No payrises in benchmarking ? "Shock"

room305 said:
I have no doubt their bosses would but at least their "doodling" isn't paid for out of your taxes.
Click to expand...

Public and civil servants still work for an employer its the employer that pays there wages not the tax payer.
Someone who works for a phone company wouldn't consider a bill payer as their wage provider, doodling on a computer during office hours is costing their employer money and therefore ultimately the customer.
It just seems funny to me that people who are complaining about inefficiency should be on a computer during office hours (doodling that is).


leghorn said:
Yes. In addition, many posters may be working for themselves.
Click to expand...

Anybody who is self employed and has time to doodle on the net needs his or her head examined, there are far more important things to do. If you were self employed you'd know that. I certainly don't have time to mess with a PC during my long work hours.
S.L.F
 
S.L.F said:
Public and civil servants still work for an employer its the employer that pays there wages not the tax payer.
Someone who works for a phone company wouldn't consider a bill payer as their wage provider, doodling on a computer during office hours is costing their employer money and therefore ultimately the customer.
It just seems funny to me that people who are complaining about inefficiency should be on a computer during office hours (doodling that is).
Click to expand...
Very true but if the cost of that inefficiency is passed on to the customer that customer can move to a different phone company. This is not the case in the public and civil service where such costs are passed on to the general public in the form of taxes.

S.L.F said:
Anybody who is self employed and has time to doodle on the net needs his or her head examined, there are far more important things to do. If you were self employed you'd know that. I certainly don't have time to mess with a PC during my long work hours.
S.L.F
Click to expand...
I have been in work since 7.30 and as taking a 10 minute break.
 
Purple said:
Very true but if the cost of that inefficiency is passed on to the customer that customer can move to a different phone company. This is not the case in the public and civil service where such costs are passed on to the general public in the form of taxes.
Click to expand...

Yes but the phone company bills you directly and thus makes a profit whereas the govt service does not make a profit that's why its called a service.
There are many services that are provided by our civil and public service that could not be funded by private organizations.

leghorn said:
No. SLF knows best.
Click to expand...

Thank you leghorn I haven't heard that for quite a while.
 
S.L.F said:
Yes but the phone company bills you directly and thus makes a profit whereas the govt service does not make a profit that's why its called a service.
Click to expand...
I agree, it's about efficiency. The phone company needs to be efficient or it will loose customers due to high prices and bad service. The public sector should be efficient because it is spending other peoples money and has a duty to do so in an efficient manner.

S.L.F said:
There are many services that are provided by our civil and public service that could not be funded by private organizations.
Click to expand...
Again I agree but there are also many that are provided by the public and civil service which shouldn't be.
 
S.L.F said:
Yes but the phone company bills you directly and thus makes a profit whereas the govt service does not make a profit that's why its called a service.
Click to expand...

The ESB doesn't make a profit? That's news to me.
 
shnaek said:
The ESB doesn't make a profit? That's news to me.
Click to expand...
They are a commercial semi-state. This means that they can overcharge so much that not only can they cover their massive wage bill and compensate for their gross inefficiencies but they can have money left over when they are finished. The government, as the owner, then takes some of this "profit" as a "dividend". In real terms the tax payer foots the bill for an over paid and inefficient company which still operates in a monopolistic way in most of it's market and then we pay a top-up tax to the government.
That's why we have employees in the ESB who's job was computerised in the mid 1980's still "working" there but having no constructive function and adding no value for 20 years. And these guys are earning twice and three times the average industrial wage. I know this because a close relative of mine is such a man. To pretend that these "commercial" semi-state companies actually operate like real commercial bodies is laughable.
 
Hi Purple,

Which business model for Electricity production / distribution from around the world would be best in your opinion?

aj
 
ajapale said:
Hi Purple,

Which business model for Electricity production / distribution from around the world would be best in your opinion?

aj
Click to expand...
I do not know enough about international electricity generation to answer that. Why do you ask?
 
ajapale said:
Hi Purple,

Which business model for Electricity production / distribution from around the world would be best in your opinion?

aj
Click to expand...

The one that doesn't pay people a very high wage to come in to work every day for two years in a power station that was closed.
 
Purple said:
. This means that they can overcharge so much that not only can they cover their massive wage bill and compensate for their gross inefficiencies but they can have money left over when they are finished.
Click to expand...
I couldn't have sworn that it was the CER that set electricity prices, not the ESB themselves. Silly old me...
 
RainyDay said:
Do you have some evidence that CER are not acting in an independent fashion?
Click to expand...

Possibly I was being a little obtuse, but it was a general statement on how the prices are set rather than a direct allegation of collusion or corruption. The CER receives submissions from the ESB for pricing changes and takes into account investment in the infrastructure, fuel costs and the "efficient" provision of service. From this they calculate whether the price increases are justified, they may also decide during review that prices should be decreased.

Some general points here:

1) How do the CER calculate "efficient" service delivery except by looking the existing ESB operations. But who knows what delights in efficiency competition would bring? What would a regulator looking at airline prices in the eighties adjudge to be "efficient service delivery"? Could they ever envisage the current market-place for air travel? Currently in the US customers can opt for cheaper electricity rates but a higher likelihood of power cuts (it is possible to imagine the reverse for companies depending on uninterrupted supply like Intel), it is through such measures that greater efficiencies are made.

2) The level of investment required can be greatly exaggerated. In the UK, the water regulatory authority (OFWAT) succumbed to the numerous scare stories circulated by water utility companies about the level of investment required in the infrastructure. That the increases in water rates allowed were disproportionate was signified by the willingness of private equity consortiums to buy out these companies as well as their consequent share price appreciation. Okay, the ESB isn't a publically-traded company but who do we know similar scare-mongering tactics are not being employed with similar success? As with water, the level of demand is so assured that it is reasonable to expect margins to be low.
 
room305 said:
Some general points here:

1) How do the CER calculate "efficient" service delivery except by looking the existing ESB operations. But who knows what delights in efficiency competition would bring? What would a regulator looking at airline prices in the eighties adjudge to be "efficient service delivery"? Could they ever envisage the current market-place for air travel? Currently in the US customers can opt for cheaper electricity rates but a higher likelihood of power cuts (it is possible to imagine the reverse for companies depending on uninterrupted supply like Intel), it is through such measures that greater efficiencies are made.

2) The level of investment required can be greatly exaggerated. In the UK, the water regulatory authority (OFWAT) succumbed to the numerous scare stories circulated by water utility companies about the level of investment required in the infrastructure. That the increases in water rates allowed were disproportionate was signified by the willingness of private equity consortiums to buy out these companies as well as their consequent share price appreciation. Okay, the ESB isn't a publically-traded company but who do we know similar scare-mongering tactics are not being employed with similar success? As with water, the level of demand is so assured that it is reasonable to expect margins to be low.
Click to expand...

You outline some interesting possible weaknesses of energy regulation systems. I know next to nothing about how CER operate. But based on your posts, neither do you. You are outlining potential problems, rather than giving specific criticisms. If these guys aren't doing their job, let's hear about the facts, not the gossip.
 
RainyDay said:
You outline some interesting possible weaknesses of energy regulation systems. I know next to nothing about how CER operate. But based on your posts, neither do you. You are outlining potential problems, rather than giving specific criticisms. If these guys aren't doing their job, let's hear about the facts, not the gossip.
Click to expand...
So is your opinion that if someone is not an expert they should not comment?

The fact is that wages are extremely high in the ESB and that prices are gone up well ahead of inflation. I think those who have no choice but to buy electricity from them are entitled to ask questions.
 
Purple said:
So is your opinion that if someone is not an expert they should not comment?
Click to expand...
Enough with the Paxman-like interrogations, already. Please stop trying to put words into my mouth. My opinion is pretty clear from "You are outlining potential problems, rather than giving specific criticisms. If these guys aren't doing their job, let's hear about the facts, not the gossip"

Comment is welcome from anyone. Supposition positioned as fact is not conducive to sensible debate.

Purple said:
The fact is that wages are extremely high in the ESB and that prices are gone up well ahead of inflation. I think those who have no choice but to buy electricity from them are entitled to ask questions.
Click to expand...

High relative to what? Is your comparision against comparable organisations, with similar skill levels etc? Are you referring to Consumer Price Inflation or have you focussed on oil and other fuel costs, which I presume would make up the bulk of their outgoings?

I'll be first to admit that I know very little about this subject. Informed opinion is most welcome. Uninformed speculation doesn't really get us very far.
 
RainyDay said:
Enough with the Paxman-like interrogations, already. Please stop trying to put words into my mouth. My opinion is pretty clear from "You are outlining potential problems, rather than giving specific criticisms. If these guys aren't doing their job, let's hear about the facts, not the gossip"

Comment is welcome from anyone. Supposition positioned as fact is not conducive to sensible debate.

High relative to what? Is your comparision against comparable organisations, with similar skill levels etc? Are you referring to Consumer Price Inflation or have you focussed on oil and other fuel costs, which I presume would make up the bulk of their outgoings?

I'll be first to admit that I know very little about this subject. Informed opinion is most welcome. Uninformed speculation doesn't really get us very far.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. This DeloitteReport is two years out of date but it does show that wages are 30% higher than average and that capacity is 10% lower than EU average. This cost 100 million a year in 2006.
 
I'm not trying to be difficult, but I'm having difficulty downloading the full report, and I can't find the figures you quote in the section that does download. I did find some commentary on the features of the Irish electricity market. e.g. small market, low level of interconnection, high level of historic underinvestment, and high dependancy on imported fuels.

I wonder if these effect the measures you quote.
 
RainyDay said:
I did find some commentary on the features of the Irish electricity market. e.g. small market, low level of interconnection, high level of historic underinvestment, and high dependancy on imported fuels.

I wonder if these effect the measures you quote.
Click to expand...

I'm sure they do. I am also sure that work practices and efficiencies in the ESB are much better now than they were in the 70's and 80's but there is still a way to go.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top