The Difficult task of Public Service reform.

[horusd]

The Garda's GRA have begun the probably inevitable attempts to protect their patch and face down Gov't cutbacks/reform. The argument seems to be they cannot endure staff reductions without affecting services. The idea that only staff numbers and not work practices, inefficencies, inadequate management systems, etc impact on services is a complete misnomer. The idea that they should be excluded from staff cut-backs is also an exercise in Me Feinism, muscle flexing & sectional power interests and not at all connected to the realities facing the state. Other powerful sectional interests in the Public Services will likely follow suit. How can such endemic vested interests be reined in?

 

[Chris]

I believe the simple answer is that they can't or won't be reined in unless you remove unions from the equation.
The problem I have with idea of savings through increases in efficiency is that they will not be immediate enough and will also not provide enough savings. As I have said numerous times before, it makes no sense in cutting back on services that are most essential and fully belong in the obligations of government. I would much rather see the cutting of entire services that can be done without in order to get state spending under control. There is still no real understanding in the public and especially political arena of how serious the state overspend really is and what the consequences will be as interest rates go up.

 

[Deiseblue]

The GRA's comments & the recent Government comments are the first salvoes in what is going to be an ongoing posturing comments led war by both sides prior to the upcoming Croke Park Review & budget - very much par for the course.

We can expect more of the same from all of the Unions representing Public Sector employees , personally I would prefer to see a more unified Union response but given the vast segmented nature of the Public Sector & the number of Unions involved that is probably not going to happen.

I would also contend that one man's endemic vested interest is another man's Trade Union charged with protecting terms & conditions

 

[csirl]

I think the GRA (and other public service unions) are not respecting the fact that we live in a democracy. We elected a government and that government decides what services should be provided and to what standard.

The GRA need to accept the democratic choice to downgrade the service offered by the Gardai (if this is what is happening). They may not like the fact that they are being told that they are not quite as important as they think they are and that there will be certain aspects of their non-core services that will not be delivered or delivered to a lower standard - but that's democracy. The people have the right to make these choices via their government.

 

[sulo]

http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/1117/publicservice.html

Announcement today sometime!.. Interested as part of one of the Quangos being merged/dispanded!...

 

[onq]

300,000 to 282,500 by 2015?

Too little, too late and no credit to the government.

That works out at under 2% per annum over three years (5.833%)

Annual 2% reduction will be reached by retirement, natural attrition and no replacement of leavetakers.

 

[Firefly]

http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/1117/publicservice.html

Announcement today sometime!.. Interested as part of one of the Quangos being merged/dispanded!...

I suspect that most of the quangos will just be merged into the relevant government departments with no job loses. Very little change to the bottom line but makes the government look good. As in the real world if services are not needed or more importantly not affordable the staff should be let go.

 

[shnaek]

Voluntary redundancy is like doing surgery with a spoon.

 

[Shawady]

300,000 to 282,500 by 2015?

Too little, too late and no credit to the government.

You're ingnoring the numbers of PS that have left already. I heard a figure of 35,000 less public servants by 2015. Whatever way it is reached, it is not insignificant.
I'll be more interested in the future of many of the Quangos. I remember Prime Time did a special on these a couple of years ago and the % of people on higher salaries seemed excessive.

 

[Mpsox]

300,000 to 282,500 by 2015?

Too little, too late and no credit to the government.

QUOTE]

or better late then never

 

[Booter]

300,000 to 282,500 by 2015?

Too little, too late and no credit to the government.

That works out at under 2% per annum over three years (5.833%)

Annual 2% reduction will be reached by retirement, natural attrition and no replacement of leavetakers.

Why would that matter?

 

[onq]

Voluntary redundancy is like doing surgery with a spoon.

(chuckle)

Exactly.

It seems axiomatic that the wrong people go and service is reduced while cost is not reduced.

Last night there was comment that there would be little reduction in overall costs merely by the elimination of the quangos.

 

[onq]

Why would that matter?

I didn't say it would matter.
I pointed out that's how it would be achieved.
What matters is that we need deeper cuts and quicker to balance the books.
Otherwise we keep borrowing endlessly and foisting it on future generations to pay.

 

[onq]

You're ingnoring the numbers of PS that have left already. I heard a figure of 35,000 less public servants by 2015. Whatever way it is reached, it is not insignificant.
I'll be more interested in the future of many of the Quangos. I remember Prime Time did a special on these a couple of years ago and the % of people on higher salaries seemed excessive.

I wasn't intending to ignore them Shawady.

I was commenting on the figures quoted.

 

[onq]

I suspect that most of the quangos will just be merged into the relevant government departments with no job loses. Very little change to the bottom line but makes the government look good. As in the real world if services are not needed or more importantly not affordable the staff should be let go.

That is apparently what's not happening.
Initial comment seems to suggest that this measure will have little effect.
I assumed that when the Quangos were disbanded the personnel would be retired or at least lose any additional remuneration.

 

[Purple]

It should also be remembered that over half of the bodies being “rationalised” were put on the chopping block by the last government. In reality what our new minister has come up with is an additional dozen or so quangos to be cut.
I suspect that the unions had their hands all over this before it was given to Minister Howlin. Something like ”There you go Brendan, go and read that out, there’s a good lad” and with a pat on the head off he went to the Dail to tell us what SIPTU were doing to reform the Public Service.

I don’t know why Enda is so upset about the Germans reading our budget proposals before he gets to announce it to the public; he should be more concerned about the relationship between the Public Sector unions and his coalition partners.

 

[Firefly]

Annual 2% reduction will be reached by retirement, natural attrition and no replacement of leavetakers.

Just on the retirement thing..I play golf with a university lecturer and was talking to him about this topic last week. Because of the changes to the pension arrangements he has to retire - he doesn't want to and loves his work. He has vast experience and is too young in his book (very early 60s). The result is that he will receive half his current salary and his position will have to be filled...so in effect we will be paying 50% more for the same service. To top it off he has picked up some part time lecturing in another 3rd level institution which is denying someone else a living. I think we all know that cuts have to be made but it seems with these pension changes the most experienced and most expensive workers are being siphoned off...

 

[Booter]

I didn't say it would matter.
I pointed out that's how it would be achieved.
What matters is that we need deeper cuts and quicker to balance the books.
Otherwise we keep borrowing endlessly and foisting it on future generations to pay.

Okay let me ask a different way, do you think it matters?
If you do, why?
If you don't, why mention it?

 

[horusd]

Voluntary redundancy is like doing surgery with a spoon.

Brilliant line, and very true. I don't get the ethos of embargo's and the voluntary redundancy thing at all. We need flexibility and finesse, these are too blunt. What is the problem with simply saying that public services, by and large, will be run as commerical private businesses contracting to the state, including private pension arrangements. Set that as the target, L.T. and apply proper accountable management structures to achieve it.

 

[Delboy]

Brilliant line, and very true. I don't get the ethos of embargo's and the voluntary redundancy thing at all. We need flexibility and finesse, these are too blunt. What is the problem with simply saying that public services, by and large, will be run as commerical private businesses contracting to the state, including private pension arrangements. Set that as the target, L.T. and apply proper accountable management structures to achieve it.

nothing wrong with that approach at all....except it won't happen- the unions will not allow it and the Govt won't take them on.
Vol Sev sees the better/more experienced people take the cash and leave- a lot of them can pick up a bit of work elsewhere if need be, as they have the drive, the knowledge, the reputation.
Meanwhile, the wasters stay on the payroll....and public services continue to under perform