# Public Service Attitudes.



## quarterfloun

1. It rained today. They stopped giving out Swine Flu jabs in the clininc so Public service staff can go home.
2. It rained today. My kids got sent home early. Their school is on the highest point locally.
3. It rained today. My kids school is shut tomorrow. Their scholl will be in the same high place tomorrow.
4. They are slouching off Tuesday because they feel hard done by.

Sod the lot of them. Sack every last civil servant and re-employ those that are prepared to get on with it and do a days work. The rest of the sponging, insipid, unionised shirkers can go and hold their unemployment offices to ramsom.


PS...I'm still at work although I finish at 5, I will be at work tomorrow and Tuesday too.

Vive la revolucion!!!!!


----------



## redbhoy

I hope you put that post up on your own time.


----------



## quarterfloun

Nope....used all my own money!!!!


----------



## csirl

At least, unlike bankers, they dont reward themselves with multimillion euro bonuses even if they do a rubbish job.


----------



## gipimann

The school may be on the highest point around, but what about the children's homes?   What would have happened if the children left school at the correct time only to find some parents couldn't get there because of flooding, or got there and couldn't get home?

The swine flu vaccine is currently being given to persons over 65 with an underlying health condition - not exactly the weather for such people to be out.  Do you know for a fact that the staff went home?


----------



## gianni

quarterfloun said:


> PS...I'm still at work although I finish at 5, I will be at work tomorrow and Tuesday too.
> 
> Vive la revolucion!!!!!



Wow, my hero...


----------



## roland

csirl said:


> At least, unlike bankers, they dont reward themselves with multimillion euro bonuses even if they do a rubbish job.



Give us a break would ya.  The vast majority of people working in banking do nothing of the sort, nor can they.  It is idiotic, trite, puerile and frankly irrelevant to the debate to talk about the bonuses a few at the top can get.  We could go on about the few at the top of the public sector too - expenses, early retirement pensions etc.  But that too is irrelevant to the debate.

The comparison here is between the vast bulk of private sector workers versus the vast bulk of public sector workers.


----------



## Howitzer

I thought there was a bonus culture within the Public Sector too - Brendan Drumm and his 70K spring to mind. It exists in any organization where you allow guys in back rooms to backslap each other.

Here's another pretty desperate example.
http://www.independent.ie/national-...nus-scheme-cost-taxpayers-83643m-1715282.html

And another.
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/top-civil-servants-get-pay-rise-on-double-1248314.html

It's nothing to do with Public or Private Sector, it's about the guys (invariably) at the top with their snouts in the trough. The Unions are just as complicit in this exercise. Ask any of them why they earn 150K+ they simply point out that their pay is indexed to someone else, who's pay is indexed to someone else, who pay is determined by a committee who all get paid by .....

We do need a revolution.


----------



## colin79ie

Here we go again.............

Mods, please put any references to public/private arguments into a sub section somewhere. This site is getting painful to the eye


----------



## Firehead

Quarter, I suppose you blame the public servants for the bad weather as well....... the words painting all with one brush springs to mind, give it a rest.


----------



## Protocol

Some public servants I know earn up to *87k, or 7000 per month*, with 14 wks annual leave, that's *70 days annual leave*.

And their attitude is to strike..........I can't understand it.

If I had that pay and conditions, I'd never vote for a strike.


----------



## Complainer

Protocol said:


> Some public servants I know earn up to *87k, or 7000 per month*, with 14 wks annual leave, that's *70 days annual leave*.


And would you like to compare this against the salaries of the senior people in the private colleges, just for balance?



Protocol said:


> If I had that pay and conditions, I'd never vote for a strike.


It's not that long ago that the public sector was struggling to recruit staff. Funny how you didn't rush in then?



quarterfloun said:


> 2. It rained today. My kids got sent home early. Their school is on the highest point locally.
> 3. It rained today. My kids school is shut tomorrow. Their scholl will be in the same high place tomorrow.


Have you brought up your concerns with the school principal, or through the Parents Association or the parents rep on the Board of Management?


----------



## liaconn

Mods, any chance you could change the title of this thread to 'yet another excuse to bash the public service'.


----------



## redbhoy

Protocol said:


> Some public servants I know earn up to *87k, or 7000 per month*, with 14 wks annual leave, that's *70 days annual leave*.
> 
> And their attitude is to strike..........I can't understand it.
> 
> If I had that pay and conditions, I'd never vote for a strike.


 
Which area is this person in? 70 days annual leave seems excessive.


----------



## Complainer

redbhoy said:


> Which area is this person in? 70 days annual leave seems excessive.


3rd level college, I'd guess.


----------



## liaconn

Well, it's certainly not the Civil Service. Even the Secretary General doesn't get half that amount of Annual Leave.


----------



## liaconn

I've just seen this Article from Tuesday's Irish Examiner. It kind of sums up a lot of what I've been trying to say. 


Public sector pay cuts unfair and counter-productive on the tax front

By Fergus Finlay This story appeared in the printed version of the Irish Examiner Tuesday, November 17, 2009


I THINK if I were a public servant today, I’d be mad as hell.
With a few well documented political exceptions, I’ve never known anyone who went into the public service to make money. 
In fact if you wanted to make money, the last place you’d go for a career is into the public service. 
Some people choose a public service career for security and many choose it because it offers the chance to do something or to be something they’ve always wanted to be. A nurse, a doctor, a teacher, a fireman. To work at healing the sick, catching the baddies, teaching the kids — I’ve known people who grew up from childhood wanting to do just that, and who have found tremendous fulfilment from following a chosen career as a public servant. 
And I’ve known public servants who maybe ended up in places they never expected to find themselves, and nevertheless did the state more than a little service. It is public servants who run our libraries (and if you haven’t visited a library lately, go and take a look — it will knock your socks off). 
It is public servants who help Irish manufacturers to market their goods and to export them. It is public servants who, behind the scenes, probably did as much and more to bring peace to this island than any of the higher profile politicians who routinely claim their place in history. 
I could go on. But you’re going to have to take my word for this, if you haven’t had direct experience of the public service. As I said, I’ve never met a public servant who was in it for the money. And I’ve never met a public servant who wanted to let his or her country down. 
Sure, they’re not all equally able. They’re not even all equally pleasant. We’ve all, I’m guessing, had both good and bad experiences at the hands of public servants. But I’m guessing we’ve all had mixed experiences at the hands of business people, bankers, priests, shopkeepers, mechanics, car salesmen, dentists, doctors, and the thousands and thousands of other people who make their living in the private sector in Ireland. 
So why, I wonder, are public servants being told, day after day, that they have to bear the brunt of the public expenditure cuts? In addition to that, why are public servants being constantly attacked and derided as if they had suddenly become the fat cats in our society? 
Why is there such division, and it seems such jealousy, between the public and the private sector? When public servants, quite rightly, point out that their pay has been hit by the pension levy, the commentators immediately snap that it’s only a modest contribution to the real cost of their pensions. 
But for years and years public service pay in Ireland was calculated on the basis that the value of the pension had to be taken into account when making comparisons. In other words, public service salaries tended to be lower than those in the private sector because there was more security in the public service and the pensions were related to income rather than to the contribution made. 
I’ve always argued (and I see the OECD is doing it too) that some government has to bite the bullet on the pension issue by closing down the "defined benefit" scheme (which relates pension to salary) for new entrants to the public service, and by placing all new entrants on a defined contribution scheme (which relates pension to the amount you pay into the scheme). 
Such a change would bring the cost of funding public service pensions down dramatically over time. It would also mean that everyone in the economy who was working towards a pension, whether in the private or the public sector, would be on the same footing. 
But you know what? The pensions entitlements of public servants haven’t actually changed at all. What has changed is that many pension schemes in the private sector have lost huge value partly because of mismanagement and also because the equities and stocks and shares they have been invested in have been damaged by greed and incompetence. More than a few pension funds, for instance, invested heavily in Irish bank shares. Need I say more? 
And we’re being told every day that public service pay is at the heart of the whole public expenditure problem because it accounts for a massive proportion of public spending. 
When they’re talking about public spending, commentators seem to use whatever figure comes into their heads. I’ve heard it solemnly reported on the radio that public service pay accounts for proportions of spending ranging from 50% to 75%. There’s a mantra about it — "it’s simply impossible to cut public spending (and thereby save the economy is the inference) without cutting pay because pay simply accounts for too much". 
The actual figure is about one-third. Public service pay is about one-third of public spending. So every €3 you take off a public servant should give you about €1 in public spending cuts. 
There’s a couple of problems with this. First, every time you take €3 off a public servant, you lose anything up to €1 in tax revenue because (unlike a lot of people in the private sector) public servants are all PAYE workers — cut their pay and you immediately lose the income tax they give you. So actually, if you want to get a cut of €1 in overall public spending from public service pay, you have to take around €4. 
The Government has said it wants to take €1.3 billion from public servants as their contribution to resolving our financial crisis. If it means that as a net figure (taking account of the loss in tax revenue), it’s going to have to cut pay by around €1.7bn in fact. That’s 10% of the public pay bill from January 1 next. 
BUT IF it wants to apply that kind of a cut so that lower paid public servants have to take a hit of, say, 5%, it’s going to have to cut middle income public servants by around 15%. 
It was not the public service, nor anyone in the public service, who precipitated this crisis in the first place. And when we’re not busy sneering at public servants, we totally depend on them. Take away our public service in Ireland and you drive a huge hole into our quality of life. 
Against that background, the kind of cuts that are now having to be considered, to yield a net €1.3bn in public spending reductions, are savage. They will have a huge impact on thousands of families (some commentators don’t like us noticing that public servants have families, too) and they will seriously damage morale in vital services. 
Despite what the commentators might like us to think, cuts of that magnitude are fundamentally unfair. I mightn’t agree — in fact I don’t agree — with the proposition that our economy and our school system can be shut down for a day, or maybe more, by public sector protest. But because the whole approach is so unfair, I can fully understand the anger behind that protest.


----------



## Protocol

liaconn said:


> Mods, any chance you could change the title of this thread to 'yet another excuse to bash the public service'.


 
I don't want to bash the public service.

I want a well-paid, strong, high-morale, productive public service.

I don't want pay cuts.

I want to see high calibre candidates attracted to quality jobs, with a flexible and adaptable attitude from workers and staff.

*Example:*

Well paid teachers
being supported with training (outside class times)
with good pensions (with workers contributing 10% of wages)
working more days than the current 167 per year
with smaller class sizes
with procedures to deal with disruptive pupils
*What I mean is that already well-paid staff with low tax are striking to achieve what????*


----------



## Protocol

Complainer said:


> And would you like to compare this against the salaries of the senior people in the private colleges, just for balance?


 
These are regular, not senior, teaching staff.


----------



## Complainer

Protocol said:


> These are regular, not senior, teaching staff.


What grade?


----------



## Howitzer

liaconn said:


> Public service pay is about one-third of public spending. So every €3 you take off a public servant should give you about €1 in public spending cuts.


I've the greatest of respect for Fergus Finlay but this makes no sense. A 3 Euro saving is a 3 Euro saving no matter what way you look at it (before tax).



liaconn said:


> When they’re talking about public spending, commentators seem to use whatever figure comes into their heads. I’ve heard it solemnly reported on the radio that public service pay accounts for proportions of spending ranging from 50% to 75%. There’s a mantra about it — "it’s simply impossible to cut public spending (and thereby save the economy is the inference) without cutting pay because pay simply accounts for too much".
> The actual figure is about one-third. Public service pay is about one-third of public spending.


I've never heard anyone misrepresent what percentage of spending PS pay represents - on this forum or on the airwaves. You can argue over details but when you start making up numbers you lose all credibility and, unfortunately, Fergus has done so in my eyes here.


----------



## Protocol

Complainer said:


> What grade?


 
Entry-level, e.g. you could be less than 30 and earning 60-65k, heading for 85k.


----------



## liaconn

Howitzer said:


> I've the greatest of respect for Fergus Finlay but this makes no sense. A 3 Euro saving is a 3 Euro saving no matter what way you look at it (before tax).


 
I think what he meant  was that cutting the public sector payroll by 3% would only lead to 1% savings in total public spending because payroll is about 1/3rd of public expenditure.


----------



## Complainer

Protocol said:


> Entry-level, e.g. you could be less than 30 and earning 60-65k, heading for 85k.


Can you please be specific - what grades of staff in what institutions are earning the €87k that you originally quoted and getting 70 days leave?

For the record, the salary scale for entry level Assistant Lecturer in DIT runs up to €52k

[broken link removed]


----------



## liaconn

Howitzer said:


> I've never heard anyone misrepresent what percentage of spending PS pay represents - on this forum or on the airwaves.


 
No, but Fergus Finlay obviously has.


----------



## Howitzer

liaconn said:


> I think what he meant  was that cutting the public sector payroll by 3% would only lead to 1% savings in total public spending because payroll is about 1/3rd of public expenditure.


What he said and what he may have meant are 2 different things.


liaconn said:


> No, but Fergus Finlay obviously has.


I don't know what this means. Has anyone misrepresented what percentage PS pay represents (50%, 75% as Fergus as states). I'm as one-eyed as the next man but I've never seen or heard this.


----------



## liaconn

Howitzer said:


> *What he said and what he may have meant are 2 different things.*
> 
> Yes, but surely what he _meant _is important.
> 
> *I don't know what this means. Has anyone misrepresented what percentage PS pay represents (50%, 75% as Fergus as states). I'm as one-eyed as the next man but I've never seen or heard this.[/*quote]
> 
> You seem to be saying that, because you personally haven't heard any misrepresentation then Fergus Finlay is obviously lying.


----------



## Purple

Complainer said:


> It's not that long ago that the public sector was struggling to recruit staff. Funny how you didn't rush in then?


 What utter rubbish; there has been a massive increase in public sector numbers over the last few years.

Furgus Finlay is a Labour Party hack, as biased as they come. He was Dick Springs special advisor during his time as minister for foreign affairs. He wrote a book about it, is was the most self congratulatory piece of fiction I have ever read. The overarching impression it gave was that his biggest fan is Furgus Finlay.


----------



## Howitzer

liaconn said:


> *What he said and what he may have meant are 2 different things.*
> 
> Yes, but surely what he _meant _is important.


Absolutely. But who's to say that that's what he meant. Are you Fergus Finlay?


liaconn said:


> *I don't know what this means. Has anyone misrepresented what percentage PS pay represents (50%, 75% as Fergus as states). I'm as one-eyed as the next man but I've never seen or heard this.*
> 
> You seem to be saying that, because you personally haven't heard any misrepresentation then Fergus Finlay is obviously lying.


All you gotta do is point me at a link. I'm not so biased in my opinions that I can't admit I'm wrong. Where has this been stated? Is it a widely held view?


----------



## liaconn

Howitzer said:


> *Absolutely. But who's to say that that's what he meant. Are you Fergus Finlay?*
> 
> Well, it was pretty obvious to anyone else I know who read the article that that is what he meant. Obviously, you'd rather believe he's making stuff up.
> 
> *All you gotta do is point me at a link. I'm not so biased in my opinions that I can't admit I'm wrong. Where has this been stated? Is it a widely held view?[/*quote]
> 
> It is Fergus Finlay who said he's seen/heard these figures quoted. You seem to be accusing him of lying on the basis that you have not heard any misrepresentation yourself. That is the point I am making.


----------



## liaconn

Purple said:


> What utter rubbish; there has been a massive increase in public sector numbers over the last few years.
> 
> Furgus Finlay is a Labour Party hack, as biased as they come. He was Dick Springs special advisor during his time as minister for foreign affairs. He wrote a book about it, is was the most self congratulatory piece of fiction I have ever read. The overarching impression it gave was that his biggest fan is Furgus Finlay.


 
Why would being a labour party hack make him biased in favour of the Public Service? Quite the opposite I would have thought.


----------



## Purple

liaconn said:


> Why would being a labour party hack make him biased in favour of the Public Service? Quite the opposite I would have thought.



The Labour Party are the party of the middle-class urbanity public sector employee.
They are to the public sector unions what Sinn Fein are to the IRA.


----------



## liaconn

Purple said:


> The Labour Party are the party of the middle-class urbanity public sector employee.
> .


 
You have got to be joking. The labour party have traditionally been very tough on Civil Servants. That's why a lot of us are terrified to vote for them.


----------



## Howitzer

liaconn said:


> *Absolutely. But who's to say that that's what he meant. Are you Fergus Finlay?*
> 
> Well, it was pretty obvious to anyone else I know who read the article that that is what he meant. Obviously, you'd rather believe he's making stuff up.
> 
> *All you gotta do is point me at a link. I'm not so biased in my opinions that I can't admit I'm wrong. Where has this been stated? Is it a widely held view?*
> 
> It is Fergus Finlay who said he's seen/heard these figures quoted. You seem to be accusing him of lying on the basis that you have not heard any misrepresentation yourself. That is the point I am making.


LMAO.

Here again is the orginal quote. I haven't misrepresnted or paraphrased Fergus in any way shape or form.


liaconn said:


> When they’re talking about public spending, commentators seem to use whatever figure comes into their heads. I’ve heard it solemnly reported on the radio that public service pay accounts for proportions of spending ranging from 50% to 75%. There’s a mantra about it — "it’s simply impossible to cut public spending (and thereby save the economy is the inference) without cutting pay because pay simply accounts for too much".
> The actual figure is about one-third. Public service pay is about one-third of public spending. So every €3 you take off a public servant should give you about €1 in public spending cuts.


You may know what Fergus meant but the article isn't aimed at you. It's an opinion piece, by definition the aim is to form opinion. Fergus makes an unsubstantiated point that people are misrepresnting PS wages as a percentage of overall numbers and then 1 line later makes, what I can only assume, to be a glaring mistake in his own figures. 

When you're in the business of opinion forming you gotta be able to back up what you say.

(I know this thread is now way off topic, is there any chance a Mod could split it into another something along the lines of "Opinion formers - get your facts right", you could lump DMcW stuff in there too.)


----------



## Staples

Purple said:


> What utter rubbish; there has been a massive increase in public sector numbers over the last few years.


 
I did a thesis in 2003/2004 on public sector recruitment.  At the time it was extremely difficult to recruit people, to the point where significant sums were expended by the Public Appointments Service on advertising/recruitment.  There's hardly anyone in the current workforce who couldn't have got into the public service at that point if they really wanted to.  The reality is that they didn't.  That they may wish now that they did is a different matter. 




Purple said:


> Furgus Finlay is a Labour Party hack, as biased as they come. He was Dick Springs special advisor during his time as minister for foreign affairs. He wrote a book about it, is was the most self congratulatory piece of fiction I have ever read. The overarching impression it gave was that his biggest fan is Furgus Finlay.


 
Fergus Finlay has been highly critical of civil servants in the past.  I rememebr him on the Late Late having a pop.  He may well have some bias towards the labour party but not for public sector workers.


----------



## Latrade

Purple said:


> The Labour Party are the party of the middle-class urbanity public sector employee.
> They are to the public sector unions what Sinn Fein are to the IRA.


 
Just to be contrary, while Labour has 1/3 of its funding by unions, only very small part of that is from a public sector union, the bulk is the smaller private sector unions.


----------



## Purple

Staples said:


> I did a thesis in 2003/2004 on public sector recruitment.  At the time it was extremely difficult to recruit people, to the point where significant sums were expended by the Public Appointments Service on advertising/recruitment.  There's hardly anyone in the current workforce who couldn't have got into the public service at that point if they really wanted to.  The reality is that they didn't.  That they may wish now that they did is a different matter.


 The public sector were recruiting 20’000 odd people a year at that stage. That’s quite a successful record for any organisation. 



Staples said:


> Fergus Finlay has been highly critical of civil servants in the past.  I rememebr him on the Late Late having a pop.  He may well have some bias towards the labour party but not for public sector workers.


 “Some bias towards the Labour Party”, you have to be joking! He spent most of his adult life as a member and working for them. He has criticised government policy and the actions of some state service providers but I never remember his saying that PS pay was too high.


----------



## Purple

Latrade said:


> Just to be contrary, while Labour has 1/3 of its funding by unions, only very small part of that is from a public sector union, the bulk is the smaller private sector unions.


Good point about its funding; since union dues are tax deductable this amounts to a subsidy by the exchequer to the Labour Party.


----------



## liaconn

Howitzer said:


> LMAO.
> 
> Here again is the orginal quote. I haven't misrepresnted or paraphrased Fergus in any way shape or form.
> 
> You may know what Fergus meant but the article isn't aimed at you. It's an opinion piece, by definition the aim is to form opinion. Fergus makes an unsubstantiated point that people are misrepresenting PS wages as a percentage of overall numbers and then 1 line later makes, what I can only assume, to be a glaring mistake in his own figures.
> 
> When you're in the business of opinion forming you gotta be able to back up what you say.
> 
> (I know this thread is now way off topic, is there any chance a Mod could split it into another something along the lines of "Opinion formers - get your facts right", you could lump DMcW stuff in there too.)


 
This is getting ridiculous. I NEVER said you misrepresented him. I said that just because you never heard misrepresentative quotes about ps salaries accounting for 50% or 75% of public expenditure, doesn't automatically mean Fergus Finaly is lying when he says he has. Yet, in your original post, this is what you implied.

Anyway, I'm bored with this. It's going around in circles. I'm done.


----------



## Protocol

Complainer said:


> Can you please be specific - what grades of staff in what institutions are earning the €87k that you originally quoted and getting 70 days leave?
> 
> For the record, the salary scale for entry level Assistant Lecturer in DIT runs up to €52k
> 
> [broken link removed]


 
Here is an ad for a job in St. Pat's from April 2008:



There are 2 scales - AL and L.  The AL starts at 48k, the L at 52k.

I am referring to staff who start on the L scale at 52k, next point = 62k, then head on for 84-87k.


----------



## Staples

Purple said:


> The public sector were recruiting 20’000 odd people a year at that stage. That’s quite a successful record for any organisation.


 
Have you considered that this may have in response to the vacancies arising by people leaving to join the private sector and/or by the increase to public services (not servants) that the public demanded (and which successive governments where only too happy to provide).

The point is that there was plenty of opportunity to join for anyone who really wanted.  To complain now that the people who have these jobs are somehow privileged is just nonsense.  



Purple said:


> “Some bias towards the Labour Party”, you have to be joking! He spent most of his adult life as a member and working for them. He has criticised government policy and the actions of some state service providers but I never remember his saying that PS pay was too high.


 
I never heard him denouncing Hitler either but that doesn't make him a Nazi.

I don't care what level of bias he has towards the labour party because frankly it's irrelevant.  My point is that he doesn't have any bias (historical or current) towards public servants.


----------



## Complainer

Protocol said:


> Here is an ad for a job in St. Pat's from April 2008:
> 
> 
> 
> There are 2 scales - AL and L.  The AL starts at 48k, the L at 52k.
> 
> I am referring to staff who start on the L scale at 52k, next point = 62k, then head on for 84-87k.


Given that the post in St Pats is a one year post, the scale is pretty much moot. Your mention of 30-year-old 'heading for €87k' is intentionally misleading. You might want to mention exactly how long it will take them to get to the top of the scale - they certainly won't be 30 when they get there (though quite why their age is relevant, I don't know).


----------



## Protocol

It will take them approx 7-10 years to reach 87k.

First point = 52k
Second point = 62k
7-10 points altogether
Top point = 85-87k

My main point is this: *they have no real complaints*.

They are very well paid. They start straight onto the upper L scale.  They get plenty of leave. They have good pensions. Most other workers would argue that they have little to strike about.

Most people would wonder why they are striking - it appears to be fruitless.

There is little or no public support for their actions.

A family with 2 children on 30-50k single or combined income has more to worry about. GP costs, childcare costs, etc.

Fair play to them, they have strong wages, but it's the militant strike attitude I can't understand.


----------



## Complainer

Protocol said:


> They start straight onto the upper L scale.


I don't see your problem here. Lots of people in a range of posts in both public and private sectors start at €60k or at €70k or at €600k (if you work in AIB). They start on the scale for the job that they get, the job they are qualified to do.


----------



## Protocol

Note that most colleges have a lower scale, as well as a higher scale.

By not having a lower scale, they are lucky, they get higher incomes than the same workers elsewhere.

Anyway, good luck to them.

But strike?? They should be thanking the Govt, in my opinion.


----------



## Protocol

Similarly, there are couples, both employed in the public service, on 150k, paying 25% tax.

Good jobs, low tax compared to everywhere else, good pensions, plenty of leave.

*Why strike???*


----------



## Protocol

I know of retired teachers on 1000+ per week.

Some pay as little as 2% tax in 2008.

They earn 85 per hour part-time wages.

They have medical cards.

That sort of society is lovely, but unsustainable.

*Why strike??*


----------



## Complainer

Protocol said:


> Note that most colleges have a lower scale, as well as a higher scale.


And is there any reason/rationale/explanation for the difference scales at different institutions?


----------



## Mouldy

There are two major misconceptions in this thread.
The first is that all public servants are striking next Tuesday. They are not. To the best of my knowledge none of the SIPTU state agencies branches (of which I am member) are striking. I’m sure there are other PS organisations which will not strike.

The second, which arises form the first ill-informed, clearly biased post, is that PS workers don’t care for their jobs or the quality of their work. This is such nonsense that it doesn’t even warrant a reply. But its typical of the public attitude being fired up by the Independent and other rags. I worked for years in the private sector before joining the PS and most of my former colleagues wouldn’t have stayed a wet week in the job.

Also a note about recruitment. In my department, a position opened in 2003 for very good technical position. There were 10 applications, 5 of which were chosen for interview. Only two of these showed up and the rest didn’t even call to cancel.

Same grade job was advertised before the recruitment ban. 500 applications. And I’m guessing they all showed up for the interview. Like a lot of public servants, I had friends laugh at me during the boom when I told them I worked 45-50 hours with no overtime and no bonus. I would tell friends about open positions over the years and never once did I get any interest.

M


----------



## Complainer

Mouldy said:


> There are two major misconceptions in this thread.
> The first is that all public servants are striking next Tuesday. They are not. To the best of my knowledge none of the SIPTU state agencies branches (of which I am member) are striking. I’m sure there are other PS organisations which will not strike.


Are you certain? I understood that SIPTU had voted for strike, and I'm in an agency that will definitely be striking (albeit IMPACT, not SIPTU).




Mouldy said:


> Also a note about recruitment. In my department, a position opened in 2003 for very good technical position. There were 10 applications, 5 of which were chosen for interview. Only two of these showed up and the rest didn’t even call to cancel.
> 
> Same grade job was advertised before the recruitment ban. 500 applications. And I’m guessing they all showed up for the interview. Like a lot of public servants, I had friends laugh at me during the boom when I told them I worked 45-50 hours with no overtime and no bonus. I would tell friends about open positions over the years and never once did I get any interest.


Absolutely agree. I know of one organisation that was recruiting an architect at AP level (approx 70k prior to the levies) in 2007, and went through three rounds of recruitment with very little interest from serious candidates. It was only as construction started tightening in 2008 that they finally got good candidates on board.


----------



## Husker

Protocol said:


> It will take them approx 7-10 years to reach 87k.
> 
> First point = 52k
> Second point = 62k
> 7-10 points altogether
> Top point = 85-87k
> 
> My main point is this: *they have no real complaints*.
> 
> They are very well paid. They start straight onto the upper L scale. They get plenty of leave. They have good pensions. Most other workers would argue that they have little to strike about.
> 
> Most people would wonder why they are striking - it appears to be fruitless.
> 
> There is little or no public support for their actions.
> 
> A family with 2 children on 30-50k single or combined income has more to worry about. GP costs, childcare costs, etc.
> 
> Fair play to them, they have strong wages, but it's the militant strike attitude I can't understand.


 
Perhaps they are striking to try to protect their pay and conditions.  Hardly a big surprise really.


----------



## onq

Reading Fergus Finlay upbraiding people for daring to criticise our overpaid public servants, justifying the unjustifiable with what seems to be illogical reasoning, is like watching a dog licking its balls while a hind leg is scratching at a flea - an amazing pointless spectacle that fascinates in a sordid sort of way.

Then you remember why dogs lick their balls - because they can.
And eventually, you see the connection between Fergus and ball-licking.
Fergus Finlay does this, because he can.

Take this comment by the Clever One.

_"Public service pay is about one-third of public spending. So every €3 you take off a public servant should give you about €1 in public spending cuts."_

Pardon?

Now I don't claim to be as bright as Fergus, and I certainly don't enjoy a six figure salary proving how valuable my personal abilities are to the state and whatever body employs me.

But if something is 1/3 of something else, say like €2 is 1/3 of €6 and you take away €1, you have reduced the total by €1 to €5 not by 33 cent.

Please feel free to tell me I've missed something here and Fergus logic in 6 dimensions is correct.

Mods, I'm sorry if this is decending into a rant and I apologise in advance, but somebody quoting a page of Finlay's nonsense at me is more than I can take this afternoon - that's not directed at the poster, but at the content. 

TIA

ONQ.


----------



## Protocol

Complainer said:


> And is there any reason/rationale/explanation for the difference scales at different institutions?


 
Most colleges have at least 2 scales.

This place has only one (the upper) leaving the staff in the lucky position of never having to apply for a promotion to the upper scale.


----------



## Protocol

Husker said:


> Perhaps they are striking to try to protect their pay and conditions. Hardly a big surprise really.


 
Yes, that is what they say.

My point is that even if they suffer a 5% pay cut, their pay and conditions are still very good.

Indeed, some tell me that they feel overpaid for the job they do.


----------



## Sarn

Protocol said:


> They get plenty of leave.



Just to clarify, it was mentioned previously that lecturers got 14 weeks off. If I remember correctly I got about 25 days off, a far cry from 70 and and not that much above the minimum leave entitlement. Now saying that, the salary was pretty good.


----------



## Protocol

Sarn said:


> Just to clarify, it was mentioned previously that lecturers got 14 weeks off. If I remember correctly I got about 25 days off, a far cry from 70 and and not that much above the minimum leave entitlement. Now saying that, the salary was pretty good.


 

In one IT, I can confirm summer leave from either 20th or 25th June to 1st September.  That makes 9-10 weeks?


----------



## Purple

Protocol said:


> In one IT, I can confirm summer leave from either 20th or 25th June to 1st September.  That makes 9-10 weeks?



A friend of mine works in an IT. He gets 40 days off plus his 12 flexi-days. He said his week is so short it's hard not to work up flexi-days.


----------



## Purple

onq said:


> Reading Fergus Finlay upbraiding people for daring to criticise our overpaid public servants, justifying the unjustifiable with what seems to be illogical reasoning, is like watching a dog licking its balls while a hind leg is scratching at a flea - an amazing pointless spectacle that fascinates in a sordid sort of way.
> 
> Then you remember why dogs lick their balls - because they can.
> And eventually, you see the connection between Fergus and ball-licking.
> Fergus Finlay does this, because he can.
> 
> Take this comment by the Clever One.
> 
> _"Public service pay is about one-third of public spending. So every €3 you take off a public servant should give you about €1 in public spending cuts."_
> 
> Pardon?
> 
> Now I don't claim to be as bright as Fergus, and I certainly don't enjoy a six figure salary proving how valuable my personal abilities are to the state and whatever body employs me.
> 
> But if something is 1/3 of something else, say like €2 is 1/3 of €6 and you take away €1, you have reduced the total by €1 to €5 not by 33 cent.
> 
> Please feel free to tell me I've missed something here and Fergus logic in 6 dimensions is correct.
> 
> Mods, I'm sorry if this is decending into a rant and I apologise in advance, but somebody quoting a page of Finlay's nonsense at me is more than I can take this afternoon - that's not directed at the poster, but at the content.
> 
> TIA
> 
> ONQ.



LMAO, that's brilliant!


----------



## Sarn

Protocol said:


> In one IT, I can confirm summer leave from either 20th or 25th June to 1st September.  That makes 9-10 weeks?



Guess I should have went to work in one of the ITs rather than one of the universities.


----------



## smiley

Protocol said:


> It will take them approx 7-10 years to reach 87k.
> 
> First point = 52k
> Second point = 62k
> 7-10 points altogether
> Top point = 85-87k



Where did you get this salary scale from? I have never seen such a short salary scale in my life.

Secondly nobody would reach the top of that salary scale for at least 10-15 years or somebody with 10-15 years of experience.

Do not forget that the likely candidate to get this job would probably have a masters degree and a doctorate. These are high calibre individuals.

They also conduct a lot of research as well as lecturing.

Where did it say that the person gets 40 days leave per annum??


----------



## Protocol

smiley said:


> Where did you get this salary scale from? I have never seen such a short salary scale in my life.
> 
> Secondly nobody would reach the top of that salary scale for at least 10-15 years or somebody with 10-15 years of experience.
> 
> Do not forget that the likely candidate to get this job would probably have a masters degree and a doctorate. These are high calibre individuals.
> 
> They also conduct a lot of research as well as lecturing.
> 
> Where did it say that the person gets 40 days leave per annum??


 
This is a 3rd level teaching salary scale.

It starts at approx 52k, next point 62k (I don't know why the increment is so big), then several more points, to finish at 85-87k approx.

There are maybe 7-10 points altogether, ok probably 10 points.

Very few of the staff have doctorates, I'd say less than 20%.  Until recently, several did not have MAs.

There is 14 weeks leave, or 70 days.

Of course, research is encouraged, and some are active, but this has only really happeneing recently.

My point is: with such good pay, conditions and pensions, why go on strike?


----------



## smiley

In Waterford institute of technology an assistant lecturer post salary scales are as below:

Salary scale (as at 01/05/2008): €41,097, €42,789, €44,519, €45,886, €47,270, €48,652, €50,035, €51,404

Minimum Qualifications for the Post

appropriate Honours primary degree (second class or higher) or equivalent
3 years relevant post graduate experience


Back to the strike, personally i work for a semi state body and we are NOT on strike on Tuesday. I am in a state agency branch of SIPTU.

Personally i don't agree with the strike but i can understand the reason behind it. If people don't make any noise the government could make bigger salary cuts.

With price reductions/deflation taking place there is scope for some more cuts.


----------



## quarterfloun

You've all gone round the point.

After the rain and all the hype there were NO local floods of significant relevance. It was just an excuse for the public employees to skive off. NO other business shut. For examples creches and playgroups sun was tayed open so the argument earlier about abandonment is only relevant to public sector employees.

On Friday - the sun was splitting the stones and I managed to drive to Dublin, Naas and Carlow before returning to Wexford. Yet my childrens school was shut. 

Regarding the point made about hiring people to work in the public sector back in 2003 - 2004 - thats rubbish. I know plenty of people that would love to have taken a job if offered. After all what was FAS doing if employment was so rife....maybe in Dublin but we all don't live there.

Finally I was not being flippant suggesting a revolution.....we need something that gets rid of the useless bantering that goes on in the Dail, gets rid of cash bungs to their buddies in the banks, get rid of kow towing to unions - if the job goes in the private sector it goes. Should be the same in public sector. 

In my book a militant takeover is welcome if it puts this country back on its feet. As for the defence forces - if we had a revolution you never know...they might do a bit more than minding the banks money (or is that our money now?).


----------



## Complainer

Maybe as an intermediate step before you put everyone up against the wall for shooting (or firing), have you considered talking to the school to understand their actions, and/or attempt to change their policy for the future?

or perhaps being a keyboard warrior is a bit easier?


----------



## quarterfloun

"Health & Safety" was the given reason....as for being a "Keyboard Warrior" I am attempting to change policy - by making as many people as I can aware of the gross abuse of their taxes. Oh, and my kids are home again today ....the lazy gits are not even picketing the school. Just another day off to go with the other holidays they get like "in service". Probably gone to Newry for a days shopping......


----------



## johnd

ASTI members only had to picket for an hour and a half and then off to shop. I knew I would be right about the nurses union  - they are picketing the hospices again as in 1999. Just on the news now. So dying patients are being targeted again. Shame on them


----------



## Purple

johnd said:


> I knew I would be right about the nurses union  - they are picketing the hospices again as in 1999. Just on the news now. So dying patients are being targeted again. Shame on them



I have a close family member in one. It is very upsetting for the family but obviously the nurses don't care.


----------



## Latrade

Pickets and strikes are two separate things. The strike, which is what unions voted on is the withdrawl of labour. 

The pickets are different and are an effort to "communicate" the issue and "persuade" (ahem) colleagues to not break the strike. Therefore, the target of the pickets has been when staff _could_ be entering the workplace.

Not saying I agree or that there is any merit in what is happening, but it is important to distinguish the two.


----------



## Protocol

johnd said:


> ASTI members only had to picket for an hour and a half and then off to shop.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My cousin's wife, a teacher in Co. Galway, is on the picket line for 20 mins.
Click to expand...


----------



## johnd

The union, which I only joined a month ago and will now be leaving had the vote for industrial action in March 2009. According to a memo we received yesterday 'they did consider a more up to date vote but as the situation is changed decide not to bother'. In real speak this means they guessed members might vote against the strike so decided not to ask members just in case.  

A recruitment drive took place in the last few weeks and those who joined at that time are now wondering if the reason was to boost the union membership and so make the strike more successful?


----------



## VOR

johnd said:


> A recruitment drive took place in the last few weeks...


 
Well today it's a drive of different sorts. Tail backs entering Newry. PR disaster for the unions. Couldn't even put in a decent shift in the country never mind on the picket line.


----------



## johnd

Now, apparently, we are going on strike in two weeks time and in December for 3 days!  Well they will be going on strike without me and my 4 workmates and we will keep the office open to the public. We've had enough of them.


----------



## VOR

johnd said:


> Now, apparently, we are going on strike in two weeks time and in December for 3 days! Well they will be going on strike without me and my 4 workmates and we will keep the office open to the public. We've had enough of them.


 
Well said. I wonder how deep the union pockets are. We will soon find out.


----------



## johnd

The union, which I only joined a month ago and will now be leaving had the vote for industrial action in March 2009. According to a memo we received yesterday 'they did consider a more up to date vote but as the situation is changed decide not to bother'. In real speak this means they guessed members might vote against the strike so decided not to ask members just in case.  

A recruitment drive took place in the last few weeks and those who joined at that time are now wondering if the reason was to boost the union membership and so make the strike more successful?[/quote]


Sorry, that should have read 'as the situation is unchanged decided not to bother'


----------



## Caveat

VOR said:


> Well said. I wonder how deep the union pockets are. We will soon find out.


 
I honestly don't see what they think they are going to achieve.

Public opinion is not generally in their favour as far as I can see and can only deteriorate.  Escalating action will see to that - it will also save the government some of the money they hope to recoup.  Evidence that existing union members are becoming disgruntled - both on this site and with people I speak to.

Strike away my friends if that's what you want - turn the public completely against you all, save some money *and* bankrupt the unions.

Cuts will still be made anyway.


----------



## Complainer

johnd said:


> The union, which I only joined a month ago and will now be leaving had the vote for industrial action in March 2009. According to a memo we received yesterday 'they did consider a more up to date vote but as the situation is changed decide not to bother'. In real speak this means they guessed members might vote against the strike so decided not to ask members just in case.


Which union? Did you not check about their plans and intentions before you signed up?


johnd said:


> A recruitment drive took place in the last few weeks and those who joined at that time are now wondering if the reason was to boost the union membership and so make the strike more successful?


Do you have a problem with unions recruiting new members?


VOR said:


> Well today it's a drive of different sorts. Tail backs entering Newry. PR disaster for the unions.


Can you tell union cars from a distance? Is there a possibility that maybe some of these cars are families that took time off work to mind their kids?



johnd said:


> I knew I would be right about the nurses union  - they are picketing the hospices again as in 1999. Just on the news now. So dying patients are being targeted again. Shame on them


Are they dying patients running in and out of the gates? Are the services for the patients inside affected?




quarterfloun said:


> "Health & Safety" was the given reason....as for being a "Keyboard Warrior" I am attempting to change policy - by making as many people as I can aware of the gross abuse of their taxes.


Yeah, you mentioned H&S the last time, and it seems like a fairly crap reason, which is why I suggested talking to people to change things for the next time. If you do want to change policy, try talking to the people who set the policy (the principal and the board of management), rather than talking to the world on the 'net.


----------



## Purple

Complainer said:


> Are they dying patients running in and out of the gates? Are the services for the patients inside affected?


 I'm sure you are aware that few if any dying people are in a position to run anywhere but the services offered to the families of the dying, who are spending as much time as possible with their loved ones in their last days and hours, are most definitely affected. 
I'm sure you think that's a small price to pay and they should really be sucking it up to show solidarity with those seeking to make their final moments less comfortable.


----------



## Complainer

This letter from today's Irish Times gives another side of life as a college lecturer;

Madam, – I am a college lecturer and a public servant. I am 34 years old and I have been teaching for five years. I work full-time hours and am not on a permanent contract. I earn €34,000 per annum, which includes a supplement for a first-class postgraduate degree. I am not secure, but I love my job. I have a nine-month-old son and a self-employed wife, whose business has all but disappeared.
 I see Government Ministers’ ludicrous salaries and their sickening expense claims. I see them pretend to take control of our affairs and then be bullied and dictated to by corrupt banks. I see them U-turn, flip-flop and cynically test the waters of public opinion. I see them manipulate facts, talk about “averages” in public service pay and drive a wedge between the workers. I see them pay off crooks and conmen.
 I am not striking for more money or for better conditions. I am striking for a cap of about €100,000 on public service salaries, including those of Government Ministers. I am striking for more equitable taxation. I am striking for those who can’t strike and for those who won’t. I am striking for the moral high ground that our Government can see but has chosen not to take. – Yours, etc,
  ALAN COSTELLO,
 Broadstone, Dublin 7.


----------



## Purple

What are "full time hours" for poor Alan?
He's been teaching for 5 years, were they all as a lecturer in the same place?


----------



## truthseeker

Complainer said:


> This letter from today's Irish Times gives another side of life as a college lecturer;
> 
> Madam, – I am a college lecturer and a public servant. I am 34 years old and I have been teaching for five years. I work full-time hours and am not on a permanent contract. I earn €34,000 per annum, which includes a supplement for a first-class postgraduate degree. I am not secure, but I love my job. I have a nine-month-old son and a self-employed wife, whose business has all but disappeared.
> I see Government Ministers’ ludicrous salaries and their sickening expense claims. I see them pretend to take control of our affairs and then be bullied and dictated to by corrupt banks. I see them U-turn, flip-flop and cynically test the waters of public opinion. I see them manipulate facts, talk about “averages” in public service pay and drive a wedge between the workers. I see them pay off crooks and conmen.
> I am not striking for more money or for better conditions. I am striking for a cap of about €100,000 on public service salaries, including those of Government Ministers. I am striking for more equitable taxation. I am striking for those who can’t strike and for those who won’t. I am striking for the moral high ground that our Government can see but has chosen not to take. – Yours, etc,
> ALAN COSTELLO,
> Broadstone, Dublin 7.


 
Whats your point here? 
IMO I dont think this letter is representative, the salary stated is too low for a start, he makes no mention of his 4 months off every summer and full-time hours for a lecturer do not equate to full time hours for a private company employee.


----------



## dockingtrade

Complainer said:


> This letter from today's Irish Times gives another side of life as a college lecturer;
> 
> I am striking for a cap of about €100,000 on public service salaries, including those of Government Ministers.


 
What union has suggested this?


----------



## Purple

dockingtrade said:


> What union has suggested this?



...and do they include union officials?


----------



## quarterfloun

This is simple - people need to be paid their worth at fair market value and right now there are plenty of people that would do civil service jobs for a whole lot less. Given that most of the pen pushers in the civil service (excluding qualified teaches, nurses, accountants etc.) only qualification for the role was a nod and a wink from Fianna Fail TD's (Thats how it was when I emigrated in 85) we should replace them all. If an Indian call centre replaces my job why the hell can we not replace civil servants with the same?

Lets overthow the government, say, Saturday morning next week?


----------



## Purple

quarterfloun said:


> This is simple - people need to be paid their worth at fair market value and right now there are plenty of people that would do civil service jobs for a whole lot less. Given that most of the pen pushers in the civil service (excluding qualified teaches, nurses, accountants etc.) only qualification for the role was a nod and a wink from Fianna Fail TD's (Thats how it was when I emigrated in 85) we should replace them all. If an Indian call centre replaces my job why the hell can we not replace civil servants with the same?
> 
> Lets overthow the government, say, Saturday morning next week?


 That's a bit much; public sector recruitment procedures are very fair.


----------



## Complainer

quarterfloun said:


> This is simple - people need to be paid their worth at fair market value and right now there are plenty of people that would do civil service jobs for a whole lot less. Given that most of the pen pushers in the civil service (excluding qualified teaches, nurses, accountants etc.) only qualification for the role was a nod and a wink from Fianna Fail TD's (Thats how it was when I emigrated in 85) we should replace them all. If an Indian call centre replaces my job why the hell can we not replace civil servants with the same?


Right. When you have a serious proposal, feel free to post it up here.



quarterfloun said:


> Lets overthow the government, say, Saturday morning next week?


Damn it, I'm tied up at a meeting with the Parents rep on the school Board of Management on Saturday morning. I've brought some concerns about school issues to his attention, and he is keen to follow up.

Could you make it Sat PM instead?


----------



## Purple

Complainer said:


> Right. When you have a serious proposal, feel free to post it up here.
> 
> 
> Damn it, I'm tied up at a meeting with the Parents rep on the school Board of Management on Saturday morning. I've brought some concerns about school issues to his attention, and he is keen to follow up.
> 
> Could you make it Sat PM instead?



Having been involved in a school board I find it very unlikely that a member would meet with you like that.


----------



## Complainer

johnd said:


> ASTI members only had to picket for an hour and a half and then off to shop. I knew I would be right about the nurses union  - they are picketing the hospices again as in 1999. Just on the news now. So dying patients are being targeted again. Shame on them


The RTE News tonight mentioned about a family member visiting at Our Lady's Hospice in Harolds Cross coming down to the picket line to offer them his support.


----------



## Purple

Complainer said:


> The RTE News tonight mentioned about a family member visiting at Our Lady's Hospice in Harolds Cross coming down to the picket line to offer them his support.


 That's just the sort of biased BS I’d expect from the Public Sector Broadcaster. None of my family members were offering them support.


----------



## Purple

Complainer said:


> Right. When you have a serious proposal, feel free to post it up here.



Who put you in charge?


----------



## DonDub

Complainer said:


> Right. When you have a serious proposal, feel free to post it up here.
> 
> 
> Damn it, I'm tied up at a meeting with the Parents rep on the school Board of Management on Saturday morning. I've brought some concerns about school issues to his attention, and he is keen to follow up.
> 
> Could you make it Sat PM instead?


 
Today, the vast majority of teaching staff have demonstrated that they will put their own interests ahead of their students. Teachers argue that they cannot and will not take more pain. What a joke - they are now paying a modest contribution towards their Rolls Royce pensions - but react as if they have had a leg amputated.
I have a question for these poor,downtrodden caring professionals - did the thought ever occur to you, that you should continue to teach 6th year students without interruption. These students will not get an opportunity to make-up for classes lost due to the strike(s) - with the obvious  negative impact this will have on their leaving cert prospects.
Teachers had/have a choice - they have chosen to hurt students at a critical time in their education, to advance their own interests - they have earned our contempt...


----------



## Lex Foutish

DonDub said:


> Today, the vast majority of teaching staff have demonstrated that they will put their own interests ahead of their students. Teachers argue that they cannot and will not take more pain. What a joke - *they are now paying a modest contribution towards their Rolls Royce pensions* - but react as if they have had a leg amputated.
> I have a question for these poor,downtrodden caring professionals - did the thought ever occur to you, that you should continue to teach 6th year students without interruption. These students will not get an opportunity to make-up for classes lost due to the strike(s) - with the obvious negative impact this will have on their leaving cert prospects.
> Teachers had/have a choice - they have chosen to hurt students at a critical time in their education, to advance their own interests - they have earned our contempt...


 
Don, what does the above bit in bold mean? Do you know what you're talking about?


----------



## johnd

'The RTE News tonight mentioned about a family member visiting at Our Lady's Hospice in Harolds Cross coming down to the picket line to offer them his support'.

That was a quote from some SIPTU offical at the hospice. Of course he's going to say that. To see him and his members grinnning for the cameras was disgusting. What kind of people would picket people dying of cancer. What kind of person would leave their dying relative to join a bunch of SIPTU picketers who are depriving that relative of care?  I don't think so, thats just a spin put out by the union because they are or should be ashamed of themselves.  The same as those who picketed special schools for the disabled or those with learning difficulties or those who picketed facilities for old people. What kind of people are these?


----------



## DonDub

Lex Foutish said:


> Don, what does the above bit in bold mean? Do you know what you're talking about?


 
Yes actually - based on what I have read, and importantly, on real examples - for instance - a colleague who told me that his retired parents (teachers) were being paid significantly more now than when they both retired 10 years ago. It is a fact that the vast majority of defined pension schemes are in (serious) deficit - and that it will take over a decade for them to recover - and that most have/will close to new members.
PS pensions are paid from current spending - crazy. 
I sat with a colleague today who is being made compulsory redundant - 3 kids, big mortage, partner recently laid off. This is the real world. In an ideal world, nobody would have to take pain - however, it is immoral and indefensible to militate for special treatment for those in the most protected sector. And, was/is it beyond the capacity of teachers to ensure that their Leaving Cert students reamain unaffected.....


----------



## Lex Foutish

DonDub said:


> Yes actually - based on what I have read, and importantly, on real examples - for instance - a colleague who told me that his retired parents (teachers) were being paid significantly more now than when they both retired 10 years ago. It is a fact that the vast majority of defined pension schemes are in (serious) deficit - and that it will take over a decade for them to recover - and that most have/will close to new members.
> PS pensions are paid from current spending - crazy.
> I sat with a colleague today who is being made compulsory redundant - 3 kids, big mortage, partner recently laid off. This is the real world. In an ideal world, nobody would have to take pain - however, it is immoral and indefensible to militate for special treatment for those in the most protected sector. And, was/is it beyond the capacity of teachers to ensure that their Leaving Cert students reamain unaffected.....


 
Very sorry for your friend. A few of my friends in the same boat. And it's a horrible situation to be in.

But you missed my point completely. Before the recent Pension Levy was introduced, teachers were already paying 6.5% of their salaries in pension contributions.


----------



## Complainer

DonDub said:


> Today, the vast majority of teaching staff have demonstrated that they will put their own interests ahead of their students. Teachers argue that they cannot and will not take more pain. What a joke - they are now paying a modest contribution towards their Rolls Royce pensions - but react as if they have had a leg amputated.
> I have a question for these poor,downtrodden caring professionals - did the thought ever occur to you, that you should continue to teach 6th year students without interruption. These students will not get an opportunity to make-up for classes lost due to the strike(s) - with the obvious negative impact this will have on their leaving cert prospects.
> Teachers had/have a choice - they have chosen to hurt students at a critical time in their education, to advance their own interests


No teacher (and no public servant) wants to be out on strike, losing a days pay, worrying about losing another days pay next month or more again in the future. No-one wants to be on strike. The existing cut of the pension levy (which goes directly into current expenditure and has absolutely nothing to do with their pension) has caused significant pain. Today's protest was not about that cut, but about the proposed next round of cuts which aim to further target the soft option of public servant salaries.


DonDub said:


> they have earned our contempt.


 Speak for yourself. The parent interviewed on the news who joined the teachers on the picket line didn't seem to think so.



johnd said:


> That was a quote from some SIPTU offical at the hospice. Of course he's going to say that. To see him and his members grinnning for the cameras was disgusting.


Ah I see. Anything that doesn't suit your personal agenda is dismissed as a lie. I've just replayed the clip ([broken link removed]) and I don't see any grinning from Tommy Morris (IMPACT, not SIPTU) or any of the staff picketing the Hospice, but feel free to make up other wild allegations. Some of them might just stick.



johnd said:


> What kind of person would leave their dying relative to join a bunch of SIPTU picketers who are depriving that relative of care?


Probably the kind of person who sees the value of public services. Maybe the kind of person who has seen staff working their asses off in very difficult circumstances to provide excellent care to patients and their families.



johnd said:


> The same as those who picketed special schools for the disabled or those with learning difficulties or those who picketed facilities for old people. What kind of people are these?


These are public servants, picketing their workplaces - no more, no less - while their colleagues are still at work inside continuing to provide essential services.


----------



## johnd

Lex Foutish  said:
			
		

> But you missed my point completely. Before the recent Pension Levy was introduced, teachers were already paying 6.5% of their salaries in pension contributions.



6.5% of salary contribution for a 50% of salary pension was, I think, too generous a deal. For a person in the private sector to get anything like that would require a lot more than 14% (6.5% + 7.5% pension levy).

I think public sector workers should be allowed to opt out of the pension if they wish. Like people in the private sector they should make their own arrangements if they want to top up the state pension. End of problem.


----------



## DonDub

johnd said:


> 6.5% of salary contribution for a 50% of salary pension was, I think, too generous a deal. For a person in the private sector to get anything like that would require a lot more than 14% (6.5% + 7.5% pension levy).
> 
> I think public sector workers should be allowed to opt out of the pension if they wish. Like people in the private sector they should make their own arrangements if they want to top up the state pension. End of problem.


 
Great suggestion - I wonder would we get 250,000 to take up such an opt out....the number on strike today. The state would save a fortune.


----------



## S.L.F

johnd said:


> 'The RTE News tonight mentioned about a family member visiting at Our Lady's Hospice in Harolds Cross coming down to the picket line to offer them his support'.
> 
> That was a quote from some SIPTU offical at the hospice. Of course he's going to say that. To see him and his members grinnning for the cameras was disgusting. What kind of people would picket people dying of cancer. What kind of person would leave their dying relative to join a bunch of SIPTU picketers who are depriving that relative of care? I don't think so, thats just a spin put out by the union because they are or should be ashamed of themselves. The same as those who picketed special schools for the disabled or those with learning difficulties or those who picketed facilities for old people. What kind of people are these?


 
Interesting you should mention Our Ladies Hospice is that one of the hospices that is always looking for donations because this govt has cut its funding.


----------



## DonDub

Complainer said:


> No teacher (and no public servant) wants to be out on strike, losing a days pay, worrying about losing another days pay next month or more again in the future. No-one wants to be on strike. The existing cut of the pension levy (which goes directly into current expenditure and has absolutely nothing to do with their pension) has caused significant pain. Today's protest was not about that cut, but about the proposed next round of cuts which aim to further target the soft option of public servant salaries.
> 
> Speak for yourself. The parent interviewed on the news who joined the teachers on the picket line didn't seem to think so.
> .


 
I'm not arguing that PS aren't suffering pain - however, it is an absolute scandal that one group in society is immune to the full impact of the economic crisis....its a simple matter of fairness. All citizens are entitled to equality of treatment i.e. if the risk of forced redundancyis a feature of life for of the majority, it should apply equally to the minority. Likewise with pensions - if the majority are expected to fund their pensions..so to should the minority. And on pay, when most have taken a hit on earnings (through job loss, part-time working, bonus elimination, freezes, cuts etc) it is perfectly reasonable to insist that the minority should be open to the same scale of risk/pain. There is no 'right' to a given standard of living.....everything must be earned. Ireland is broke...we can't afford to carry the PS as presently structured and paid. This is not hysterical anti PS ranting...its simple fact....such as that faced by legions of private sector workers who have lost their jobs - no sales..no profits..no jobs...PS workers and their unions need to cop on, grow up and get real!!


----------



## S.L.F

DonDub said:


> its a simple matter of fairness.


 
My understanding is that a good majority of the private sector has not had job cuts or pay decreases of any kind in fact the national pay agreement has been implemented by most of the companies who signed up for it.

*BUT* the minority, the entire Public and civil service has taken a hit.


----------



## johnd

Ah I see. Anything that doesn't suit your personal agenda is dismissed as a lie. I've just replayed the clip ([broken link removed]) and I don't see any grinning from Tommy Morris (IMPACT, not SIPTU) or any of the staff picketing the Hospice, but feel free to make up other wild allegations. Some of them might just stick.

These are public servants, picketing their workplaces - no more, no less - while their colleagues are still at work inside continuing to provide essential services.[/quote]



A hospice is a lot more than just a place of work. Maybe not to your mates in Impact or Siptu or whatever other union they are a member of. It is a place where people are dying. They and their families need comfort and care and security and above all dignity. Not to have their pain relief withdrawn because pharmacy is affected by the strike or other services withdrawn. I presume the purpose of a picket is to stop people actually passing that picket? People delivering food or medicines, visitors coming to visit their family members? 

Ten years ago I remember a young women coming onto a radio show crying because her mother had terminal cancer. Nurses from the hospice visited every day with pain relief for her condition. That day the hospices were picketed by the nurses union and her mother did not receive her pain relief and she was in agony. She, the daughter, was begging for someone to help. I have never forgotten that show and I thought it was heartless of the unions then and I think it is heartless of them now.


----------



## Rois

Purple said:


> That's a bit much; public sector recruitment procedures are very fair.


 
*Only on paper* - which is a far cry from the real world in public sector recruitment - i know have been there and seen how it works ...


----------



## Complainer

Rois said:


> *Only on paper* - which is a far cry from the real world in public sector recruitment - i know have been there and seen how it works ...


I've seen both sides, public and private. Public sector recruitment is far more open, transparent and equitable than anything that I saw in 25 years in the private. If you have evidence to the contrary, please post details.



johnd said:


> A hospice is a lot more than just a place of work. Maybe not to your mates in Impact or Siptu or whatever other union they are a member of. It is a place where people are dying. They and their families need comfort and care and security and above all dignity. Not to have their pain relief withdrawn because pharmacy is affected by the strike or other services withdrawn. I presume the purpose of a picket is to stop people actually passing that picket? People delivering food or medicines, visitors coming to visit their family members?
> 
> Ten years ago I remember a young women coming onto a radio show crying because her mother had terminal cancer. Nurses from the hospice visited every day with pain relief for her condition. That day the hospices were picketed by the nurses union and her mother did not receive her pain relief and she was in agony. She, the daughter, was begging for someone to help. I have never forgotten that show and I thought it was heartless of the unions then and I think it is heartless of them now.


Right so the 'grinning SIPTU' lie didn't stick, so you decide to up the stakes with the unverifiable dying relative story. I certainly have no recollection of such an incident, and I have a feeling that it would be regularly rehashed in the meeja if it did actually happen. But regardless, it certainly didn't happen yesterday. No picket would ever try and block relatives visiting a hospital - that suggestion shows how little you actually understand about pickets. No patient, cancer or otherwise, went without essential pain relief yesterday. As was the case in the Mater, many of the picketing staff were off-duty staff, showing support for their working colleagues inside.

But do feel free to keep making up stories and hypotethicals. If anything, the fact that you feel obliged to attack for things that didn't actually happen points to the sound, reasonable, measured and dignified nature of yesterday's protest.



DonDub said:


> I'm not arguing that PS aren't suffering pain - however, it is an absolute scandal that one group in society is immune to the full impact of the economic crisis....its a simple matter of fairness. All citizens are entitled to equality of treatment i.e. if the risk of forced redundancyis a feature of life for of the majority, it should apply equally to the minority. Likewise with pensions - if the majority are expected to fund their pensions..so to should the minority. And on pay, when most have taken a hit on earnings (through job loss, part-time working, bonus elimination, freezes, cuts etc) it is perfectly reasonable to insist that the minority should be open to the same scale of risk/pain. There is no 'right' to a given standard of living.....everything must be earned. Ireland is broke...we can't afford to carry the PS as presently structured and paid. This is not hysterical anti PS ranting...its simple fact....such as that faced by legions of private sector workers who have lost their jobs - no sales..no profits..no jobs...PS workers and their unions need to cop on, grow up and get real!!


I'm not questioning your bona-fides Don, but unfortunately, this is yet another hysterical rant. Hysterical because it contains so many factual errors that I don't know where to start. 

The public service is the one sector where EVERY employee (with the exception of a few judges) has already taken a hit through the so-called pension levy. I already fund my pension - the fact that my employer chooses not to put that funding away and invest it is not my responsibility. Many public sector staff have already lost their jobs (8,000 according to last week's Tribune) and many more will lose their jobs as contracts expire. Yes, there is a difference insofar as there have been no forced redundancies of permanent staff as yet, but there are no guarantees around this - it is simply a matter for negotiation between employers and the employees. Public sector employees (like all employees) are entitled to the contracted terms & conditions of employment. If any other employer in the country had done with the Govt did with the pension levy (unilateral deduction), they would be in jail. So don't speak to me about fairness.

Your conclusion that 'the country can't afford it' is a matter of opinion, not fact. There are many things the county can do, including stop pouring billions into Anglo-Irish (€4billion next year, does that figure ring a bell, i.e. the entire proposed cuts to public services) and stop subsiding landlords through mortgage interest relief (€500m each year). I'm not an economist, and I don't claim to have all the answers (unlike many of the bar-stool experts here on AAM), but I do know that this Govt has no mandate to go for 'small Government' by cutting the public sector. There has been no real debate or discussion around this, and it is interesting to note that most of those who recommend this approach aren't depending on the public health service or the public schools etc.


----------



## Latrade

Complainer said:


> Your conclusion that 'the country can't afford it' is a matter of opinion, not fact. There are many things the county can do, including stop pouring billions into Anglo-Irish (€4billion next year, does that figure ring a bell, i.e. the entire proposed cuts to public services) and stop subsiding landlords through mortgage interest relief (€500m each year). I'm not an economist, and I don't claim to have all the answers (unlike many of the bar-stool experts here on AAM), but I do know that this Govt has no mandate to go for 'small Government' by cutting the public sector. There has been no real debate or discussion around this, and it is interesting to note that most of those who recommend this approach aren't depending on the public health service or the public schools etc.


 
This is the crux of the problem in this debate: the waters are being muddied by all sides. We have several big plugs to fill on this sinking ship so it isn't just a matter of only fixing one problem. Initially the big problem for us was the state of the banks. No matter how irresponsible and even immoral their actions, we had to bite the bullet and help them. That is a had to. I don't care what others say about letting them go bust, we just couldn't. 

Then there's the public spending bill which isn't just on PS/CS wages, it's far reaching; and then there's the tax intake.

So this isn't about putting all the hardship on one area, it's about plugging all the holes as best we can. Sorting out the tax intake will take a while not just to define and implement, but to also see any benefits. But that still leaves that deficit and borrowing that we have to do every week to pay for social welfare and the PS/CS.

It's not a matter of finding 4 billion and we'll be grand (not all of that is pay bill savings either, that's 1.4 billion), it's about finding a sustainable way to provide a public service within our means. The other factor often ignored is we have to cut the public spending bill otherwise we won't be able to borrow any more money.

The reason the government managed to get the borrowings, despite the country being more or less blacklisted at the time, in order to keep paying the PS/CS and social welfare bills was because it promised the creditors it would reduce the payments on public spending this year by 4 billion. If we don't, we don't get anymore money. That's not good. 

More importantly, it's not good for the PS/CS or those on social welfare because the pockets will be well and truly empty. It won't be a matter of sitting down and discussing things, it will be a matter of shutting offices overnight and ceasing benefits.

This whole economic mess is multi-causal and multi-faceted, it's not as simple as saying the PS/CS must take all the hits or that the banks and property developers must take all the hits. There a several plugs and issues that _have_ to be dealt with if we're to last through the first quarter of next year.

And nice try on the no mandate thing. If the government had a mandate to increase the size of the PS/Cs it has a mandate to reduce it. We elect them and they can do what they want to manage the country so long as it is constitutional. Unless there’s a hidden bit in the Constitution that restricts the cutting of the size of the PS, the mandate was there the minute the votes were counted and the government formed.


----------



## Sunny

Complainer said:


> Your conclusion that 'the country can't afford it' is a matter of opinion, not fact. There are many things the county can do, including stop pouring billions into Anglo-Irish (€4billion next year, does that figure ring a bell, i.e. the entire proposed cuts to public services) and stop subsiding landlords through mortgage interest relief (€500m each year). I'm not an economist, and I don't claim to have all the answers (unlike many of the bar-stool experts here on AAM), but I do know that this Govt has no mandate to go for 'small Government' by cutting the public sector. There has been no real debate or discussion around this, and it is interesting to note that most of those who recommend this approach aren't depending on the public health service or the public schools etc.


 
Again, this a red herring. The deficit that the Government is trying to solve doesn't include the money given to Anglo. If you include the bank bail out costs, the deficit rises to €26-27 billion. The Government is simply trying to solve the problem that they are spending more on running the Country every day than they are bringing in. Sure there are ways to raise revenue but there are not enough ways to raise €20-22 billion extra. You don't need to be an economist or a bar stool expert to know that this Country is living beyond its means both in terms of the level of services that it provides and the cost of providing those services. We will have to accept that we either face less public services or we find a a way to provide the same services for less money. Either way, public sector pay and/or numbers have to be reduced.


----------



## Sunny

sorry


----------



## Purple

Latrade; excellent post, very well put.


----------



## VOR

Complainer said:


> The parent interviewed on the news who joined the teachers on the picket line didn't seem to think so.


 
The unions can't even keep to their own rules. 

From PSEU :
"Only persons employed by the employer concerned (along with trade union officials) are permitted to picket an employment."

[broken link removed]


----------



## Staples

Latrade said:


> And nice try on the no mandate thing. If the government had a mandate to increase the size of the PS/Cs it has a mandate to reduce it. We elect them and they can do what they want to manage the country so long as it is constitutional. Unless there’s a hidden bit in the Constitution that restricts the cutting of the size of the PS, the mandate was there the minute the votes were counted and the government formed.


 
In my own punblic sector organisation, there 'll be a staff cut of some 15% over a 12 month period as a consequence of the early retirement scheme; the incetivised career break scheme; natural wastage and the recruitment freeze.

Assuming this is typical of most public sector organisations, would most commentators be happy to have a corresponding reduction in the level of public services provided?  I'm sure the combination of these measures would reduce public expenditure to the required levels.  The alternative is that people expect the SAME level of public services for the less money.

I could equally ask "On which planet are these people?".


----------



## VOR

Staples said:


> In my own punblic sector organisation, there 'll be a staff cut of some 15% over a 12 month period as a consequence of the early retirement scheme; the incetivised career break scheme; natural wastage and the recruitment freeze.
> 
> Assuming this is typical of most public sector organisations, would most commentators be happy to have a corresponding reduction in the level of public services provided? I'm sure the combination of these measures would reduce public expenditure to the required levels. The alternative is that people expect the SAME level of public services for the less money.
> 
> I could equally ask "On which planet are these people?".


 
Staples, this is nothing personal against you as I am sure you are a good worker. However, where there is no performance management and people get scaled pay increases whether they are good at their job or not, is it not inevitable that more can be done with less? An environment like that breeds inefficiencies and laziness.

Bring in 
-real IT changes to move away from the paper system we currently have.
-performance management to weed out and sack the lazy and 
- incentivise staff performance with salary increases for the best and nothing for the worst employees.

Do those 3 things first and I am sure you'll find a better service with less employees.


----------



## Complainer

VOR said:


> The unions can't even keep to their own rules.
> 
> From PSEU :
> "Only persons employed by the employer concerned (along with trade union officials) are permitted to picket an employment."
> 
> [broken link removed]


The PSEU are not teachers. The teachers unions are not responsible for stopping parents hanging around outside their schools. But do feel free to keep nitpicking.



VOR said:


> Bring in
> -real IT changes to move away from the paper system we currently have.
> -performance management to weed out and sack the lazy and
> - incentivise staff performance with salary increases for the best and nothing for the worst employees.


You are about 5 years too late. It's all been done.


----------



## liaconn

Rois said:


> *Only on paper* - which is a far cry from the real world in public sector recruitment - i know have been there and seen how it works ...


 
Can you elaborate on this?

I'm not saying it's the case with you, but it really irritates me when people who sat the Civil Service exams and didn't make the grade or were surpassed by better candidates at the interview stage, then go around whinging that you have to use 'pull' to get into the Public Service. God forbid that the jobs just went to superior applicants.

As I said, I'm not saying this is what happened with you but would be interested to know what areas of the Public Service are using dodgy recruitment procedures.


----------



## VOR

Complainer said:


> You are about 5 years too late. It's all been done.


 
I have to disagree. If it were already done then people would be laid off and the PS would not have continued to grow. Benchmarking came without any real measures and conditions.


----------



## Latrade

Complainer said:


> You are about 5 years too late. It's all been done.


 
Not universally, the C&AG who made the initial recommendations has a serious of progress reports (available on the C&AG website). Some departments have been effective, but others much less so.


----------



## Latrade

Staples said:


> In my own punblic sector organisation, there 'll be a staff cut of some 15% over a 12 month period as a consequence of the early retirement scheme; the incetivised career break scheme; natural wastage and the recruitment freeze.
> 
> Assuming this is typical of most public sector organisations, would most commentators be happy to have a corresponding reduction in the level of public services provided? I'm sure the combination of these measures would reduce public expenditure to the required levels. The alternative is that people expect the SAME level of public services for the less money.
> 
> I could equally ask "On which planet are these people?".


 
I don't either side has allowed any serious debate on this issue. As stated all along cutting the "pay bill" does not immediately mean loss of basic pay.

Is it the government, the media, or the partisan attitude of those with the biggest voices who have created the divide? I'd say a combination of them all, but the main issue is that any cut in public spending is directly related to less nurses, teachers and an escalation in crime. 

All I ask is show me where any government official has said this. Show me where they've actual said about cutting pay? We've only heard from those outraged at the cuts which has fuelled and divided public opinion.

If the government's proposal is sweeping in cuts, I'll be as outraged. If it doesn't take account of "natural wastage" etc. I'll be outraged at their myopia too. But there's nothing I can see that indicates we won't have a tough, but reasonable approach to reducing the pay bill via various routes.


----------



## Complainer

Latrade said:


> Not universally, the C&AG who made the initial recommendations has a serious of progress reports (available on the C&AG website). Some departments have been effective, but others much less so.


Indeed - not universally in public or private sector. Always room for improvment on all sides of the fence. But facile suggestions from outsiders who have no idea what is actually happening on the ground are not going to help.


----------



## Staples

Latrade said:


> As stated all along cutting the "pay bill" does not immediately mean loss of basic pay.


 
No, but it's the quickest and neatest way without any requirement for analsysis or consideration of outcomes. In other words, a typical government response.

Pay has already been reduced (courtesy of the pension levy) and the government has indicated an unwillingness to react to the either the McCarthy report or that of the Commission on Taxation. That doesn't leave a whole lot of options.



Latrade said:


> If the government's proposal is sweeping in cuts, I'll be as outraged. If it doesn't take account of "natural wastage" etc. I'll be outraged at their myopia too.


 
May I suggest that you polish your outrage in preparation.


----------



## johnd

Right so the 'grinning SIPTU' lie didn't stick, so you decide to up the stakes with the unverifiable dying relative story. I certainly have no recollection of such an incident, and I have a feeling that it would be regularly rehashed in the meeja if it did actually happen. But regardless, it certainly didn't happen yesterday. No picket would ever try and block relatives visiting a hospital - that suggestion shows how little you actually understand about pickets. No patient, cancer or otherwise, went without essential pain relief yesterday. As was the case in the Mater, many of the picketing staff were off-duty staff, showing support for their working colleagues inside.

But do feel free to keep making up stories and hypotethicals. If anything, the fact that you feel obliged to attack for things that didn't actually happen points to the sound, reasonable, measured and dignified nature of yesterday's protest.


I'm not questioning your bona-fides Don, but unfortunately, this is yet another hysterical rant. Hysterical because it contains so many factual errors that I don't know where to start. 

The public service is the one sector where EVERY employee (with the exception of a few judges) has already taken a hit through the so-called pension levy. I already fund my pension - the fact that my employer chooses not to put that funding away and invest it is not my responsibility. Many public sector staff have already lost their jobs (8,000 according to last week's Tribune) and many more will lose their jobs as contracts expire. Yes, there is a difference insofar as there have been no forced redundancies of permanent staff as yet, but there are no guarantees around this - it is simply a matter for negotiation between employers and the employees. Public sector employees (like all employees) are entitled to the contracted terms & conditions of employment. If any other employer in the country had done with the Govt did with the pension levy (unilateral deduction), they would be in jail. So don't speak to me about fairness.

Your conclusion that 'the country can't afford it' is a matter of opinion, not fact. There are many things the county can do, including stop pouring billions into Anglo-Irish (€4billion next year, does that figure ring a bell, i.e. the entire proposed cuts to public services) and stop subsiding landlords through mortgage interest relief (€500m each year). I'm not an economist, and I don't claim to have all the answers (unlike many of the bar-stool experts here on AAM), but I do know that this Govt has no mandate to go for 'small Government' by cutting the public sector. There has been no real debate or discussion around this, and it is interesting to note that most of those who recommend this approach aren't depending on the public health service or the public schools etc.[/quote]


----------



## Latrade

Complainer said:


> Indeed - not universally in public or private sector. Always room for improvment on all sides of the fence. But facile suggestions from outsiders who have no idea what is actually happening on the ground are not going to help.


 
But the C&AG didn't direct the private sector to do so and set a timescale. I couldn't agree more that some private employers do not have the same set up as suggested for the ps, but then that is their choice as all their resources are through a competative market. They know the risks, these are well defined.

However, as the C&AG states, it isn't unreasonable to expect an efficient PS. It isn't unreasonable to expect these changes across the whole PS. It's been at least 10 years (stand to be corrected) and some areas are still way behind the proposals.

So you're right, it isn't far to say the whole PS needs reform, plenty have already taken that step. But then this isn't the case for all areas. It also isn't far to compare the PS to the private in this sense as the risk is the burden of the private employer/shareholders and not public spending.




Staples said:


> No, but it's the quickest and neatest way without any requirement for analsysis or consideration of outcomes. In other words, a typical government response.
> 
> Pay has already been reduced (courtesy of the pension levy) and the government has indicated an unwillingness to react to the either the McCarthy report or that of the Commission on Taxation. That doesn't leave a whole lot of options.
> 
> May I suggest that you polish your outrage in preparation.


 
Behind the scenes, there is a lot of attention being given to the McCarthy Report. Not all changes can be made immediately and not all will have an immediate pay back. But I would expect a large part of the report to be phased in over the next few years and would expect some of the more simple recommendations (merging various units) to feature in the budget or early next year. 

Same thing for the taxation. Except this will need a greater degree of considerations as to how to change the tax system while having to retain and increase tax revenue given the times we're in. It may be a couple of years before we see too much on this.

As I said, I'll back the outrage if that is what happens. But look at what has happened over the last 18 months in the ending of temporary contracts, the early retirement scheme, etc. They've been relatively successful and indicates that there is a thought about how to get the cuts without sweeping decimination (as such).


----------



## johnd

Complainer said:


> I've seen both sides, public and private. Public sector recruitment is far more open, transparent and equitable than anything that I saw in 25 years in the private. If you have evidence to the contrary, please post details.
> 
> 
> Right so the 'grinning SIPTU' lie didn't stick, so you decide to up the stakes with the unverifiable dying relative story. I certainly have no recollection of such an incident, and I have a feeling that it would be regularly rehashed in the meeja if it did actually happen. But regardless, it certainly didn't happen yesterday. No picket would ever try and block relatives visiting a hospital - that suggestion shows how little you actually understand about pickets. No patient, cancer or otherwise, went without essential pain relief yesterday. As was the case in the Mater, many of the picketing staff were off-duty staff, showing support for their working colleagues inside.
> 
> But do feel free to keep making up stories and hypotethicals. If anything, the fact that you feel obliged to attack for things that didn't actually happen points to the sound, reasonable, measured and dignified nature of yesterday's protest.
> 
> I did not make up the story. It did happen and eventually the Irish Cancer Society went on air to say they would provide the pain relief. I'm sure if you contacted Liam Doran or the INO they will confirm that hospices were picketed then as yesterday. The fact that I mistook a Impact official for a Siptu is easy as they all have a tendancy to look and sound alike. Not being as familiar with pickets as you obviously are what exactly is the point of them? If it is not to impede people making deliveries or stop people passing the pickets? I am genuinely curious -honest.


----------



## liaconn

Latrade said:


> But the C&AG didn't direct the private sector to do so and set a timescale. I couldn't agree more that some private employers do not have the same set up as suggested for the ps, but then that is their choice as all their resources are through a competative market. They know the risks, these are well defined.
> 
> However, as the C&AG states, it isn't unreasonable to expect an efficient PS. It isn't unreasonable to expect these changes across the whole PS. It's been at least 10 years (stand to be corrected) and some areas are still way behind the proposals.
> 
> So you're right, it isn't far to say the whole PS needs reform, plenty have already taken that step. But then this isn't the case for all areas. It also isn't far to compare the PS to the private in this sense as the risk is the burden of the private employer/shareholders and not public spending.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Behind the scenes, there is a lot of attention being given to the McCarthy Report. Not all changes can be made immediately and not all will have an immediate pay back. But I would expect a large part of the report to be phased in over the next few years and would expect some of the more simple recommendations (merging various units) to feature in the budget or early next year.
> 
> Same thing for the taxation. Except this will need a greater degree of considerations as to how to change the tax system while having to retain and increase tax revenue given the times we're in. It may be a couple of years before we see too much on this.
> 
> As I said, I'll back the outrage if that is what happens. But look at what has happened over the last 18 months in the ending of temporary contracts, the early retirement scheme, etc. They've been relatively successful and indicates that there is a thought about how to get the cuts without sweeping decimination (as such).


 
This post makes lots of sense to an 'insider' like me. There are lots and lots of areas within the Public Service where efficiencies can be made, lots of overstaffed areas where flexibility is required to allow staff to be redeployed where they're needed, areas where resistance to change is leading to the maintainance of outdated practices and far too much tolerance of the minority of public servants who are lazy, dishonest or who exaggerate the pressure they're under when they could easily take on more work. I think these are the issues which need to be debated and resolved. Private Sector and Public Sector workers having 'we don't get  a half day shopping leave at Christmas', 'well, we don't get a free party and a bonus', 'well we don't have flexi time, nah nah' squabbles is just muddying the waters and avoiding a real, 'big picture' (sorry!) debate.


----------



## VOR

Liaconn & Latrade, thanks for saying what many won't.


----------



## Latrade

liaconn said:


> This post makes lots of sense to an 'insider' like me. There are lots and lots of areas within the Public Service where efficiencies can be made, lots of overstaffed areas where flexibility is required to allow staff to be redeployed where they're needed, areas where resistance to change is leading to the maintainance of outdated practices and far too much tolerance of the minority of public servants who are lazy, dishonest or who exaggerate the pressure they're under when they could easily take on more work. I think these are the issues which need to be debated and resolved. Private Sector and Public Sector workers having 'we don't get a half day shopping leave at Christmas', 'well, we don't get a free party and a bonus', 'well we don't have flexi time, nah nah' squabbles is just muddying the waters and avoiding a real, 'big picture' (sorry!) debate.


 
Can't disagree with any of this. But it isn't being put on the table by the extremists on either side (publically at least). One side says "think of the nurses!" the other side says, "damn them all in their cushy number". 

My only frustration is that as we haven't seen the government's plan, what were the protests for? A potential plan? The possibility of a plan? I'm sorry to be glib about it, but it seemed there was a lot of outrage generated within some parts of the union without anything to suggest this is what will happen. In essence they were protesting against the "myths" they put out into the media in the first place.

In combination, McCarthy, C&AG progess reports on change and the methods used to cut numbers indicate that there is a view to more sustainable changes to PS operations.


----------



## Howitzer

Back on the original topic, Public Services Attitudes.

[broken link removed]



> Divilly teaches second class in Knocklyon Junior National School. She’s 25 and in her fourth year of teaching.
> ....
> Divilly currently earns €43,042 before tax. “It’s fine, it’s not a huge amount, but it’s grand. My worry is that if we take more cuts, living in Dublin is going to be increasingly difficult. I’m really not complaining, not with the economy the way it is. Money never came into my decision to become a teacher, but I have to be able to live.”


My personal opinion is that 43K is way too high a salary to be paying a 25 year old teacher but her own opinion is there for anyone to read.

(I'd also prefer to see people entering teaching later in life but that's somewhat irrelevant. The system somewhat works against that by starting everyone at the bottom grade and taking no account of experience - even foreign or private teaching experience.)


----------



## Delboy

Howitzer said:


> Back on the original topic, Public Services Attitudes.
> 
> [broken link removed]
> 
> My personal opinion is that 43K is way too high a salary to be paying a 25 year old teacher but her own opinion is there for anyone to read.
> 
> (I'd also prefer to see people entering teaching later in life but that's somewhat irrelevant.)



i thought i heard union heads/teachers saying you could be 18 years a teacher before you ever hit 50k. 43k sounds very hight for someone only in their 4th year of work as a teacher.


----------



## Purple

Howitzer said:


> Back on the original topic, Public Services Attitudes.
> 
> [broken link removed]
> 
> My personal opinion is that 43K is way too high a salary to be paying a 25 year old teacher but her own opinion is there for anyone to read.
> 
> (I'd also prefer to see people entering teaching later in life but that's somewhat irrelevant. The system somewhat works against that by starting everyone at the bottom grade and taking no account of experience - even foreign or private teaching experience.)



That's about €45-€50 per hour for each hour of classroom time. If she does one hour of prep-time for each classroom hour (and I'm sure it's not much less) that's €30-€33 per hour. Not a bad rate for a 25 year old.


----------



## galleyslave

on a related but not directly relevant topic - did anyone see the teacher on frontline yesterday - the intro said he was on close to 50k, but he claimed  he only got paid 950 per fortnight. How can that be correct?

Back on topic - re public sector attitudes. Theres a real lack of leadership not just at the top but in the middle management also. I worked for a while as an it contractor to a county council and i could name many areas where improvments could me made, but let me give one silly, but telling example of the lack of leadership. In the planning dept, there were numerous template docs. These were old, having been written using ibm displaywrite, a product from the days of DOS. They still insist on using displaywrite in that dept, despite it being completely obsolete. I can see no reason why the old templates can't be opened using word, which they also have. In my opinion, its to do with clinging to outmoded work practices and an unwillingness to change. Where was the IT or departmental leadership to standardise on Word? MIA of course


----------



## Purple

Delboy said:


> i thought i heard union heads/teachers saying you could be 18 years a teacher before you ever hit 50k. 43k sounds very hight for someone only in their 4th year of work as a teacher.



That's basic rates. As with so many public sector areas there's all sorts of extra payments (like for having a H-Dip).


----------



## galleyslave

Purple said:


> That's basic rates. As with so many public sector areas there's all sorts of extra payments (like for having a H-Dip).


is that not mandatory anyhow these days?


----------



## Howitzer

How does a 25 year have the attitude that 43K isn't a huge salary - irrespecitive of how many hours are worked in the week, or how stressfull those hours are or how many days off you get?


----------



## galleyslave

spoilt celtic tiger cub howitzer


----------



## Purple

galleyslave said:


> is that not mandatory anyhow these days?


 I would think so.


----------



## Complainer

johnd said:


> I did not make up the story. It did happen and eventually the Irish Cancer Society went on air to say they would provide the pain relief. I'm sure if you contacted Liam Doran or the INO they will confirm that hospices were picketed then as yesterday. The fact that I mistook a Impact official for a Siptu is easy as they all have a tendancy to look and sound alike. Not being as familiar with pickets as you obviously are what exactly is the point of them? If it is not to impede people making deliveries or stop people passing the pickets? I am genuinely curious -honest.



To be honest, given your previous posts, I have no interest in educating you about pickets or contacting other people to verify your stories.


----------



## Howitzer

galleyslave said:


> on a related but not directly relevant topic - did anyone see the teacher on frontline yesterday - the intro said he was on close to 50k, but he claimed  he only got paid 950 per fortnight. How can that be correct?


I saw that too and almost lost the rag.

Frequent posters may recognise my pernikity attitude with regards to getting figures right - but he said he received 940 a forthnight after tax, however 49,000/52 = 940. He gave his WEEKLY before tax figure. His forthnightly after tax figure would be in the region of 1400.


----------



## Howitzer

galleyslave said:


> spoilt celtic tiger cub howitzer


But that I don't get. When I envisage celtic cubs I think of guys in banking or construction, working in bubble industries getting bubble wages. Not primary school teachers.


----------



## RMCF

Howitzer said:


> I saw that too and almost lost the rag.
> 
> Frequent posters may recognise my pernikity attitude with regards to getting figures right - but he said he received 940 a forthnight after tax, however 49,000/52 = 940. He gave his WEEKLY before tax figure. His forthnightly after tax figure would be in the region of 1400.



Surely then its the responsibility of RTE and the programme makers to make sure they give totally accurate figures. We watched that programme last night and my wife, who is also a primary teacher, had a puzzled look on her face and said to me "How is he only earning €950 a fortnight take home pay? I earn more than that and I'm not on anything like €49k".

I think its all about inventing figures to make a bad situation look worse.

And on another note, I think the 3rd example in that porgramme, the woman who was a physio summed up why Ireland is in such a mess in terms of competitiveness. She earned €58,000 !!! For a physio. I know a physio in NI and he has many years experience and is nowhere near that. Nowhere. Crazy wages.


----------



## johnd

Complainer said:


> To be honest, given your previous posts, I have no interest in educating you about pickets or contacting other people to verify your stories.


 
Great! suits me fine


----------



## becky

RMCF said:


> Surely then its the responsibility of RTE and the programme makers to make sure they give totally accurate figures. We watched that programme last night and my wife, who is also a primary teacher, had a puzzled look on her face and said to me "How is he only earning €950 a fortnight take home pay? I earn more than that and I'm not on anything like €49k".
> 
> I think its all about inventing figures to make a bad situation look worse.
> 
> And on another note, I think the 3rd example in that porgramme, the woman who was a physio summed up why Ireland is in such a mess in terms of competitiveness. She earned €58,000 !!! For a physio. I know a physio in NI and he has many years experience and is nowhere near that. Nowhere. Crazy wages.


 

I agree on the take home pay - he should be in the region of €1,200 depending on his tax credits etc. I can only presume he has some AVC's, VHI etc which come out of his payslip.

€58,000 means she's a senior physio as the basic grade stops at around €53K.


----------



## galleyslave

Howitzer said:


> But that I don't get. When I envisage celtic cubs I think of guys in banking or construction, working in bubble industries getting bubble wages. Not primary school teachers.


but no experience of the dole, hardship, recession etc...everything came easy, including credit


----------



## csirl

What I'm most dissappointed with regarding the proposed public sector cuts is the attitude of BOTH the Government and the Unions to what I consider to be the elephant in the room.

As I've said many times on this forum before, the Government should be laying off staff in areas where programmes have been shut down and getting rid of the swathes of politically connected people in useless quangos and the HSE.

The Government is proposing an across the board pay cut in order to protect useless workers at the expense of those who are doing a good job. This is wrong and should not happen. What's more, while the unions  have opposed pay cuts, they have been strangely silent about these useless people.


----------



## Howitzer

csirl said:


> What I'm most dissappointed with regarding the proposed public sector cuts is the attitude of BOTH the Government and the Unions to what I consider to be the elephant in the room.
> 
> As I've said many times on this forum before, the Government should be laying off staff in areas where programmes have been shut down and getting rid of the swathes of politically connected people in useless quangos and the HSE.
> 
> The Government is proposing an across the board pay cut in order to protect useless workers at the expense of those who are doing a good job. This is wrong and should not happen. What's more, while the unions  have opposed pay cuts, they have been strangely silent about these useless people.


A big +1.


----------



## Purple

Howitzer said:


> A big +1.



Yep, it was a good point well made.


----------



## Complainer

csirl said:


> As I've said many times on this forum before, the Government should be laying off staff in areas where programmes have been shut down and getting rid of the swathes of politically connected people in useless quangos and the HSE.



This is nonsense. Who are these 'politically connected people' and which 'useless quangos' do you want to close down?


----------



## Sunny

Complainer said:


> This is nonsense. Who are these 'politically connected people' and which 'useless quangos' do you want to close down?


 
Does anyone have an list of the quangos that actually exist. Tried to find one but couldn't. Only found this.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/ireland/article616806.ece


----------



## csirl

Complainer said:


> This is nonsense. Who are these 'politically connected people' and which 'useless quangos' do you want to close down?


 
There's a list of useless quangos in the Bord Snip report.

While the HSE may be nominally politically independent, it still has the legacy of its recent past (as Health Boards) when it was controlled by politicians i.e. local councillors. In e.g. the core civil service, recruitment is done in an unbiased way and employees are forbidden from being members of any political parties. I'm not sure the same can be said about the legions of "Assistant National Directors" et al in the HSE. 

You also have to ask why we have so many quangos in the first place? My theory is that because they are outside the civil service, they are not subject to the same recruitment rules as the civil service and so the Government can use these jobs as gifts to their supporters. They are usually headed up by politicially connected Directors and we all know what that means in terms of recruitment.


----------



## Shawady

Prime Time did a special on Quangos a few months back and one thing that struck me was that although the numbers were small in some of these (30-40), the percentage of high level grades was large. From memory, one had 40% of staff at AP level or higher. That would be considered a reletively high position in the public service.


----------



## Latrade

Sunny said:


> Does anyone have an list of the quangos that actually exist. Tried to find one but couldn't. Only found this.
> 
> http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/ireland/article616806.ece


 
You also have the boards of state agencies and state sponsored agencies that are made up of Social Partners. FAS would be one example. Most receive some form of stipend for their time and (ahem) trouble and it wasn't unknown that board meetings take place "off site" to facilitate those who have to travel. Though why one particular agency had to have a board meeting in 2008 up in Derry (with overnights) when the member of the board who lived closest lived in Malahide is beyond me.

In fairness since the economy went belly up, most have curbed the worst of the excess, but it still requires some review of their operations and expense.

In addition, depending on the agency you can have several sub-committees feeding into the board, again made up of social partners. 

While some tripartite systems are worthwhile for some agencies, it can't be said to be the same for all. the point being, we should be careful of throwing the baby out with the bathwater.


----------



## Staples

"Quango" is an emotive term that seems to convey the impression that they exist only to support those who work for them.

They may also be referred to as specialist agencies that provide a particular service in repsonse to public demand. If this public demand no longer exists, or if the government that it can no longer afford to provide this service, then by all means shut them down. 

But at least try to understand why they're there in the first place and judge them individually on the extent to which they have fulfilled their mandate.


----------



## Sunny

Staples said:


> "Quango" is an emotive term that seems to convey the impression that they exist only to support those who work for them.
> 
> They may also be referred to as specialist agencies that provide a particular service in repsonse to public demand. If this public demand no longer exists, or if the government that it can no longer afford to provide this service, then by all means shut them down.
> 
> But at least try to understand why they're there in the first place and judge them individually on the extent to which they have fulfilled their mandate.


 
Hence the fact that I was looking for a list but there doesn't seem to be one.


----------



## Complainer

csirl said:


> There's a list of useless quangos in the Bord Snip report.


There is no overall list of agencies in the Bord Snip report, as this report is structured by Govt Dept. So again, let me ask you to clarify, who are the 'useless agencies' that you propose to close down?



csirl said:


> While the HSE may be nominally politically independent, it still has the legacy of its recent past (as Health Boards) when it was controlled by politicians i.e. local councillors. In e.g. the core civil service, recruitment is done in an unbiased way and employees are forbidden from being members of any political parties. I'm not sure the same can be said about the legions of "Assistant National Directors" et al in the HSE.


So you're 'not sure' that they are independent. Does this mean that you are sure that they are politically connected, or does it (more likely) mean that you have absolutely no idea what is really going on here, so you are going to attack by slur and innuendo. Once again, can I ask you to produce some details of these 'politically connected' staff?



csirl said:


> You also have to ask why we have so many quangos in the first place? My theory is that because they are outside the civil service, they are not subject to the same recruitment rules as the civil service and so the Government can use these jobs as gifts to their supporters. They are usually headed up by politicially connected Directors and we all know what that means in terms of recruitment.


Your theory has no basis in fact. My theory is that you have no idea what you are talking about here. Again, if you have any details/evidence/specifics about what agencies/people/roles have resulted in politically connected staffers, let's get it on the table. If you don't have any details, maybe you'd consider withdrawing your unfounded slur.


----------



## Shawady

Sunny said:


> Hence the fact that I was looking for a list but there doesn't seem to be one.


 
This is taken from discussion on another webstie. I cannot see the list referenced to an offical document but it mentions a number of 170 quangos.

[broken link removed]


----------



## VOR

Complainer said:


> let me ask you to clarify, who are the 'useless agencies' that you propose to close down?


 
Ah Complainer, we seem to be at odds all day.  
Shall I start with this one: Limerick Northside Generation Agency and perhaps the Limerick Southside Regeneration Agency. 2 separate boards as seen here 
Madness.

But it gets better. 2 separate boards but 3 separate addresses


----------



## Sunny

Shawady said:


> This is taken from discussion on another webstie. I cannot see the list referenced to an offical document but it mentions a number of 170 quangos.
> 
> [broken link removed]


 

Ha ha. Are they all for real? Not doubting the work done by many but what does the Health and Children Office for Tobacco Control 2002 do??


----------



## csirl

Instead of trying to pass the onus onto the me, can you tell me why the people recruited by these organisations are not recruited in the same way as core civil servants and are not subject to the same restrictions on political activity? Where is the transparancy on the probity of these organisations? As public sector organisations paid out of taxpayers money, the taxpayer has a right to be given proof of probity? 

I'm well able to give examples. I used to work for a Government Department myself. I have friends and family who work in some of these areas of the public sector. I also live in an area that that has been rife with political patronage due to us having some politicians who like exercising their influence in the area. I personally know people who have benefited from political patronage and have been employed by some of these organisations. I dont think the Mod will allow me to print their names on this message board. Not coincidently, I also have a few neighbours who have appeared at or been named in recent tribunals.


----------



## Complainer

VOR said:


> Ah Complainer, we seem to be at odds all day.
> Shall I start with this one: Limerick Northside Generation Agency and perhaps the Limerick Southside Regeneration Agency. 2 separate boards as seen here
> Madness.
> 
> But it gets better. 2 separate boards but 3 separate addresses




Two seperate boards, and one team of staff. 



So are you closing down both agencies, or merging them? What savings will this produce?


----------



## csirl

Complainer said:


> Two seperate boards, and one team of staff.
> 
> 
> 
> So are you closing down both agencies, or merging them? What savings will this produce?


 
Two points. Firstly, in my experience, this agency seems top heavy with staff considering its brief.

Secondly, why does it exist at all? Couldnt this be done by the local authority?


----------



## VOR

Complainer said:


> Two seperate boards, and one team of staff.
> 
> 
> 
> So are you closing down both agencies, or merging them? What savings will this produce?


 

Merging in the absence of the councils and HSE actually doing their job. Limerick needs some level of support.

Savings on stationery, phones, staff and rent. Then of course there's staff costs such as minuting two board meetings, changing letters for each side of the city, two financial reports etc. etc.

We are talking about a city of less than 80,000 people. It's not the New York. How can we need two board of directors working out of two different offices and a central team to administer it all?


----------



## Staples

Sunny said:


> Ha ha. Are they all for real? Not doubting the work done by many but what does the Health and Children Office for Tobacco Control 2002 do??


 
Here's a thought.  Why don't you find out before you begin questioning their existence?

Or are afraid you might not like what you'd find?


----------



## Sunny

Staples said:


> Here's a thought. Why don't you find out before you begin questioning their existence?
> 
> Or are afraid you might not like what you'd find?


 
I actually did find out. Something to do with creating a smokeless society or something. Do we have one for a alcohol free society as well?


----------



## Staples

csirl said:


> Two points. Firstly, in my experience, this agency seems top heavy with staff considering its brief.
> 
> Secondly, why does it exist at all? Couldnt this be done by the local authority?


 

These are reasonable questions for all state agencies.  But just becasue you may not be able to readily come up with good reasons doesn't mean they don't exist.


----------



## Complainer

VOR said:


> Merging in the absence of the councils and HSE actually doing their job. Limerick needs some level of support.
> 
> Savings on stationery, phones, staff and rent. Then of course there's staff costs such as minuting two board meetings, changing letters for each side of the city, two financial reports etc. etc.
> 
> We are talking about a city of less than 80,000 people. It's not the New York. How can we need two board of directors working out of two different offices and a central team to administer it all?



I've no idea what is going on here. I know nothing about these agencies. It is fairly clear that you know nothing about what is actually going on here either. You might want to go and do some actual research before you go making proposals. But seriously, how much do you reckon this merger will save?


----------



## csirl

Staples said:


> These are reasonable questions for all state agencies. But just becasue you may not be able to readily come up with good reasons doesn't mean they don't exist.


 
Be careful about confusing the fact that work that needs to be done with the question of who should do this work.


----------



## Howitzer

Staples said:


> These are reasonable questions for all state agencies.  But just becasue you may not be able to readily come up with good reasons doesn't mean they don't exist.


We're slipping into this sort of territory.



> There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know.


----------



## Complainer

csirl said:


> Instead of trying to pass the onus onto the me, can you tell me why the people recruited by these organisations are not recruited in the same way as core civil servants and are not subject to the same restrictions on political activity? Where is the transparancy on the probity of these organisations? As public sector organisations paid out of taxpayers money, the taxpayer has a right to be given proof of probity?
> 
> I'm well able to give examples. I used to work for a Government Department myself. I have friends and family who work in some of these areas of the public sector. I also live in an area that that has been rife with political patronage due to us having some politicians who like exercising their influence in the area. I personally know people who have benefited from political patronage and have been employed by some of these organisations. I dont think the Mod will allow me to print their names on this message board. Not coincidently, I also have a few neighbours who have appeared at or been named in recent tribunals.



The only onus that I'm putting on you is to justify your claim about politically-connected staffers and useless quangos. Please don't give me the 'I used to know a bloke who' stories. If you have a serious proposal to make in this area, let's get it on the table, with the evidence that supports it. If you are concerned about naming names in public, just PM them to me, and let's see how many out of the 320k approx public servants are politically connected. Let's be specific about which quangos you plan to abolish.


----------



## Howitzer

1. The FAS senior management and Board of Directors.


----------



## csirl

> Let's be specific about which quangos you plan to abolish.


 
All of them. As I've said before, there is no reason why the work of all the quangos cannot be done within the Government Department with responsibility for the area.


----------



## Staples

csirl said:


> Be careful about confusing the fact that work that needs to be done with the question of who should do this work.


 
If you accept that work needs to be done, you also have to ask how best it can be done which encompassess the question of who does it.

In the case of the agency to which you refer, I can't say who's best placed. My point is that on the basis of what you've presented, neither can you but you have to at least accept the possibility that somebody has considered this in the past and concluded that the agency approach, for reasons that are not clearly evident to us, may be the way to go.


----------



## Complainer

csirl said:


> All of them. As I've said before, there is no reason why the work of all the quangos cannot be done within the Government Department with responsibility for the area.



So you want the Dept of Health administrators out nursing patients and carring out operations? And you want the Dept of Transport administrators carrying out driving tests? And you want the Dept of Enterprise administrators to be carrying out safety inspections on building sites? And you want the Dept of Enterprise administrators training brickies and electricians and webdesigners in the FAS training centre? And you want the Dept Justice administrators to be hearing Equality Tribunal cases?


----------



## Staples

Sunny said:


> I actually did find out. Something to do with creating a smokeless society or something. Do we have one for a alcohol free society as well?


 
If enough of the public wanted one, we probably would.

Would you like one?


----------



## csirl

> The only onus that I'm putting on you is to justify your claim about politically-connected staffers and useless quangos.


 
We can start here:

http://www.independent.ie/national-...as-port-chief-before-key-meeting-1274742.html. 

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/coughlan-in-row-over-state-post-1893505.html


----------



## Complainer

csirl said:


> We can start here:
> 
> http://www.independent.ie/national-...as-port-chief-before-key-meeting-1274742.html.
> 
> http://www.independent.ie/national-news/coughlan-in-row-over-state-post-1893505.html



These people are board members, not staffers. None of them were out on the street yesterday. None of them went through any recruitment process.

Now try again - where are these politically connected public sector staff?


----------



## csirl

Complainer said:


> So you want the Dept of Health administrators out nursing patients and carring out operations? And you want the Dept of Transport administrators carrying out driving tests? And you want the Dept of Enterprise administrators to be carrying out safety inspections on building sites? And you want the Dept of Enterprise administrators training brickies and electricians and webdesigners in the FAS training centre? And you want the Dept Justice administrators to be hearing Equality Tribunal cases?


 

There is no reason why all of the above tasks cannot be administered from within a Government Department. It does not require a separate organisation to be set up to ensure that any of these tasks are done.



> So you want the Dept of Health administrators out nursing patients and carring out operations?


 
This shows that you are not aware of the real situation. Nurses and surgeons are actually employed by the hospitals, NOT the HSE. The hospitals are independent privately owned entities (mostly by trusts owned by religious orders). There is no reason why the D/Health administrators need to hire a bunch of HSE administrators to contract with hospitals for services. Cut out the unnecessary middleman. 





> And you want the Dept of Enterprise administrators training brickies and electricians and webdesigners in the FAS training centre?


 
Judging by recent reports, they might do a better job


----------



## VOR

Complainer said:


> I've no idea what is going on here. I know nothing about these agencies. It is fairly clear that you know nothing about what is actually going on here either. You might want to go and do some actual research before you go making proposals. But seriously, how much do you reckon this merger will save?


 

What they are doing is irrelevant. I am sure it is a worthwhile exercise. That is not the point. The point is that doubling of work is inefficient and should be done away with. 

As for the savings, I'll hazard a very rough guess. Say each rented property costs €12K a year, then closing 2 will save €24K. Even the saving of one staff member would then save at least another €26K. That's €50K before looking at other items like financial reports, stationery etc.


----------



## Complainer

csirl said:


> There is no reason why all of the above tasks cannot be administered from within a Government Department. It does not require a separate organisation to be set up to ensure that any of these tasks are done.



So you want these staff part of a Govt department, and not part of of the agency. What is the benefit of this?


----------



## Howitzer

Complainer said:


> These people are board members, not staffers. None of them were out on the street yesterday. None of them went through any recruitment process.
> 
> Now try again - where are these politically connected public sector staff?



http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/ireland/article6860375.ece


----------



## VOR

Complainer said:


> So you want these staff part of a Govt department, and not part of of the agency. What is the benefit of this?


 
Can I take this one on csirl's behalf. I feel I am repeating myself. Less staff due to synergies, less rented offices, less phone line costs, electricity costs, stationery costs and finance costs due to annual reports etc etc.That's just for a start. 
Then you have fewer boards so fewer board members for travel expenses and salaries. Fewer payroll runs so a streamlined and more manageable payroll and HR function. That's off the top of my head. 
Ask any one who has ever worked in an Ops function in a decent sized company and they will surely agree with the above and give you many more examples.

I have been looking at a list of the quangos set up in the last 10 years. One such quango is the mushroom taskforce. It has been a huge success if its job was to keep us in the dark and feed us you know what_. Sorry, but I couldn't resist._


----------



## Complainer

Howitzer said:


> http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/ireland/article6860375.ece



Woohoo - you found one, out of 320,000.

Any advances on 1, have we got 2 out there?


----------



## Sunny

Well this guy was a great find by Bertie

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/joe-burke-was-only-minutes-from-death-1265013.html


----------



## Howitzer

Sunny said:


> Well this guy was a great find by Bertie
> 
> http://www.independent.ie/national-news/joe-burke-was-only-minutes-from-death-1265013.html


No fair, he's only a Chairman/Board member. You know the rules. This is going to make a great Xmas board game.


----------



## Sunny

Howitzer said:


> No fair, he's only a Chairman/Board member. You know the rules. This is going to make a great Xmas board game.


 
Oh sorry, I didn't read the rules. Remind me again why board members don't count??


----------



## Complainer

VOR said:


> Less staff due to synergies


Eeesh enough of the vague consultant-speak already. What staff will be cut?



VOR said:


> less rented offices, less phone line costs, electricity costs, stationery costs and finance costs due to annual reports etc etc.That's just for a start.


Nonsense - you have the same people, who still require offices, still make phone calls, still print out from their PCs. There are no savings here. On the annual reports, all public bodies are no publishing these to the web only, so the savings here wouldn't buy the biccies for the cabinet meeting.



VOR said:


> Then you have fewer boards so fewer board members for travel expenses and salaries.


 yep, maybe a few less board members all right, but again, those savings won't pay the toilet-roll bill for Anglo/AIB/BOI.



VOR said:


> Fewer payroll runs so a streamlined and more manageable payroll and HR function.


 More simplistic nonsense. In many cases, these functions have already been integrated. The Dept Justice provides payroll and accounts services to a whole range of Justice agencies already, so there won't be any savings from integration.



VOR said:


> That's off the top of my head.
> Ask any one who has ever worked in an Ops function in a decent sized company and they will surely agree with the above and give you many more examples.


You see that's the problem right there. It is off the top of your head. You have no real understanding of what is actually happening on the ground, no understanding of  the role and functions of these organisations, no understanding of the focus and accountability that has come about through these agencies, no understanding of the in-depth expertise of staff  but you are quite happy to pontificate on major, structural changes that will have huge impacts on the effectiveness of safety, health, regulation 'off the top of your head'. This is McCreevy-ite stuff, and we all know where his great ideas got us (over a billion down the drain on his decentralisation scam, if I recall correctly).


----------



## Complainer

howitzer said:


> this is going to make a great xmas board game.


rofl.


----------



## VOR

Complainer, you can say a lot of things to me but the McCreevy comment really hurt.  

By "off the top of my head" I meant that my experiences would lead me to believe in the savings I gave. They are tried and tested.

Take the work of 3 and give it to two where possible. Much of the time, the two step up to meet the challenge. If not, you hire one person part time. Still savings.

Simple finance says that if you are renting 3 units and can incorporate into one, you will save on fixed costs such as insurance, lighting and other utilities.

Where you can use one type of paper, you save on stationery. 

If you are giving someone €20K in expenses to turn up to board meetings you can save €200K for every board of 10 you get rid of. That's a hell of a lot of biscuits. (I took a conservative figure based on Celia Larkin's €30K http://www.tribune.ie/article/2008/aug/24/fee-bonanza-at-taxpayers-expense-for-celia-larkin/ )

You say the department of justice have streamlined payroll for its agencies. Then what about health and education? 

I really don't see how H&S is affected.


----------



## csirl

> Eeesh enough of the vague consultant-speak already. What staff will be cut?


 
Generally speaking, with all of these agencies, you have a section of staff in the Government Department who's job is to watch over or liaise with the agency. Say for example, the agency has 30 staff and the Dept has 4 staff watching over them. If the Government Department does the job itself, you save the cost of 4 staff.

I also have a personal view that many of these agencies are over staffed. I think that it would be possible to do a lot of their work with less staff. So in the case of the above, the Government Department could probably do the same job with 15 staff. Some of this is down to being able to do the back office functions such as HR, payroll, procurement etc. rather than having the agency hire separate people for these functions, some of it is down to having greater flexibility/productivity in a larger organisation and to be truthful, some of it is down to eliminating quango type behaviour such as empire building (the larger your staff, the more important you are) and jobs for the boys. 

So, in my above mention example we go from having 30 quango staff and 4 civil servants administering this area to having 15 civil servants. A saving of 19 people.


----------



## z101

Cant wait to see what strike action is planned for the IMF when they come in and slash 25% of public sector pay across the board. No one there will listen to the Unions nonsense for a second. It'll make the governments current proposals look like windfall. This seems to escape some people how close we are to this situation.


----------



## Complainer

VOR said:


> Take the work of 3 and give it to two where possible. Much of the time, the two step up to meet the challenge. If not, you hire one person part time. Still savings.


I've managed M&A (mergers and acquistions) projects for one of the largest, most gung-ho, aggressive companies in the world. If I produced this kind of simplistic rubbish as part of my integration plan, I'd have been fired. If you take the work of 3 people and give it to 2, you get 2/3rds of the work done, unless there are very obvious synergies available. 


VOR said:


> Simple finance says that if you are renting 3 units and can incorporate into one, you will save on fixed costs such as insurance, lighting and other utilities.


Again, this is facile stuff. Moving three units together into one won't necessarily save money. Sometimes it does, sometimes it don't. It depends hugely on the existing lease conditions, the locations of the buildings, the age of the buildings etc. As it happens, OPW has been doing this stuff for years. Check out Government Offices, The Glen, in Waterford, where Revenue, Dept Ag and HSA all share an existing building. You now want to split these up, with Revenue moving to a Dept Finance building, Ag moving to an Ag building and HSA moving to an Environment building. It makes no sense



VOR said:


> Where you can use one type of paper, you save on stationery.
> 
> If you are giving someone €20K in expenses to turn up to board meetings you can save €200K for every board of 10 you get rid of. That's a hell of a lot of biscuits. (I took a conservative figure based on Celia Larkin's €30K http://www.tribune.ie/article/2008/aug/24/fee-bonanza-at-taxpayers-expense-for-celia-larkin/ )


Come on, €50m or maybe if very generous €100m - it is peanuts, a drop in the ocean.



VOR said:


> You say the department of justice have streamlined payroll for its agencies. Then what about health and education?


Yep, Education did this years ago - all teachers are paid from Dept Ed in Tullamore. Health - Remember PPARS, where the cream of the private sector (Deloittes, IBM et al) leached €220m out of the health boards for a system that never delivered.


VOR said:


> I really don't see how H&S is affected.


There is quite a lot you don't see. You don't see the lack of focus and further dilution of accountability that occurs when you lose a dedicated, focussed agency like the RSA or the EPA.

Why do you think that AIB run Goodbody's as a seperate operation? Why do Irish Life run ILIM as a seperate operation? Why do multinationals like Johnson & Johnson run Janssen Pharma as a seperate operation?

Integration is not a panacea solution, and may well cause serious damage. 



csirl said:


> Generally speaking, with all of these agencies, you have a section of staff in the Government Department who's job is to watch over or liaise with the agency. Say for example, the agency has 30 staff and the Dept has 4 staff watching over them. If the Government Department does the job itself, you save the cost of 4 staff.
> 
> I also have a personal view that many of these agencies are over staffed. I think that it would be possible to do a lot of their work with less staff. So in the case of the above, the Government Department could probably do the same job with 15 staff. Some of this is down to being able to do the back office functions such as HR, payroll, procurement etc. rather than having the agency hire separate people for these functions, some of it is down to having greater flexibility/productivity in a larger organisation and to be truthful, some of it is down to eliminating quango type behaviour such as empire building (the larger your staff, the more important you are) and jobs for the boys.
> 
> So, in my above mention example we go from having 30 quango staff and 4 civil servants administering this area to having 15 civil servants. A saving of 19 people.





csirl said:


> Generally speaking, with all of these agencies, you have a section of staff in the Government Department who's job is to watch over or liaise with the agency. Say for example, the agency has 30 staff and the Dept has 4 staff watching over them. If the Government Department does the job itself, you save the cost of 4 staff.


There is a bit more to it than that. These people have more than just an oversight role, including driving through relevant legislation, working with Dept Finance on budget and spending, dealing with the Minister on policy and PQs. There may possibly be some savings possible here, but they are not material in the overall scheme of things.



csirl said:


> I also have a personal view that many of these agencies are over staffed. I think that it would be possible to do a lot of their work with less staff. So in the case of the above, the Government Department could probably do the same job with 15 staff. Some of this is down to being able to do the back office functions such as HR, payroll, procurement etc. rather than having the agency hire separate people for these functions, some of it is down to having greater flexibility/productivity in a larger organisation and to be truthful, some of it is down to eliminating quango type behaviour such as empire building (the larger your staff, the more important you are) and jobs for the boys.


Your personal view is your personal view. Please let's not base a huge infrastructural change (which has the potential to incur huge cost, huge time, huge energy and divert people from productive work) on your whim. Again, start being specific - name say 3-5 agencies which are overstaffed.

Many agencies already share resources on IT, HR, payroll, procurement, facilities management, health & safety etc, so integration is going to have very little impact here.


csirl said:


> So, in my above mention example we go from having 30 quango staff and 4 civil servants administering this area to having 15 civil servants. A saving of 19 people.


I really hope that the Govt have a sounder basis for their policies than this kind of fiction.


----------



## Purple

Complainer said:


> I've managed M&A (mergers and acquistions) projects for one of the largest, most gung-ho, aggressive companies in the world.



I find that hard to believe.


----------



## VOR

Purple said:


> I find that hard to believe.


 
I am going to take Complainer at face value and believe him on that. I will argue until the cows come home that "obvious synergies" exist. 

-ILIM and Goodbody have to be run sepearately from parent companies under law.
- All teachers are not paid centrally. There are about 30 VECs outside the net. Hospitals are another example of this.
- €100m isn't peanuts. It wasn't in the good times and it certainly isn't peanuts now.

I'll happily come in and have those "peanuts" for 1% of the savings.

Perhaps those on the outside see things that people inside the system cannot see. That is not me having a go at any one. It is just an observation. The "wood for the trees" idiom is quite apt here.

We're never going to agree on this, are we Complainer? I just can't see how we need a quango for every 5,000 people in this country.


----------



## Complainer

VOR said:


> I will argue until the cows come home that "obvious synergies" exist.


Stop argueing and start explaining - what are these 'obvious synergies'? There may well be some synergies on back-office functions (IT, HR etc). But these are small in the overall scheme of things. Many of these synergies have already been achieved without integration, and many more can be achieved without integration.

What synergies will be achieved by taking the staff of HSA (largely safety inspectors) An Bord Pleanala (largely planners) and EPA (largely environmental inspectors) all back to the Dept Environment?



VOR said:


> -ILIM and Goodbody have to be run sepearately from parent companies under law.


I wasn't aware of this - what law are you referring to? 



VOR said:


> - All teachers are not paid centrally. There are about 30 VECs outside the net. Hospitals are another example of this.


And the VECs have been operating a shared services environment for over 20 years now (see ). Of course there is always room for further development and improvement, but this is not a reason for major structural changes.



VOR said:


> - €100m isn't peanuts. It wasn't in the good times and it certainly isn't peanuts now.
> 
> I'll happily come in and have those "peanuts" for 1% of the savings.
> 
> Perhaps those on the outside see things that people inside the system cannot see. That is not me having a go at any one. It is just an observation. The "wood for the trees" idiom is quite apt here.
> 
> We're never going to agree on this, are we Complainer? I just can't see how we need a quango for every 5,000 people in this country.



You are ignoring a number of issues;
- the distraction effect - at a time when public servants need to be focused on public service, a change like this will lead to 1-3 years of internal focus, dealing with organisational change, HR issues, IT integrations, building changes and lots of other naval gazing - all when the public need their services most.
- the dilution effect - the loss of focus and accountability that would arise from wiping out focused organisations like EPA, HSA, RSA, RPA, NRA, Public Appts Service, Legal Aid Board - all who have strong records of delivering effective services in their own area. Who will now be held accountable for the road network, or the safety of construction sites, or regulation of waste providers?

This isn't a question of digging my heels in and resisting change. This is resisting change for the sake of change - change proposed from a position of ignorance - change proposed with no clear understanding of the benefits to be realised.

There are many things that need to be developed and improved in the public sector - wiping out established and successful organisations to sate a media-driven attack on quangos is not a sensible strategy.


----------



## Complainer

Sunny said:


> Ha ha. Are they all for real? Not doubting the work done by many but what does the Health and Children Office for Tobacco Control 2002 do??


Just for the record - these are the people who brought about a hugely successful social change in Ireland that has been used as an example of best practice worldwide - the elimination of smoking in workplaces. They led this change, which has improved the health of staff and customers in workplaces, and made it possible for families to return to pubs and restaurants. The change has become self-policing. Give them credit for this incredible success.

As it happens, they were listed for merger with some other Health bodies in the Bord Snip report.


----------



## Sunny

Complainer said:


> Just for the record - these are the people who brought about a hugely successful social change in Ireland that has been used as an example of best practice worldwide - the elimination of smoking in workplaces. They led this change, which has improved the health of staff and customers in workplaces, and made it possible for families to return to pubs and restaurants. The change has become self-policing. Give them credit for this incredible success.
> 
> As it happens, they were listed for merger with some other Health bodies in the Bord Snip report.


 
Why couldn't the department of health have done exactly the same thing themselves? Why was a new body set up? 

Are we saying that everytime we want to introduce a new policy, we need to set up a new body to implement it.


----------



## galleyslave

for jaysus sake complainer - if you have multiple agencies doing the same job, there's clearly scope to amalgamate them and save money on duplication - case in point - the IDA and shannon development. same function, 2 agencies. now if we could only achieve the holy grail of downsizing the redundant employees of such a merger we'd be a lot better off. Aside from the 'obvious syngergies' associated with closing one of them such as duplication of printed materials, duplication of websites, translation of materials etc etc.


----------



## Purple

Complainer said:


> This isn't a question of digging my heels in and resisting change. This is resisting change for the sake of change - change proposed from a position of ignorance - change proposed with no clear understanding of the benefits to be realised.
> 
> There are many things that need to be developed and improved in the public sector - wiping out established and successful organisations to sate a media-driven attack on quangos is not a sensible strategy.



Can you suggest changes that should be made?


----------



## Purple

VOR said:


> I am going to take Complainer at face value and believe him on that.



You are right, I shouldn't have said that. If I wasn't on Complainers ignore list I'd apologise to him directly.


----------



## Latrade

Complainer said:


> Moving three units together into one won't necessarily save money. Sometimes it does, sometimes it don't. It depends hugely on the existing lease conditions, the locations of the buildings, the age of the buildings etc. As it happens, OPW has been doing this stuff for years. Check out Government Offices, The Glen, in Waterford, where Revenue, Dept Ag and HSA all share an existing building. You now want to split these up, with Revenue moving to a Dept Finance building, Ag moving to an Ag building and HSA moving to an Environment building. It makes no sense.


 
I'd actually agree in the examples. However, I wouldn't say it is a universal situation across the entire PS/CS. There will always be synergies tha can be integrated without loss of identity or roll.



Complainer said:


> Why do you think that AIB run Goodbody's as a seperate operation? Why do Irish Life run ILIM as a seperate operation? Why do multinationals like Johnson & Johnson run Janssen Pharma as a seperate operation?
> 
> Integration is not a panacea solution, and may well cause serious damage.


 
On those, the main reason is that the other company already had an identity and it doesn't always pay to remove that identity if it is a strong brand. It does in some cases, but not in all. However, there will be synergies and shared services that are integrated, but i see the point.

However, in some case it does, take Aviva and how they have "rebranded" several key and long standing insurance companies under the one brand. The point is it can be done and pays to be done in some areas.


----------



## Caveat

Complainer said:


> *There are many things that need to be developed and improved in the* *public sector* - wiping out established and successful organisations to sate a media-driven attack on quangos is not a sensible strategy.


 
Complainer, I seem to recall you saying things like this on a number of occasions but I don't remember you ever expanding on it (maybe I'm mistaken)  

Could you give us all an idea of the many things that need improvement in the public sector in your view?


----------



## VOR

Complainer said:


> I wasn't aware of this - what law are you referring to?


 

It is covered under conflict of interest and insider trading legislation such as _Section 33AK of the Central Bank and Financial Services Authority of Ireland Act, 2003, _Part V of the Companies Act, 1990 and European Council Directive 89/592/EEC
By keeping a separate operation the bank enforces a Chinese walls policy to ensure that there are effective barriers in place to prevent the passing of confidential information. Well that's the theory anyway...


----------



## shnaek

Sunny said:


> Why couldn't the department of health have done exactly the same thing themselves?


Why do we even have a department of health when we have the HSE?

(Though each appear to be equally mediocre.)


----------



## galleyslave

shnaek said:


> Why do we even have a department of health when we have the HSE?
> 
> (Though each appear to be equally mediocre.)


we have a lot more than those 2

have a look here
http://www.gov.ie/en/sites/health/


----------



## VOR

Purple said:


> If I wasn't on Complainers ignore list I'd apologise to him directly.


 
Look on the bright side, he is talking about me being fired for a lousy job. Maybe he's not ignoring your posts afterall?


----------



## Complainer

galleyslave said:


> for jaysus sake complainer - if you have multiple agencies doing the same job, there's clearly scope to amalgamate them and save money on duplication - case in point - the IDA and shannon development. same function, 2 agencies. now if we could only achieve the holy grail of downsizing the redundant employees of such a merger we'd be a lot better off.


Indeed, there are some cases where there may be overlap and duplication, as per Shannon Dev & IDA. I know SFA about Shannon Dev & IDA. I'm sure there is an argument there about the benefits of regional focus, but I have no idea of the validity of this arguement. Likewise, the people who come out with simplistic solutions know SFA about what is happening in these situations. They really should restrict themselves to talking about those subjects that they know a little bit about. 



galleyslave said:


> Aside from the 'obvious syngergies' associated with closing one of them such as duplication of printed materials, duplication of websites, translation of materials etc etc.


So instead of two medium-sized annual reports, you get one big annual report. And instead of two medium-sized websites, you get one big website, saving what - the cost of one domain registration? The savings available on these admin things are incidental - integration only makes sense where there are synergies available around the core functions of the organisations.



Latrade said:


> I'd actually agree in the examples. However, I wouldn't say it is a universal situation across the entire PS/CS. There will always be synergies tha can be integrated without loss of identity or roll.


I'm sure there are some cases like this, and I'm sure that they are already under consideration and review. The public sector does not need random posters on bulletin boards to tell it how to optimise its office space. It has professionals in place doing just that already.



shnaek said:


> Why do we even have a department of health when we have the HSE?


Because (in very broad terms), the Dept deals with policy and the HSE deals with implementation.




Sunny said:


> Why couldn't the department of health have done exactly the same thing themselves? Why was a new body set up?


Because the Dept of Health did not have a team of experts in Tobacco Control available to put a dedicated focus on this particular issue over a number of years.



Sunny said:


> Are we saying that everytime we want to introduce a new policy, we need to set up a new body to implement it.


Yes, that's it - you've got it in one. 

The reality is that in some cases, it makes sense to set up a new body. In some cases, it doesn't. IMHO, the removal of smoke from workplaces is well worth the small price involved in setting up the new organisation.



Caveat said:


> Complainer, I seem to recall you saying things like this on a number of occasions but I don't remember you ever expanding on it (maybe I'm mistaken)
> 
> Could you give us all an idea of the many things that need improvement in the public sector in your view?


No, I won't. The atmosphere here on AAM is overwhelmingly and consistently negative towards public services. Here we have posters coming out with absolute rubbish about 'useless quangos and politically connected staff' with nothing to back it up, and these claims are left unchallenged and untested, except by the few stubborn fools like myself who try to bring some reality to the debate. I'll sow my seeds for improvement in fertile ground, not in the dry, barren fields of AAM.


----------



## galleyslave

Complainer said:


> And instead of two medium-sized websites, you get one big website, saving what - the cost of one domain registration?


thats just silly.theres a lot more to a website than a domain registration and to dismiss them as incremental is crazy. 2 sets of IT workers on technical grade 4's at least (thats 40k min each) working on 2 websites saying broadly the same thing. 2 lots of servers, 2 lots of software licenses, 2 lots of everything else associated with a website

hmmm..."They really should restrict themselves to talking about those subjects that they know a little bit about."


----------



## Sunny

Complainer said:


> Because the Dept of Health did not have a team of experts in Tobacco Control available to put a dedicated focus on this particular issue over a number of years.
> 
> 
> .


 
And these people are experts in tobacco control??

[broken link removed]

And by the way I am not doubting their good intentions or hard work.


----------



## Complainer

Sunny said:


> And these people are experts in tobacco control??
> 
> [broken link removed]



Well, I'd say they know a bit more about it than you or me, but they are the board members who meet once a month to set and direct the strategy. The real experts are the staff.



galleyslave said:


> thats just silly.theres a lot more to a website than a domain registration and to dismiss them as incremental is crazy. 2 sets of IT workers on technical grade 4's at least (thats 40k min each) working on 2 websites saying broadly the same thing. 2 lots of servers, 2 lots of software licenses, 2 lots of everything else associated with a website
> 
> hmmm..."They really should restrict themselves to talking about those subjects that they know a little bit about."



No public body has web servers. Public bodies (like most organisations) buy hosting services from hosting providers. These may well be using shared services hosting via CMOD, or LGCSB or Dept Justice already, so the benefits available will be minimal. Few small to medium public bodies have any dedicated IT staff, let alone dedicated webmasters. For those who have dedicated webmasters, the amount of content going on the website isn't going to change, so the amount of work involved is largely the same. You might manage to make some saving on software licencing, provided you take on the extra work of converting all the content from one system to the other - so really, where is the saving.


----------



## Sunny

Complainer said:


> Well, I'd say they know a bit more about it than you or me, but they are the board members who meet once a month to set and direct the strategy. The real experts are the staff.
> 
> 
> 
> .


 
 But if the real experts are the staff, why doesn't the Department of Health hire them directly to implement the policy instead in setting up an whole new agency with a seperate board and all the related expenses and administration.


----------



## Howitzer

Complainer said:


> No, I won't. The atmosphere here on AAM is overwhelmingly and consistently negative towards public services. Here we have posters coming out with absolute rubbish about 'useless quangos and politically connected staff' with nothing to back it up, and these claims are left unchallenged and untested, except by the few stubborn fools like myself who try to bring some reality to the debate. I'll sow my seeds for improvement in fertile ground, not in the dry, barren fields of AAM.


Hold on a second there sunshine. You asked for examples - examples were given. Even when you narrowed the criteria further examples were still  found. It's not my job to jump every time you push a button. 

Many of the points raised have been self evident and WELL documented. If you choose to ignore them that's your perogative but don't go mouthing off that black is white. 

Maybe you've lived in a hole all your life, with your eyes closed sticking berries up your nose but these things are obvious to anyone with eyes to see.


----------



## galleyslave

Complainer said:


> No public body has web servers. Public bodies (like most organisations) buy hosting services from hosting providers. These may well be using shared services hosting via CMOD, or LGCSB or Dept Justice already, so the benefits available will be minimal. Few small to medium public bodies have any dedicated IT staff, let alone dedicated webmasters. For those who have dedicated webmasters, the amount of content going on the website isn't going to change, so the amount of work involved is largely the same. You might manage to make some saving on software licencing, provided you take on the extra work of converting all the content from one system to the other - so really, where is the saving.


so if they don't have them, they have to be bought and paid for, so the argument boils down to the same issue - costs. I've come to the conclusion you are arguing for the sake of it and have a great line in distorting the issue.... so, enough


----------



## Complainer

Howitzer said:


> Hold on a second there sunshine. You asked for examples - examples were given. Even when you narrowed the criteria further examples were still  found. It's not my job to jump every time you push a button.
> 
> Many of the points raised have been self evident and WELL documented. If you choose to ignore them that's your perogative but don't go mouthing off that black is white.
> 
> Maybe you've lived in a hole all your life, with your eyes closed sticking berries up your nose but these things are obvious to anyone with eyes to see.


Nice. Got any specifics there to go with that rant, or is it just more of the same? 

The only half-decent examples given on this thread are;

1) 1 FAS employee with FF connections (and I'd be quite happy to fire that guy anyway, regardless of his connections)
2) IDA/Shannon Dev - possibility of some savings through merger, though no-one really knows enough to have a real idea of what's going on. 



galleyslave said:


> so if they don't have them, they have to be bought and paid for, so the argument boils down to the same issue -


The issue is that where you have two parties buying hosted bandwidth, you don't achieve savings by merging. The bandwidth will be the same before and after the merger, by and large, because you have the same website content and the same customers. You have one big website instead of two medium ones, and the bandwidth will be the same.



galleyslave said:


> I've come to the conclusion you are arguing for the sake of it and have a great line in distorting the issue.... so, enough


Sorry that the facts get in the way of your grand master plan. They are so inconvenient.


----------



## shnaek

Complainer said:


> Because (in very broad terms), the Dept deals with policy and the HSE deals with implementation.



Which is something that sounds good but evidently isn't working at all. Like "Irish Democracy"! Maybe we should just throw our hands up and hand over the running of the country to the Germans...


----------



## galleyslave

bah, we'd spend all our day sorting our rubbish and waiting at the traffic lights


----------



## shnaek

But we'd also be brewing some more great beers


----------



## galleyslave

but we'd have some weird customs - I don't think I could hack seeing naked irish bodies on the phoenix park on a sunny day for instance


----------



## Complainer

shnaek said:


> Which is something that sounds good but evidently isn't working at all.


Absolutely agree - the HSE is completely dysfunctional. However, that doesn't mean that the solution is to disband the HSE and take everyone back into Dept Health. That is one of many possible solutions, but I'm amazed and amused at the armchair experts here on AAM who are prepared to pontificate about simplistic solutions.

My own personal view is that another structural change (such is disbanding the HSE) will result in focus on structure rather than services. But I don't claim to be the world's leading expert on structuring of health services.


----------



## Sunny

Sitting there defending everything  without offering any constructive ideas of your own isn't much better .......


----------



## VOR

Complainer said:


> That is one of many possible solutions, but I'm amazed and amused at the armchair experts here on AAM who are prepared to pontificate about simplistic solutions.


 
Complainer, we need your thoughts over here
[broken link removed]

Private Sector free zone. I'm just here to listen (for once)


----------



## shnaek

Complainer said:


> Absolutely agree - the HSE is completely dysfunctional. However, that doesn't mean that the solution is to disband the HSE and take everyone back into Dept Health. That is one of many possible solutions, but I'm amazed and amused at the armchair experts here on AAM who are prepared to pontificate about simplistic solutions.
> 
> My own personal view is that another structural change (such is disbanding the HSE) will result in focus on structure rather than services. But I don't claim to be the world's leading expert on structuring of health services.



True. A mess was made changing to the HSE from the health boards. No point in repeating that. What is frustrating is nearly 100 years of independence and it's farther away from a good health service that we're getting!


----------



## DonDub

liaconn said:


> Mods, any chance you could change the title of this thread to 'yet another excuse to bash the public service'.


 
I don't want to bash public servants - I blame our political class for the mess we are in. For decades, they have failed to properly manage or modernise the structures of this state. It was inevitable therefore that the state sector would end up in a mess i.e. overmanned, poorly managed, inefficient and too expensive.
Many of the 'sins' in the public sector have featured in private sector organisations - however, private businesses will go bust if they fail to live within their means. So, those that change and adapt (often through painful means) have a reasonable chance of survival. Those that consistently make poor decisions typically hit the wall.
It is clear that the public sector in Ireland has no in-built controls - poor political, managerial, employee decisions have no real consequences. Overlay unions who are free to argue issues to death, and you have a recipe for disaster.
So, while individual public servants are not to 'blame', and it would be great for the politicians to get what they deserve, it is unreasonable and immoral to expect private sector workers to pay more to fund a state sector that is bloated, inefficient and unaffordable. Why for example should a worker with no pension, who is exposed to forced redundancy, pay extra taxes to protect employees who are paid more, who have fantastic pensions, and who are not exposed to forced redundancy.
This is not PS bashing, its reality......


----------



## Purple

DonDub said:


> I don't want to bash public servants - I blame our political class for the mess we are in. For decades, they have failed to properly manage or modernise the structures of this state. It was inevitable therefore that the state sector would end up in a mess i.e. overmanned, poorly managed, inefficient and too expensive.
> Many of the 'sins' in the public sector have featured in private sector organisations - however, private businesses will go bust if they fail to live within their means. So, those that change and adapt (often through painful means) have a reasonable chance of survival. Those that consistently make poor decisions typically hit the wall.
> It is clear that the public sector in Ireland has no in-built controls - poor political, managerial, employee decisions have no real consequences. Overlay unions who are free to argue issues to death, and you have a recipe for recipe for disaster.
> So, while individual public servants are not to 'blame', and it would be great for the politicians to get what they deserve, it is unreasonable and immoral to expect private sector workers to pay more to fund a state sector that is bloated, inefficient and unaffordable. Why for example should a worker with no pension, who is exposed to forced redundancy, pay extra taxes to protect employees who are paid more, who have fantastic pensions, and who are not exposed to forced redundancy.
> This is not PS bashing, its reality......



Excellent post.


----------



## Complainer

DonDub said:


> overmanned, poorly managed, inefficient and too expensive....the public sector in Ireland has no in-built controls - poor political, managerial, employee decisions have no real consequences. ....a state sector that is bloated, inefficient and unaffordable.


I don't suppose there is any chance of any evidence/backup/comparitive data/explanation for any of these claims? Is that too much to expect?


----------



## S.L.F

Complainer said:


> I don't suppose there is any chance of any evidence/backup/comparitive data/explanation for any of these claims? Is that too much to expect?


 
Complainer you have to realise he doesn't need evidence, he 'knows' besides he read it in the indo so it must be true.


----------



## shnaek

Complainer said:


> I don't suppose there is any chance of any evidence/backup/comparitive data/explanation for any of these claims? Is that too much to expect?



Where is the evidence/backup/comparitive data/explanation to prove the contrary? In the health service?


----------



## DonDub

Complainer said:


> I don't suppose there is any chance of any evidence/backup/comparitive data/explanation for any of these claims? Is that too much to expect?


 
OK


Old school pal in mid management role in PS - over the years, often mentioned that he uses his 'sick' days as holidays
Friend works in PS, manages small team, needed to upgrade his hardware/software - took time to identify optimal solution. Sought approval from boss to spend €15k. Request took months to process - was told eventually that a better solution had been identified.Months later, it arrived, cost €80K. Friend says that it is not fit for purpose, and will have to replaced
I had building work carried out a while back, needed one of utility meters moved - builder said he would do whole job for €100. I contacted utility for approval - they said that only they could move, once builder had done the prep work - at cost of €550 euro. It took the three of them who turned up 20 mins to move - as most of the real work had been done by the builder
One of my family members was in A&E last year - after several hours was seen by nurse - then doctor. Blood samples sent to lab for analysis - doc said it would take 3 hours for results, as only one lab tech on duty - apparently union had (for years) objected to providing adequate shift cover at weekends
My wife is ex PS. I could fill a book with the mad goings-on she encountered - but here is just is one - colleagues insisted on being provided with winter clothing (boots, hat, jacket etc) so that they could brave the terrible winter weather as they moved between two adjacent buildings - joined by a covered walk-way
Friend is a business consultant, works internationally - tells me that the most inefficient utility provider he has encountered is the ESB, and that they are hugely over-paid when compared to international (efficient) peers
Met a senior PS manger at a conference a while back - told me that she had joined PS for a break, as pressure in business meant that it was hard to juggle work and family. Also mentioned that she had been involved in closing an office of the state agency she worked for, and moving the affected staff to another office, 20 mins away. Union got involved, insisted that bus must be provided to transport staff from/to old office, within office hours ........ the bus was provided
Businesses in the private sector that permitted this sort of behaviour would go bust. In the PS, there are no consequences for greed, incompetence,bad management, in fact it is often rewarded.........it has to stop.....WE CANNOT AFFORD IT ANY LONGER.........


----------



## S.L.F

DonDub said:


> Old school pal in mid management role in PS - over the years, often mentioned that he uses his 'sick' days as holidays


 
This old turkey has been hashed to death here on AAM, it's always the same my mate said or I heard down in the pub or I read it in the indo.

Abuses occur but you can tarnish the entire PS because of your 'mate'.



DonDub said:


> Friend works in PS, manages small team, needed to upgrade his hardware/software - took time to identify optimal solution. Sought approval from boss to spend €15k. Request took months to process - was told eventually that a better solution had been identified.Months later, it arrived, cost €80K. Friend says that it is not fit for purpose, and will have to replaced


 
Do you want to give more specifics?



DonDub said:


> I had building work carried out a while back, needed one of utility meters moved - builder said he would do whole job for €100. I contacted utility for approval - they said that only they could move, once builder had done the prep work - at cost of €550 euro. It took the three of them who turned up 20 mins to move - as most of the real work had been done by the builder


 
Which bunch are you on about now?



DonDub said:


> One of my family members was in A&E last year - after several hours was seen by nurse - then doctor. Blood samples sent to lab for analysis - doc said it would take 3 hours for results, as only one lab tech on duty - apparently union had (for years) objected to providing adequate shift cover at weekends


 
Send a letter to Mary Harney she's the one who has been responsible for a huge range of cut-backs in the hospitals.



DonDub said:


> My wife is ex PS. I could fill a book with the mad goings-on she encountered - but here is just is one - colleagues insisted on being provided with winter clothing (boots, hat, jacket etc) so that they could brave the terrible winter weather as they moved between two adjacent buildings - joined by a covered walk-way


 
Name of dept or agency???



DonDub said:


> Friend is a business consultant, works internationally - tells me that the most inefficient utility provider he has encountered is the ESB, and that they are hugely over-paid when compared to international (efficient) peers


 
He's probably been reading the indo.



DonDub said:


> Met a senior PS manger at a conference a while back - told me that she had joined PS for a break, as pressure in business meant that it was hard to juggle work and family. Also mentioned that she had been involved in closing an office of the state agency she worked for, and moving the affected staff to another office, 20 mins away. Union got involved, insisted that bus must be provided to transport staff from/to old office, within office hours ........ the bus was provided


 
I know a good few people who work in the PS can you give me the details for what that woman does because I'm sure they would love the same job.



DonDub said:


> In the PS, there are no consequences for greed, incompetence,bad management, in fact it is often rewarded.....


 
Don't suppose you can give any named people who have done these things?


----------



## galleyslave

"Send a letter to Mary Harney she's the one who has been responsible for a huge range of cut-backs in the hospitals." 

I did in the past - nothing heard. Short version - I was returning crutches to the Mercy Hospital in Cork and was told to keep them. Enquiring why, I was told health and safety - could be infected etc. Though this was mad, phoned my sister who is a nurse in Dublin - she said they always take them back. So contacted Mary, no reply, no acknowledgement and to this day I dunno if the Mercy take back crutches.

So, waste in the public sector - nothing surprises me


----------



## galleyslave

"Originally Posted by DonDub  
In the PS, there are no consequences for greed, incompetence,bad management, in fact it is often rewarded.....

Don't suppose you can give any named people who have done these things?"
the head of FAS perhaps?


----------



## z107

What does DonDub have to gain by making this stuff up, as is implied? DonDub must have a very good imagination.

I would suspect that the anecdotes listed do not state names because it could get certain people into trouble.


----------



## DonDub

S.L.F said:


> This old turkey has been hashed to death here on AAM, it's always the same my mate said or I heard down in the pub or I read it in the indo.
> 
> Abuses occur but you can tarnish the entire PS because of your 'mate'.
> 
> 
> 
> Do you want to give more specifics?
> 
> 
> 
> Which bunch are you on about now?
> 
> 
> 
> Send a letter to Mary Harney she's the one who has been responsible for a huge range of cut-backs in the hospitals.
> 
> 
> 
> Name of dept or agency???
> 
> 
> 
> He's probably been reading the indo.
> 
> 
> 
> I know a good few people who work in the PS can you give me the details for what that woman does because I'm sure they would love the same job.
> 
> 
> 
> Don't suppose you can give any named people who have done these things?


 
Yeah, like I made it all up....and sure, I will name people on a public forum.
I could have listed another 50 real examples, like anyone else who has dealt with the PS.
No one in the real world would name an individual on an internet forum,
you need to get real!


----------



## galleyslave

dondub, don't you realise that this is a court of law and you need a chain of evidence sufficient to sway a high court judge before you can critique the PS here!


----------



## S.L.F

galleyslave said:


> dondub, don't you realise that this is a court of law and you need a chain of evidence sufficient to sway a high court judge before you can critique the PS here!


 
Since the PS is an organisation of 350,000 people you are bound to get bad stories coming from it.

How about some stories about the private sector

I used to know a guy who would steal everything he could from his job then when he was made redundant he started off his own business using all the stolen parts he aquired over the years.

I know a guy who would spend his entire day watching utube links in work.

I know a bunch of *estate agents* who don't bother to answer the phone because they spend their day playing computer games.

I know of a guy who point blank refuses to employ foreigners because he hates them.

A friend of mine was working in catering and they had a girl who was illegal (being paid cash) and when she became pregnant she was fired.

I know of a chipper that used to make it's burgers out of dog food (lots of tins outside every bin day but no dog).

I have heard of a few people here in Ireland who stiff people on a regular basis they promise to do the work get a deposit and then vanish, one particular woman lost 10,000 CASH.

All of the things I have told you are true does that make private sector workers lazy, heartless, shiftless, bigotted, thieves, well hell YES .

*Edit that should read mortgage brokers not estate agents*


----------



## Complainer

DonDub said:


> OK
> 
> 
> Old school pal in mid management role in PS - over the years, often mentioned that he uses his 'sick' days as holidays
> Friend works in PS, manages small team, needed to upgrade his hardware/software - took time to identify optimal solution. Sought approval from boss to spend €15k. Request took months to process - was told eventually that a better solution had been identified.Months later, it arrived, cost €80K. Friend says that it is not fit for purpose, and will have to replaced
> I had building work carried out a while back, needed one of utility meters moved - builder said he would do whole job for €100. I contacted utility for approval - they said that only they could move, once builder had done the prep work - at cost of €550 euro. It took the three of them who turned up 20 mins to move - as most of the real work had been done by the builder
> One of my family members was in A&E last year - after several hours was seen by nurse - then doctor. Blood samples sent to lab for analysis - doc said it would take 3 hours for results, as only one lab tech on duty - apparently union had (for years) objected to providing adequate shift cover at weekends
> My wife is ex PS. I could fill a book with the mad goings-on she encountered - but here is just is one - colleagues insisted on being provided with winter clothing (boots, hat, jacket etc) so that they could brave the terrible winter weather as they moved between two adjacent buildings - joined by a covered walk-way
> Friend is a business consultant, works internationally - tells me that the most inefficient utility provider he has encountered is the ESB, and that they are hugely over-paid when compared to international (efficient) peers
> Met a senior PS manger at a conference a while back - told me that she had joined PS for a break, as pressure in business meant that it was hard to juggle work and family. Also mentioned that she had been involved in closing an office of the state agency she worked for, and moving the affected staff to another office, 20 mins away. Union got involved, insisted that bus must be provided to transport staff from/to old office, within office hours ........ the bus was provided


All very interesting stuff, and probably a grain of truth behind some or all of it. It would be particularly helpful if you could be more specific about the bits that don't expose any individual. Where was the adjacent buildings with the covered walkway where the staff got the  protective clothing? Where were the two offices 20 minutes apart with the bus provided? In which hospital did the union object to providing extra lab cover at the weekend? Which utility (come on, there is only two of them) charged €550 for their meter?

But just for comparison, here's my stories from my 25 year career in the private sector (no nomes to protect my confidentiality);

- the large multinational with the 'zombie' project, one that couldn't be killed off - to develop an in-house IT system for one of the lines of business. It reared up three times in my six years, had over $1m spent on it each time, and then faded away with no deliverables. No execs fired or sanctioned, and several well promoted and bonused to oblivion to reward all their hard work
- the senior IT manager of a major Irish company whose staff used to book him for every conference/seminar/training course they could find, to minimise the damage that he would do to the business. He was generally accepted by all a bit of a dope, who got to where he was through family connections. He stayed in the role to retirement, despite a series of fairly major screw-ups
- the multi-national where you couldn't get to see the MD or the FD after lunch, because they would both be pi$$ed, generally together, but sometimes separately, before they would drive off home in their company Mercs around 4pm. The FD couldn't keep a secretary for more than 3 months due to his wandering hands. Both retired comfortably, no sanction, and not that long ago (late 90's)
- the senior manager in a large multinational who would regularly pull out of a meeting at short notice because he was 'maxed out', and within 20 minutes was mooching round the open plan looking for somebody to accompany him for a coffee. He got promoted.
- the large consultancy that introduced a bonus system based on personal goals, and not team goals, despite that fact that 90% of projects were team-based. The place exploded over the next 12 months as staff beat each other up to achieve their personal goals with no regard for the team or the project. Several large projects slipped substantially, one project collapsed, key team members left in frustration. The 'visionaries' of the new bonus system stayed, and 1 was promoted.
- the large multi-national that stored filing cabinets in the fire-escape stair landings because they had 'no room' elsewhere, and ignored several complaints about this life-threatening issue.

I'm sure I could come up with a few more if I keep digging, but don't just rely on me. Look around on this site and find the stories of how Mercer pensions managers have been screwing up pensioners for several years now, with no improvement or sanction. Look at the damage all the banks, but Anglo and INBS in particular have done to their shareholders, and to the economy as a whole. Where is that sanction for Seanie Fitz and Michael €27m pension Fingleton? Look at the kinds of screwups reported on this site regularly with NTL, with Ryanair, with MBNA etc.

There is no doubt that the public sector screws up, and sometimes it screws up bigtime (FAS, PPARS, eVoting etc). Just as the private sector screws up, though of course most of the private sector screw-ups are dealt with nice and quietly internally, with no fuss and no media, so we just don't get to hear about it.

What I was really hoping for when I asked for some evidence was not a few anecdotal stories, which are pretty worthless. Given the extent to which the public sector has been examined with many fine toothcombs over recent years, is it unreasonable to think that these  apparently huge, glaring problems would have come out.


----------



## becky

Find it hard to believe unions have a problem with more lab staff at night as they get on call rates plus time off. It would mean less staff available during the earlier part of the day which is probably the issue.


----------



## Lex Foutish

umop3p!sdn said:


> What does DonDub have to gain by making this stuff up, as is implied? DonDub must have a very good imagination.
> 
> I would suspect that the anecdotes listed do not state names because it could get certain people into trouble.


 
What has DonDub have to gain by making this stuff up? 

Funny you should ask but I'm sure we'd all like to know.

Never let the facts get in the way of a dig at the Public Service might help you find the answer. 

Last week he claimed that the recent pension levy was teachers' first ever contribution towards their pension...........

http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showthread.php?p=965293#post965293


Maybe his Private Sector friends told him that also.


----------



## Firehead

DonDub said:


> OK
> 
> 
> Old school pal in mid management role in PS - over the years, often mentioned that he uses his 'sick' days as holidays
> Friend works in PS, manages small team, needed to upgrade his hardware/software - took time to identify optimal solution. Sought approval from boss to spend €15k. Request took months to process - was told eventually that a better solution had been identified.Months later, it arrived, cost €80K. Friend says that it is not fit for purpose, and will have to replaced
> I had building work carried out a while back, needed one of utility meters moved - builder said he would do whole job for €100. I contacted utility for approval - they said that only they could move, once builder had done the prep work - at cost of €550 euro. It took the three of them who turned up 20 mins to move - as most of the real work had been done by the builder
> One of my family members was in A&E last year - after several hours was seen by nurse - then doctor. Blood samples sent to lab for analysis - doc said it would take 3 hours for results, as only one lab tech on duty - apparently union had (for years) objected to providing adequate shift cover at weekends
> My wife is ex PS. I could fill a book with the mad goings-on she encountered - but here is just is one - colleagues insisted on being provided with winter clothing (boots, hat, jacket etc) so that they could brave the terrible winter weather as they moved between two adjacent buildings - joined by a covered walk-way
> Friend is a business consultant, works internationally - tells me that the most inefficient utility provider he has encountered is the ESB, and that they are hugely over-paid when compared to international (efficient) peers
> Met a senior PS manger at a conference a while back - told me that she had joined PS for a break, as pressure in business meant that it was hard to juggle work and family. Also mentioned that she had been involved in closing an office of the state agency she worked for, and moving the affected staff to another office, 20 mins away. Union got involved, insisted that bus must be provided to transport staff from/to old office, within office hours ........ the bus was provided
> Businesses in the private sector that permitted this sort of behaviour would go bust. In the PS, there are no consequences for greed, incompetence,bad management, in fact it is often rewarded.........it has to stop.....WE CANNOT AFFORD IT ANY LONGER.........


----------



## Firehead

Ah in all fairness we could all quote these urban legends, what about all the public servants dealing with the floods around the country over the past week?


----------



## Lex Foutish

Firehead said:


> Ah in all fairness we could all quote these urban legends, what about all the public servants dealing with the floods around the country over the past week?


 
Huh!!! Lazy useless gits!!!

If they were any good and had been doing their job properly, they would have seen the bad weather and floods coming and would have been putting anti flood measures in place over the duration of the Celtic Tiger, instead of sitting on their backsides, doing damn all except taking extended coffee breaks, drawing wages for nothing, building up pension credit at no cost to themselves and single handedly being totally responsible for all of our current economic woes.

They should all hang their heads in shame!


----------



## DonDub

S.L.F said:


> Since the PS is an organisation of 350,000 people you are bound to get bad stories coming from it.
> 
> How about some stories about the private sector
> 
> I used to know a guy who would steal everything he could from his job then when he was made redundant he started off his own business using all the stolen parts he aquired over the years.
> 
> I know a guy who would spend his entire day watching utube links in work.
> 
> I know a bunch of estate agents who don't bother to answer the phone because they spend their day playing computer games.
> 
> I know of a guy who point blank refuses to employ foreigners because he hates them.
> 
> A friend of mine was working in catering and they had a girl who was illegal (being paid cash) and when she became pregnant she was fired.
> 
> I know of a chipper that used to make it's burgers out of dog food (lots of tins outside every bin day but no dog).
> 
> I have heard of a few people here in Ireland who stiff people on a regular basis they promise to do the work get a deposit and then vanish, one particular woman lost 10,000 CASH.
> 
> All of the things I have told you are true does that make private sector workers lazy, heartless, shiftless, bigotted, thieves, well hell YES .


 
I won't argue with any of this, in fact I'm sure there are plenty of worse examples - my point is that the private sector 'self corrects' over time - bad management, unreasonable employees etc will eventually cause a business to hit a crisis point, and ultimately failure if they dont take corrective action.
Regarding the PS pensions - of course some PS employess were already contributing towards their pensions pre levy - however, their contributions didn't, and don't come within an asses roar of paying for the pensions offered.
All of the PS examples I gave are real - the utility was Bord Gais, I will not give any more details as they might compromise individuals.
By the way, FAS had a budget of 1 billion, when we had virtually full employment - and yes the top brass acted disgracefully (including the union reps on the board), but get real - it is obvious that much of that money was wasted employing people in non-jobs.
Apart from some contract staff, not one permanent PS has been made redundant against their will - hundreds of thousands of private sector works have suffered this faith.
Why the hell should one sector of society be immune from the full effects of the recession - and to cap it all - then complain when asked to take some pain - which would leave them in still a privilaged position.
If this were the Titanic, the PS would argue that the lifeboats should be reserved for them - because, well, just because..
This country is baldly governed, badly managed, and is broke. The private sector is going through painful adjustments, and their is more to come.
The PS is inefficient,too large, too costly, and is unaffordable.....thats just a fact.....most of the people arguing to the contrary are 'whistling past the graveyard'.......


----------



## Lex Foutish

DonDub said:


> I won't argue with any of this, in fact I'm sure there are plenty of worse examples - my point is that the private sector 'self corrects' over time - bad management, unreasonable employees etc will eventually cause a business to hit a crisis point, and ultimately failure if they dont take corrective action.
> Regarding the PS pensions - of course some PS employess were already contributing towards their pensions pre levy - however, their contributions didn't, and don't come within an asses roar of paying for the pensions offered.
> All of the PS examples I gave are real - the utility was Bord Gais, I will not give any more details as they might compromise individuals.
> By the way, FAS had a budget of 1 billion, when we had virtually full employment - and yes the top brass acted disgracefully (including the union reps on the board), but get real - it is obvious that much of that money was wasted employing people in non-jobs.
> Apart from some contract staff, not one permanent PS has been made redundant against their will - hundreds of thousands of private sector works have suffered this faith.
> Why the hell should one sector of society be immune from the full effects of the recession - and to cap it all - then complain when asked to take some pain - which would leave them in still a privilaged position.
> If this were the Titanic, the PS would argue that the lifeboats should be reserved for them - because, well, just because..
> This country is *baldly* governed, badly managed, and is broke. The private sector is going through painful adjustments, and their is more to come.
> The PS is inefficient,too large, too costly, and is unaffordable.....thats just a fact.....most of the people arguing to the contrary are 'whistling past the graveyard'.......


 
Don, you make a few fair points. 

But the Public Service pensions only seems to have become a massive issue since the huge pensions that *some* non PS workers were achieving, and could contribute large sums of spare cash to with large tax relief, were greatly affected when the bottom fell out of the financial market. 

I often think there's a bit of a "my pension has been decimated and I'm damned if yours isn't going to be now as well, if I have anything to do with it!" attitude from many. 

P.S.


I hope *BaldyMan* doesn't take offence to how you think he's running the country! (Second last line above)


----------



## S.L.F

DonDub said:


> I won't argue with any of this, in fact I'm sure there are plenty of worse examples - my point is that the private sector 'self corrects' over time - bad management, unreasonable employees etc will eventually cause a business to hit a crisis point, and ultimately failure if they dont take corrective action.


 
You are correct about that but the thing you forget which most people do is that it is the govt that gives the direction that the public service is to go in.

When ever they made a new ombudsman they had to employ more staff to run it, these things don't run themselves.

Remember the decentralisation thing that has cost a billion who thought that turkey up and the crazy timescale.



DonDub said:


> Regarding the PS pensions - of course some PS employess were already contributing towards their pensions pre levy - however, their contributions didn't, and don't come within an asses roar of paying for the pensions offered.


 
This is what they signed up to when they joined the PS, the pension is only superduper if you are in the PS for a full 40 years if you are only in the PS for 39 years you don't get 39/40 of a pension you get less than that.

Any professionals would only be going into the PS when they are between 25 and 30 so they will be hard pressed to get the full 40 years.

You can buy extra years but it is very expensive.



DonDub said:


> All of the PS examples I gave are real


 
I'm not doubting what you say but you have to understand the PS is an enormous organisation, of course you are going to get horror stories.

But really and truly, don't you have anything good to say about the people who work their guts out in the PS, because if you don't, then you don't have a balanced view there for as far as I'm concerned you are just another PS basher.



DonDub said:


> By the way, FAS had a budget of 1 billion, when we had virtually full employment - and yes the top brass acted disgracefully (including the union reps on the board), but get real - it is obvious that much of that money was wasted employing people in non-jobs.


 
I don't know enough about FAS to answer questions about it, having read some of the stuff in the papers it would seem there was some very funny goings on and if there was truth to any of them the Garda should be involved.

I would suspect our dear govt would be the ones who would stop any investigation by the garda.



DonDub said:


> Apart from some contract staff, not one permanent PS has been made redundant against their will - hundreds of thousands of private sector works have suffered this faith.
> Why the hell should one sector of society be immune from the full effects of the recession - and to cap it all - then complain when asked to take some pain - which would leave them in still a privilaged position.
> If this were the Titanic, the PS would argue that the lifeboats should be reserved for them - because, well, just because..


 
Metaphors I love metaphors and the Titanic is a great example.

The captain (the govt) steers the Titanic (Ireland in case you weren't paying attention) through waters at full speed, in spite of iceberg (financial troubles) warnings then when it hits the iceberg the captain refuses to believe it will sink (FF and the soft landing) then when it is sinking the only ones who make it out are the ones who are already seriously wealthy.

Most of the crew died, a few very wealthy individuals had the moral courage to die with the lower classes but they were few and far between.

Yeah the Titanic is a great example...



DonDub said:


> This country is baldly governed, badly managed, and is broke. The private sector is going through painful adjustments, and their is more to come.


 
Badly goverened-agreed

Badly managed-I'm not so sure about

Broke-due to the most appalling decisions by any govt

According to a poll in The Irish Times 70% of people queried have not lost their jobs nor have had wage cuts in fact the national pay agreement has been honoured by a whole load of companies including the ESB 



DonDub said:


> The PS is inefficient,too large, too costly, and is unaffordable.....thats just a fact.....


 
It is not a fact as far as I'm concerned.



DonDub said:


> most of the people arguing to the contrary are 'whistling past the graveyard'.......


 
This country is not dead yet if the govt has it's way and destroys the moral of the PS we will be in even more trouble.


----------



## Birroc

Firehead said:


> Ah in all fairness we could all quote these urban legends, what about all the public servants dealing with the floods around the country over the past week?


 
Yes but those public sector workers will do alright with expenses/mileage/time-off. I used to work in public service but stupidly left - my ex-colleagues, all office workers were ringing me telling me they were sent home last week due to floods (Galway) and told not to come in the next day either - many of them were not affected by the flooding in any way. And don't start me on the sick leave - PS where I worked was a complete doss-house - not all dept/councils are dossy but many are...I miss it...


----------



## Birroc

Complainer said:


> - the large multinational with the 'zombie' project, one that couldn't be killed off - to develop an in-house IT system for one of the lines of business. It reared up three times in my six years, had over $1m spent on it each time, and then faded away with no deliverables.


 
When I worked in PS, a guy in IT told me that he had nothing to do for 70% of the week - when he complained to his boss, his boss told him he was too eager and to relax. He left after 3 years but he told me that his proudest achievement during work was writing a program/macro that would log him in and out of the system automatically at times he specified. He and a few mates used it to ensure that they made their standard hours + overtime in order to get the flexi day a month even though at the end he reckoned he was in the office for less than 20 hours a week on average.


----------



## Complainer

DonDub said:


> I won't argue with any of this, in fact I'm sure there are plenty of worse examples - my point is that the private sector 'self corrects' over time - bad management, unreasonable employees etc will eventually cause a business to hit a crisis point, and ultimately failure if they dont take corrective action.
> Regarding the PS pensions - of course some PS employess were already contributing towards their pensions pre levy - however, their contributions didn't, and don't come within an asses roar of paying for the pensions offered.
> All of the PS examples I gave are real - the utility was Bord Gais, I will not give any more details as they might compromise individuals.
> By the way, FAS had a budget of 1 billion, when we had virtually full employment - and yes the top brass acted disgracefully (including the union reps on the board), but get real - it is obvious that much of that money was wasted employing people in non-jobs.
> Apart from some contract staff, not one permanent PS has been made redundant against their will - hundreds of thousands of private sector works have suffered this faith.
> Why the hell should one sector of society be immune from the full effects of the recession - and to cap it all - then complain when asked to take some pain - which would leave them in still a privilaged position.
> If this were the Titanic, the PS would argue that the lifeboats should be reserved for them - because, well, just because..
> This country is baldly governed, badly managed, and is broke. The private sector is going through painful adjustments, and their is more to come.
> The PS is inefficient,too large, too costly, and is unaffordable.....thats just a fact.....most of the people arguing to the contrary are 'whistling past the graveyard'.......


I have to say that the 'it might compromise individuals' thing is a bit of a cop-out. Of the three other items that I asked you about, none of these can have been confidential to an individual. You don't get to give out protective clothing to an entire building and keep it secret. You don't get unions negotiating in secret about weekend lab staff. You don't get to provide a shuttle bus between two buildings in secret. If these things happened, they can be verified with the relevant organisations through FOI requests and/or PQs. No individual can be identified as 'leaking' these stories. So come on, let's get it all on the table.

Indeed, the behaviour at FAS was disgraceful at many levels, and all the board members bear responsibility for this. The fact that only Rody has taken a hit so far is very worrying. However, there is a lot of hindsight going on with the complaints here. I don't recall too many people worry about their €1billion budget at the time. I do know that they weren't just working with unemployed people here - a major part of their activities at the time was going round the world attracting people from other countries to come and work in Ireland - something that they did very well. Perhaps part of the reason why employment was so low here was precisely because FAS did a good job at making people employable? In fairness, I just guessing here - I don't know enough about this area to comment sensibly, But yet again, I'm sure that those who jump in with generalised attacks don't know enough about this area either.

I'm not sure that the 'private sector self-corrects' argument stands up to scrutiny either. Where is the self-correction for Mercer, who have clearly been screwing pensioners around for some years now. Where is the self-correction for companies notorious for dreadful customer service, like NTL, or Perlico? We all experience crap service and crap products at crap prices every day of the week, but this magical 'self-correction' effect doesn't seem to be doing a whole lot. 

But even if we did accept this idea of self-correction, my first response is 'so what?'. So what if the badly managed companies go bust - what is the benefit from this? Does it give a nice sense of revenge or schaddenfreude? Does it ensure that people learn from their mistakes? Well not really - some people will learn from their experiences, but some wont. People learn in different ways - some learn from having a great mentor, some learn from being thrown in at the deep end, some learn from books. There is no particular benefit from this self-correcting effect.

You can make all the bald claims about the public sector you like, and you can repeat them as often as you like - that doesn't make them true.


----------



## thedaras

Birroc said:


> Yes but those public sector workers will do alright with expenses/mileage/time-off. I used to work in public service but stupidly left - my ex-colleagues, all office workers were ringing me telling me they were sent home last week due to floods (Galway) and told not to come in the next day either - many of them were not affected by the flooding in any way. And don't start me on the sick leave - PS where I worked was a complete doss-house - not all dept/councils are dossy but many are...I miss it...


 
My brother in law,works in the PS ,he takes off most fridays at 2..( he isnt supposed to finish till 4.30 ) he has never worked an honest (full )day, ...to go to his other house in the country!!

My brother in law works alongside a porter in a hospital who when he is asked to go to the shops ,in fact goes home for an hour..,and dare you ask him where he was,you can hear the unions running to help as soon as the words are said..nice!

The reality is that anyone I know whom works for the Public Service,tells me directly about all the dossing that goes on in their particular department,and the means and ways to get by doing as little as possible.
It is a reality that the less work people do ,the less they want to do and this spreads like a cancer.

Can anyone tell me why,they would say these things if they are not true?

Anyone I know who works in the public service agrees that they take advantage of  "sick leave"..they think its funny..

Those ps workers whom are being hailed as heros for dealing with the floods are just doing what they are being paid to do.for once..IMO..what do they want a medal!!

I worked for several years with the PS, and I fought against the system and the unions and it was the most difficult of situations as I was seen as not being one of them,because I didnt want to become a complete dosser.
It is soul destroying to want to do a decent days work and be told your doing too much and letting the side down..
The reality is that as someone said earlier this can and does happen in the private sector,but if you choose to go down that road you run the risk of being sacked..this is not the case in the public service..

I have seen appalling waste,of time ,money,services during my time there.

There are good ,very good people there,but I think its a bit like,for example the priesthood where peadophiles where attracted to become priests,for the opportunitys it gave them,and for me the public service attracts a lot of people whom are aware that once they are made permanant ,have a job for life,doss to their hearts content and cannot be sacked,add to that the nice pension and you get my point..

We have many examples of companys ,private like perlico etc where people complain of bad sevice,but the reality is we can choose to leave that company and use one of the many others available to us..we cant do this with a public service ..companys with appalling service will in the long run ,go out of buisness..

The fact is that I do know many people whom work in the PS and they are the ones who tell me about the goings on..

I can understand those who are trying to do a good days work in the PS being completly frustrated by those of us who are having a go,but please be aware that ,the comments are not directed at you personally ,but at the ones who are dragging you down,dossing,not doing their fair share,taking all the "sick leave ",they can get,go home early..dont answer phones,refuse to do any little thing that may be considered extra to their employment contract.,cause problems left right and centre for the slightest thing,fight all change..and run to the unions as soon as they feel there is something in it for them.those are the ones I have a problem with.

I really do feel sorry for those of us in the PS who do the best we can,and fight a lossing battle with those diehards causing the problems


----------



## Maximus152

csirl said:


> At least, unlike bankers, they dont reward themselves with multimillion euro bonuses even if they do a rubbish job.


..What kind of a statement is that  there is a handfull of Bankers (taking millions granted) there are 1000's of public service employee's. There is no connection or reasoning, Im totally against these massive Bankers bonus packages but the public service issue is a different animal.The public service get rewarded by wonderful working hours, superb pension packages generous expenses (travell etc) and tasty sick leave with a dash of garaunteed job security for the rest of working life. I like it...I like it a lot. I will have one of those please.


----------



## gianni

Maximus152 said:


> The public service get rewarded by wonderful working hours



Wonderful ? Have you ever seen the Garda shift rotation ?



Maximus152 said:


> generous expenses (travell etc)


 
Please give an example of these generous expenses?



Maximus152 said:


> I like it...I like it a lot. I will have one of those please.



 was where you should have been looking for one of these jobs, not on AAM. Terms, conditions and application details were there - all suitable candidates were welcome to apply.


----------



## S.L.F

thedaras said:


> We have many examples of companys ,private like perlico etc where people complain of bad sevice,but the reality is we can choose to leave that company and use one of the many others available to us..we cant do this with a public service ..companys with appalling service will in the long run ,go out of buisness..


 
So when you dial 999 you want a particular Garda station to answer the phone and call to your house or you want a particular hospital to admit you when you get ill.


----------



## DonDub

Complainer said:


> I have to say that the 'it might compromise individuals' thing is a bit of a cop-out. Of the three other items that I asked you about, none of these can have been confidential to an individual. You don't get to give out protective clothing to an entire building and keep it secret. You don't get unions negotiating in secret about weekend lab staff. You don't get to provide a shuttle bus between two buildings in secret. If these things happened, they can be verified with the relevant organisations through FOI requests and/or PQs. No individual can be identified as 'leaking' these stories. So come on, let's get it all on the table.
> 
> Indeed, the behaviour at FAS was disgraceful at many levels, and all the board members bear responsibility for this. The fact that only Rody has taken a hit so far is very worrying. However, there is a lot of hindsight going on with the complaints here. I don't recall too many people worry about their €1billion budget at the time. I do know that they weren't just working with unemployed people here - a major part of their activities at the time was going round the world attracting people from other countries to come and work in Ireland - something that they did very well. Perhaps part of the reason why employment was so low here was precisely because FAS did a good job at making people employable? In fairness, I just guessing here - I don't know enough about this area to comment sensibly, But yet again, I'm sure that those who jump in with generalised attacks don't know enough about this area either.
> 
> I'm not sure that the 'private sector self-corrects' argument stands up to scrutiny either. Where is the self-correction for Mercer, who have clearly been screwing pensioners around for some years now. Where is the self-correction for companies notorious for dreadful customer service, like NTL, or Perlico? We all experience crap service and crap products at crap prices every day of the week, but this magical 'self-correction' effect doesn't seem to be doing a whole lot.
> 
> But even if we did accept this idea of self-correction, my first response is 'so what?'. So what if the badly managed companies go bust - what is the benefit from this? Does it give a nice sense of revenge or schaddenfreude? Does it ensure that people learn from their mistakes? Well not really - some people will learn from their experiences, but some wont. People learn in different ways - some learn from having a great mentor, some learn from being thrown in at the deep end, some learn from books. There is no particular benefit from this self-correcting effect.
> 
> You can make all the bald claims about the public sector you like, and you can repeat them as often as you like - that doesn't make them true.


 
Did I say an entire building - they were the employees who had to make the arduos trek between the two buildings. Your insistence that I name names seems to suggests that if you can prove I'm lying, then the PS is vindicated.....yeah right....my few examples are just the tip of a very, very large iceberg. What about P-Pars - did I make that up, army defness claims, blue flu,benchmarking,ESB prices - 2nd highest in Europe, massive over-runs on PS manged infrastructural projects e.g. port tunnel - by hundreds of millions, hundreds of civil servants in Dept of Health, years after the HSE juggernaut was created...oh yeah, the HSE...layer upon layer of additional headcount running an incredibly inefficient  health 'service',teachers refusing to hold PT meetings outside school hours......have I made all these up...do you want the names and addresses of all involved?

Actually, I know a bit about  FAS.....I have read acres of print about it lately...now lets assume that not every journalist is in on the 'anti-PS' conspiracy..and that that there are many legitimate questions about the €1billion budget in times of virtual full employment.

Of course there is a benefit through self-correction...If I run a business selling cakes or cars or whatever, and my service, quality, price is not up to that of the competition, it won't be long before my sales begin to go south - I either respond by cutting prices, improving service etc...or I eventually go bust. Joe public benefits either way. There are sectors in the private sector where this process has not acted effectively - typically in areas that have been poorly regulated by that shower of gombeens in government. But, even for them the market catches up..as Buffett says.."you only see who is swimming naked when the tide goes out"

Again, its really simple maths....Income = €32billion, expenditure = €54billion, 80% of expenditure is in wages and social welfare. Therefore, we either jack up taxes even further, in a crazy attempt to leave spending intact, or we cut spending to affordable levels. Now, I know PS unions favour extra taxes, of course they would - even though such a course of action will only deepen and extend the duration of the recession/depression. Its analagous to a child who has been allowed to overeat by its parents for many years- and as a consequence is overweight and dependent on the 'rich' diet. I don't expect the child to voluntarily cut its food intake. I expect the parents to intervene, and to ensure that the child eats a more balanced diet - the Dail needs to take the tough decisions required to cut spending, to save this country from ruin ....these so called partnership talks are almost certainly going to result in an ineffective  response to the public finances crisis. So, don't worry Complainer, there are enough political muppets in government prepared to accept the truth as spoken by Jack, Peter and the lads.....and people like me will be ignored, with insinuations that we are liars...again....

Anyway, I'm off back to the real world, where close friends and colleagues have been made redundant, where banks are refusing to lend to people because of job insecurity, where pay is being cut, where......oh wait...I'm doing it again.....I must remember to post all their names, addresses......


----------



## Maximus152

gianni said:


> Wonderful ? Have you ever seen the Garda shift rotation ?
> 
> 
> 
> Please give an example of these generous expenses?
> 
> 
> 
> was where you should have been looking for one of these jobs, not on AAM. Terms, conditions and application details were there - all suitable candidates were welcome to apply.


 
Okay, I know numerous folk who work shift rotation in private sector and have done it in another life myself.  
Expenses were discussed on Radio 1 numerous times, travel exp to work if outside Dublin, accomadation exp, I heard of free creche facilities (surely not!), because I can not list more does not mean they are not available! 
Yes the jobs were posted I am sure, but alas I do not know anyone in there.
For record I am not targeting any section in Public sector, we need Gardai, Emerg services etc thats a given, what I am trying to convey (prob badly) is there needs to be a over haul of attitude and responsible cost of running public sector. People are sick to the back teeth of seeing these union officials they do the Public sector zero beneift, they actually make my skin crawl. I would think Govern and different sections talking by themselves would make much more progress each on there own merit.


----------



## Complainer

DonDub said:


> Did I say an entire building - they were the employees who had to make the arduos trek between the two buildings. Your insistence that I name names seems to suggests that if you can prove I'm lying, then the PS is vindicated.....yeah right....my few examples are just the tip of a very, very large iceberg. What about P-Pars - did I make that up, army defness claims, blue flu,benchmarking,ESB prices - 2nd highest in Europe, massive over-runs on PS manged infrastructural projects e.g. port tunnel - by hundreds of millions, hundreds of civil servants in Dept of Health, years after the HSE juggernaut was created...oh yeah, the HSE...layer upon layer of additional headcount running an incredibly inefficient  health 'service',teachers refusing to hold PT meetings outside school hours......have I made all these up...do you want the names and addresses of all involved?
> .



Nice diversion, I'll take that as a 'No' then to my request for verifiable details. Seems a pity, but there you go.


----------



## thedaras

Complainer said:


> Nice diversion, I'll take that as a 'No' then to my request for verifiable details. Seems a pity, but there you go.


 
What!!  Are you for real!! you actually want someone to post the names ,addresses etc of people whom they are mentioning on this board!!
You are having a laugh...

If you are so insistent on everyone naming names ,how come you use a psudeo name?

That is just playground stuff ,No one in their right mind would do that ,and only someone who doesnt live in the real world would actully expect it.
C,mon, you cannot be serious,and you call it a diversion when they wont! 

What exactly would you like to do with the names addresses etc.
The reality is that a board like AAM gives people the chance to give their opinions,I dont see anywhere in the rules that says names and addresses must be supplied.
Really rather shocked at your request..


----------



## Complainer

thedaras said:


> What!!  Are you for real!! you actually want someone to post the names ,addresses etc of people whom they are mentioning on this board!!
> You are having a laugh...
> 
> If you are so insistent on everyone naming names ,how come you use a psudeo name?
> 
> That is just playground stuff ,No one in their right mind would do that ,and only someone who doesnt live in the real world would actully expect it.
> C,mon, you cannot be serious,and you call it a diversion when they wont!
> 
> What exactly would you like to do with the names addresses etc.
> The reality is that a board like AAM gives people the chance to give their opinions,I dont see anywhere in the rules that says names and addresses must be supplied.
> Really rather shocked at your request..


You might want to go back and read my requests to Don  again, slowly this time.


----------



## thedaras

Complainer said:


> You might want to go back and read my requests to Don again, slowly this time.


 
Originally Posted by *Complainer* http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showthread.php?p=966850#post966850 
_I don't suppose there is any chance of any evidence/backup/comparitive data/explanation for any of these claims? Is that too much to expect"._

_like this one?_


----------



## Complainer

thedaras said:


> Originally Posted by *Complainer* http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showthread.php?p=966850#post966850
> _I don't suppose there is any chance of any evidence/backup/comparitive data/explanation for any of these claims? Is that too much to expect"._
> 
> _like this one?_


Try harder. Even more slowly.


----------



## thedaras

Complainer said:


> Try harder. Even more slowly.


 
*Perhaps you could clarify what exactly you mean by*

_*complainer *"evidence/backup/comparitive data/explanation for any of these claims? Is that too much to expect"._

_Originally Posted by *Complainer* http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showthread.php?p=967640#post967640 _
_



			I have to say that the 'it might compromise individuals' thing is a bit of a cop-out. Of the three other items that I asked you about, none of these can have been confidential to an individual
		
Click to expand...

_ 
_*what part of " it might compromise individuals" do you think is a cop out?*_

_*Surely if Don thinks it may compromise individuals he wouldnt be silly enough to post verifiable evidence*?_


_. 






			You don't get to give out protective clothing to an entire building and keep it secret. You don't get unions negotiating in secret about weekend lab staff. You don't get to provide a shuttle bus between two buildings in secret. If these things happened, they can be verified with the relevant organisations through FOI requests and/or PQs. No individual can be identified as 'leaking' these stories. So come on, let's get it all on the table.
		
Click to expand...

_ 

_*Lets say he/she named the companys involved..what exactly would that do? how would it help?*_





> All very interesting stuff, and probably a grain of truth behind some or all of it. It would be particularly helpful if you could be more specific about the bits that don't expose any individual. Where was the adjacent buildings with the covered walkway where the staff got the protective clothing? Where were the two offices 20 minutes apart with the bus provided? In which hospital did the union object to providing extra lab cover at the weekend? Which utility (come on, there is only two of them) charged €550 for their meter?


 
*What difference does it make where the buildings are or which hospital?*



> But just for comparison, here's my stories from my 25 year career in the private sector (no nomes to protect my confidentiality);


 
*Do you think it possible that Don may be trying to do what you just did?*

*If everyone named specific companys/offices/hospitals etc,I dont think AAM would be too happy...*


----------



## Birroc

Complainer said:


> Nice diversion, I'll take that as a 'No' then to my request for verifiable details. Seems a pity, but there you go.


 
Complainer, you are only making things worse with the denials. As you know I worked in PS and I can tell you I milked the system and dossed with the best of them, it was too easy - however I did not keep a record of my actions or others and even if I did somehow, do you expect me to share them with you on a public forum?


----------



## thedaras

S.L.F said:


> So when you dial 999 you want a particular Garda station to answer the phone and call to your house or you want a particular hospital to admit you when you get ill.


 
I dont have any choice in the matter, I have to take what Im given...regardless of the service, however if it were a private company of course I would have the choice..

The point is that we need a more efficient,customer focused service.We all need to be able to complain about a bad service and to be heard when things go wrong...when someone works in a company and they never have to suffer the consequences of their actions,what incentive is there for them to preform to a high standard?


----------



## thedaras

Birroc said:


> Complainer, you are only making things worse with the denials. As you know I worked in PS and I can tell you I milked the system and dossed with the best of them, it was too easy - however I did not keep a record of my actions or others and even if I did somehow, do you expect me to share them with you on a public forum?


Plus 1
And I also worked in the PS where I saw people milk the system and dossed to their hearts content,with no one suffering the consequences of their actions.

I also worked in the private sector,where there were dossers and people who tried to milk the system,however those who did,eventually got what they deserved.ie; the sack!!


----------



## Complainer

thedaras said:


> *Perhaps you could clarify what exactly you mean by*
> 
> _*complainer *"evidence/backup/comparitive data/explanation for any of these claims? Is that too much to expect"._


I did clarify exactly what I meant in the earlier post that I asked you twice to read. I said the following; "*Where was the adjacent buildings with the covered walkway where the staff got the protective clothing? Where were the two offices 20 minutes apart with the bus provided? In which hospital did the union object to providing extra lab cover at the weekend? Which utility (come on, there is only two of them) charged €550 for their meter?*" from which it is clear that I am not looking for any individual to be named, just the organisation & locations. Perhaps this would be a good time for you to withdraw your attack on me where you alleged that I was looking for individuals to be named.


----------



## thedaras

Complainer said:


> I did clarify exactly what I meant in the earlier post that I asked you twice to read. I said the following; "*Where was the adjacent buildings with the covered walkway where the staff got the protective clothing? Where were the two offices 20 minutes apart with the bus provided? In which hospital did the union object to providing extra lab cover at the weekend? Which utility (come on, there is only two of them) charged €550 for their meter?*" from which it is clear that I am not looking for any individual to be named, just the organisation & locations. Perhaps this would be a good time for you to withdraw your attack on me where you alleged that I was looking for individuals to be named.


 
Absolutly,if you feel you were "attacked" that was never my intention..
However you  forgot to mention in the above post that you did ask for "verifiable" details,can you tell me how someone could do this without identifying a lot of people?

Perhaps you could now tell me why you want to know where the buildings /offices, which hospital and utilities,what is the purpose of this?

If for example I was to say it was the Xcompany of the public service who had demanded protective clothing for a covered walkway, surely that would be identifying them? I do not see what use it serves...


----------



## Complainer

thedaras said:


> However you  forgot to mention in the above post that you did ask for "verifiable" details,can you tell me how someone could do this without identifying a lot of people?


DonDub could do this by answering the specific questions that I asked above, i.e. "*Where was the adjacent buildings with the covered walkway where the staff got the protective clothing? Where were the two offices 20 minutes apart with the bus provided? In which hospital did the union object to providing extra lab cover at the weekend? Which utility (come on, there is only two of them) charged €550 for their meter?*" All of these questions can be answered by identifying organisations and locations, not people.



thedaras said:


> Perhaps you could now tell me why you want to know where the buildings /offices, which hospital and utilities,what is the purpose of this?
> 
> If for example I was to say it was the Xcompany of the public service who had demanded protective clothing for a covered walkway, surely that would be identifying them? I do not see what use it serves...



Identifying the organisations and locations will allow us to confirm or deny the validity of these claims. Why would anyone be reluctant to identify the organisations and locations involved?


----------



## Howitzer

Complainer said:


> DonDub could do this by answering the specific questions that I asked above, i.e. "*Where was the adjacent buildings with the covered walkway where the staff got the protective clothing? Where were the two offices 20 minutes apart with the bus provided? In which hospital did the union object to providing extra lab cover at the weekend? Which utility (come on, there is only two of them) charged €550 for their meter?*" All of these questions can be answered by identifying organisations and locations, not people.
> 
> 
> 
> Identifying the organisations and locations will allow us to confirm or deny the validity of these claims. Why would anyone be reluctant to identify the organisations and locations involved?


I'd agree, these instances could be pretty easilly identified and it probably wouldn't compromise anyone's identity.

However, what's the point? You continually ask for examples to back up poster's assertions, even when examples have been widely published and are common knowledge. When linked examples are posted you ignore them and move on to the next circular argument, obfuscating issues and hiding behind a pretence that "there's nothing to see here people, move on".


----------



## Complainer

Howitzer said:


> However, what's the point? You continually ask for examples to back up poster's assertions, even when examples have been widely published and are common knowledge. When linked examples are posted you ignore them and move on to the next circular argument, obfuscating issues and hiding behind a pretence that "there's nothing to see here people, move on".


Unsurprisingly, I don't agree with this. But if this was happening, wouldn't the best solution be to repeatedly hammer me with specific and detailed examples to back up the wild, generalised claims?


----------



## Howitzer

Yes. But playing whack-a-mole isn't a terribly enjoyable pastime. I get the impression that if i said it was currently raining outside you'd want a paper trail a mile long before you'd consider the possibility.

Many of the examples have been widely documented and only someone who wanted to pretend it wasn't would say otherwise.


----------



## Complainer

Howitzer said:


> Yes. But playing whack-a-mole isn't a terribly enjoyable pastime. I get the impression that if i said it was currently raining outside you'd want a paper trail a mile long before you'd consider the possibility.


I've told you a thousand times not to exaggerate.

In fairness, DonDub listed a pile of examples. I asked him to be specific about the three cases that could be detailed without identifying any individual. Is that really too much to ask?


----------



## Howitzer

Would you now accept that the point raised by johnd regarding the picketing of hospices was valid?



johnd said:


> 'The RTE News tonight mentioned about a family member visiting at Our Lady's Hospice in Harolds Cross coming down to the picket line to offer them his support'.
> 
> That was a quote from some SIPTU offical at the hospice. Of course he's going to say that. To see him and his members grinnning for the cameras was disgusting. What kind of people would picket people dying of cancer. What kind of person would leave their dying relative to join a bunch of SIPTU picketers who are depriving that relative of care? I don't think so, thats just a spin put out by the union because they are or should be ashamed of themselves. The same as those who picketed special schools for the disabled or those with learning difficulties or those who picketed facilities for old people. What kind of people are these?





Complainer said:


> Ah I see. Anything that doesn't suit your personal agenda is dismissed as a lie. I've just replayed the clip ([broken link removed]) and I don't see any grinning from Tommy Morris (IMPACT, not SIPTU) or any of the staff picketing the Hospice, but feel free to make up other wild allegations. Some of them might just stick.



Hospice patients very 'distressed' by picket


----------



## Howitzer

Complainer said:
			
		

> No picket would ever try and block relatives visiting a hospital - that suggestion shows how little you actually understand about pickets. No patient, cancer or otherwise, went without essential pain relief yesterday. As was the case in the Mater, many of the picketing staff were off-duty staff, showing support for their working colleagues inside.





> "Regrettably, members of the IMPACT and SIPTU unions impeded access to our care facilities and their industrial action led to the closure of our community reablement, pharmacy and therapy services alongside seriously curtailing our ability to care for our remaining patients.


----------



## Complainer

The Indo article isn't all that clear. The CEO says she has no problem with any of the staff's actions, but she has a problem with the picket. Well, the people picketing are her staff. There is no comment from any patients or relatives or patient representatives groups. There is nothing in the body of the article that justifies the headline claim that 'patients were very distressed'. The CEO seems to be suggesting that there should be no picket, and I don't see any justification for that. 
A calm and dignified picket does not in itself cause distress to anyone. 

I'm not sure exactly what is meant by "Relatives were deprived of essential supports and facilities" - perhaps there may be a case to review what supports and facilities are available if required.


----------



## Howitzer

Complainer said:


> The CEO says she has no problem with any of the staff's actions, but she has a problem with the picket. Well, the people picketing are her staff.





> Ms Flynn praised the members of two unions, the [broken link removed]  and the [broken link removed], who continued to provide care.
> She added: "I am asking you to use your influence on the leaderships of IMPACT and SIPTU to ensure there is no repeat of the obstruction by picket groups next Thursday when they are engaging in further industrial action.


Some unions worked. Others picketed. I'm not sure how many IMPACT or SIPTU members would work in a hospice, I would have thought the majority of employees would be INO or IMO members. The quote, and implication, seems pretty clear to me.


----------



## Complainer

Howitzer said:


> Some unions worked. Others picketed. I'm not sure how many IMPACT or SIPTU members would work in a hospice, I would have thought the majority of employees would be INO or IMO members. The quote, and implication, seems pretty clear to me.


I know SIPTU represents a pile of nurses - not sure about IMPACT, perhaps these are the non-qualified care staff.


----------



## Birroc

For me, the biggest problem with the PS is that nobody gets fired (well, extremely rare and you really have to do something bad). I think this is the key point. Useless people get 'moved on' but it is very very difficult to fire someone - the union protection is partly to blame for this.


----------



## VOR

This PS thread (and many others) is starting to feel like the Griswalds.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iAgX6qlJEMc&feature=related

Look kids, it's the PS debate again!!!


----------



## becky

Complainer said:


> I know SIPTU represents a pile of nurses - not sure about IMPACT, perhaps these are the non-qualified care staff.


The non qualified care staff would be mainly SIPTU.  Impact have physio and pharmacists.


----------



## thedaras

As Howitzer also said, whats the point?
If there are only two utility companies for example,well it has to be one or the other..dont see what difference it makes apart from a diversion away from the main issue...


----------



## Complainer

thedaras said:


> As Howitzer also said, whats the point?
> If there are only two utility companies for example,well it has to be one or the other..dont see what difference it makes apart from a diversion away from the main issue...


The point is that it allows the claims to be verified. This isn't me in denial. Before I ask for verification, I've no idea whether these claims will stand up or not. So if I was argueing tactically, it could be a huge mistake for me to ask for verification. The old lawyers line of 'never ask a question that you don't know the answer to' springs to mind.

By giving information that the utility was Bord Gais, no-one gets exposed or fired, no confidentialities are breached, and the €500 charge can be verified as correct (see [broken link removed]). Now, is the charge good/bad/indifferent - I really don't know enough about gas meters to comment. I don't know how many people you would typically need. I don't know if this charge is regulated by the CER. I can see that Bord Gais is open and direct about requiring all of the excavation works to be done for them, so DonDub's little dig about the building doing most of the work isn't relevant.

So now, wouldn't it be nice to get equivalent answers to my other queries?


----------



## shnaek

Personally, I think the thread should be locked. It's like arguing with quicksand.


----------



## thedaras

Complainer said:


> The point is that it allows the claims to be verified. This isn't me in denial. Before I ask for verification, I've no idea whether these claims will stand up or not. So if I was argueing tactically, it could be a huge mistake for me to ask for verification. The old lawyers line of 'never ask a question that you don't know the answer to' springs to mind.
> 
> By giving information that the utility was Bord Gais, no-one gets exposed or fired, no confidentialities are breached, and the €500 charge can be verified as correct (see [broken link removed]). Now, is the charge good/bad/indifferent - I really don't know enough about gas meters to comment. I don't know how many people you would typically need. I don't know if this charge is regulated by the CER. I can see that Bord Gais is open and direct about requiring all of the excavation works to be done for them, so DonDub's little dig about the building doing most of the work isn't relevant.
> 
> *So now, wouldn't it be nice to get equivalent answers to my other queries?*


 
No it wouldnt,as I and anyone else who has had to have a meter moved will have had to go to the companies involved to get a price as no one else is allowed move them!!

I understand dondubs post to say that the amount of work involved was minimal and did not justify a 500 euro charge,but that there was no choice but to pay it!

Totally agree with earlier posters view about the quicksand..


----------



## Complainer

thedaras said:


> No it wouldnt,as I and anyone else who has had to have a meter moved will have had to go to the companies involved to get a price as no one else is allowed move them!!
> 
> I understand dondubs post to say that the amount of work involved was minimal and did not justify a 500 euro charge,but that there was no choice but to pay it!


OK, sorry for taking so long to understand - I think I'm getting it now.

a) One out of DonDub's 6-8 stories checks out, so there is no value in him answering a simple question - to name the organisations/locations involved in two of his other claims.
b) DonDub's view on Bord Gais is final, and no-one else's view matters.

I can definitely see how this approach and the constructive suggestions on the other thread are definitely going to find robust and reliable solutions to Ireland's economic woes. 

I apologise for trying to hold things back by looking for some facts.


----------



## shnaek

Can't believe how many posters are getting taken in by classic WUM behaviour in The Depths lately!


----------



## Complainer

shnaek said:


> classic WUM behaviour in The Depths lately!


 ???


----------



## S.L.F

Howitzer said:


> Hospice patients very 'distressed' by picket


 
The indo is not an unbiased newspaper, it is a rag and I for one will never buy it again.

I understand it's readership is dropping all the time now, hardly surprising.


----------



## shnaek

S.L.F said:


> The indo is not an unbiased newspaper, it is a rag and I for one will never buy it again.
> 
> I understand it's readership is dropping all the time now, hardly surprising.



Your problem is with the indo, but not the picketing of the hospice? Here are other articles on the issue from other sources.

[broken link removed]


----------



## S.L.F

shnaek said:


> Your problem is with the indo, but not the picketing of the hospice?


 
Is that a question or a statement?


----------



## Purple

S.L.F said:


> Is that a question or a statement?



Dodge the links and deflect from the issue with an off topic question...
Sensei Complainer has thought you well grasshopper!


----------



## Mpsox

There are lots of examples(well documented) of the PS wasting money, storage of evoting machines spring to mind, likewise PPARs, FAS ads(I saw the €600k ad on the RTE news last week, oh what a waste that was!!!!!!). It may not always have been the PS wasting the money directly, but ultimately, senior managers in the various depts and quangos, had responsibility for spending budgets and managing the projects. 

Another example of waste is sickness in the Civil Service. For example, in 2007

42% of all sick leave was uncertified
75% of Clerical Offices took sick leave and the average, 16 days off sick a year
The average number of days lost for staff on a 3 day week was 80% higher then those working a full working week
33% of absences commenced on a Monday

If my staff in the private sector averaged 16 days off sick a year, I'd be sacked sooner rather then later.


----------



## shnaek

S.L.F said:


> Is that a question or a statement?



Here it is, nice and clear. 
Do you condone the picketing of a hospice - yes or no? 

Personally, I say no. What do others think?


----------



## Teatime

Mpsox said:


> 42% of all sick leave was uncertified
> 75% of Clerical Offices took sick leave and the average, 16 days off sick a year
> The average number of days lost for staff on a 3 day week was 80% higher then those working a full working week
> 33% of absences commenced on a Monday


 
wow, I wonder if Complainer will reply to this post...


----------



## Firefly

Course he will, he'll have a problem with the report itself


----------



## S.L.F

Purple said:


> Dodge the links and deflect from the issue with an off topic question...
> Sensei Complainer has thought you well grasshopper!


 
In fairness I can't answer a loaded question about like that the question was... 





> Your problem is with the indo, but not the picketing of the hospice?


 
a bit like asking, "You think the news paper report was flawed but picketing a hospice is ok?"...loaded?



shnaek said:


> Here it is, nice and clear.
> Do you condone the picketing of a hospice - yes or no?
> 
> Personally, I say no. What do others think?


 
I believe people at the end of their lives need respect and privacy with their families and friends.



Mpsox said:


> There are lots of examples(well documented) of the PS wasting money, storage of evoting machines spring to mind, likewise PPARs, FAS ads(I saw the €600k ad on the RTE news last week, oh what a waste that was!!!!!!).


 
The e-voting thing was a political decision not a PS one.

PPARS again was a complete waste of money but look to our govt for the reason it was a complete dogs dinner.



Mpsox said:


> It may not always have been the PS wasting the money directly, but ultimately, senior managers in the various depts and quangos, had responsibility for spending budgets and managing the projects.


 
Agreed



Mpsox said:


> Another example of waste is sickness in the Civil Service. For example, in 2007
> 
> 42% of all sick leave was uncertified
> 75% of Clerical Offices took sick leave and the average, 16 days off sick a year
> The average number of days lost for staff on a 3 day week was 80% higher then those working a full working week
> 33% of absences commenced on a Monday
> 
> If my staff in the private sector averaged 16 days off sick a year, I'd be sacked sooner rather then later.


 
I've not seen this report can you post a link to the report itself.

Don't bother to post a link to anything the indo says because I won't bother to read anything that rag prints.


----------



## Mpsox

S.L.F said:


> In fairness I can't answer a loaded question about like that the question was...
> 
> a bit like asking, "You think the news paper report was flawed but picketing a hospice is ok?"...loaded?
> 
> 
> 
> I believe people at the end of their lives need respect and privacy with their families and friends.
> 
> 
> 
> The e-voting thing was a political decision not a PS one.
> 
> PPARS again was a complete waste of money but look to our govt for the reason it was a complete dogs dinner.
> 
> 
> 
> Agreed
> 
> 
> 
> I've not seen this report can you post a link to the report itself.
> 
> Don't bother to post a link to anything the indo says because I won't bother to read anything that rag prints.


 
Don't worry, as a Corkman there is only De paper as far as I am concerned

The report was writen by the Auditor and Comptroller General and is titled 
Special Report 69, Managing Sickness in the Civil service
http://www.audgen.gov.ie/ViewDoc.asp?fn=/home.asp

In fairness, the report acknowledges early on that "Sickness absence is well governed by Dept of finances rules and regs" but also seems to indicate that absence management is poorly handled by some departments and that there is a lack of consistancy across departments

there is a summary as well available here

http://www.audgen.gov.ie/viewdoc.asp?DocID=1183

Incidentally, on the e voting thing, yes it was a political decision to try it, but it was not a political decision to give storage contracts for longer then the projected life of the machines.


----------



## S.L.F

Mpsox said:


> Don't worry, as a Corkman there is only De paper as far as I am concerned
> 
> The report was writen by the Auditor and Comptroller General and is titled
> Special Report 69, Managing Sickness in the Civil service
> http://www.audgen.gov.ie/ViewDoc.asp?fn=/home.asp
> 
> In fairness, the report acknowledges early on that "Sickness absence is well governed by Dept of finances rules and regs" but also seems to indicate that absence management is poorly handled by some departments and that there is a lack of consistancy across departments
> 
> there is a summary as well available here
> 
> http://www.audgen.gov.ie/viewdoc.asp?DocID=1183
> 
> Incidentally, on the e voting thing, yes it was a political decision to try it, but it was not a political decision to give storage contracts for longer then the projected life of the machines.


 
Regarding health I'd assume people would not want their nurses (and other med staff) coughing all over them while they are in hospital.

With regard to teaching I was told the average numbers of days sick is 1 single day don't have any access to data on that but allowed sick leave is 30 days.

I find it interesting that they make no mention that if you are sick on your day off it is taken as a sick day even if it happens to be the weekend.


----------



## DB74

S.L.F said:


> With regard to teaching I was told the average numbers of days sick is 1 single day don't have any access to data on that but allowed sick leave is 30 days.


 
Can you show me the report which states this please


----------



## S.L.F

S.L.F said:


> With regard to teaching I was told the average numbers of days sick is 1 single day *don't have any access to data on that* but allowed sick leave is 30 days.


 


DB74 said:


> Can you show me the report which states this please


 
Read the bold bit please


----------



## DB74

Oh right because I was told that the average was 20 days for teachers but unfortunately I also don't have a report to back it up!

Which basically makes my statistic just as useless and meaningless as yours.


----------



## Howitzer

S.L.F said:


> Read the bold bit please


Complainer's going to have your balls for that. Posting unsubstantiated opinion as fact with no linked references.

Oh, wait a sec.


----------



## shnaek

S.L.F said:


> I believe people at the end of their lives need respect and privacy with their families and friends.


So you can't even answer yes or no. You would be well suited to politics.


----------



## S.L.F

DB74 said:


> Oh right because I was told that the average was 20 days for teachers but unfortunately I also don't have a report to back it up!
> 
> Which basically makes my statistic just as useless and meaningless as yours.


 
Er no you just made that up 2 secs ago.

Tell you what if I can find evidence that teachers take less than the average sick leave in the public service will you start attacking PS bashers.


----------



## shnaek

S.L.F said:


> evidence that teachers take less than the average sick leave in the public service


Just give us a report that states the figures, not some vague rubbish about 'less than average sick leave in the public service'. And before you go calling me a PS basher, my father is a teacher, so I am simply giving the views of a pragmatist who fears for the future of his country.


----------



## Mpsox

S.L.F said:


> Regarding health I'd assume people would not want their nurses (and other med staff) coughing all over them while they are in hospital.
> 
> With regard to teaching I was told the average numbers of days sick is 1 single day don't have any access to data on that but allowed sick leave is 30 days.
> 
> I find it interesting that they make no mention that if you are sick on your day off it is taken as a sick day even if it happens to be the weekend.


 
This report refers to civil service, not the public sector as a whole, but agree with your comments relating to health service.


----------



## S.L.F

shnaek said:


> So you can't even answer yes or no.


 
It is conceivable that on balance once you take all things into consideration that you are not correct with your thought process but are right about the underlying pre-concious decisions that lead you to it.



shnaek said:


> You would be well suited to politics.


 
*Blush*

I have no interest in becoming a politician but if I was asked I'd be selfless and be prepared to serve my country.


----------



## DB74

If you can provide evidence that *ALL* PS/CS employees take *less* than the average then I will attack "PS bashers"  

BTW, I'm not bashing the PS here - I have stated on another thread that I am not in favour of more across-the-board pay cuts. However, I *am* in favour of reform of the Public Sector and one aspect which, IMO, looks like it needs reform is the issue of paid sick leave.

But it just looks to me that the PS don't really want reform at all

I take your point about sick nurses etc but there are state provisions for payment of social welfare for days off sick so maybe health care professionals could receive that rate of social welfare pay rather than normal certified sick pay from Day 1 as opposed to Day 3.


----------



## S.L.F

shnaek said:


> Just give us a report that states the figures, not some vague rubbish about 'less than average sick leave in the public service'. And before you go calling me a PS basher, my father is a teacher, so I am simply giving the views of a pragmatist who fears for the future of his country.


 
I didn't call you a PS basher and I fear for the future of this country as well.


----------



## csirl

There's a link to an Indo article on another thread on this forum - the one on sick pay in PS - where the article says that certain areas of the PS have a significantly lower sick leave rate than the private sector.

Having worked in both the public sector and also for one of the biggest multinationals in Ireland, I have seen both sides of the coin. The multinational had a DAILY sick rate of 15% (yes you are reading this correctly). Staff received full pay while on sick leave. Multinational is still around and profitable. My opinion is the sick leave abuse is common in a lot of large organisations, both private and public, where employees arent missed, due to the large workforce and where certain managers dont care and can survive by keeping under the radar.


----------



## Husker

shnaek said:


> Just give us a report that states the figures, not some vague rubbish about 'less than average sick leave in the public service'.


 
[broken link removed]


----------



## DB74

"Don't bother to post a link to anything the indo says because I won't bother to read anything that rag prints"


----------



## S.L.F

DB74 said:


> "Don't bother to post a link to anything the indo says because I won't bother to read anything that rag prints"


 
Thank you for that

It must have been where I read it from (only recently stopped reading the rubbish it spews out).


----------



## Caveat

Incidentally, which paper would PS workers/defenders consider to be acceptable to quote from/link to - The IT?

Is this perceived anti-PS agenda from the Indo a recent development BTW?  I have no idea, I never buy it.


----------



## S.L.F

Caveat said:


> Incidentally, which paper would PS workers/defenders consider to be acceptable to quote from/link to - The IT?
> 
> Is this perceived anti-PS agenda from the Indo a recent development BTW? I have no idea, I never buy it.


 
I'm not sure when it started but do know for a fact that it is very anti PS.


----------



## Mpsox

S.L.F said:


> I'm not sure when it started but do know for a fact that it is very anti PS.


 
I presume you have stats etc which can back up this claim !!!


----------



## Howitzer

Mpsox said:


> I presume you have stats etc which can back up this claim !!!


I think there may have been an article in the Indo about it.


----------



## Purple

Howitzer said:


> I think there may have been an article in the Indo about it.



There's a hole in my bucket...


----------



## S.L.F

Howitzer said:


> I think there may have been an article in the Indo about it.


 
Indeed there was and it said it was the fault of the PS


----------

