IMPACT balloting members

[Mpsox]

An ex of mine works for the department of justice, she was told she would struggle to get promoted unless she joined the union.

quote]

Whoever told her that was talking absolute rubbish. How on earth could union membership affect her promotion chances. The Union has absolutely no say, whatsoever , in who is and isn't promoted. They may be allowed raise objections if they felt a particular competition wasn't run fairly and their objections may or may not be taken on board for future competitions but that's it. They have no say whatsoever in what particular individuals should be placed on promotion panels.

If they have no particuler say in promotion then what on earth are they doing sitting in on external recrutiment interviews?. I've never heard of that happening in the private sector

 

[liaconn]

The oriignal remark was made about a person working in the Dept of Justice and implied that not joining a union would prevent promotion in the Civil Service. This is absolutely untrue (and I'm not a union rep or anything). Sorry for going at you Purple, but I'm just so sick and tired of nonsense being written about the Civil Service that just isn't true. It gets really tiring. I don't argue about issues raised re overstaffing, poor deployment of staff, and certain other things because they are true and are as frustrating for Civil Servants who have to work with the system as for the other taxpayers out there who have to finance it. But making up stupid nonsense just to support an argument really gets to me.

 

[liaconn]

If they have no particuler say in promotion then what on earth are they doing sitting in on external recrutiment interviews?. I've never heard of that happening in the private sector

I was referring to your comment re Dept of Justice. I can assure you no union would be represented on a promotion interview board or be allowed sit in as an observer. They would also not be allowed sit in on interviews run by the Public Appointments Commission.

 

[Mpsox]

They would also not be allowed sit in on interviews run by the Public Appointments Commission.

They were when the PAC interviewed me on 2 occassions. The guy concerned (who was very nice I have to say) introduced himself as a union rep, never spoke or asked question in the interview, just took the notes for the interview panel having said that he would be doing so at the start of the interview. That is not me union bashing or public sector bashing, that is me stating a simple actual fact.

 

[liaconn]

What I'm talking about is your statement that not joining a Union affects your promotion chances in the Civil Service. That is simply not true, whether you're being interviewed by PAC or internally within your own Department.

 

[Sunny]

Here is the recent Exchequer statement:

Press release:
http://www.finance.gov.ie/viewdoc.asp?DocID=6007&CatID=1&StartDate=1+January+2009&m=n

Document:
http://www.finance.gov.ie/documents/exchequerstatements/2009/Excheqstatsept.pdf


You will see that the deficit includes a 4bn investment in Anglo.

It also includes the usual payments to the NPRF, which AFAIK were used for the investments in AIB and BoI.

Even if we don't include the €4.7 billion paid to Anglo and NPRF, we are still on a track for a deficit of around €20 billion by year end.

 

[Mpsox]

What I'm talking about is your statement that not joining a Union affects your promotion chances. That is simply not true, whether you're being interviewed by PAC or internally within your own Department.

I can only go by what a non union member working in a govt department told me. I have no reason whatsoever to disbelieve her and cannot think of any reason why she would tell me something that wasn't true. I accept that the official policy may say differently but policy and reality on the ground is different

Out of curiosity I asked 4 other friends and family members this afternoon who work in various parts of the public sector if not being in a union would affect their promotion chances. All 4 said that it would, especially if the other applicants were union members and the management team in the area were weak

 

[liaconn]

That may be the case in semi state bodies, I wouldn't know, but it is not the case in the Civil Service and I have no idea why someone would have told your ex such a load of rubbish unless there's something very strange going on in Dept of Justice.

 

[csirl]

They were when the PAC interviewed me on 2 occassions. The guy concerned (who was very nice I have to say) introduced himself as a union rep, never spoke or asked question in the interview, just took the notes for the interview panel having said that he would be doing so at the start of the interview. That is not me union bashing or public sector bashing, that is me stating a simple actual fact.

Are you sure you didnt pick him up wrong? I've done some public service interviews in the past (and turned down a couple of PS jobs) and sat on a couple of interview panels in a former life - usually 3 person panel - 2 public servants and 1 independent external person. 2 ask questions and the other takes note, but doesnt ask questions. They usually rotate the note taking between the 3 people. The note takers are not union representatives. Whereas I have come across some unorthodox stuff done by the public servants on a couple of ocassions, I never came across any union interference. Under no circumstances would a union rep ever be allowed to sit in on an interview, not even as an observer, or even talk to candidates beforehand. To be honest, there is a tendency in the public service to automatically appoint people who's interviews have been "polluted" because the public service is paranoid about lawsuits - I would imagine if anyone complained that a union rep was in the room, they would be offered a job to prevent a lawsuit. Easy way to find out who is in the room - you can FOI the notes and they'll tell you. I havent sat on any interviews in the past 6-7 years - have moved onto other things - so unless there has been a drastic change in rules in the meantime, this must be one of those urban legends.

 

[Mpsox]

Are you sure you didnt pick him up wrong? I've done some public service interviews in the past (and turned down a couple of PS jobs) and sat on a couple of interview panels in a former life - usually 3 person panel - 2 public servants and 1 independent external person. 2 ask questions and the other takes note, but doesnt ask questions. They usually rotate the note taking between the 3 people. The note takers are not union representatives. Whereas I have come across some unorthodox stuff done by the public servants on a couple of ocassions, I never came across any union interference. Under no circumstances would a union rep ever be allowed to sit in on an interview, not even as an observer, or even talk to candidates beforehand. To be honest, there is a tendency in the public service to automatically appoint people who's interviews have been "polluted" because the public service is paranoid about lawsuits - I would imagine if anyone complained that a union rep was in the room, they would be offered a job to prevent a lawsuit. Easy way to find out who is in the room - you can FOI the notes and they'll tell you. I havent sat on any interviews in the past 6-7 years - have moved onto other things - so unless there has been a drastic change in rules in the meantime, this must be one of those urban legends.

No, he said he was there to protect my interests and ensure everything was done fairly. Think I was so gobsmacked it was no wonder i didn't get the job. This was only 2 years ago

 

[liaconn]

And he definitely said he was from a Union? Not just an independent observer of some sort?

 

[csirl]

And he definitely said he was from a Union? Not just an independent observer of some sort?

Usually this is the role of the independent person on the panel - to ensure that the public servants dont stray from the procedures or have any bias. They generally arent public servants, so definately would not be members of a public service union.

Mpsox - can you contact the organisation who did the interview and ask for the notes? Usually they'll give them out free of charge informally because they know that they'll have to give them if a FOI request is lodged anyway. That way we'll find out for certain who was in the room.

 

[liaconn]

That's why I thought it was strange. My father used to chair interviews for the PAC and his role was to oversee the interview and make sure it was conducted properly while the experts on the board (eg engineers, architects, people who worked in the Agency concerned) asked the technical questions. I have absolutely no idea what a union member could be overseeing.

 

[becky]

That's why I thought it was strange. My father used to chair interviews for the PAC and his role was to oversee the interview and make sure it was conducted properly while the experts on the board (eg engineers, architects, people who worked in the Agency concerned) asked the technical questions. I have absolutely no idea what a union member could be overseeing.

My boss sits on PAS boards and there use to be a PAS rep who took notes of the questions asked. Not sure on the process since the Commision of Public Service Appointments (CPSA) got set up.

I'm in the HSE and we deal with unions all the time but they never get involved with the actual selection process, CPSA would lose their life.

 

[becky]

Many people working in the higher grades of the public service are bad managers.

There is no requirement that the Head of Finance is a Finacial Accountant.

The Head of IT needs no IT qualifications.

The one thing they are good at is claiming expenses.

What we see is that the Higher Grades hiding behind the lower grades.

Expect to see more of this.

The Labour party as per normal lacks any bottle for either public sector pay cuts or serious reform.

In the HSE the Finacial Accountant - grade VIII must have the relevant accountance exams.

Not too sure about the Head of IT though.

 

[bogle]

In the HSE the Finacial Accountant - grade VIII must have the relevant accountance exams.

Not too sure about the Head of IT though.

In my own organisation (CS) the H/IT has a research masters in computer science. Most of my colleagues have degrees or diplomas in computing or information systems, some of us have multiple primary degs and post grads, other colleagues in different sections from more of a science back round would be very computer literate and some would be qualified up to PhD level.

I've never heard of a union rep being present at an interview in my 14 years working in the CS/PS.

 

[becky]

In my own organisation (CS) the H/IT has a research masters in computer science. Most of my colleagues have degrees or diplomas in computing or information systems, some of us have multiple primary degs and post grads, other colleagues in different sections from more of a science back round would be very computer literate and some would be qualified up to PhD level.

I've never heard of a union rep being present at an interview in my 14 years working in the CS/PS.

I'd be pretty sure out head of IT has a formal qualification but I'm not too sure if it's essential. In ICT most have a formal qualifcation. Less so in HR and Finance, but I am only basing this on the people I know.

 

[bogle]

Kieran Mulvey, the Head of the Labour Relations Commission was interviewed on Newstalk’s breakfast show this morning and on RTE radio news this evening about partnership, what happened in the 80s (country was said to be broke then but in reality a huge amount of money was moved off shore – the revenue spending most of the 90s trying to get it back!!) and how the circle might be squared this time.

I thought what he had to say was very reasonable. I believe the interview is available as a podcast from Newstalk.

 

[Complainer]

They were when the PAC interviewed me on 2 occassions. The guy concerned (who was very nice I have to say) introduced himself as a union rep, never spoke or asked question in the interview, just took the notes for the interview panel having said that he would be doing so at the start of the interview. That is not me union bashing or public sector bashing, that is me stating a simple actual fact.

That may be the case in semi state bodies, I wouldn't know, but it is not the case in the Civil Service and I have no idea why someone would have told your ex such a load of rubbish unless there's something very strange going on in Dept of Justice.

Indeed - absolute rubbish. If MPSOX wants to go on the record about what the competition in question was, a simple request to PAS will identify the interview board, and there won't be any union members there. Public sector or semi-state - no difference.

Many people working in the higher grades of the public service are bad managers.

There is no requirement that the Head of Finance is a Finacial Accountant.

The Head of IT needs no IT qualifications.

The one thing they are good at is claiming expenses.

What we see is that the Higher Grades hiding behind the lower grades.

Expect to see more of this.

The Labour party as per normal lacks any bottle for either public sector pay cuts or serious reform.

It is really quite funny how you castigate the Labour party for the state of the public sector. You seem to forget about which party has been in power for the last 15 years. (Hint: It is one of the three big ones, and it is not Labour or FG - geddit?).

The best IT Manager (for a $1 billion business) that I've ever reported to was a marketing guy, with no IT qualifications. Many private sector companies (and some public ones) have a policy of rotating heads of function around various roles, so this year's head of HR may well be next year's head of IT. It's not unusual at all.

 

[Pique318]

. Many private sector companies (and some public ones) have a policy of rotating heads of function around various roles, so this year's head of HR may well be next year's head of IT. It's not unusual at all.

That's the most insane thing I've heard about a companys practice, and one that neither I nor any of my friends have heard about, let alone experienced.

So the head of HR suddenly becomes responsible for the IT framework and the head of IT becomes responsible for the HR responsibilities of a normal (potentially non-IT) company!?

Dear Jebus, I'm glad I don't work for that company. I can't see such lunacy being in any way positive for the sustained growth (or even preventing chaos!) in any organisation.