HSE: Voluntary Early Retirement Scheme and Voluntary Redundancy Scheme.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Well if you don't deal with the totality of the non frontline PS sector then what you are indulging in is massive generalisation.

Thanks for clearing that up for me .

Thanks for the kind comments about my suitability for a job as a Principal Officer but I 'm quite happy with my private sector status.
 
Deiseblue said:
Well if you don't deal with the totality of the non frontline PS sector then what you are indulging in is massive generalisation.
Click to expand...

No it isn't.

It's perfectly reasonable to observe an appropriate sample of a larger population and to then draw conclusions in relation to the larger population.

Per the HSE, we know that 5,000 people can wander off into the sunset without any detrimental effect on services. Per the HSE, we know that there are 2,000 HR personnel employed centrally within the HSE. These are truly shocking figures.

When the health boards merged, the plan was to achieve synergy and to streamline. Where each health board had (say) a head of HR or a financial controller, most of these (or even all but one) of these should have been made redundant. Then Bertie Ahern rode in like some kind of retarded knight in shining armour and unilaterally promised that nobody would be made redundant. That's why we know have multiple people in the HSE doing jobs that one person would do in a private sector entity.

Fianna Fail (and Bertie Ahern specifically) bought industrial peace during the boom with idiotic partnership agreements and crazy concessions like the one above and this is what's wrecked the country. And it was all done with unsustainable income. The problem in this country is primarily on the expenditure side and the most effective way to tackle the problem is to attack public sector pay (both pay rates and employee numbers).
 
The HSE is such a huge organisation with a wide breadth of services that you cannot draw any worthwhile conclusions from a small demographic such as you deal with , you undoubtedly are indulging in massive generalisations.

The view that the administration will be unaffected by 5,000 redundancies is quite frankly ludicrous never mind what some guy who is charged with selling the deal to the public says.

Indeed the HSE said today that the mental health service is at risk due to the imminent retirement of 1000 mental health nurses and a further derogation of the recruitment moratorium will have to be granted.

As to the current deal presumably you don't have a problem with the 5000 employees receiving decent terms from their employer paricularly as large savings will be made by the employer ?- seems fair to me
 

It is ludicrous and it illustrates the amount of fat within the organisation. This fat is the result of Bertie's capitulation.

Frontline services are a different story. There shouldn't be a recruitment ban in relation to (say) nurses, doctors, firemen, Gardai etc because that ban really is affecting services and putting lives in jeopardy.

But the wasters who work in 'admin'? Cull them immediately and make those left behind actually work for a living.
 

This is nonsense. There has been no analysis that shows that the organisation is 'fat'. They're just cutting because they can, not because they know where the excess staff are.

This demonisation of 'admin' staff is foolish and narrow-minded. The staff who pull the charts and have them ready for the docs are essential to the smooth running of clinics. The staff who maintain the xray machines and the MRI machines are essential. The staff who build and maintain the system that delivers electronic xrays to the relevant docs are essential.
 
Over very many years there have been very many TV reports and newspaper articles that have highlighted inefficiencies and wastage in the PS. It is possible that these are evidence of an unfair, coordinated and sustained anti-PS campaign.
Alternatively, they may reflect the reality of the PS i.e. over-manned, poorly managed and over-paid. As most PS employees are drawn from the same genetic pool as private sector employees, it would seem reasonable to argue that they are generally as clever/stupid as this group. What separates these groups are the realities they face i.e. in the private sector, if the business you work in produces goods/services that are poor quality and/or too expensive - it will not be a business for too much longer. These clever/stupid private sector workers generally respond to crisis quickly e.g new ways of working, pay cuts/freezes etc. Sometimes this is sufficient to sustain the business and their jobs, at other times compulsory redundancies are required - hence the 430,000 jobless.

For the clever/stupid PS employees (including front line staff), there are no real negative consequences for poor quality/service. Where individuals are challenged for below-par performance, they can rely on the union cavalry to ride over the hill to the rescue. As for compulsory redundancy - Ian Paisley's
..Never! Never! Never! comes to mind.

So, given the ubiquity of clever/stupid people across both the PS and private sector, I can only draw the following conclusions:

- That clever/stupid people will tend towards the soft option, if allowed to
- That clever/stupid people will take unpalatable decisions when the consequence of not doing so is even more unpalatable
- That clever/stupid politicians will pander to clever/stupid public servants (e.g. benchmarking) to buy votes
- That the clever/stupid private sector employees (and those on the dole) will no longer take the pain to sustain their PS counterparts in their unsustainable jobs, with their unsustainable pay and conditions..........
 
Last edited:
BazFitz said:
What about the Revenue staff who are attacked for changing the clocks in their office to reflect the hour going back "because it's robbing an OPW guy of his job"?
Click to expand...

Where is the proof that this is happening in any Revenue office in Ireland?

Also, if you take a chainsaw to the 'admin' in our 'joke' of a public service, who is going to suply these services?

Also, where is it mentioned anywhere that there is 2000 staff in HR in the HSE? You keep mentioning it but you have yet to supply any hard facts on these figures. Have you a chip on your shoulder in relation to the HSE or just in relation to the Public Sector in general?
 
From the Horses Mouth;See also: THE POST.IE
 
2000 staff in a HR department is massive no matter what way you look at it. When you compare the figure to the [broken link removed] in total that work for the HSE, it equates to 2% of the workforce in such a diverse organisation.
 
RonanC said:
2000 staff in a HR department is massive no matter what way you look at it. When you compare the figure to the [broken link removed] in total that work for the HSE, it equates to 2% of the workforce in such a diverse organisation.
Click to expand...

I remain unconvinced that all these HR staff are solely corporate HR. I'm HR, not corporate but am pretty sure I'm included in this number.

Sean McGrath in another interview stated that admin levels are on very much on a par to international rates, including NHS.
[broken link removed]

I like him, appreciate we have too many and I have a list of 5 people who could leave HR without anyone even noticing. He was shooting from the hip that day trying to deliver a message on behalf of the government.
 
BazFitz said:
But the wasters who work in 'admin'? Cull them immediately and make those left behind actually work for a living.
Click to expand...

Why are all the wasters in admin do you think? Or do you know?

I don't normally bother with the public service bashing debates but do find it tiresome that it's always admin who are the 'wasters'.
 
DonDub said:
From the Horses Mouth;See also: THE POST.IE
Click to expand...

Hardly from the horse's mouth .

More from the mouth of the guy charged with selling the deal to staff and the media.

The comment that he could "probably get by " with 700/800 HR staff sounds to me that little or no background research has been done prior to unveiling the deal.

It will be a cold day in hell before I take comments from the upper echelons of HR in any large company as being absolute fact when it comes to explaining the rationale for large scale voluntary redundancies/early retirements.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Menu
Log in
Register