boat race on the River Liffey. Both teams practiced hard and long to reach their peak performance. On the big day, they were as ready as they could be.

The NHS team won by a mile.

Afterwards, the HSE team became discouraged by the loss and their morale sagged. Corporate management decided that the reason for the crushing defeat had to be found. A Continuous Measurable Improvement Team of "Executives" was set up to investigate the problem and to recommend appropriate corrective action.

Their conclusion: The problem was that the NHS team had 8 people rowing and 1 person steering, whereas the HSE team had 1 person rowing and 8 people steering. The HSE Corporate Steering Committee immediately hired a consulting firm to do a study on the management structure.

After some time and billions of euro, the consulting firm concluded that "too many people were steering and not enough rowing." To prevent losing to the NHS again next year, the management structure was changed to "4 Steering Managers, 3 Area Steering Managers, and 1 Staff Steering Manager" and a new performance system for the person rowing the boat to give more incentive to work harder and become a six sigma performer. "We must give him empowerment and enrichment." That ought to do it.

The next year the NHS team won by two miles.

Heard it ages ago and googled to find it, robbed and adapted from here

Einhard · 02-11-2010 06:15AM

FoxT wrote: »

If the HSE has 100,000 on the payroll, then natural wastage will surely see them losing about 2500 people a year?

If that is the case, why pay people up to 2 years pay to leave now? Why not just sit back, let the 2,500 a year retire as normal, replace just say 4-500 of these, & watch the numbers fall?

- Doing this will take longer but cost about the same as early leavers now will receive up to 2 years pay
- It would allow the HSE to ramp down in an orderly fashion vs a big bang when they wake up 1 morning & suddenly find 5000 people gone.

Would take discipline though...Aha! maybe not so good after all...

I'd say it's because cutting the €200 million will make a dent on the deficit for next year. That's probably why they want it all sorted this year, so that the €400 million cost can be added to this years deficit, and not impact on next years. Therefore, the scheme impacts on the deficit from the start. If they waited around for natural wastage, the redundancies would have no affect on the deficit. That's just my guess mind, but if it's right it's a good plan. Pity they didn't come up with it earlier.

topper75 · 02-11-2010 10:11AM

I suspect a lot of unnecessary HSE admin staff were hired on the back of abnormally large stamp duty receipts during the housing boom.
There was no heed given to the temporary nature of that boost in tax revenue, nor to the rather more permanent nature of the salary expenditure. It was unsustainable.

prinz · 02-11-2010 10:59AM

Terry wrote: »

You do all know that this is to pay for NAMA, right? That the knock-on effect will more than likely lead to strikes and more patients left on trollies.But hey, you're all private sector workers who look down on those employed by the government because your taxes pay their wages, right?Fúck the terminally ill and those needing emergency treatment. It's all about you and your disposable income. In two months you will all be complaining about further rises on the live register and blaming the government for it, little realising how much of an effect this will have on the PPP of the country.Praise Harney.

This isn't going to affect the terminally ill and those needing emergency treatment. I take it you haven't had an experience recetly with a public hospital.. my wife's experience in the last few weeks..

Her file was triplicated. Her original file including ultrasound results (central to diagnosis) was lost. She has since received three different appointments for the same thing, on three different times and dates with the same specialist. That's red tape and clerical staff BS. NOT doctors and nurses.

She spent 24 hours over three days in the hopspital, 23 waiting, 1 hour actually being treated. During that time she had to go through 'registration' three times, and had to go via A&E (which is already overcrowded and overworked) twice after the inital consult because 'that's how things are done'.

kraggy · 02-11-2010 01:37PM

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

€400 million / 5,000 = €80,000 and that's an average !!!

And it's being offered to people who are near retirement , sounds like there will be a lot of golden handshakes

please tell me that people with less than two years to go till retirement will be excluded form the scheme, but this is Ireland

and no doubt there will be a lot of last in , first out too because of unions , so tiny savings will be made at the cost of a lot of hardship

we are paying 7% a year on bonds

so while it might save €200m a year it will cost about €30m to service the debt so the savings won't appear until the middle of 2013

€80,000 is well worth if if it means getting rid of the high management people whose salaries are about that every year anyway.

Again, as I said earlier, it's a mix of people from near minimum wage to high management.

Therefore, some of the people leaving will be getting much more than €80,000. But that's better than continuing to give them that amount each year for another few years and then giving them a pension, lump sum etc.

Morlar · 02-11-2010 01:44PM

kraggy wrote: »

€80,000 is well worth if if it means getting rid of the high management people whose salaries are about that every year anyway.

Again, as I said earlier, it's a mix of people from near minimum wage to high management.

Therefore, some of the people leaving will be getting much more than €80,000. But that's better than continuing to give them that amount each year for another few years and then giving them a pension, lump sum etc.

Why not just make them involuntarily redundant on the statutory minimum - like you would in the private sector.

The croke park agreement 'not to sack any ps workers' was dependent on the economy not worsening - which it has. We are now (according to the independent) one month from IMF intervention. If they come in I think the only saving grace will be the public sector teamsters unions being dealt with.

Glenbhoy · 02-11-2010 01:45PM

doolox wrote: »

The HSE has something like 100,000 on the payroll so 2000 in HR may be reasonable especially since the sector is very complicated with agreements from many original hospitals and organisations still exist for existing staff.

Unlike what would happen in private organisations would just stick to a unified policy and pay rate for a given grade and type of worker and that would be that. PPARS failed because of the complexity of the pay roll system in the HSE. HR covers a lot more than pay so one can only imagine the complexity of other systems and policies etc.. in place.

The redundancy of 5,000 is only the beginning. Once the govt get their way with this package they will repeat it other public operations. Also a selloff of semistates is on the cards.

Having contracted within the health service, I noted that HR was vastly overstaffed and that with the advent of shared services centres many of the staff were no longer necessary as their roles were duplicated however, as far as I am aware, nothing was done to cut the numbers in the original organisations. One observation I took from that time was that many of the staff had been promoted or moved up pay grades simply because they had obtained further academic qualifications, whilst it was right to encourage people to further themselves, these should not have led to increased salaries almost automatically.

In saying that, I would be infavour of redeploying excess staff to areas within the public sector where they are needed in as many cases as possible, but obviously we need to see the public sector wage bill slashed. It makes infinitely more sense to cut salaries right across the board and keep the numbers as they are at present imo, but this doesn't appear to be an option being considered.

Capt'n Midnight · 02-11-2010 01:50PM

gizmo wrote: »

I don't doubt the article is unclear on the figures, I'm just highlighting that the €200m figure seems more likely given a similar breakdown you gave above.

This is from the same Government that didn't realise that civil servants could claim back the increased pension charges against tax and so that move would only raise about half the money they announced.

Add to that the drip feed revelations about the amount of debt we are in and you can understand how some of will be upset but not shocked when yet again their figures are out by a factor of 2.

Oh by the way our 10 year bonds peaked at 7.125 base points.
In other words 1.07125^10 = 1.99 - yes over the next 10 years we will pay TWICE what we are currently borrowing ( The Germans will only have to pay 21% more than they borrowed , guess where the people lending to us are getting their money )

Capt'n Midnight · 02-11-2010 01:55PM

Einhard wrote: »

I'd say it's because cutting the €200 million will make a dent on the deficit for next year. That's probably why they want it all sorted this year, so that the €400 million cost can be added to this years deficit, and not impact on next years. Therefore, the scheme impacts on the deficit from the start. If they waited around for natural wastage, the redundancies would have no affect on the deficit. That's just my guess mind, but if it's right it's a good plan. Pity they didn't come up with it earlier.

No no no.
We will have to borrow €400m today to possibly save 200m over each of the next two years. Then in year three we will have to wait until we've saved another €30m for the interest before we see any real savings.

As other posters have said by then 5,000 should have left though natural wastage anyway. So the only excuse for this is if they are getting rid of people who aren't overworked and in areas where morale isn't very low. So those who have had it cushy get rewarded but there are still shortages in some frontline staff.

Or we could simply apply benchmarking, Private sector wages have fallen by 30% ( just look at PAYE revenues ) so ....

Capt'n Midnight · 02-11-2010 01:58PM

kraggy wrote: »

€80,000 is well worth if if it means getting rid of the high management people whose salaries are about that every year anyway.

Again, as I said earlier, it's a mix of people from near minimum wage to high management.

Therefore, some of the people leaving will be getting much more than €80,000. But that's better than continuing to give them that amount each year for another few years and then giving them a pension, lump sum etc.

They will still get pensions and stuff.
Also this will be more attrative to experianced staff rather than to those hired more recently

my understanding (please correct me if I'm wrong) is that most of the recent bloat in numbers is in admin rather than in healthcare and so the people who have specific knowledge will go and the pencil pushers in what are generic clerical roles that could easily be replaced will stay.

Degsy · 02-11-2010 02:26PM

Morlar wrote: »

Why not just make them involuntarily redundant on the statutory minimum - like you would in the private sector.

The croke park agreement 'not to sack any ps workers' was dependent on the economy not worsening - which it has. We are now (according to the independent) one month from IMF intervention. If they come in I think the only saving grace will be the public sector teamsters unions being dealt with.

And the dole-bums on 200 a week for doing nothing will be left alone to enjoy thier lives,yeah?

Sizzler · 02-11-2010 02:46PM

mox54 wrote: »

these guys are not in the real world at all, 2000 in HR, for heavens sake that is madness and we're putting up with it!!:rolleyes:

The HSE employs 18,000 people in admin functions :eek: The number of non-medical staff in the HSE who are earning more than €100k also runs into the hundreds.

The dept of health employs 400 people who do not actually do anything, have zero power and merely "support" the minister for health in her quest to ensure we have a world class health system. 400 people to do that and look at the state of it?

How f**ked is the country :mad:

yankinlk · 02-11-2010 03:02PM

prinz wrote: »

This isn't going to affect the terminally ill and those needing emergency treatment. I take it you haven't had an experience recetly with a public hospital.. my wife's experience in the last few weeks..

Her file was triplicated...

Ditto that experience recently. My aunt's files/results were lost and she was asked to start all over again by the doctor...not his fault if admin screw it up. I cant see why they cant cut more people.

The voluntary scheme will easily hit its target, short notice and all.

FlutterinBantam · 02-11-2010 03:40PM

yankinlk wrote: »

Ditto that experience recently. My aunt's files/results were lost and she was asked to start all over again by the doctor...not his fault if admin screw it up. I cant see why they cant cut more people.

The voluntary scheme will easily hit its target, short notice and all.

I would agree that the scheme will hit it's target.

Unfortunately it will be the genuine committed people who will go and the

punters who see the HSE as a lifetime 'meal ticket' will of course remain to do

as little as possible , resist change and rely on the unions to keep even the

most unproductive and least cost efficient in nice little earners for life.

We will never learn.:rolleyes:

Morlar · 02-11-2010 03:45PM

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

I would agree that the scheme will hit it's target.
Unfortunately it will be the genuine committed people who will go and the punters who see the HSE as a lifetime 'meal ticket' will of course remain to do
as little as possible , resist change and rely on the unions to keep even the
most unproductive and least cost efficient in nice little earners for life.
We will never learn.:rolleyes

Who exactly will never learn? The public or the politicians ? I think the politicians need to stand up to the unions that's the part that needs to be learned by the politicians only. In my opinion the majority of people view this much the same as the taxi situation from a few years ago - the govt were afraid to stand up to the taxi unions which meant they exploited every situation and bled every one dry. Much the same as the govt are afraid to stand up to the ps unions now. As soon as that tide breaks it'll be open season and the unions will have no one to blame but themselves. imo.

PS I also don't think it will hit it's target. It will turn into an early retirement gift to the people on the way out or looking to emigrate, change career, start a family etc. Another perk.

FlutterinBantam · 02-11-2010 04:00PM

Morlar wrote: »

Who exactly will never learn? The public or the politicians ? I think the politicians need to stand up to the unions that's the part that needs to be learned by the politicians only. In my opinion the majority of people view this much the same as the taxi situation from a few years ago - the govt were afraid to stand up to the taxi unions which meant they exploited every situation and bled every one dry. Much the same as the govt are afraid to stand up to the ps unions now. As soon as that tide breaks it'll be open season and the unions will have no one to blame but themselves. imo.

PS I also don't think it will hit it's target. It will turn into an early retirement gift to the people on the way out or looking to emigrate, change career, start a family etc. Another perk.

The taxpayer, the people who pay for all this, and are are conned into thinking that that the spin produced by all the vested interests in the HSE is correct.

They are costing way too much for the service provided.

Bottom line.

kraggy · 02-11-2010 04:07PM

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

They will still get pensions and stuff.
Also this will be more attrative to experianced staff rather than to those hired more recently

my understanding (please correct me if I'm wrong) is that most of the recent bloat in numbers is in admin rather than in healthcare and so the people who have specific knowledge will go and the pencil pushers in what are generic clerical roles that could easily be replaced will stay.

Not those who go for voluntary redundancy.

Once they're gone, they're gone.

Typhoon. · 02-11-2010 04:23PM

I'm pretty sure they still get pensions/lump sum...but it wont be a full pension it'll be short a few years

Also the package will be based on pay rates before the salary reductions of this year.... will suit some people very well

K-9 · 02-11-2010 09:22PM

prinz wrote: »

This isn't going to affect the terminally ill and those needing emergency treatment. I take it you haven't had an experience recetly with a public hospital.. my wife's experience in the last few weeks..

Her file was triplicated. Her original file including ultrasound results (central to diagnosis) was lost. She has since received three different appointments for the same thing, on three different times and dates with the same specialist. That's red tape and clerical staff BS. NOT doctors and nurses.

She spent 24 hours over three days in the hopspital, 23 waiting, 1 hour actually being treated. During that time she had to go through 'registration' three times, and had to go via A&E (which is already overcrowded and overworked) twice after the inital consult because 'that's how things are done'.

That would be my experience of it too.

Brendan Drum, when he left the HSE said his biggest regret was the lack of a functioning, efficient computer system in Hospitals. Why that wasn't done, I'm sure there are loads of reasons.

My own suspicion is, that more efficiency would have meant job cuts and redundancies and it suited Government and Unions not to have it as a top priority.

Terry · 02-11-2010 10:56PM

prinz wrote: »

This isn't going to affect the terminally ill and those needing emergency treatment. I take it you haven't had an experience recetly with a public hospital.. my wife's experience in the last few weeks..

Her file was triplicated. Her original file including ultrasound results (central to diagnosis) was lost. She has since received three different appointments for the same thing, on three different times and dates with the same specialist. That's red tape and clerical staff BS. NOT doctors and nurses.

She spent 24 hours over three days in the hopspital, 23 waiting, 1 hour actually being treated. During that time she had to go through 'registration' three times, and had to go via A&E (which is already overcrowded and overworked) twice after the inital consult because 'that's how things are done'.

Last Wednesday.
You actually posted in the thread I made about my trip.
I was there for about 2 hours. In that time I had bloods taken (by a sexy nurse, who I then had sex with), an ECG done (by a smoking hot Eastern European chick, who I then had sex with), spent ~half an hour with a doctor and, because this is AH, she was really hot and we had great sex during that half an hour.

If it wasn't for all the sex, I probably would have only been there for about 20 minutes. Christ, were it not for the threesome with two hot sisters I met on the way to the clinic, I would have been on time for my appointment.*

On a serious note, these 5,000 people will end up on the dole and will undoubtedly be called spongers by the good folk of AH.

In the 6 years I have spent on this site, I have learned quite a lot about the personal lives of about 200 members. This is just through browsing. I didn't actively seek out this information. It's there for anyone to see. I'm sure if I looked a bit deeper, I, or anyone else, could find out much more.

I would regard about 40 of these people as complete and utter hypocrites and/or really self deluded. They go on an on about single mothers, dole spongers, immigrants and so forth, but they themselves are more than happy to take advantage of loopholes in the system in order to pay less tax.

As soon as the 5,000 people are laid off, these hypocrites will criticise the government for rises in the live register and whine about the lack of jobs being created. They will continue to call everyone on the dole a sponger, all the while doing everything they can to pay less tax. They'll shop up North for Christmas bargains, and then complain when their local supermarket lays off a few people. They will then complain about more people being on the dole and the cycle continues. Then they'll vote FF back in because they don't think the opposition can do any better. At the same time, they'll tell the political canvassers to feck off when they call to their houses, because they don't want to listen to them.

Now you can all go and praise the government for cutting down on bureaucracy, but I can guarantee that things will slow down. Things will get lost in the system because of lack of communication.
The solution to this is to reform the system.
It will cost money in the short term, but will lead to a better system in the long term. Laying people off does not make anything better. In job education is needed. This will also create a few more jobs in the teaching field.

The only things this move will achieve are more people on the dole and more votes for FF from private sector employees.

*I was only in the hospital for about 2 hours, and all those things did happen within that time frame, apart from the sex. I'm still a virgin at 34 (35 in a couple of weeks. Anyone wanna pay for a hooker for my birthday?).

P.S., I hope all goes well for your wife and what I assume is her pregnancy (you mentioned an ultrasound). I really do mean that.

K-9 · 02-11-2010 11:20PM

Terry wrote: »

On a serious note, these 5,000 people will end up on the dole and will undoubtedly be called spongers by the good folk of AH.

In the 6 years I have spent on this site, I have learned quite a lot about the personal lives of about 200 members. This is just through browsing. I didn't actively seek out this information. It's there for anyone to see. I'm sure if I looked a bit deeper, I, or anyone else, could find out much more.

I would regard about 40 of these people as complete and utter hypocrites and/or really self deluded. They go on an on about single mothers, dole spongers, immigrants and so forth, but they themselves are more than happy to take advantage of loopholes in the system in order to pay less tax.

As soon as the 5,000 people are laid off, these hypocrites will criticise the government for rises in the live register and whine about the lack of jobs being created. They will continue to call everyone on the dole a sponger, all the while doing everything they can to pay less tax. They'll shop up North for Christmas bargains, and then complain when their local supermarket lays off a few people. They will then complain about more people being on the dole and the cycle continues. Then they'll vote FF back in because they don't think the opposition can do any better. At the same time, they'll tell the political canvassers to feck off when they call to their houses, because they don't want to listen to them.

Well said that man, well said.

Kalimah · 03-11-2010 12:11AM

Love your posts Terry. Spot on as usual!

mad m · 03-11-2010 01:07AM

bonzos wrote: »

What are the chances that some off the "top"pen pushers will be rehired in some form or other after they get their lump sum

Q15 If I avail of the Early Retirement and retrain as a nurse/allied health professional will I be eligible for re-employment?

A15 No you cannot work in Irish public service again

Seems not

Einhard · 03-11-2010 01:14AM

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

No no no.
We will have to borrow €400m today to possibly save 200m over each of the next two years. Then in year three we will have to wait until we've saved another €30m for the interest before we see any real savings.

As other posters have said by then 5,000 should have left though natural wastage anyway. So the only excuse for this is if they are getting rid of people who aren't overworked and in areas where morale isn't very low. So those who have had it cushy get rewarded but there are still shortages in some frontline staff.

Or we could simply apply benchmarking, Private sector wages have fallen by 30% ( just look at PAYE revenues ) so ....

If the staff numbers are reduced through natural wastage over the next two years, then the impact on the deficit will not be fully felt for another 3 years, ie after the 5k have been removed through normal retirement etc. If however, the government spends €400 million implementing this scheme by year's end, then the positive impact in reducing the deficit will be felt from next year. Which is in keeping with the aim to cut our costs immediately in order to boost our standing in the markets. Waiting 2-3 years would be the ideal situation if we had the time to do so, but we need to eliminate the costs now. This plan does so; natural wastage doesn't.

K-9 · 03-11-2010 01:34AM

Einhard wrote: »

If the staff numbers are reduced through natural wastage over the next two years, then the impact on the deficit will not be fully felt for another 3 years, ie after the 5k have been removed through normal retirement etc. If however, the government spends €400 million implementing this scheme by year's end, then the positive impact in reducing the deficit will be felt from next year. Which is in keeping with the aim to cut our costs immediately in order to boost our standing in the markets. Waiting 2-3 years would be the ideal situation if we had the time to do so, but we need to eliminate the costs now. This plan does so; natural wastage doesn't.

Plus it sends out a signal to the markets that we are prepared to cut Public Service numbers. Not that the markets seem to care what we do at this stage!

Capt'n Midnight · 03-11-2010 01:44AM

Einhard wrote: »

If the staff numbers are reduced through natural wastage over the next two years, then the impact on the deficit will not be fully felt for another 3 years, ie after the 5k have been removed through normal retirement etc. If however, the government spends €400 million implementing this scheme by year's end, then the positive impact in reducing the deficit will be felt from next year. Which is in keeping with the aim to cut our costs immediately in order to boost our standing in the markets. Waiting 2-3 years would be the ideal situation if we had the time to do so, but we need to eliminate the costs now. This plan does so; natural wastage doesn't.

I've just realised a big hole in my figures.

Part of the €200m they save a year is taxes - unless someone can show me otherwise I can't accept that our government actually are using nett figures.

In addition to the one off cost of €400m there will be dole / pension payments of at least €10K per person per year for each of the 5,000 (if they get a job it will only be at the exensive of those already unemployed) - so in the first 3 years there will be another €150m payments

This means that we don't break even in the first three years and possibly longer.

K-9 · 03-11-2010 02:08AM

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

I've just realised a big hole in my figures.

Part of the €200m they save a year is taxes - unless someone can show me otherwise I can't accept that our government actually are using nett figures.

In addition to the one off cost of €400m there will be dole / pension payments of at least €10K per person per year for each of the 5,000 (if they get a job it will only be at the exensive of those already unemployed) - so in the first 3 years there will be another €150m payments

This means that we don't break even in the first three years and possibly longer.

If it is lower level, the taxes lost are minimal.

30K is quite low level tax, PRSI, pension levy etc.

60/70k and they contribute a fair bit, probably 41% tax, 8% PRSI.

There are 2 pension levies as well, an old one and the one introduced, though they are tax deductible, which reduces the hit in that respect, so people on over 40/50k are paying 60% taxes or thereabouts marginal rate!

Also remember, cuts in Govt. expenditure results in cuts to GDP growth and as Terry pointed out, the cut, cut, cut brigade will forget this come the growth figures next year.

I realise the damage cuts do both on an individual and macroeconomic point of view, but we don't have any alternative.

Others, ala the Tea Party in the US, see cut, cut, cut as some type of way out of this mess.

K-9 · 03-11-2010 02:11AM

FFS, I can't believe I've outlined why the sacking lower paid workers actually costs us less!

It's a mad, mad fecking world!

5,000 Redundancies sought at HSE

Comments