Should criminal proceedings be taken against these people?

Boombastic · 15-01-2013 12:14PM #1

Should criminal proceedings be taken against these people?

From todays independent

The findings from the HSE's national office of internal audit showed that a number of staff were reporting for duty to an unnamed special care unit in Limerick and receiving weekend premium payments even though it was closed.

I think it is blatant thievery from the HSE. Getting paid for and claiming extra payments for working at a unit that's closed. Surely these people knew they were getting the money under false pretenses? Whoever authorised these payments should also be prosecuted. This is only a sample of what was found in the audit. I think these people should be made to payback all the money and criminal proceedings taken against them.

kaimera · 15-01-2013 12:16PM

Yes.

There's a queue of people in front of them from the banks that should be prosecuted first.

Won't happen tho.

kylith · 15-01-2013 12:18PM

They should certainly have all money fraudulently acquired deducted from their wages until every red cent is paid back.

Boombastic · 15-01-2013 12:19PM

kylith wrote: »

They should certainly have all money fraudulently acquired deducted from their wages until every red cent is paid back.

Why should they keep their jobs at all? They have stolen from their employer. I agree about being made to pay it back.

Edit: I also think they should be named and shamed

SEPT 23 1989 · 15-01-2013 12:29PM

One taxi firm charged €8.33 a mile for a six-mile journey.

In contrast, another covered a distance of 66.6 miles and the payment worked out at 0.75c a mile.

What utter gob****e signed off on this payment?:mad:

HondaSami · 15-01-2013 12:36PM

The manager who signed off on this should be sacked and the people who made false claims should also be sacked.
The biggest problem in the public service is management, not all of them but a lot them.

Boombastic · 15-01-2013 12:38PM

HondaSami wrote: »

The manager who signed off on this should be sacked and the people who made false claims should also be sacked.
The biggest problem in the public service is management, not all of them but a lot them.

This is what should happen. Wasn't the Croke Park Agreement supposed to have introduced accountability? Lets see it in action!!

sfwcork · 15-01-2013 12:38PM

you cant beat the public sector bashing threads on here

Boombastic · 15-01-2013 12:39PM

sfwcork wrote: »

you cant beat the public sector bashing threads on here

Do you think this is OK?

It's not bashing if it is the truth:rolleyes:

SEPT 23 1989 · 15-01-2013 12:43PM

I would love Michael o Leary to come in and turn around this absolute disaster once and for all

Mountjoy Mugger · 15-01-2013 12:49PM

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

I would love Michael o Leary to come in and turn around this absolute disaster once and for all

Yeah, right! :rolleyes:

MOL will be charging you per injection, for each cuppa tea, arse wipe, blanket, and if you're not better by the time he says you should be, he'll toss you out on the street.

HondaSami · 15-01-2013 12:49PM

sfwcork wrote: »

you cant beat the public sector bashing threads on here

I'm a public servant and this type of abuse really annoys me, it gives the hard working people in the ps a bad rep.
Management have a lot to answer for imo. It's not ps bashing when it's fair to bash them.

Odysseus · 15-01-2013 12:54PM

HondaSami wrote: »

I'm a public servant and this type of abuse really annoys me, it gives the hard working people in the ps a bad rep.
Management have a lot to answer for imo. It's not ps bashing when it's fair to bash them.

Well even a broken clock is right twice a day.

kylith · 15-01-2013 12:55PM

Boombastic wrote: »

Why should they keep their jobs at all? They have stolen from their employer. I agree about being made to pay it back.

Edit: I also think they should be named and shamed

I just figured it as the easiest way to get the money back off of them. They can't claim that they're unable to pay a fine if their wages are being garnished.

Boombastic · 15-01-2013 12:56PM

kylith wrote: »

I just figured it as the easiest way to get the money back off of them. They can't claim that they're unable to pay a fine if their wages are being garnished.

Garnish their dole;)

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 15-01-2013 12:56PM

sfwcork wrote: »

you cant beat the public sector bashing threads on here

It's fraud. Private sector workers have been basked for fraud as well, ya know.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 15-01-2013 12:57PM

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

I would love Michael o Leary to come in and turn around this absolute disaster once and for all

Noooooo.... for so many reasons, no.

Doc Ruby · 15-01-2013 01:00PM

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

It's fraud. Private sector workers have been basked for fraud as well, ya know.

Its always funny when these threads come along and someone responds with "but private sector workers" as if they were two teams in a match.

Nobody gives a feck about private sector workers since nobody is obliged to pay their wages.

Public sector workers on the other hand take a cut out of every bit of profit I make and every cent I earn, so I feel I have the right to be annoyed at tales of corruption (and this is far from the first), incompetence, and fraud.

Boombastic · 15-01-2013 01:10PM

Poll added

Even if we were going to compare to the private sector...where did Garlic man end up?

That's the place these people should be going, after they too pay it back, but as long as they have their apologists defending the indefensible there will never be true reform.

Looks like the unions have done a good job of brainwashing some of their members, convincing them that any negative publicity about the public sector is only to bash them and holds no merit. The honest workers in the public sector are as disgusted by this as those in the private sector (I assume).

Odysseus · 15-01-2013 01:12PM

From what I can see in that link, I can see nothing illegal and certainly not fraud. It states that staff where reporting to work in a centre which is closed.

If that is correct, those staff have done nothing illegal. Some manager for reasons which we are not being told has signed that off. So if staff have been told by a line manager to sign on for days they have not worked, I cannot see anything illegal in that. I may have other issues with it, but if I am correct can any here show me under what act they could be charged?

And of course if I am not correct and somebody has extra info to show that I would love to see it.

Where To · 15-01-2013 01:14PM

What are they doing wrong, exactly?

If someone offers me 8.33 a mile I take it.

Allyall · 15-01-2013 01:18PM

Will Criminal proceedings be taken against these people?

Yes ██ 1
No █████████████████████████████████████████████ 3,892

Should Politicians get locked up when they are corrupt?

It doesn't matter. They won't.

Boombastic · 15-01-2013 01:23PM

@ Odysseus - not sure about the legal aspect

Where To wrote: »

What are they doing wrong, exactly?

If someone offers me 8.33 a mile I take it.

Why don't they have a policy in place? we pay x / Km for taxis

also, why are they still working in Miles??

HondaSami · 15-01-2013 01:28PM

Where To wrote: »

What are they doing wrong, exactly?

If someone offers me 8.33 a mile I take it.

One taxi firm charged €8.33 a mile for a six-mile journey.

Some taxi drivers -- who were ferrying patients to attend centres in Limerick, Tullamore, Galway and Dublin -- were more than doubling the mileage if they had two passengers

In contrast, another covered a distance of 66.6 miles and the payment worked out at 0.75c a mile.

Three taxi firms charged for patients on a particular day even though they were not named on the booking schedule.

The taxi firms are wrong here and management is equally wrong not to check what it is they are paying for.

Odysseus · 15-01-2013 01:31PM

Boombastic wrote: »

@ Odysseus - not sure about the legal aspect

Why don't they have a policy in place? we pay x / Km for taxis

also, why are they still working in Miles??

Unless it can legally be called fraud I can't see how people can ask for them to pay money back. Certainly nothing criminal can happen unless a law is broken, which in case of the staff over the x-mas period I can't see anything illegal, if it was passed by a manager.

Now if that article told me why those staff where paid it would be real reporting, it just seems like finger pointing at the moment.

A lot of systems still work in miles, I know mileage paid to staff is still measure in miles. Once it is correct it should not matter, I would be more focused on it being correct.

Madam_X · 15-01-2013 01:38PM

1. When someone without any legal background says "It's illegal!" I immediately, with great confidence, assume it isn't. How the **** are we qualified to know whether criminal proceedings should be taken against them btw?

2. Since this was reported in the Spindependent, I'll be skeptical as to its authenticity until it is corroborated by non anti public sector news sources.

Boombastic · 15-01-2013 01:48PM

Ok to translate it to a different sector.

I own supermarkets. I am paying you to run a branch. You hire all these staff and invoice me (including special overtime payments) , but you never actually open the supermarket.

It's a big scam and just because it's the hse involved doesn't make it any less so.

Why hasn't this unit been named? We need to know how many staff are involved.

@Odysseus: Staff over the x-period?? I don't see x-mas being mentioned at all. Can you explain?

Where To · 15-01-2013 01:50PM

Boombastic wrote: »

@ Odysseus - not sure about the legal aspect

Why don't they have a policy in place? we pay x / Km for taxis

also, why are they still working in Miles??

There is a policy in place, taxis tender forcontracts and contracts are awarded, the company didnt just decide to charge that, that's the rate that was agreed.

Same goes for the workers in the care unit, it's not their fault they are paidfor doing nothing, so why should they be punished?

Boombastic · 15-01-2013 01:55PM

Where To wrote: »

There is a policy in place, taxis tender forcontracts and contracts are awarded, the company didnt just decide to charge that, that's the rate that was agreed.

Same goes for the workers in the care unit, it's not their fault they are paidfor doing nothing, so why should they be punished?

For the taxis the tenders awarded need to be investigated. Who awarded the contracts at that price? What relationship do they have with the taxi company?

The workers could have at least spoke up about it. I've heard nothing from the politicians or the media about this centre before now? How long has this been going on for?

Odysseus · 15-01-2013 01:59PM

Boombastic wrote: »

Ok to translate it to a different sector.

I own supermarkets. I am paying you to run a branch. You hire all these staff and invoice me (including special overtime payments) , but you never actually open the supermarket.

It's a big scam and just because it's the hse involved doesn't make it any less so.

Why hasn't this unit been named? We need to know how many staff are involved.

@Odysseus: Staff over the x-period?? I don't see x-mas being mentioned at all. Can you explain?

Yeah, Maybe I'm wrong, I thought the payment whilst the unit was closed referred to a unit being closed over the x-mas period, hence the extra payments.

I could be wrong, it is not mentioned in the link, now I looked at the times when I was getting milk this morning so maybe I saw it there. Because I had a big smile reading it, thinking I beg there is a thread on this calling for blood.

It is the paper not naming the unit, I imagine the know, as well as the reasons why this was signed off. However, I'm not sure WE NEED TO KNOW how many staff.

The people we charge with evaluating services need to know all the info, I'm not sure if every citizen needs to know everything about the HSE.

What I want to know before I start calling people criminals is why this was signed off, how signed it off, and how high up was this authorised? Only them can we start saying if it was a scam or not.

Boombastic · 15-01-2013 02:03PM

Odysseus wrote: »

Yeah, Maybe I'm wrong, I thought the payment whilst the unit was closed referred to a unit being closed over the x-mas period, hence the extra payments.

I could be wrong, it is not mentioned in the link, now I looked at the times when I was getting milk this morning so maybe I saw it there. Because I had a big smile reading it, thinking I beg there is a thread on this calling for blood.

It is the paper not naming the unit, I imagine the know, as well as the reasons why this was signed off. However, I'm not sure WE NEED TO KNOW how many staff.

The people we charge with evaluating services need to know all the info, I'm not sure if every citizen needs to know everything about the HSE.

What I want to know before I start calling people criminals is why this was signed off, how signed it off, and how high up was this authorised? Only them can we start saying if it was a scam or not.

Extra payments were for weekend work as I understand it. I think the public do need to know the extent of it and be kept informed of what follow up action (if any) is taken.

Should criminal proceedings be taken against these people?

Should criminal proceedings be taken against these people? 130 votes

Comments