# civil/public service redunancies 2009



## sakigrant (17 Dec 2008)

I've heard (off the record of course) from my Union Rep that the executive officers within the public/civil service Unions are having talks presently, about how to deal with the redundancies their members are going to experience in 2009.

He suggested that there are going to be voluntary redundancy packages offered initially and then compulsory redundancies on a last in first out basis.

I am currently working in an Authority within the Public Service but was moved over from the Civil Service so still retain the Civil Service terms and conditions. It looks likely that I will be able to apply to transfer back into the Civil Service if you are in the Public Service.

Has anyone heard anything similar or different?


----------



## Complainer (26 Dec 2008)

Talks with who? I don't think unions generally get involved in 'secret' negotiations. Why not put a query into your union rep?


----------



## j26 (26 Dec 2008)

Complainer said:


> I don't think unions generally get involved in 'secret' negotiations.


Oh yes they do, unfortunately.

But I'd doubt this is true - I'd have heard something about it by now.


----------



## Complainer (27 Dec 2008)

j26 said:


> Oh yes they do, unfortunately.


I know it's the panto season, but you really need to give a bit more detail in your response. When has this happened before?


----------



## j26 (27 Dec 2008)

Complainer said:


> I know it's the panto season, but you really need to give a bit more detail in your response. When has this happened before?



I'm afraid I can't really fill in the blanks on this one, but over the years I have been involved in one or two grassroots actions to "renegotiate" deals that were made on behalf of the members without their knowledge.

Watching out of that sort of thing one of the reasons I went back onto the branch, and built up some useful contacts.


----------



## assumpta1 (29 Dec 2008)

I have also heard that at year-end parties/speeches it was mentioned that there would be voluntary redundancies across the board in 2009 - must have been to give people Christmas to decide they might want to go for it (seems a good 50% of the workforce based on observation only are near retirement anyway).

Also I think the unions are generally at higher management level in the CS these days anyway.


----------



## Padraigb (29 Dec 2008)

assumpta1 said:


> Also I think the unions are generally at higher management level in the CS these days anyway.



What does that mean?


----------



## poohbear (29 Dec 2008)

sakigrant said:


> I've heard (off the record of course) from my Union Rep that the executive officers within the public/civil service Unions are having talks presently, about how to deal with the redundancies their members are going to experience in 2009.
> 
> He suggested that there are going to be voluntary redundancy packages offered initially and then compulsory redundancies on a last in first out basis.
> 
> ...



There are all sorts of rumours floating around at the moment, If redundancies are offered its more likely to be aimed at the PS first, preferably at higher level - grade 7/8's etc I believe. 

Although if they offered me a package such as PTSB did to their staff - go away for 3 years and we'll give you 75% of one years wage I'd be gone no childcare to worry about!!

Anybody employed since 2005 (open to correction here) pay full PRSI and therefore can be let go, they will get SW benefit which longterm C and P Servants would not be eligible for. If they want non-full PRSI people to leave then they will have to arrange for those people to be able to access the SW Benefit system which currently they can not. 

Nothing would surprise me at this stage, I'm waiting for an embargo to be announced I've 17 years service but with the job senario out there now, there is nothing to encourage me to take redundancy.


----------



## becky (29 Dec 2008)

poohbear said:


> There are all sorts of rumours floating around at the moment, If redundancies are offered its more likely to be aimed at the PS first, preferably at higher level - grade 7/8's etc I believe.
> 
> Although if they offered me a package such as PTSB did to their staff - go away for 3 years and we'll give you 75% of one years wage I'd be gone no childcare to worry about!!
> 
> ...


 
No way are they going to offer a ptsb package - may as well have them working rather than that. 

I expect a voluntary redundancy programme to be announced and then they will see the lay of the land. The Dir of HR - HSE confirmed that he is working on a redundancy program and based on his interview in the SBP this should be completed. I assume it has to be approved by the board of the HSE/Mary Harney/B Drumm to move to the next stage.


----------



## Complainer (30 Dec 2008)

j26 said:


> I'm afraid I can't really fill in the blanks on this one, but over the years I have been involved in one or two grassroots actions to "renegotiate" deals that were made on behalf of the members without their knowledge.
> 
> Watching out of that sort of thing one of the reasons I went back onto the branch, and built up some useful contacts.


Forgive my ignorance, but I just don't understand this. How can an action be 'grassroots' if it is done without the knowledge of members (i.e. the grassroots)? What do you mean by 'went back into the branch'?



assumpta1 said:


> I have also heard that at year-end parties/speeches it was mentioned that there would be voluntary redundancies across the board in 2009 -


I find it hard to believe that any manager would use a year-end party to raise the issue of redundancies? This would be entirely inappropriate? What about the staff who don't attend the party? What about written information about the redundancy package? Are you referring to public sector or private sector here?


assumpta1 said:


> Also I think the unions are generally at higher management level in the CS these days anyway.


Like PadraigB, I just don't get what you mean here. Can you clarify?


----------



## assumpta1 (30 Dec 2008)

Well from observation (I'm not CS) they don't really represent the grassroots (or new young blood) anymore - most established union reps have been promoted over the past few decades and now really look after their own "cliques" (i.e. friends getting promoted etc., bad behaviour completely brushed under the carpet).  That's all I'm saying about it !  It may be different in other departments than the one I'm familiar with.  I would hope that any redundancies offered might breathe new life into an old culture of infinite sick days & bare minimum targets being met (or ignored).  Of course it's the minority that give the rest a bad name needless to say.

This is just my opinion from knowing people who joined the CS from the private sector in the past decade and the walls they were up against when trying to make any sort of progress or change.


----------



## Padraigb (30 Dec 2008)

assumpta1, your anecdotal approach does not make a great deal of sense to me. There are a number of trade unions with membership in the civil service, and they tend to be stratified by rank. The Civil and Public Services Union, for example, represents EOs and the Association of Higher Civil Servants represents APs (a promotion grade for EOs). I think it unlikely that local union reps are generally much above the grade of the members they represent.

Yes, it is often the case that unions at local level can leave their members dissatisfied. Sometimes that is because members' expectations are unreasonable; sometimes it is because union reps do not do a good job. In the latter case, there is a remedy available to members: vote for a change of representative.

I am no longer surprised, but continue to be disappointed, by people who express dissatisfaction with their unions at local level and are not prepared to get involved, even to the extent of attending meetings.


----------



## assumpta1 (30 Dec 2008)

Padraig you're right in saying it's anecdotal and of course also based only on one department.  However the people I know in the CS are actively involved in the union (not just quiet complainers) but the stark reality is unchanged.

You're probably right about union reps being the same level etc. as those they represent but the power is at the top as always so they can only do so much even the good ones.  

Some of the stories I've heard are absolutely shocking - e.g. senior members of management being off "sick" half the year (due to bullying allegations against them - and several over the years not just one) and then turning up to every envelope opening (while off sick !) getting trollied.  I can't imagine anywhere in the private sector putting up with that sort of thing. These same people then being promoted despite a huge file of complaints against them.

It's cases like these (can't be anything other than anecdotal of course !) which must really demotivate other employees.  You can't take on an entire deep-rooted office culture you can only do your job as best you can (usually several people's work to cover all the half-years off sick !) and hope it is rewarded - which in latter years there does seem to be an effort being made to reward those who work hard thankfully.  

And as well as working hard - the genuine hardworkers also have to put up with the negative attitudes towards the CS despite how much effort they themselves put in - it must be very tough.  Especially as it looks like there'll be a definite promotions freeze for years in this economic climate.


----------

