There are times the limb is so badly infected that it must be amputated in order that the patient recovers.So you are blaming each and every employee for the stupid legislation and poor management of the RTB?
There are times the limb is so badly infected that it must be amputated in order that the patient recovers.So you are blaming each and every employee for the stupid legislation and poor management of the RTB?
There are times the limb is so badly infected that it must be amputated in order that the patient recovers.
I would tend to agree with this. Setting up a system like this should be relatively straightforward.Not sure that makes any sense in this context.
The RTB has been useful in dispute resolution and keeping things out of the courts, mostly.
The legislation was skewed to favour new (large) landlords I can see no other reason for it. Nothing anyone in RTB could do about that.
Its also been hamstrung with being under resourced. But you'd have to say it's processes were poorly thought out and then they tried a systems migration which was compounded by the existing processes and poorly executed. Otherwise I wouldn't been asked to register multiple times, unable to look up my records, lost my records, lost my login, required me to register yet again, in order to unregister. That ticks all the boxes of failed system.
In addition RTB has been used (in my opinion) to confusticate the reporting landscape. Their metrics have changed so the data can't be compared and the data is oddly at odds with the situation on the ground but oddly in line with govt policy.
While I'd be the first to say data and statistics often disprove what is thought to be true but aren't. But the discordance of their reporting, gives me no confidence in it. If feels like it's been selective edited to construct a narrative. The ambiguity to the terms used reinforces that impression.
So it's either being poorly managed, or more likely there is considerable political (govt) interference.
Always found it odd that the Revenue ROS system worked well from its inception. Revenue are always very proactive when glitches arise. Likewise, online banking works so smoothly too.
What the RTB's register does is far simpler than either of the above, yet it crashed literally within hours of its roll out and took months to resolve. They obviously never did a live test of the original iteration; an unbelievable omission.
Likewise, their previous register was completely wrong. Duplicate registrations were allowed. Spent registrations were never taken down. This went on for years because they were clueless this was happening. One look at the register should have led them to ask why some properties had multiple tenancies attached.
Landlords had a better chance going to court than they do with the RTB. They are a woeful organisation and have been so from the very beginning. They have migrated to different systems since their inception, each of them difficult to navigate or catastrophic. They are raking in money, lack of resources is not the issue.Not sure that makes any sense in this context.
The RTB has been useful in dispute resolution and keeping things out of the courts, mostly.
The legislation was skewed to favour new (large) landlords I can see no other reason for it. Nothing anyone in RTB could do about that.
Its also been hamstrung with being under resourced. But you'd have to say it's processes were poorly thought out and then they tried a systems migration which was compounded by the existing processes and poorly executed. Otherwise I wouldn't been asked to register multiple times, unable to look up my records, lost my records, lost my login, required me to register yet again, in order to unregister. That ticks all the boxes of failed system.
In addition RTB has been used (in my opinion) to confusticate the reporting landscape. Their metrics have changed so the data can't be compared and the data is oddly at odds with the situation on the ground but oddly in line with govt policy.
While I'd be the first to say data and statistics often disprove what is thought to be true but aren't. But the discordance of their reporting, gives me no confidence in it. If feels like it's been selective edited to construct a narrative. The ambiguity to the terms used reinforces that impression.
So it's either being poorly managed, or more likely there is considerable political (govt) interference.
Obviously they are never going to do as I suggested as that would make too much sense.
Getting rid of staff is rooted in my own experience of a company I worked for buying a poorly performing competitor and trying to incorporate it once job duplication had been executed.
This company and staff were rooted to the poorest of practice, procedures and old ways of doing things. It was an enormous undertaking to get them to adapt and change and many on our side were of the view that it was a pity they were rescued in the first place.
Voluntary redundancy or move them across other deptsChanging ingrained corporate culture is one thing. A unionised public sector organisation is entirely different. They are not the same.
You can't run a loss making public service on the lines as profit generating company.
He is a new appointment and is only interim. Niall Byrne, the previous head, resigned suddenly at the end of last year.Owen Keegan is a good guy. Is he a new appointment?
It would be a tough ship to turn around, but he would be well placed to do it if he has the resources.
That IT farce is a good example.
Brendan
Voluntary redundancy or move them across other depts
Given there is 110 (circa) of them presumed this would be achievable but no, don't have any examples of it except where it occurs on an individual basis.Can you give an example of such in the Irish Public Sector. Closest I've seen is early retirement. Tbh all the better people grab it, and all it does is shred the organisation of the best people. Same in private sector tbh.
Owen Keagan is probably counting you 3 times, no wonder there is a 10% rise in a few months.RTB and efficiency are two different animals.
In the past week I got 9, yes 9 separate notifications and 3 text messages for the annual registration of the same property and 3 email messages regarding same property.
Given there is 110 (circa) of them presumed this would be achievable but no, don't have any examples of it except where it occurs on an individual basis.