# Does anyone in the Irish Government (Public Service) actually answer phones



## pflangan (17 Sep 2008)

Just spent the last hour trying to get through to the various regional Vehicle Registration Offices, yet to have the pleasure of speaking with someone in the flesh.

what a joke


----------



## aircobra19 (17 Sep 2008)

*Re: Does anyone in the Irish Government actually answer phones*

Probably the busiest time to ring them. Everyone always rings just before the end of the day.


----------



## ajapale (17 Sep 2008)

*Re: Does anyone in the Irish Government actually answer phones*

Moved from  Taxation to Letting Off Steam


----------



## micmclo (17 Sep 2008)

*Re: Does anyone in the Irish Government actually answer phones*

Some offices only answer calls between 9 and 12:30.
They need the afternoon for whatever it is they do.
The Revenue offices I call do this, they're very helpful actually 

Best off calling in the morning.


----------



## Purple (17 Sep 2008)

*Re: Does anyone in the Irish Government actually answer phones*

Call between 10.30 and 12.00 and 2.30 and 3.30. These seem to be the "core" hours for most of the government offices.


----------



## quarterfloun (31 Oct 2008)

*Re: Does anyone in the Irish Government actually answer phones*

am I missing the point or are we paying over the odds for a civil service that only works part time? A whole 2.5 hours a day????  These useless gits should do a days work for a days pay. Nor does my employer does not need to borrow 10% of my salary elsewhere to pay me - (he laid off three staff -15% of our workforce) to balance the books - Cowan should do the same -make these justify their jobs - if they can't - door is over there


----------



## gianni (31 Oct 2008)

*Re: Does anyone in the Irish Government actually answer phones*



quarterfloun said:


> am I missing the point or are we paying over the odds for a civil service that only works part time? A whole 2.5 hours a day????  These useless gits should do a days work for a days pay. Nor does my employer does not need to borrow 10% of my salary elsewhere to pay me - (he laid off three staff -15% of our workforce) to balance the books - Cowan should do the same -make these justify their jobs - if they can't - door is over there



As you rightly suspected, you're missing the point.

Core working hours are the hours where staff must be in the office. They still have to work their 39hr week (or whatever it is) but have the flexibility of adjusting their work patterns to suit their lifestyles. It's known as work-life balance. I don't begrudge them this facility - I wish my employers would implement it! Where the nature of the work allows for it, it's something that should be available for all, in my opinion.

Incidentally I had to deal with 2 departments in the past week, Revenue and Social Welfare, found both to be extremely helpful.


----------



## boris (1 Nov 2008)

*Re: Does anyone in the Irish Government actually answer phones*

Actually you have the core hours wrong.  They are between 10:00 am and 12:30 pm.  The afternoon goes from 2:30 pm to 4:00 pm.  

However do note that there is always staff coverage to cover "normal" hours outside of flexitime regulations which are 9:15 am to 12:45pm and 2:00 pm to 5:30 pm.  Even at that combining with flexi there would be a skeleton staff there over lunch anyway.  They do have to work their alloted hours per week (keeping in mind atypicals/job sharers/part timers).

I worked in Revenue years ago and mornings the phones would be absolurely manic with the effort being in the afternoon to catch up.  Staffs there were trying their best with (at the time) very limited resources e.g. 1 computer for every three persons

Also I have found that the phone systems give the impression that they are ringing when in reality all phones are off the hook on all the desks.  I have even found that ringing sections where I used to work.  While this is wrong it would be expensive and financially irresponsible to replace such a system.

I would have to say that all Sections I have seen would have staff covering phones and where management see that there isn't, there would be questions why.


----------



## liaconn (1 Nov 2008)

*Re: Does anyone in the Irish Government actually answer phones*



quarterfloun said:


> am I missing the point or are we paying over the odds for a civil service that only works part time? A whole 2.5 hours a day???? These useless gits should do a days work for a days pay. Nor does my employer does not need to borrow 10% of my salary elsewhere to pay me - (he laid off three staff -15% of our workforce) to balance the books - Cowan should do the same -make these justify their jobs - if they can't - door is over there


 
What a rude, sweeping post. Civil Servants are expected to work an average of 7 hours a day, excluding their lunch break. While the facility is there to go at 4, you can only do this if you make up the hours somewhere else, and if there will be sufficient coverage in the office until 5.30. Yes, there are some useless gits in the Civil Service, just as I have had to deal with some useless gits in shops, banks, restaurants, airports etc etc. These kind of people  get jobs everywhere, not just in the Civil Service, and are always in the minority. Please don't tar us all with  the same brush.


----------



## mathepac (1 Nov 2008)

*Re: Does anyone in the Irish Government actually answer phones*



boris said:


> ...
> 
> Also I have found that the phone systems give the impression that they are ringing when in reality *all phones are off the hook on all the desks*.  I have even found that ringing sections where I used to work.  *While this is wrong it would be expensive and financially irresponsible to replace such a system*.
> 
> ...



The correct thing to do would be to replace the staff leaving the phone "off the hook".


----------



## Complainer (1 Nov 2008)

*Re: Does anyone in the Irish Government actually answer phones*



mathepac said:


> The correct thing to do would be to replace the staff leaving the phone "off the hook".


That's one option, though a slightly extreme one. Another option would be implement appropriate management practices to ensure that customers are served in an appropriate manner, including allowing time for dealing with cases in addition to time spent on the phone.


----------



## Teabag (1 Nov 2008)

*Re: Does anyone in the Irish Government actually answer phones*



liaconn said:


> Yes, there are some useless gits in the Civil Service, just as I have had to deal with some useless gits in shops, banks, restaurants, airports etc etc. These kind of people  get jobs everywhere, not just in the Civil Service, and are always in the minority. Please don't tar us all with  the same brush.



That is a fair point I have to say. The only problem is that the private sector "useless gits" have a fair chance of being fired if they continue to be "usesless gits" whereas it seems nigh impossible to get fired in the civil service. From my experience, the useless/lazy gits tend to be moved on to new sections or departments rather than getting fired which is not ideal.


----------



## Caveat (5 Nov 2008)

*Re: Does anyone in the Irish Government actually answer phones*

Exactly Teabag.


----------



## Purple (5 Nov 2008)

*Re: Does anyone in the Irish Government actually answer phones*



Complainer said:


> That's one option, though a slightly extreme one. Another option would be implement appropriate management practices to ensure that customers are served in an appropriate manner, including allowing time for dealing with cases in addition to time spent on the phone.



I agree... and any employee who obstructs that reform should be shown the door.

BTW, 7 hours a day is a bit of a joke.


----------



## MrMan (5 Nov 2008)

*Re: Does anyone in the Irish Government actually answer phones*



Purple said:


> I agree... and any employee who obstructs that reform should be shown the door.
> 
> BTW, 7 hours a day is a bit of a joke.




We should all be on 7 hours a day and get back to having a life away from work again. Its a bit of a dream right now but I do think that we tend to spend way to much time either at work or in work mode (dam mobiles) at least I do anyway and its becoming harder to see the benefit coming from my extra hours.


----------



## Purple (5 Nov 2008)

*Re: Does anyone in the Irish Government actually answer phones*



MrMan said:


> We should all be on 7 hours a day and get back to having a life away from work again. Its a bit of a dream right now but I do think that we tend to spend way to much time either at work or in work mode (dam mobiles) at least I do anyway and its becoming harder to see the benefit coming from my extra hours.


 The "should" and "can" thing again.


----------



## Killter (5 Nov 2008)

*Re: Does anyone in the Irish Government actually answer phones*

The op has  a vaild point. We pay for the civil servants to run the country and they should be available to answer calls during normal working hours i.e. 9-5. 

Fair is fair.


----------



## ophelia (5 Nov 2008)

*Re: Does anyone in the Irish Government actually answer phones*

I phoned the Dept of Health just last week at about 11am and got through first time to a very helpful person who gave me all the information I needed to know.


----------



## Teabag (5 Nov 2008)

*Re: Does anyone in the Irish Government actually answer phones*



ophelia said:


> I phoned the Dept of Health just last week at about 11am and got through first time to a very helpful person who gave me all the information I needed to know.



I advise you to get a second opinion !


----------



## Teabag (5 Nov 2008)

*Re: Does anyone in the Irish Government actually answer phones*



Purple said:


> BTW, 7 hours a day is a bit of a joke.



Is it hell ! 
I spend 8 hours at work but 2 hours of it is daydreaming and 1 hour on the internet.
I would gladly give up the daydreaming and internet for a 5 hour day.


----------



## dereko1969 (5 Nov 2008)

*Re: Does anyone in the Irish Government actually answer phones*

the OP mentioned the VRO, now is it not the case that at VRO offices most staff will be engaged for a good portion of their day in checking vehicles outside the office? therefore is the OP suggesting that specific staff be hired to simply answer phones ie extra administrative staff?


----------



## Ciaraella (5 Nov 2008)

*Re: Does anyone in the Irish Government actually answer phones*

The Revenue service is excellent, when ringing the 1890 number you are told in minutes and seconds how long you will be waiting to speak to someone, something that Sky and NTL could do with.


----------



## quarterfloun (5 Nov 2008)

*Re: Does anyone in the Irish Government actually answer phones*



Ciaraella said:


> The Revenue service is excellent, when ringing the 1890 number you are told in minutes and seconds how long you will be waiting to speak to someone, something that Sky and NTL could do with.



The difference is if I do not want to pay for NTL or SKy you can take your money elsewhere. The civil service is not optional - there is only one. God help you if you need them to do something in a hurry - A FIS claim took me three months. FIS is there to protect low income families. 

And as for sacking the useless gits - the unions have it so tight that these useless gits are in a job for life - all they do is go in, put on the lights on but no-one home sign and collect the salary at the end of the week.

Privatise the Civil Service, put SLA's in place and penalise those who do not deliver bang for buck.


----------



## boris (5 Nov 2008)

*Re: Does anyone in the Irish Government actually answer phones*



quarterfloun said:


> And as for sacking the useless gits - the unions have it so tight that these useless gits are in a job for life - all they do is go in, put on the lights on but no-one home sign and collect the salary at the end of the week.
> 
> Privatise the Civil Service, put SLA's in place and penalise those who do not deliver bang for buck.


 
Again the proverbial tarring of the same brush for all civil/public servants. 

Look at the following website's pdf [broken link removed], especially page 9 of the magazine.

"Throughout the economic slump of the 1980’s, sections of the media, most notoriously the ‘Independent’ group, economists and other snake oil salesmen joined with self-important politicians in pursuit of cheap publicity in blaming the country’s woes on Public Servants who were said to be over-paid, cosseted and in receipt of outlandishly inflated
pensions etc., etc. This culminated in the infamous ‘Fur-Lined Mouse- Trap’ article in the Irish Independent."​ 
Civil Servants are constrained by their contracts, Official Secrets Act etc. from defending themselves so it is quite easy to knock them about.​


----------



## z103 (5 Nov 2008)

So during the last slump we also had a wasteful, bloated public sector?



> Again the proverbial tarring of the same brush for all civil/public servants.


It is acceptable to tar all civil/public servants with the same brush because they do have one common factor. All of them chose to work in the public sector.


----------



## quarterfloun (5 Nov 2008)

*Re: Does anyone in the Irish Government actually answer phones*

If civil servants were actually customer orientated they would have no difficulties with privatisation. Without giving too much away under the Official Secrets Act would civil servants be happy to work in the real world with no guaranteed pensions, a full working week and a full amount of work to get through every day would they be happy? Of course not. So until there is equality between civil & public there will always be the perception that civil servants have it easy. I could regale you with stories of my life experiences with these people in Ireland & the UK. I suppose the difference between me and Boris is that I do not believe it is right for older Public Sector workers to sit around knitting sweaters because they cannot upskill to using computers - first hand hearsay I'll admit but a trusted source nevertheless.


----------



## boris (5 Nov 2008)

leghorn said:


> So during the last slump we also had a wasteful, bloated public sector?
> 
> 
> It is acceptable to tar all civil/public servants with the same brush because they do have one common factor. All of them chose to work in the public sector.


 
Actually the recent OECD report stated that the Irish Civil Service was understaffed using comparatives with the rest of Europe. 



Also you seem so have missed the point. The mark I was making is that just because of a small group of civil servants who are not pulling their weight does not mean that *all *civil servants are doing the same. If that was the case, then the organs of Government would completely grind to a halt.

Finally I do agree with you (I have to use other Dept's as well in a personal capacity) I don't think that all Government employees are all the same. While things were like that 15-20 years ago, there has been a huge tightening up on abuses etc. since then.

They didn't cause the current downturn.


----------



## Complainer (6 Nov 2008)

MrMan said:


> We should all be on 7 hours a day and get back to having a life away from work again. Its a bit of a dream right now but I do think that we tend to spend way to much time either at work or in work mode (dam mobiles) at least I do anyway and its becoming harder to see the benefit coming from my extra hours.



You could be onto something here. Could there be a link between increasing anti-social behaviour and family breakdowns and decreasing voluntary activity and the additional pressures in the work environment from recent years.



Purple said:


> I agree... and any employee who obstructs that reform should be shown the door.


You'd need to clarify your definition of 'obstruct'. At times (both public and private sector), I've 'obstructed' organisational change for very good reasons, where it was very clear to me that the change wasn't going to work, wasn't thought through, was going to impact customers negatively etc. Should I have been shown the door?


----------



## liaconn (8 Nov 2008)

*Re: Does anyone in the Irish Government actually answer phones*



Teabag said:


> That is a fair point I have to say. The only problem is that the private sector "useless gits" have a fair chance of being fired if they continue to be "usesless gits" whereas it seems nigh impossible to get fired in the civil service. From my experience, the useless/lazy gits tend to be moved on to new sections or departments rather than getting fired which is not ideal.


 
I agree with you and believe me, that is just as frustrating for the rest of us in the civil service. We would love to see these problem staff get the kick they deserve. My point though was that, just because there are some useless lazy people in the Civil Service does not entitle people to come on message boards like this and make sweeping statements about all civil servants.


----------



## liaconn (8 Nov 2008)

leghorn said:


> So during the last slump we also had a wasteful, bloated public sector?
> 
> 
> It is acceptable to tar all civil/public servants with the same brush because they do have one common factor. All of them chose to work in the public sector.


 

Yes and some of them work damn hard and are absolutely brilliant at their job. Why does choosing to work in the public sector mean you have to tolerate being lumped in with the minority who don't do  their job properly? That really doesn't make sense.


----------



## boris (10 Nov 2008)

liaconn said:


> Yes and some of them work damn hard and are absolutely brilliant at their job. Why does choosing to work in the public sector mean you have to tolerate being lumped in with the minority who don't do their job properly? That really doesn't make sense.


 
Total and absolutely agree with you Liaconn. Have spent the last 15 years working damned hard in my present and other positions and have had the honour of working with colleagues for whom I hold the highest respect due to their integrity and goodwill in their job. Am getting very tired of these people blaming the ills of the entire world on the civil service.

Yes we know that it is not a perfect environment and not every is going ot satisfy everyone but we get most things done right. If we didn't then both private and public industry would grind to a halt.

On a final and related point, I just happened to watch the repeat of "The Panel" last night with Kevin Myers guesting on the first slot. While I sometimes find Mr. Myers entertaining if somewhat eccentric in his column and comments, he made an accusation that *ALL public servants *partake in the exercise of taking 8 uncertified sick days in any one year and that there is a culture of doing so. In my experience (and those of my colleagues) what a load of rubbish. 

But then Adolf Hitler supposedly did say "If you tell a big enough lie and tell it frequently enough, it will be believed."


----------



## Caveat (10 Nov 2008)

boris said:


> ...  *ALL public servants *partake in the exercise of taking 8 uncertified sick days in any one year


 
I doubt it.



> ...and that there is a culture of doing so.


 
But based on my experience, I have no doubt that this is true.


----------



## Purple (10 Nov 2008)

I see some very interesting posts above. Here’s a question to public sector employees:
If a colleague who you knew was utterly useless and abused the system was sacked and his sacking resulted in a union picket on your place of work would you pass that picket?


----------



## BoscoTalking (10 Nov 2008)

I had reason to deal with this very department recently - not only did they answer the phone but the person emailed me the details, rang me to see did i get it and was very helpful and, well, intelligent in what she was explaining. i have called other departmets and the call was put on hold maybe 3 times because the person had no idea of information she was supposed to know.


----------



## boris (10 Nov 2008)

Purple said:


> I see some very interesting posts above. Here’s a question to public sector employees:
> If a colleague who you knew was utterly useless and abused the system was sacked and his sacking resulted in a union picket on your place of work would you pass that picket?


 
Purple 

Very good question and I have quickly discussed it with my colleagues here. Just remember that the civil/public service has many different areas so I can only discuss this question from the viewpoint that I and my colleagues have experienced.

There would never be an occasion in the public/civil sevice where a picket for the above situation would occur. There are mechanisms and procedures in place whereby a sudden sacking could not occur. Employees are given numerous warnings (recorded I must add). Then the Unions would be involved to ensure that a workers rights are 
being upheld (to protect against bullying I would suspect). After this process has been done, the employee would then be let go. Therefore the unions would be totally involved and would not therefore have the recourse to go to place a picket.

The other reason that these mechanisms are in place is that they have to protect the Exchequer in the case of wrongful dismissal.

Finally one of colleagues here stated that he has never seen a case where pickets have been placed where a person has been dismissed (and he has over 30 years experience).

So Purple it just would not happen in the Civil Service.  Now Semi States could be a different matter....................

Back to work.


----------



## aircobra19 (10 Nov 2008)

Purple said:


> I see some very interesting posts above. Here’s a question to public sector employees:
> If a colleague who you knew was utterly useless and abused the system was sacked and his sacking resulted in a union picket on your place of work would you pass that picket?


 
Purple is waiting for someone to say they'll take a sickie. Or they'd never get the phone call to tell them about it as the phone would be off the hook. LOL. I can't see the situation arising as described, my last experience of a picket, where pretty much everyone agreed with the picket. A lot of people still crossed it anyway. 

Most of the places I've worked public and private sector have had very similar sick leave policies. So where its available it gets seems to get used about the same. Obviously where theres no sick policy people just come in and spread flu's etc around the office, or take the hit in the pay packet.


----------



## z103 (10 Nov 2008)

> If a colleague who you knew was utterly useless and abused the system was sacked and his sacking resulted in a union picket on your place of work would you pass that picket?


So it seems people don't get the sack in the public sector, especially for being 'utterly useless'.


----------



## boris (10 Nov 2008)

leghorn said:


> So it seems people don't get the sack in the public sector, especially for being 'utterly useless'.


 

Yes they do.  I know of one case near me that is in the process at the moment.  Unfortunately they do have to go through the motions before they place the case on the Head of Departments desk for approval.  Also I could not put a number on the number of cases that I have seen in my career where it was justified.


----------



## Purple (10 Nov 2008)

What if the picket was placed because the union said that correct procedures were not followed (even though you knew the guy sacked deserved it)?
To broaden the question; would you pass a picket if you disagreed with it or would you act in solidarity with your comrades?


----------



## boris (10 Nov 2008)

boris said:


> There would never be an occasion in the public/civil sevice where a picket for the above situation would occur. There are mechanisms and procedures in place whereby a sudden sacking could not occur.


 
Purple 

Think I have already answered this.

They are good systems in place for this. Hence that is why there are very few industrial disputes in the Civil Service due to this. Lets broaden my answer as you have broadened your question. What about the cases of fraud, assualt etc. People are obviously shown the door then and prosecuted (hopefully).

Finally as a last point, why do you keep referring to employees in the Civil Service in the male gender when the service is made of 2/3 female employees.


----------



## Purple (10 Nov 2008)

boris said:


> Purple
> 
> Think I have already answered this.
> 
> They are good systems in place for this. Hence that is why there are very few industrial disputes in the Civil Service due to this. Lets broaden my answer as you have broadened your question. What about the cases of fraud, assualt etc. People are obviously shown the door then and prosecuted (hopefully).


 I was asking if you would pass a picket that you disagree with or would you support you “comrades” (union speak) right or wrong.



boris said:


> Finally as a last point, why do you keep referring to employees in the Civil Service in the male gender when the service is made of 2/3 female employees.


 My apologies; I am usually quite careful to use both him/her or gender neutral terms.


----------



## boris (10 Nov 2008)

NoI would not pass a picket line.  When you are part of a union, you really not showing "comradeship" if you opt out when something doesn't suit you.

Only once was I ever on strike and that was way way back in 1996 when Ruairi Quinn put an embargo on the Civil Service (without discussing it with the unions).  At the time I didn't agree with the action as I could not afford it as a low paid civil servant.  The action in this instance was a half days industrial action.  While a lot of our colleagues in the same grades as us (who were not members of the union) passed the picket line, there was no reprecussions against them and the office in question was still open for business with no effect on the services provided.

The end result was that the unions neogtiated a cap on numbers which is still in place in a lot of quarters.


----------



## Purple (10 Nov 2008)

boris said:


> NoI would not pass a picket line.  When you are part of a union, you really not showing "comradeship" if you opt out when something doesn't suit you.
> 
> Only once was I ever on strike and that was way way back in 1996 when Ruairi Quinn put an embargo on the Civil Service (without discussing it with the unions).  At the time I didn't agree with the action as I could not afford it as a low paid civil servant.  The action in this instance was a half days industrial action.  While a lot of our colleagues in the same grades as us (who were not members of the union) passed the picket line, there was no reprecussions against them and the office in question was still open for business with no effect on the services provided.
> 
> The end result was that the unions neogtiated a cap on numbers which is still in place in a lot of quarters.


 Thanks for the answer. For my part I would not be part of a union as I Believe that they are a cancer on society and the single biggest threat to the future prosperity of this country so I admit I am biased. That siad I believe in individual choice and individual responsibility so I would pass a picket if I disagreed with the reason for it and I would not pass it if I supported it.


----------



## boris (10 Nov 2008)

Purple said:


> Thanks for the answer. For my part I would not be part of a union as I Believe that they are a cancer on society and the single biggest threat to the future prosperity of this country so I admit I am biased. That siad I believe in individual choice and individual responsibility so I would pass a picket if I disagreed with the reason for it and I would not pass it if I supported it.


 
In partial agreement with you, I have sat on Union committee's and realise that they do both good and evil.

It might surprise you but a lot of times they do have the public interest at heart (not all about the members) which I think does reflect their interest in doing a good job.  However I have sat on some committees where it has been a power trip with those in positions.  But overall I think they are needed to buffer against injustices.


----------



## aircobra19 (10 Nov 2008)

leghorn said:


> So it seems people don't get the sack in the public sector, especially for being 'utterly useless'.


 
I can't speak for the whole sector. But I only know of one who was encouraged to leave which they did. I've heard of others being disciplined, but no direct experience of that. Also seen people get moved and retrained, for under performance which seems to work out. Have to say I only seen it happen very rarely in the private sector too.


----------



## Purple (10 Nov 2008)

aircobra19 said:


> I can't speak for the whole sector. But I only know of one who was encouraged to leave which they did. I've heard of others being disciplined, but no direct experience of that. Also seen people get moved and retrained, for under performance which seems to work out. Have to say I only seen it happen very rarely in the private sector too.


I agree that it doesn’t happen very often in the private sector but if there is a culture of underperformance in a private company it will eventually go out of business. This is not the case in the public sector.


----------



## aircobra19 (10 Nov 2008)

Dunno about that. People can hide away in big private companies, and family members are often kept "busy" in the family business, or indeed, dictator style bosses can be highly inefficient, but still muddle along. Probably in every area you get people who aren't very good, but get enough business to stay afloat. Being private sector isn't a 
panacea for everything. When


----------



## aircobra19 (10 Nov 2008)

Dunno about that. People can hide away in big private companies, and family members are often kept "busy" in the family business, or indeed, dictator style bosses can be highly inefficient, but still muddle along. Probably in every area you get people who aren't very good, but get enough business to stay afloat. Being private sector isn't a 
panacea for everything. When contracting I saw a lot of very poor performing private companies, because you are often dragged in to firefight some problem.


----------



## Purple (10 Nov 2008)

aircobra19 said:


> Dunno about that. People can hide away in big private companies, and family members are often kept "busy" in the family business, or indeed, dictator style bosses can be highly inefficient, but still muddle along. Probably in every area you get people who aren't very good, but get enough business to stay afloat. Being private sector isn't a
> panacea for everything. When contracting I saw a lot of very poor performing private companies, because you are often dragged in to firefight some problem.


 I agree on big companies but most people work for small businesses and lot sof those go bust.


----------



## aircobra19 (10 Nov 2008)

I've seen a lot of chronic small companies and self employed people who are just woeful. I dunno how they stay in business but they do.


----------



## Purple (10 Nov 2008)

aircobra19 said:


> I've seen a lot of chronic small companies and self employed people who are just woeful. I dunno how they stay in business but they do.


 Working hard instead of smart?


----------



## aircobra19 (10 Nov 2008)

Purple said:


> Working hard instead of smart?



Usually not. Anyway thats making heavy weather of a simple truth. You get people who don't answer phones in the private sector too. Sometimes theres a valid reason, and sacking people isn't always the right solution.


----------



## Purple (10 Nov 2008)

aircobra19 said:


> Usually not. Anyway thats making heavy weather of a simple truth. You get people who don't answer phones in the private sector too. Sometimes theres a valid reason, and sacking people isn't always the right solution.



I agree.

Accountability is important though and that has to mean that management has a meaningful sanction against those that can’t and/or won’t do their work. That sanction has to be more than theoretical. 
How do we, as a country, get to the stage where we have a lean and accountable public sector? That’s the question that needs to be answered. Blaming the foot solders is too easy and it’s not the root cause (and so will not lead to the correct solution). For what it’s worth I blame bad management, unions that obstruct change and weak government that don’t have the balls to face down the unions who, after all, are only there to represent the interests of their members and not the general good.


----------



## aircobra19 (10 Nov 2008)

Ditto. 

Rather than debating the whole private vs public sector repeatably, I'd much prefer to see debate on reform in public sector in other countries and talk about whats worked and what hasn't. Maybe this should be a new thread though. 

[broken link removed]


----------



## Purple (10 Nov 2008)

aircobra19 said:


> Ditto.
> 
> Rather than debating the whole private vs public sector repeatably, I'd much prefer to see debate on reform in public sector in other countries and talk about whats worked and what hasn't. Maybe this should be a new thread though.
> 
> [broken link removed]



Great link, thanks 

(when the hell did we start being nice to each other? )


----------



## Complainer (10 Nov 2008)

Purple said:


> I see some very interesting posts above. Here’s a question to public sector employees:
> If a colleague who you knew was utterly useless and abused the system was sacked and his sacking resulted in a union picket on your place of work would you pass that picket?


When was the last strike you came across that related to the sacking of an individual?


----------



## Purple (11 Nov 2008)

Complainer said:


> When was the last strike you came across that related to the sacking of an individual?



Don’t obfuscate; you know that’s not what I’m talking about.


----------



## Complainer (11 Nov 2008)

Purple said:


> Don’t obfuscate; you know that’s not what I’m talking about.


I'm struggling to see what you're talking about, other than to put out an unrealistic hypothetical situation and draw conclusions from unrealistic hypothetical answers.


----------



## Purple (12 Nov 2008)

Complainer said:


> I'm struggling to see what you're talking about, other than to put out an unrealistic hypothetical situation and draw conclusions from unrealistic hypothetical answers.



The question is simple; would you pass a picket if you disagreed with the reason it was placed.


----------



## Complainer (13 Nov 2008)

Purple said:


> The question is simple; would you pass a picket if you disagreed with the reason it was placed.


Simplistic, rather than simple. The only answer I can give is 'maybe'.

There may be a case for supporting the collective action of a union, even where I don't agree with the particular issue. I might be looking for support from comrades on the next issue down the line. It's what give the unions collective strength.

There may will be issues that go too far, and that I'd be unable to support. I guess in such circumstances I'd resign from the union as a first step.


----------



## liaconn (14 Nov 2008)

boris said:


> Purple
> 
> Very good question and I have quickly discussed it with my colleagues here. Just remember that the civil/public service has many different areas so I can only discuss this question from the viewpoint that I and my colleagues have experienced.
> 
> ...


 

Haven't been here all week so have just seen this. I absolutely agree with Boris, if someone is sacked its after due procedures have been followed, and I can't imagine why you think we'd all go on strike if some useless and lazy individual was fired.


----------

