# Sickening Sick Leave



## Purple (7 Aug 2014)

The Irish Times reports that sick leave in the Public Sector is twice as high as the Private Sector. The total cost is €430'000'000 a year. Given longer holidays, generally better conditions and shorter working hours one would think that "Sick" leave would be lower in the Public Sector. 
If it was just the same as the private sector then it would save the state over €200 million a year.


----------



## Sunny (7 Aug 2014)

The real worrying bit is that these figures relate to 2012 because 2013 figures aren't available and it is August 2014. Show's the complete lack of management information systems and controls in the public sector.


----------



## Purple (7 Aug 2014)

Sunny said:


> The real worrying bit is that these figures relate to 2012 because 2013 figures aren't available and it is August 2014. Show's the complete lack of management information systems and controls in the public sector.



I missed that.. wow, just wow... nearly half a billion of cost and the information is 2 years out of date.


----------



## Delboy (7 Aug 2014)

Sick Leave in some of the areas of the PS that I worked in over the years are used as a target, rather than a fall back in time of genuine illness.

6 days or so sick leave uncertified + 25 days or so a/l + up to 13 days flexi (some got more via 'local' agreements') + 1/2 day shopping at xmas + 2 x  Privilege days.....PLUS the certified leave (and Dr's sure are'nt shy of handing them out).
It all adds up to a short year


----------



## Purple (7 Aug 2014)

Delboy said:


> Sick Leave in some of the areas of the PS that I worked in over the years are used as a target, rather than a fall back in time of genuine illness.
> 
> 6 days or so sick leave uncertified + 25 days or so a/l + up to 13 days flexi (some got more via 'local' agreements') + 1/2 day shopping at xmas + 2 x  Privilege days.....PLUS the certified leave (and Dr's sure are'nt shy of handing them out).
> It all adds up to a short year


A friend of mine who works in the Public Sector was told he was a trouble maker by the Union rep because he hadn't taken any sick leave in two years.
Including flexi-days he gets 54 days off a year.


----------



## michaelm (7 Aug 2014)

Would a higher level of sick leave not be expected amongst the likes of Gardai, nurses, firemen and other front-line workers relative to private sector workers?  €430m might be what what those on sick leave are paid but does it actually 'cost' the state that amount?  In many instances do co-workers not take up the slack on a given day?  I've worked in the public sector for 15 years and I'd say I've taken maybe three or four sick days in total.


----------



## Purple (7 Aug 2014)

michaelm said:


> Would a higher level of sick leave not be expected amongst the likes of Gardai, nurses, firemen and other front-line workers relative to private sector workers?  €430m might be what what those on sick leave are paid but does it actually 'cost' the state that amount?  In many instances do co-workers not take up the slack on a given day?  I've worked in the public sector for 15 years and I'd say I've taken maybe three or four sick days in total.


Why? How many firemen get injured in the line of duty? Same with Gardia, I know some get injured but would that account for more than twice the Private Sector average?
I'm a private sector employee (both managers and "workers" work so the term "worker" is outdated and silly) in a manufacturing company where machinery is used. Our rate is less than half of the Private Sector national average or less than a quarter of the Public Sector average.


----------



## michaelm (7 Aug 2014)

Purple said:


> Why? How many firemen get injured in the line of duty? Same with Gardia, I know some get injured but would that account for more than twice the Private Sector average?


I suppose it depends on how the stats are compiled.  I don't know how many firemen or Garda are injured in the line of duty but I suspect such might lead to a longer average period of sick leave . . also are the stats based on all sick days or just paid sick days?  some private sector employers do not pay for sick days and most do not pay sick leave for as long as it is paid in the public sector.   This may skew the figures.

Also, I wonder what the €430m figure would come down to if it were reduced by the amount those on paid sick leave would otherwise have been entitled to from the welfare system.  I'm not doubting that sick leave is more prevalent in the public sector but the stats can be tuned to overstate the situation.


----------



## Purple (8 Aug 2014)

michaelm said:


> I suppose it depends on how the stats are compiled.  I don't know how many firemen or Garda are injured in the line of duty but I suspect such might lead to a longer average period of sick leave . . also are the stats based on all sick days or just paid sick days?  some private sector employers do not pay for sick days and most do not pay sick leave for as long as it is paid in the public sector.   This may skew the figures.
> 
> Also, I wonder what the €430m figure would come down to if it were reduced by the amount those on paid sick leave would otherwise have been entitled to from the welfare system.  I'm not doubting that sick leave is more prevalent in the public sector but the stats can be tuned to overstate the situation.



I agree that stat’s can be presented to show almost anything people want to show.

 As the figures were presented as a percentage of days worked it looks much worse for teachers as they have a shorter working year. Secondary teachers work 33 weeks of the year in the classroom (yes, I know they correct exams and prepare coarse work during the holidays) so one missed day for them is 30% more of their working year than for people who work 48 weeks of the year.

What would be interesting is a breakdown between long term and short term leave and what the mean is for short term leave.


----------



## Deiseblue (8 Aug 2014)

With the Indo reporting this morning that half of Private Sector employees admit to having being drunk in the workplace according to a Peninsula Ireland survey it's a wonder that anything gets done in Ireland !!!!


----------



## Purple (8 Aug 2014)

Deiseblue said:


> With the Indo reporting this morning that half of Private Sector employees admit to having being drunk in the workplace according to a Peninsula Ireland survey it's a wonder that anything gets done in Ireland !!!!



Not every day though!!


----------



## michaelm (8 Aug 2014)

Purple said:


> . . and prepare coarse work during the holidays





Purple said:


> What would be interesting is a breakdown between long term and short term leave and what the mean is for short term leave.


Yes.


----------



## Firefly (8 Aug 2014)

Deiseblue said:


> With the Indo reporting this morning that half of Private Sector employees admit to having being drunk in the workplace according to a Peninsula Ireland survey it's a wonder that anything gets done in Ireland !!!!



Hi Deise,

This reminds me of a day a group of us went to the pub one Friday at lunchtime and it turned into a 4 pint lunch! It was the first and only time I've drank at lunch and although it was might craic, it made for the toughest afternoon ever. Don't know how the English do it to be honest. 

Firefly.


----------



## Firefly (8 Aug 2014)

Deiseblue said:


> With the Indo reporting this morning that half of Private Sector employees admit to having being drunk in the workplace according to a Peninsula Ireland survey it's a wonder that anything gets done in Ireland !!!!



One half of the workforce is drunk whilst the other half is on the lam. It's no wonder Ireland is consistently voted as one of the best countries in the world to live in!!!!


----------



## Sunny (8 Aug 2014)

Firefly said:


> Hi Deise,
> 
> This reminds me of a day a group of us went to the pub one Friday at lunchtime and it turned into a 4 pint lunch! It was the first and only time I've drank at lunch and although it was might craic, it made for the toughest afternoon ever. Don't know how the English do it to be honest.
> 
> Firefly.



Yeah it's mad isn't. Worked in London for awhile and I never understood the culture of lunchtime drinking. Biggest problem was I was already to go at 6pm on a Friday and they would all be already drunk and gone home by 7. They never understood why Irish people never joined them considering our reputation.


----------



## cork (13 Aug 2014)

Delboy said:


> 6 days or so sick leave uncertified + 25 days or so a/l + up to 13 days flexi (some got more via 'local' agreements') + 1/2 day shopping at xmas + 2 x  Privilege days.....PLUS the certified leave (and Dr's sure are'nt shy of handing them out).
> It all adds up to a short year



Oh Force Ma Jour day.

Heard of a case recently where a public servant was "working from home".

They see Sick leave as an entitlement.


----------



## Firefly (13 Aug 2014)

cork said:


> Heard of a case recently where a public servant was "working from home".



For the love of all that's holy and good will you please get a grip?


----------



## becky (13 Aug 2014)

cork said:


> Oh Force Ma Jour day.
> 
> Heard of a case recently where a public servant was "working from home".
> 
> They see Sick leave as an entitlement.



I'm aware of a few who work from home 1 or 2 days a week.  I also know someone who was doing it from her home in mainland Europe.


----------



## Firefly (14 Aug 2014)

becky said:


> I'm aware of a few who work from home 1 or 2 days a week.  I also know someone who was doing it from her home in mainland Europe.



I do work for a company in the private sector where three people work from home full-time. One is based in N. America, another in eastern Europe and the latter from Asia. 

For me, the attractions of working from home would be gone after a short while and I'd end up associating home with work so all-in-all I'm happy to come to the office.


----------



## cork (14 Aug 2014)

There is no scrutiny in the public sector of sick leave thus leaving a situation where there is a load of bogus leave granted.


----------



## Ceist Beag (14 Aug 2014)

cork said:


> There is no scrutiny in the public sector of sick leave thus leaving a situation where there is a load of bogus leave granted.



Nice sweeping statement there cork - any evidence to back this up? I have direct evidence to the contrary but hey why let facts get in the way!


----------



## cork (26 Aug 2014)

I have worked in both the private and public sector.

There is a differance.

But then maybe the public sector office that I worked might have been unfortunate and the private sector one fortunate.


----------



## Deiseblue (26 Aug 2014)

cork said:


> I have worked in both the private and public sector.
> 
> There is a differance.
> 
> But then maybe the public sector office that I worked might have been unfortunate and the private sector one fortunate.



Ah your probably being a bit harsh on yourself there , that Public Sector office may have been unfortunate in having you work there but you seem to have mended your ways now that you are in the private sector !


----------



## Leper (26 Aug 2014)

cork said:


> I have worked in both the private and public sector.
> 
> .



You were asked to back up your statement Cork or at least supply some evidence . . . you didn't . . . I'm still waiting otherwise would it not be prudent for you (well at least to save face) to apologise for your statement?


----------



## CMCR (26 Aug 2014)

cork said:


> There is no scrutiny in the public sector of sick leave thus leaving a situation where there is a load of bogus leave granted.


 
This is complete and utter rubbish. In fact, it's offensive to anyone who works in the public sector.   

Separately, what exactly do you mean by '_bogus leave_'? You're hardly referring to the type of leave that's provided for in employment law such as Maternity leave, Parental Leave, Adopotive Leave?


----------



## Purple (26 Aug 2014)

A close friend of mine works in the public sector. Between annual leave, bank holidays, privilege days (now added to his annual leave) and the day a month he can work up on flexi-time (on what he calls he very short working week) he gets over 10 weeks off each year. That, in my opinion, is just ridiculous. He agrees.


----------



## CMCR (26 Aug 2014)

I'm also a public sector worker and I don't know too many people where I work who can work up an additional flexi day per month, particularly given the extra hours we are already working.  I am also commuting for nearly 4 hours ever day to get to/from my job and have no choice about the time I can leave in the evening. 

Given staff shortages in the public sector generally, I don't know any manager (myself included) who could afford to have  staff member on 10 weeks leave a year. The Division I work in simply couldn't function. 

All employees are entitled to time off work for public holidays, not just public sector workers.


----------



## Leper (27 Aug 2014)

Purple said:


> A close friend of mine works in the public sector. Between annual leave, bank holidays, privilege days (now added to his annual leave) and the day a month he can work up on flexi-time (on what he calls he very short working week) he gets over 10 weeks off each year. That, in my opinion, is just ridiculous. He agrees.



Purple is a guy who normally makes some sense and always I absorb much of what he says, but let's have a look at his post above (while we are waiting for Cork to justify what he said).
Annual Leave:- Entitlement to Public and Private sectors.
Bank Holidays:- Entitlement to Public and Private sectors.
Privilege days:- Entitlement to Public and Private sectors albeit by different names.
Flexi-Time:- Entitlement to Public and Private sectors mooted by Germans to alleviate rush-hour traffic and increase work production.
10 weeks off per year:- Anybody who believes this should be looking for a man in a red suit coming down the chimney on Christmas Eve.

Let's go a bit further:-
Parental Leave:- Entitlement to Public and Private sectors - Nil Rate of Pay obtains in Public sector (sometimes paid by private employers).
Maternity Leave:- Entitlement to Public and Private sectors.
Career Break:- Entitlement to Public and Private sectors (Nil Rate of Pay in both; but a 3 year Career Break in parts of the public service will not be honoured and there are people who suffer an additional two years with no pay while Public Service seeks a placement for the employee.
Sick Leave:- From my experience while working in the Public sector the rules were enforced and in some cases beyond the rules (I've seen cases where  medical consultant's reports were not accepted).
Annual Leave:- The famous Haddington Road Agreement reduced many Public sector employees by 2 days.  In some cases this resulted in reduction of 3 days annual leave.

If anybody wants to challenge any of my post; bring it on. I can back up my post.


----------



## Delboy (27 Aug 2014)

Leper said:


> 10 weeks off per year:- Anybody who believes this should be looking for a man in a red suit coming down the chimney on Christmas Eve.



lets say 25 days AL +
2 Privilege Days +
10 Bank Holidays + 
12 Flexi Days =
49 Days off...so there's you 10 weeks off 

And thats not even looking at sick days, 1/2 day xmas shopping, the 13th flexi day if Org runs by 4 week periods rather than monthly cycles

Now where's that man in the red suit


----------



## Deiseblue (27 Aug 2014)

As we are going the anecdotal route when working in the Bank of Ireland ( when queried as to what job I did I now say " traffic warden" ! ) I worked a 32.5 hour week and received 29 days annual leave .- close to standard across the financial sector.

Public holidays are a bit of a red herring in that most employees enjoy same with the obvious exception of some Gardaí , Nurses , Doctors , Firemen etc & people employed in the service industries who keep the show on the road .

Flexi time is an excellent system employed by both sectors whereby employees work in excess of their contracted hours over a shorter time period in order to enjoy additional leave with the blessing of employers - lthough given the hours currently worked by the public sector I would imagine it difficult to amass much additional hours.


----------



## dereko1969 (27 Aug 2014)

Delboy said:


> lets say 25 days AL +
> 2 *Privilege Days* +
> 10 Bank Holidays +
> 12 Flexi Days =
> ...



Gone.


----------



## STEINER (27 Aug 2014)

Delboy said:


> lets say 25 days AL +
> 2 Privilege Days +
> 10 Bank Holidays +
> 12 Flexi Days =
> ...



I have a PS friend who told me a few years ago that he has 30 days AL.  A while back, his sector were resisting the whole clocking in system so I don't know about his flexi days.  He is sick about 15 days annually, every year.


----------



## Delboy (27 Aug 2014)

dereko1969 said:


> Gone.



Privilege days: Gone where...into AL?

I can confirm that off the record and through local arrangements, 1/2 day xmas shopping is still alive and well in some places


----------



## Deiseblue (27 Aug 2014)

As the majority of employees are entitled to public holidays & flexi time ensures that employees in both sectors work their contracted hours albeit over a shorter time in order to avail of extra leave the only point debatable is the base annual leave enjoyed by both sectors.

I would have thought that an average of 25 days would apply across both sectors ?


----------



## Ceist Beag (27 Aug 2014)

Purple said:


> A close friend of mine works in the public sector. Between annual leave, bank holidays, privilege days (now added to his annual leave) and the day a month he can work up on flexi-time (on what he calls he very short working week) he gets over 10 weeks off each year. That, in my opinion, is just ridiculous. He agrees.



As Leper said, Flexi days are not exclusive to the public sector. Bank holidays are not exclusive to the public sector. I fail to see what is ridiculous about either of these. Is your problem with the amount of annual leave he gets? What has any of this got to do with sick leave?


----------



## Andarma (27 Aug 2014)

The 2 privilege days (at Easter and Christmas) in the Civil Service were abolished in 2012. A once-off adjustment of 1.5 days was given in the leave year 2012/2013.


----------



## Sunny (27 Aug 2014)

What has any of this got to with anything. I have worked in private sector companies who didn't manage sick leave effectively and it was abused. If as we approach September 2014, we are still debating 2012 figures then you would have to question the effectiveness if management information systems in parts of the public sector. For people to claim that there isn't a problem with sick leave in PARTS of the public sector is living in cloud cuckoo land. The proof is in looking at the improvements in the amount of days lost made in certain parts of the public sector in the last couple of years. Unless people are just suddenly healthier there was abuse of the system and measures were taken to address it.


----------



## Deiseblue (27 Aug 2014)

Sunny said:


> What has any of this got to with anything. I have worked in private sector companies who didn't manage sick leave effectively and it was abused. If as we approach September 2014, we are still debating 2012 figures then you would have to question the effectiveness if management information systems in parts of the public sector. For people to claim that there isn't a problem with sick leave in PARTS of the public sector is living in cloud cuckoo land. The proof is in looking at the improvements in the amount of days lost made in certain parts of the public sector in the last couple of years. Unless people are just suddenly healthier there was abuse of the system and measures were taken to address it.


 
it is indeed puzzling as to why the figures for 2013 are as yet unavailable for the sick leave within the Public Sector , such figures will be extremely interesting given the changes to sick leave regulations recently implemented.

There is a caveat regarding sick leave figures for the Private Sector as they are based on guesstimates as it is impossible to collate exact figures given the diversity of employment within that sector - surprised that the Times didn't state that !


----------



## Ceist Beag (27 Aug 2014)

Sunny said:


> What has any of this got to with anything. I have worked in private sector companies who didn't manage sick leave effectively and it was abused. If as we approach September 2014, we are still debating 2012 figures then you would have to question the effectiveness if management information systems in parts of the public sector. For people to claim that there isn't a problem with sick leave in PARTS of the public sector is living in cloud cuckoo land. The proof is in looking at the improvements in the amount of days lost made in certain parts of the public sector in the last couple of years. Unless people are just suddenly healthier there was abuse of the system and measures were taken to address it.



Agree with all that Sunny. I don't think anyone on here was claiming there isn't a problem with sick leave in PARTS of the public sector - but a certain poster from a Munster county was claiming that ALL of the public sector had a problem with sick leave which is what some of us objected to. Certainly in the past couple of years I have seen a change in attitude in one part of the public sector in relation to sick leave (increase in scrutiny and questioning of sick leave) - which is to be welcomed of course. The figures for 2013 and 2014 to date would be interesting in comparison to the 2012 figures.


----------



## Pinkpanter (27 Aug 2014)

The hospital I work for has 3 nurses out sick long term- one with a serious medical issue and two following work related assaults. The average days taken sick are very low till their sick leave is taken into account. Then it looks like 
we have high rate of sick leave. Unfortunately statistics don't take that into account! Also new sick leave arrangements
will reduce the rates of those taking the P*ss!!


----------



## becky (27 Aug 2014)

I get 31 days per annum plus 13 flexi and good friday (I'd happily work that day).  I don't take all the flexi days but do like the flexibility of the clock.  

I don't count the public holidays as everyone gets them so I say I get 9 weeks a year.

In relation to the sick leave, our figures are fairly current ie: up to June if not July.  PPARS is good that way.


----------



## Leper (28 Aug 2014)

This flexi thing seems to irritate many people.  I've never had flexi, but I did a little enquiring.  It is used in some parts of private and some parts of public sectors.

Rules vary.  Core hours must be worked i.e. 10am - 12.30pm and 2pm - 4.00pm.  All other hours to around 6.30pm and after 8.00am are flexible.  You can work up to one "flexi-day" in a flexi month in which you must take the day as they are not accumulated to say a full week's holiday.  Flexi is reported as being good for staff morale; production is generally increased.  It is self managing and computerised e.g. if you are not in attendance for core hours or not working or working less hours the employee is knuckled (and rightly so).   

So for any time "extra" worked (and all time is managed) staff get time off; hardly 12 days "holidays." Let's call a spade a spade here.  Additionally, where flexi is working there is no mad brake screeching in the car par for people arriving at the workplace and in the evening the "perk" can help alleviate the traffic situation at rush hour.

Like I said earlier, flexi-time working was never available to me, but I think the concept is a good idea.

Becky pointed out the attributes of PPARS (Personnel Computer system in health service).  I thought PPARS failed and cost the state huge huge money a few years ago.


----------



## Delboy (28 Aug 2014)

PPARS failed because not even NASA could build a computer system that could comfortably handle the nuances of the pay scales, grades, allowances, exceptions etc of the HSE or indeed, most of the Irish CS/PS


----------



## Purple (28 Aug 2014)

I have no problem with Flexi-time but 20 days annual leave should be standard. Long service etc. could add a few more but nobody should get more than 25 days a year. 

A standard working week of 39 hours should be mandatory across all state employees (or those paid by the state). Having a very short working week (32.5 hours) with flexi-time is taking the pee. 
The department of social welfare (sorry, Social Protection) pays sick benefit after 3 days off work. Nobody should get paid sick leave unless it's a work related injury. If you want to make sure you are paid if you are sick then buy some insurance.


----------



## Purple (28 Aug 2014)

Delboy said:


> PPARS failed because not even NASA could build a computer system that could comfortably handle the nuances of the pay scales, grades, allowances, exceptions etc of the HSE or indeed, most of the Irish CS/PS


 The solution is simple; streamline the grades and allowances.


----------



## Leper (28 Aug 2014)

Purple said:


> The solution is simple; streamline the grades and allowances.



If my memory serves me correctly; were not Deloitte and Touche retained as the major advisors to the HSE for the introduction of PPARS? PPARS failed and was shelved, I think.

Also, if my memory serves me right didn't it cost (according to the main newspapers at the time) in excess of €140,000,000.00?

I think €140M would build a couple of big hospitals even today and have them kitted out, don't you?


----------



## CMCR (28 Aug 2014)

Purple said:


> Having a very short working week (32.5 hours) with flexi-time is taking the pee.
> .


 
Who is working 32.5hours per week? The majority of civil servants are now working 37 hours net per week (if not more).  Normal attendance period for civil servants now is 9am-5.45pm Mon-Thurs, and 9am-5.15pm on Friday.


----------



## becky (28 Aug 2014)

PPARS was a failure because it cost too much - a perfect example of how not to handle a IT project.  That said, it is a very useful HR tool from my point of view.  

I think I had the shortest working week - 32 hrs 55 mins (and no I don't know where the 55 minutes came from). My new standard week is 35 hours and 15 minutes ( I think).  I work 35 to 40 most weeks, it depends on what is needed to get the job done.

Purple I'm a long time working for the HSE and have in recent years had to listen to 'it's really very simple, all you need to do is................" from the new all singing all dancing 'private sector mangers' so many times, and yet they have failed to do it.

It 'simply' isn't.


----------



## Deiseblue (28 Aug 2014)

CMCR said:


> Who is working 32.5hours per week? The majority of civil servants are now working 37 hours net per week (if not more).  Normal attendance period for civil servants now is 9am-5.45pm Mon-Thurs, and 9am-5.15pm on Friday.



I can personally attest that during my working life across a broad spectrum of the private sector I worked a 32.5 hour week although starting & finishing times fluctuated with a 1 hour lunch & two 15 minute tea breaks .

I worked at physically demanding jobs in a flour mills , a brewery , a fruit growing farm & a furniture factory where such breaks were essential to maintain efficiency & energy levels .

Latterly I worked in the Bank of Ireland where initially I worked a 33.75 hour week but following a quid pro quo arrangement with the IBOA that was reduced to a 32.5 hour week - if I had worked the hours of 37.25 hours quoted by CMCR above I would have earned an additional €6,000 in overtime per annum + tea allowances.

I have little doubt that large swathes of the private sector thankfully work such work/life balance hours.


----------



## Purple (29 Aug 2014)

Deiseblue said:


> Latterly I worked in the Bank of Ireland where initially I worked a 33.75 hour week but following a quid pro quo arrangement with the IBOA that was reduced to a 32.5 hour week - if I had worked the hours of 37.25 hours quoted by CMCR above I would have earned an additional €6,000 in overtime per annum + tea allowances.


 Banking was, and in many ways still is, part of the Protected Sector which comprises the public and civil service, the so-called "commercial" semi-state and non commercial semi-state sectors and banks that are "too big to fail". This is the unionised sector and is not subject to open competition.


----------



## DerKaiser (30 Aug 2014)

Purple said:


> nobody should get more than 25 days a year.
> 
> A standard working week of 39 hours should be mandatory across all state employees (or those paid by the state).
> 
> Nobody should get paid sick leave unless it's a work related injury. If you want to make sure you are paid if you are sick then buy some insurance.



None of this says anything about creating better morale and a culture of productivity. Most large organisations (private or public) are nowhere near an acceptable level of productivity for the hours worked or effort invested. Increasing hours and restricting sick benefits whilst ignoring inefficient, and in many cases pointless, work practices is not the answer.

I assume this might sound odd to people working in small straightforward businesses, particularly owners, but more hours is not the answer to better productivity.


----------



## cremeegg (30 Aug 2014)

Delboy said:


> PPARS failed because not even NASA could build a computer system that could comfortably handle the nuances of the pay scales, grades, allowances, exceptions etc of the HSE or indeed, most of the Irish CS/PS



The figure given here is €133 million. http://www.finfacts.ie/irishfinancenews/article_10004238.shtml

Of all the examples of incompetence by the public sector in recent years and wastes of taxpayers money this one has always bugged me the most.

And the solution here "really was very simple" I will explain it in a minute.

Most of the many spent was paid to private sector consultants. Who gladly accepted the money to attempt an impossible task. 

I would go further than Delboy and say that the problem isn't that that the structure is complicated, a computer could handle that, the problem is that there is no coherent pay arrangement for many in the public sector.

I know for certain, that for some private sector employees whose wages were dictated by JLC agreements, the employers simply guess their wages because there is no coherent structure. Just a series of rules that have built up over time, which in many areas contradict each other.

I have had it confirmed to me by a senior HSE manager that this was why PPARS failed.

*Its really very simple *

All you have to do Minister Veradkar is buy a payroll system off the shelf that is capable of handling say 1 million employees on say 200 pay rates. Such systems cost in the hundreds of thousands (not millions) of Euro. 

Then inform all staff that they will have to move to the new system. If their pay structure cannot be accommodated by the new system, the pay structure will have to be modified so that it can. Simple. 

This really very simple approach was adopted by Revenue when they introduced ROS. Every accounting system in the country had to be adapted to fit ROS. 

By contract to PPARS, the introduction of ROS was a great public sector success.


----------



## Leper (31 Aug 2014)

cremeegg said:


> The figure given here is €133 million. http://www.finfacts.ie/irishfinancenews/article_10004238.shtml
> 
> 
> Most of the many spent was paid to private sector consultants. Who gladly accepted the money to attempt an impossible task. . . . .
> ...



There you have it, the public sector being ripped off by private sector well known accountants.  Nobody shouted "Stop" and I wonder why.  Was anybody sacked? Was any money recovered from the private sector advisors? What happened to former team members of PPARS in the HSE?  There is nothing simple in the whole process.  What about other comparable health departments in other countries.  I bet they have computer services that work.

If any senior manager from the HSE advised me that Croke Park is in Dublin, I would physically visit the ground just to make sure, such is my belief in that organisation of ongoing poor management.


----------



## Green (2 Sep 2014)

2008'called, it wants it's thread back.


----------



## Marion (2 Sep 2014)

"Banking was, and in many ways still is, part of the Protected Sector which comprises the public and civil service"


Were bank employees subject to  Croke Park; Haddington Road and Fempi?

I don't recall that they were.

Marion


----------



## Sunny (3 Sep 2014)

Marion said:


> "Banking was, and in many ways still is, part of the Protected Sector which comprises the public and civil service"
> 
> 
> Were bank employees subject to  Croke Park; Haddington Road and Fempi?
> ...



Error


----------



## mandelbrot (3 Sep 2014)

First thing I've to do when I get to work this morning is try to convince a colleague to heed his GP, who yesterday morning handed him a cert and told him to go home and go to bed for the rest of the week and let the steroids and antibiotics he's been on for weeks do their work... he's too busy and too conscientious to not come in though, so he came in yesterday and plans on coming in today as well.

The sickening thing for me is that in my experience for every person who sees sick days as additional annual leave, there's more who will come to work no matter what, but the stats won't show that.


----------



## Firefly (3 Sep 2014)

Purple said:


> The department of social welfare (sorry, Social Protection) pays sick benefit after 3 days off work. Nobody should get paid sick leave unless it's a work related injury. *If you want to make sure you are paid if you are sick then buy some insurance*.



A simple fix right there.


----------



## Deiseblue (3 Sep 2014)

Firefly said:


> A simple fix right there.



Already in place for many - Pay Related Social Insurance.


----------



## cremeegg (3 Sep 2014)

mandelbrot said:


> First thing I've to do when I get to work this morning is try to convince a colleague to heed his GP, who yesterday morning handed him a cert and told him to go home and go to bed for the rest of the week and let the steroids and antibiotics he's been on for weeks do their work... he's too busy and too conscientious to not come in though, so he came in yesterday and plans on coming in today as well.
> 
> The sickening thing for me is that in my experience for every person who sees sick days as additional annual leave, there's more who will come to work no matter what, but the stats won't show that.



I think many people looking at the public service feel that those who see sick days as additional leave are treated the same as the busy and conscientious.

Over time this must erode morale, and undermine efficiency. This is the result of weak management.


----------



## Firefly (3 Sep 2014)

Deiseblue said:


> Already in place for many - Pay Related Social Insurance.



I thought PRSI only paid you up to a certain amount? From Purple's post above, the employee gets paid their full salary, thereby hitting the taxpayer.


----------



## Marion (3 Sep 2014)

> First thing I've to do when I get to work this morning is try to convince a colleague to heed his GP, who yesterday morning handed him a cert and told him to go home and go to bed for the rest of the week and let the steroids and antibiotics he's been on for weeks do their work... he's too busy and too conscientious to not come in though, so he came in yesterday and plans on coming in today as well.



That is interesting

This relates to teachers: 
[broken link removed]


14. *Resumption of Duty* 

14.1 It is expected that a teacher would be medically fit to resume full duties after a period of sick leave so that a resumption of duty would not induce a relapse into illness. 

14.2 A teacher intending to resume duty prior to the date specified on her/his medical certificate, must provide a medical certificate of fitness from his/her attending doctor before the date of resumption. In the absence of such a certificate, the full period as recorded on the medical certificate(s) will be counted as sick leave. Certificates of fitness furnished at a later date will not be accepted as evidence of fitness for duty. 



Marion


----------



## Purple (4 Sep 2014)

Marion said:


> "Banking was, and in many ways still is, part of the Protected Sector which comprises the public and civil service"
> 
> 
> Were bank employees subject to  Croke Park; Haddington Road and Fempi?
> ...



I'm not saying that they were. I am saying that due to the nature of the sector; barriers to entry, unionised nature of employment and vital importance to the economy, banking cannot be seen in the same light as say restaurants and is not exposed to market forces in the same way. They same can be said for most of the financial sector. The so-called commercial semi-state companies are also part of that sector. 
In the past Irish Steel and other state subsidised companies and businesses that were considered to be of strategic importance would have been part of it as well. 
The thing they all have in common is that they are heavily unionised and operate in sectors which have big barriers to entry and so are not exposed to market forces as much as other sectors. 
The problem with high barriers is that when they break the flood is of biblical proportions.


----------

