Decentralisation

The_Conductor

Not necessarily- if a comprehensive evaluation of the skillsets of those who are being decentralised was ever undertaken there are a large number of very underemployed people at present.

E.g. EOs who came in on open competions into admin positions are actually precluded from taking IT positions (regardless of their qualifications). I am personally aware of a large group of people who have degrees in Computer Science, MCPs and between 3 and 6 years IT experience sitting down at desks processing forms, because of the bureaucratic bull**** that refuses to match people to their skillsets.

This is one big mess......

NewDubliner

>>I am personally aware of a large group of people who have degrees in Computer Science, MCPs and between 3 and 6 years IT experience sitting down at desks processing forms, because of the bureaucratic bull**** that refuses to match people to their skillsets.<<

How come they didn't volunteer to move to Kildare?

The_Conductor

NewDubliner wrote:

How come they didn't volunteer to move to Kildare?

Most of us have done so- but not to IT positions- as we are ineligible to apply for them, regardless of our qualifications....... The only reason we have applied for Kildare at all, is as the least worst option, ideally none of us want to move, lobbing in Kildare (or Drogheda) was a pre-emptive application- so that we do not end up in the middle of nowhere. Obviously, most people have absolutely no intention of upping and moving- but thats only rehashing what you already know......

S.

NewDubliner

smccarrick wrote:

Most of us have done so- but not to IT positions- as we are ineligible to apply for them, regardless of our qualifications
S.

What were the eligibility criteria?

I saw that there might be a selection process, but they just seemed to be inviting anyone with an interest in working in Kildare & didn't indicate any specific IT job descriptions.

The_Conductor

NewDubliner wrote:

What were the eligibility criteria?

I saw that there might be a selection process, but they just seemed to be inviting anyone with an interest in working in Kildare & didn't indicate any specific IT job descriptions.

Eligibility criteria at present are that you can only move to a position at the same grade. The IT positions have allowances attached to them (as IT staff were being poached previously). Thus an EO in the IT section might be denoted as EO JSA (being Executive Officer - Junior Systems Analyst). Someone who entered the service as an EO into an administrative position (regardless of their qualifications) would not be eligible to apply for one of these positions. For the most part the IT staff seem to be looking for "Head-to-Head" transfers- i.e. transfers into other government departments (that preferably are not moving) into a position which carries similar allowances.

A big problem in the civil service is a total and utter ignorance as to what aptitudes (and/or qualifications) staff in general might possess). Thus someone with a masters in an area relevant to the remit of the government department he or she might be a member of- could be stuck behind a desk doing menial administrative work, when they would be far more valuable were they correctly assigned to a task related to their particular skillset.

I have queried this with both the Civil Service Commission and also the Personnel Officer from one government department previously. The Civil Service Commission stated that in the past it almost seemed that there was a policy not to place graduates in departments related to their expertise- but that nowadays, where possible, they attempted to match up recruits as best they could. When assigned to a particular department, it is however then at the discretion of the personnel officer as to what duty they be assigned to. The personnel officer I was talking to stated that he actually had a policy of delibertly not keeping CVs on peoples files (ahhhhh ignorance is bliss......)

Nnnngggggggg!!!!!!

NewDubliner

I think anyone could have applied for the IT areas. Government just wants to fill the quotas. If the staff cannot do the work, it''ll be done for them by off-shore contractors. As long as an FF Minister gets his photo taken opening the new building, it will be declared a success.

Agreed about personnel's ignorance of aptitudes. This is deliberate as the CS is run by generalists whose creed is one of generic 'competancies'. At promotion interviews, to show expertese or a preference to specialise is to commit hari-kari there and then. Many good IT people have been lost as they successfully 'dumbed-down' their IT skills and won promotions into admin areas.

The decision to move all IT work out of Dublin could be seen as part of the Civil Service's offensive against IT grades, knowing that many will find the move unnacceptable.

The barabarians are at the gates & coming over the walls.....

The_Conductor

Sorry- you're wrong.
On the CAF application- you were applying for locations, as opposed to positions. Included on the form you had to put your current rank and location. There was a big row with some of the unions over it- as they suspected that some of their staff who were getting allowances (notably IT and Revenue staff) might loose those allowances were they to move. It was noted as the allowance being granted to the person, as opposed to the job, and were someone else to take that position, they must have similar current entitlements, or else they would face a discrimatory position of doing similar work as their peers, but on a lower payscale.

While there is precedent for the above- it has resulted in sometime massive payouts for the incumbents doing the job on the lower payscale, in particular where there was a perception that their promotional prospects were adversely affected by the actions...... Offhand- you can read up about the "paperkeepers" (where staff were graded below Clerical Officer- and large numbers of them subsequently failed to be promoted and were awarded payouts (about a year ago).

I am not advocating promoting people willy-nilly to fill the positions- even if the civil service seems to be bloody good at doing that. It is far too simplistic an approach to simply hand people a promotion after they have had their bums in a seat for X number of years. The truth of the matter is, this is what is happening though. People who are totally incapable of performing tasks are being promoted beyond their abilities, to the detriment of their staff- solely on seniority grounds. Its endemic.

The current whispers are that while removal expenses or "disturbance expenses" will not be entertained, that the promotion of people into positions, providing they agree to stay in decentralised locations for a 2 year period will be used as an enticement to get people to move. The presumption on the part of those who might possibly avail of such an arrangement- is that they will commute to decentralised locations for a 2 year period, prior to being relocated back to Dublin, 2 years down the road, when the hullabulloo has died down (and more to the point, when the general election is over......)

The whole fiasco sickens me.

joolsveer

smccarrick wrote:

Sorry- you're wrong.
On the CAF application- you were applying for locations, as opposed to positions. Included on the form you had to put your current rank and location. There was a big row with some of the unions over it- as they suspected that some of their staff who were getting allowances (notably IT and Revenue staff) might loose those allowances were they to move. It was noted as the allowance being granted to the person, as opposed to the job, and were someone else to take that position, they must have similar current entitlements, or else they would face a discrimatory position of doing similar work as their peers, but on a lower payscale.

I suspect that the strategy behind decentralising IT posts is to outsource those functions to the private sector when Revenue et al have difficulty filling positions. I agree that the CS does not value specialists. You may say I'm a conspiracy nut but I would say the writing is on the wall for non general service civil servants.

NewDubliner

>>I suspect that the strategy behind decentralising IT posts is to outsource those functions to the private sector when Revenue et al have difficulty filling positions. <<

It's important not to over-simplify what's going on. There's more than just the Government and its Dublin staff in the game.

The scheme is being used as an opportunity by various factions in the Civil Service to gain the upper hand and shaft their opponents. Revenue's independent IT department has constantly been an affront to Finance who want to control all IT. Now Revenue is being forced to move to Kildare along with Finance.

It is ominous that the person considered most likely to take over Revenue's IT department after the retirement of the current director, currently works in Finance and lives 'within easy commuting distance' of Kildare.

The lack of enthusiasm among Revenue IT staff to move is partly because they might abhor & perhaps, even detest the move to Kildare and partly because of the likely situation the where almost all of the department's experience will have been lost & the stress & workload of the remaining experienced staff will rocket.

Kildare & being in the way of a 'new broom' from Finance? Not a nice place to work.

Revenue already outsources quite a bit and it will be ironic if after relocation, it is found that the work continues to be done from Dublin, but by a private sector company at greater cost, plus the salary of a quota of staff to fill the Kildare office, plus the salary of the 'dumped' existing Dublin IT staff.

EK.

The_Conductor

I'm singing off the same hymn sheet!

ishmael whale

http://www.unison.ie/irish_independent/stories.php3?ca=9&si=1257788&issue_id=11469

“Rural move for two key State services at advanced stage
TWO Government services, including a full department, are ready to be decentralised.
Significant progress has been made in clearing the way for the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment and the new Prison Services headquarters to be decentralised to Carlow and Longford.
Tom Parlon, the Minister of State with responsibility for planning the moves, confirmed last night that negotiations in respect of two sites are nearly finalised.
"We have a site in Carlow and a site in Longford and we should be ready to move the planning permission stage very shortly in respect of both locations," he said.
Mr Parlon said 312 staff were required to facilitate moving the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment to Carlow town and 176 applications, nearly two-thirds of the numbers required, have been received.
He pointed out these were first preference choices and the government expected no difficulties in reaching the target when second and third preference choices are taken into account. …………………”

When they talk about filling the posts with ‘second and third preferences’, presumably this will reduce the numbers of people available for the other locations. Or are we not supposed to notice that.

I’m not sure what exact service is being moved to Carlow (well, Parlon doesn’t care so why should I) but people will recall that the move of the Prison Service HQ to Longford will make it more distant from all but one prison. People will also recall that its only a few years since the Prison Service established its present HQ in Clondalkin.

Simultaneously there’s a debate about how we can’t have rights based disability legislation because we don’t have the resources. Yet money is going to be wasted shunting office staff about in such a way as can only increase cost and inefficiency.

Doing things like putting the Garda training school in Templemore might have been acceptable in the days when criminals were as unsophisticated as the people pursuing them. But these days we actually need a return from the money we spend on law enforcement. The Prisons Service should not be seen as offering the kind of oul’ form fillin’ job that might allow someone to vegetate in a small town until they die. It needs to meet objectives, and moving to Longford can only be an obstacle to achieving those objectives.

NewDubliner

Parlon's logic is that once the buildings are built and filled with warm bodies, it's a success.

Note also, the recent article in the Examiner reminding us that 'expressions of interest' are just that. So Parlon is counting his chickens before they're hatched.

cdebru

i heard that rumour as well that parlon is fond of filling warm bodies

ishmael whale

Yes, reason has finally left the country. Why is Dublin is split between two regions? Why are its health services to be ‘co-ordinated’ from Kells and Tullamore? Even the people doing it can’t explain that, they’re just lost in some fantasy where everything has to be moved outside the 01 dialling area for some reason that they can’t quite remember.

Could it be suggested that getting the health services working nationally is more important that farting around with the location of office staff? Could it be suggested that Dublin exists, and no amount of wishful thinking will alter that? Can it be admitted that so much of the time of the Kells and Tullamore offices will be spent dealing with issues occurring in Dublin and services provided from Dublin that locating those offices in Dublin would be the natural choice, just as Galway and Cork are natural locations for HQs for the Western and Southern regions? Why is reality suspended when we head East?

Watch this space for the forthcoming decentralisation of Dublin City Council to Donegal.

http://www.doh.ie/pressroom/pr20040928.html
‘Minister Martin announces structure of Health Service Executive
28 September 2004
Tuesday, 28 September 2004. The regional, local and national structures of the new Health Service Executive have been announced by Minister for Health and Children, Michéal Martin TD. The new organisation becomes effective in January 2005. Commenting, Minister Martin said that "today’s announcement was a further tangible step in progress toward the necessary structural reform of the health system".
"I am very pleased to announce today that the Government has agreed four regional areas of the Health Service Executive; Western, Southern; Dublin/North-East, Dublin/Mid-Leinster. They will be headquartered in Galway City; Cork City; Kells, Co Meath and Tullamore, Co Offaly. These regional centres are not health boards, but rather units which will assist in the co-ordination of services delivered through the local health offices.………..’

Victor

Western, Southern; Dublin/North-East, Dublin/Mid-Leinster.

I wonder where Wexford fits into this.

uncivilservant

uncivilservant wrote:

Finance have held back on releasing the breakdown of CAF applications by grade until next week. Are they hoping we'll forget?

Two weeks on and still no figures released.

It would appear that any further analysis of the CAF figures by grade is an Taoiseach's business alone:

One fifth of the Taoiseach's staff have applied to be relocated outside Dublin despite the fact there are no plans to transfer the department, it emerged today.

Bertie Ahern admitted that some 44 staff, including 12 executive officers, had applied to move away from the capital.

http://www.uncivilservant.com/article.php?id=295

Speaking in the Dáil this afternoon, Mr Ahern said 44 civil servants in his own department - around 20% of the total - had applied to decentralise.

This is even though the Department of the Taoiseach is not moving itself, but Mr Ahern said that the changes would not have any adverse effect on the Department's work.

Mr Ahern added that in the future there would be greater use of information technology and conference call facilities.

The Labour Party leader, Pat Rabbitte, said he knew some of his Cabinet colleagues may not be too happy to be in the same room as the Taoiseach, but video conferencing might be taking things too far.

uncivilservant

Looks like the wait is nearly over...

The chairman of the Decentralisation Implementation Group, Phil Flynn, is to appear before the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Finance to give a progress report on the Government plan to transfer 10,300 civil servants out of Dublin.

He will reveal the latest figures on what grades are applying for what jobs in new areas.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2004/1006/decentralisation

... while relocation to the Probation and Welfare Service in Navan is theoretically oversubscribed, not a single probation officer has applied to fill the 78 probation officer jobs on offer.

A significant proportion of those applying are already based outside Dublin, and are seeking a region to region transfer.

A number of people have also sought transfers to places where there are no jobs for them at their current grade.

NewDubliner

What's the betting they'll release the report on a Friday afternoon?

No doubt, Tom Parlon will point to all the buildings he's acquiring (with superb car parking and promotional prospects) and announce that everything is on schedule.

No wonder so many staff want to leave the Taoiseach's office.....

This just in:

The Chairman of the Decentralisation Implementation Group has told an Oireachtas Committee on Finance that decentralisation can work, but that there are huge problems that must be resolved.
Phil Flynn acknowledged that there could be a breakdown of service to consumers if the relocation programme were not managed efficiently.

He stressed that the programme was voluntary, adding that the concerns of those staff staying in Dublin must also be addressed.
http://www.rte.ie/news/2004/1006/decentralisation.html

EK

ishmael whale

http://www.rte.ie/news/2004/1006/decentralisation.html
“Mr Flynn told the Oireachtas committee that there had never been any intention of big bang instant decentralisation, ……..”

Fine, there was never any big bang planned, no-one ever said they’d complete the programme in three years and the article below from the Irish Examiner last March is obviously in error.
http://www.examiner.ie/pport/web/ireland/Full_Story/did-sgI-tsdBk20ZEsg0aewFBADppk.asp

“In further comments to RTÉ yesterday, Mr Ahern said he was confident Finance Minister Charlie McCreevy could make good on his promise to complete the decentralisation process by the end of 2006."

Can anybody remember why this programme needs to be persisted with? For example, can anybody point out why a core value for the establishment of the new health services agency is it must be located in Naas?

ishmael whale

http://www.examiner.ie/pport/web/ireland/Full_Story/did-sgF6UQQdyqZiYsgHuTLc4nqWo2.asp

06/10/04
Ahern turns tables on decentralisation critic
‘…... “We should try not to think in old-fashioned ways that have more to do with gombeen days,” he [Bertie Ahern] said.”…’

http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_561509335/gombeen_man.html
‘gom•been man
noun Ireland
1. moneylender: a moneylender who charges exorbitant interest
2. entrepreneur: a small-time entrepreneur’
What exactly is Bertie trying (and failing) to say here? To the extent that the only people who seem to be supporting this decentralisation are estate agents it would seem more apt to describe his policy as an example of gombeenism.
But there’s more:
“Professor Walsh’s success in the development of the University of Limerick was a classic example of effective decentralisation, Mr Ahern said, as the former UL president moved to the city 25 years ago because he believed it wasn’t necessary to centralise all higher education facilities.”
Fine, if UL is a classic example of effective decentralisation then why don’t they follow it. Put coherent organisations in suitable locations where they have a function. What the Government is proposing is the equivalent of putting UL’s administration office in Newcastle West, its computer centre in Tullamore, some of its lecture theatres in Templemore etc etc.

Presumably what Bertie means when he points to UL as a precedent is ‘sure there’s a load of culchies taking up space in a building down the bog on publicly funded salaries, and that’s exactly the formula we’re following.”

sceptre

ishmael whale wrote:

What exactly is Bertie trying (and failing) to say here?

Something to do with Albert Reynolds by the looks of things.

NewDubliner

PSEU Has issued a circular at http://www.pseu.ie/docs/Decent17.doc

The enthusiasm of IT staff for the scheme is quite low. Mid to senior management seem to be a particularly revolting bunch....

No figures indicate if the IT staff applying are actually applying for their own IT area or someone else's, so the flight of expertese may be higher. Also,the figures do not include the attitude of the on-site contractors, some of whom may take advantage of the situation & put up their rates or opt to work for more conveniently located organisations.

Also mentioned is that Government is taking the hard line that any provincial staff required to come to Dublin to learn the jobs of the Dublin people whose jobs they are taking, must do so at their own expense.

My own experience suggests that if goverment wanted to hole staff morale below the water line, they've succeeded.


EK

NewDubliner

ishmael whale wrote:

can anybody point out why a core value for the establishment of the new health services agency is it must be located in Naas?

Forthcoming by-election for a FF seat?

parsi

smccarrick wrote:

Eligibility criteria at present are that you can only move to a position at the same grade. The IT positions have allowances attached to them (as IT staff were being poached previously). Thus an EO in the IT section might be denoted as EO JSA (being Executive Officer - Junior Systems Analyst). Someone who entered the service as an EO into an administrative position (regardless of their qualifications) would not be eligible to apply for one of these positions. For the most part the IT staff seem to be looking for "Head-to-Head" transfers- i.e. transfers into other government departments (that preferably are not moving) into a position which carries similar allowances.

That's interesting - in our place IT staff on networks/infrastructure (non-programmers basically) are all General Service and we have internal comeptitions to fill any vacancies...the programming side is a different (analyst) stream but none of us have allowances...

The_Conductor

parsi wrote:

That's interesting - in our place IT staff on networks/infrastructure (non-programmers basically) are all General Service and we have internal comeptitions to fill any vacancies...the programming side is a different (analyst) stream but none of us have allowances...

Its quite possible that its handled differently in the different departments (regardless of the directions that issue from DoF on it). What a mess.....

uncivilservant

It would appear that the Department of Finance are not overly concerned with releasing further analysis of the Decentralisation CAF applications. One can but wonder why.

As NewDubliner pointed out, they are available from the PSEU (excel) & IMPACT (pdf) websites.

Or indeed from the website in my signature.

NewDubliner

Flynn: "“We don’t have answers to some of the questions yet and we don’t even know the extent of the problems, if anything, yet,” he said."

Flynn: "there is no evidence that the scheme will not succeed."


!!!!

Cork

Would it be a fair comment to say that the majority of jobs in our public services are non specialist?

There seems to be an abundance of jobs like clerical officer, staff officer etc.

Where as in the private sector - job descriptions are given with actual jobs.

uncivilservant

Cork wrote:

Would it be a fair comment to say that the majority of jobs in our public services are non specialist?

No, it wouldn't. Please try not to confuse a formalised grade structure with individual expertise and experience; and please try to remember there's a difference between civil servants and public servants as a whole.

There seems to be an abundance of jobs like clerical officer, staff officer etc.

See above.

Where as in the private sector - job descriptions are given with actual jobs.

I'm struggling to find your point.

NewDubliner

Would it be a fair comment to say that the majority of jobs in our public services are non specialist?

That's the 'flat-earth', two dimensional view taken officially by the HR people. It makes recruitment easier & avoids acknowledging particular people who may be valuable experts & specialists, but employed under a generic title. The official dogma is that anyone can do anyone's job at the same grade. But, that's like saying that pianists should be able to sing since they're both in the 'musician' grade. Worse still, there would be a policy of forcing 'pianists' to become 'singers' in the interests of career development.

There seems to be an abundance of jobs like clerical officer, staff officer etc.

These are the 'shelf-packer', 'check-out clerk' grades of the civil service.

Where as in the private sector - job descriptions are given with actual jobs.

This would make recruitment very inconvenient, it's easier to treat people as commodities and stuff them into the next vacancy.

The current reloction scheme is based on this dogma as it would be expensive to try and match skills and expertese to vacancies & all FF wants is 'bums on seats' in new offices, with 'superb car parking'.

uncivilservant

NewDubliner wrote:

These are the 'shelf-packer', 'check-out clerk' grades of the civil service.

I think "junior grades", or perhaps an explanation of their places on the food chain would have sufficed. Those of us that progessed from clerical assistant to the heady heights of civil service middle management are an easily offended lot.


From the publicjobs.gov.ie "Typical Posts and Profiles" page:

Clerical Officer

This is the first step into an exciting career in the Civil Service. Clerical Officers work in all departments in Ireland, providing vital input to the team through a range of general office duties. Promotional opportunities are available to all Clerical Officers when they are made permanent. Clerical Officers need a good general educational standard and a customer focused attitude.

Nice and non-descript. No mention of a "typical" Staff Officer profile*, but in case you are curious I've written one myself.**

Staff Officer

This is the first taste of power for many Civil Servants. Typically female and approaching middle age, you have clawed your way from the black hole that is the Clerical Officer grade. You may now make the lives of your staff a living hell. Promotional opportunities are available to all Staff Officers once they have stayed in the same section for 15 years and their manager wants to get rid of them. Staff Officers need a good educational standard, and a real taste for tea.

* you can't be recruited directly to the SO grade.

** I'm a civil servant, so i'm allowed to make jokes about civil servants. It helps ease the pain.


edit: For those interested, the Typical Posts & Profiles page can be found here: http://www.publicjobs.gov.ie/Civil%20Service%20Career/English/career_information.htm

NewDubliner

Staff Officer.....You may now make the lives of your staff a living hell.

This remark would insult the staff officers that I know. But we jest & to enter into the spirit of things:

Department Secretary.....suggests to the minister that decentralisation can work & watches, with delight, the pain & terror it inflicts on his/her rivals as morale in their departments plummets & chaos looms. Equally, observes the panic & despair among one's own staff. That'll keep them on their toes!

AP, PO....agrees at meetings that decentralisation can work & that (s)he is totally comitted to it .....in the hope of making Assistant Secretary some day. (Hopes to have moved on before the hard bit comes.)

The rest: Not consulted anyway. Too busy working & mostly hopes it'll go away.

uncivilservant

NewDubliner wrote:

The rest: Not consulted anyway. Too busy working & mostly hopes it'll go away.

Spot on.

Interestingly enough, the most frequent comment i have heard in relation to the CAF figures is "I wonder what the numbers will look like when they actually ask people to move?"

Personally speaking, I can't wait.

The_Conductor

NewDubliner wrote:

The rest: Not consulted anyway. Too busy working & mostly hopes it'll go away.

One particular department which will remain nameless, had a Christmas party in their HQ in 1996 to celebrate their last year in their Kildare Street office (which was to be handed over to the Houses of the Oireachtas (mostly for the car parking spaces- cynical me, never).

The voluntery decentralisation of that department was never completed....

Lesson number 1- Nothing happens fast.

Lesson number 2- Politics and promises from on high are nothing more than hot air.

Lesson number 3- If you cry wolf, don't expect to be believed.

S.

Cork

uncivilservant wrote:

I'm struggling to find your point.

Many jobs within the state sector are jobs without specific job descriptions. Should this not help with decentralising people?

With the influx of many graduates into the state sector - a comprehensive skills audit is clearly needed.

uncivilservant

Cork wrote:

Many jobs within the state sector are jobs without specific job descriptions. Should this not help with decentralising people?

Well if the people performing those jobs had acquired no skills, had no attained no experience and had received no job-specific training, then yes. Yes it would.

Please refer back to my initial reply to your post.

With the influx of many graduates into the state sector - a comprehensive skills audit is clearly needed.

http://www.bettergov.ie/index.asp?locID=151

The_Conductor

Cork wrote:

Many jobs within the state sector are jobs without specific job descriptions. Should this not help with decentralising people?

With the influx of many graduates into the state sector - a comprehensive skills audit is clearly needed.

Actually one of the central tenents of the PMDS that all civil servants signed up to (as part of benchmarking) was role profiles and job descriptions- as a manner for objectively measuring performance (with debatable reliability- but I'm not going there).

Strictly speaking we all have role profiles, and job descriptions (normally based on the divisional work plan- which is totally redrawn annually and reviewed twice a year to monitor compliance).

PMDS :mad:

http://www.bettergov.ie/index.asp?locID=165&docID=-1

S.

The_Conductor

uncivilservant wrote:

Well if the people performing those jobs had acquired no skills, had no attained no experience and had received no job-specific training, then yes. Yes it would.

Please refer back to my initial reply to your post.

http://www.bettergov.ie/index.asp?locID=151

Beat me to it!



S.

parsi

uncivilservant wrote:

Nice and non-descript. No mention of a "typical" Staff Officer profile*, but in case you are curious I've written one myself.**


* you can't be recruited directly to the SO grade.

You forgot to mention that in many departments they are becoming an anachronism being replaced by EOs.

Regarding the earlier comments about being "generalists" this is quite true. I work in IT but started off in a Line section. Theroretically I could go back there on Monday. If I transferred to another Department I could end up anywhere without heed to my qualifications and experience..it's the way of the service..

uncivilservant

parsi wrote:

You forgot to mention that in many departments they are becoming an anachronism being replaced by EOs.

Regarding the earlier comments about being "generalists" this is quite true. I work in IT but started off in a Line section. Theroretically I could go back there on Monday. If I transferred to another Department I could end up anywhere without heed to my qualifications and experience..it's the way of the service..

There are many, many people in the same situation, working in IT sections (of smaller departments, usually) that aren't considered "proper" IT sections by Finance / CMOD because they are staffed by general service grades.

It's an issue not just confined to IT, though - the same holds true for any roles dependent on experienced, trained staff. While it has always been feasible to transfer or promote one or two people in and out of these sections at a time without greatly affecting the running of the operation, the idea that a mass relocation can occur across the board and everything will be ok because these are all general service staff is absolutely farcical.

NewDubliner

smccarrick wrote:

Actually one of the central tenents of the PMDS that all civil servants signed up to (as part of benchmarking) was role profiles and job descriptions- as a manner for objectively measuring performance (with debatable reliability- but I'm not going there).S.

I was on a PMDS course. The people who drew it up were totally out of touch with the work actually done in my department. The examples were pure textbook 'Maura works as a HEO in the minister's private secretary's office....'.

What would have been more relevant would be 'Sean is a systems analyst using buggy software selected by cheapest tender, trying to get the minister's e-government project working after the consultants have left.'

The_Conductor

Or- S. was instructed to tailor the divisions work plan into a neatly packaged role profile for himself. He was specifically ordered not to mention new areas of work that he inherited from other sections, or the work that he is now doing because the other 2 EOs in the section are on career breaks. When he queried why the role profile bore no resemblence whatsoever to his job, he was told- "because its what everyone else is doing, we need it for benchmarking, you are not paid to be different". No, maybe not, but we are all paid to do jobs. Like to see someone sit down in my chair and try to figure out what I was doing without suffering heartfailure.

S.

The_Conductor

parsi wrote:

You forgot to mention that in many departments they are becoming an anachronism being replaced by EOs.

Regarding the earlier comments about being "generalists" this is quite true. I work in IT but started off in a Line section. Theroretically I could go back there on Monday. If I transferred to another Department I could end up anywhere without heed to my qualifications and experience..it's the way of the service..

This was actually a smart move on the part of Personnel managers. The new guidelines are that all EO recruitment going forward, is to be strictly graduate recruitment. What this means is the AO grade is effectively being phased out, in favour of the low cost EOs. However, it also means that incompetent low skilled imbeciles who were promoted to EO solely through seniority- having their arses ploked on a seat for X number of years, will have to fight a lot harder to justify their existence. And rather laughably- as EOs, they no longer have Blair Horan and friends in the CPSU to fight their matches for them- they are now stuck with the PSEU. Hah!

S.

Cork

This PMDS thing seems flakey. Would a good supervisor be an effective alternative to PMDS.

I worked in the state sector for a while in a tiny department. I was the only person in the department not to be sent on training courses & when I used to ask my supervisor for direction - the response that I used get was "what do you think yourself?". I think the plave was very grade concious & saw me as a threat.

Any criticisms that I used get were completely OTT. I went and talked to personnel & they reccommended that I get a transfer out of there. They transferred me into a pen pushing job that did not make use of any of my skills.

My point being that PMDS sounds ok but you don't see such fluff in the private sector. Money that is being spend on PMDS should be spend on consulting staff who are the ones that are more in tune in what is happening within these very same organisations.

lucernarian

Could we get back to the topic? I still feel that there are benefits to Decentralisation but I cannot see it being implemented successfully if civil servants are opposed to it.

The_Conductor

Ok- back on topic- I filled out my decentralisation form and left all the items blank, with a note at the bottom stating that I had no interest in decentralising, that I was only filling out the form at all under duress.
This morning (Saturday....) the Civil Service Commission rang me, querying my lack of enthusiasm (obviously not too many others thought of playing mind games with them )
In light of the fact that I "do not want to leave Dublin" I am now enrolled for Naas, Newbridge and Drogheda- as the guy on the phone put it- "sure, you're only hedging your options, when we offer you a place you don't have to take it, and you might know whats happening to the Dublin people who want to stay put a bit further down the road". He stated that all of them in there are doing likewise (as they don't want to go to Youghal).

So- I am now signed up for 3 different locations, in a total of 6 different government departments (including one that still hasn't confirmed its moving (Health and Children to Naas), despite the fact that I have no great enthusiasm for moving.

Yup- another number on Tom Parlon's roll call.......

uncivilservant

To_be_confirmed wrote:

Could we get back to the topic? I still feel that there are benefits to Decentralisation but I cannot see it being implemented successfully if civil servants are opposed to it.

Considering that literally thousands of individuals will be required to transfer between departments & be retrained in order to facilitate this relocation plan, I would think a discussion about personnel & development policies in the civil service is very, very much on topic.

uncivilservant

smccarrick wrote:

Ok- back on topic- I filled out my decentralisation form and left all the items blank, with a note at the bottom stating that I had no interest in decentralising, that I was only filling out the form at all under duress.
This morning (Saturday....) the Civil Service Commission rang me, querying my lack of enthusiasm (obviously not too many others thought of playing mind games with them )
In light of the fact that I "do not want to leave Dublin" I am now enrolled for Naas, Newbridge and Drogheda- as the guy on the phone put it- "sure, you're only hedging your options, when we offer you a place you don't have to take it, and you might know whats happening to the Dublin people who want to stay put a bit further down the road". He stated that all of them in there are doing likewise (as they don't want to go to Youghal).

So- I am now signed up for 3 different locations, in a total of 6 different government departments (including one that still hasn't confirmed its moving (Health and Children to Naas), despite the fact that I have no great enthusiasm for moving.

Yup- another number on Tom Parlon's roll call.......

let me get this straight - there are people working in the CSCLAC today, being paid saturday overtime, in order to drum up more numbers?

Good grief.

The_Conductor

Yup!
Wonderful isn't it (sarcasm dripping....)

S.

NewDubliner

Could we get back to the topic? I still feel that there are benefits to Decentralisation but I cannot see it being implemented successfully if civil servants are opposed to it.

I think we need to distinguish between the current scheme of public servant relocation and real decentralisation, properly planned and executed.

We also need to distinguish between opposition to decentralisation and staff making a personal, quality of life choice, not to relocate.

Discussion of PMDS and HR policy is quite relevant as malpractices in HR management will be amplified by the current scheme.

The costs and benefits of what is called 'decentralisation' have neither been clearly identified nor agreed. Mostly, the scheme is based on guesswork.

E.K.