CPSU - will ask the Government to ease the impact....

Dannyboy83

A UNION for more than 13,000 lower-paid public servants will seek pay increases after a new report claimed the Croke Park deal has delivered €1.5bn in savings.

The Civil, Public and Services Union (CPSU) revealed it will ask the Government to ease the impact of the pension levy and pay cuts on members' wages as savings are ahead of target.

It will invoke a clause in the deal that says state employees earning €35,000 a year or less will get first call if there is any reversal of a pension levy and pay cuts -- which slashed 14pc from wages.

The clause says this can only happen if an annual pay review finds "sufficient savings" have been made.
.
.
.

Brendan Howlin is minister for reform........so why not reform?

I have no problem with people on 100k getting a pay rise - if they deserve it -
and we don't want to see someone on 35k (low earner) getting one, if they don't deserve it.

Few outside the public sector get incremental pay rises.
It's all performance based.

Either this reform is communicated to the unions - once and for all - or we are going to find ourselves back in this quagmire everytime the economy 'ebbs and flows'.

Why doesn't Brendan Howlin enforce this?

Godge

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

Brendan Howlin is minister for reform........so why not reform?

I have no problem with people on 100k getting a pay rise - if they deserve it -
and we don't want to see someone on 35k (low earner) getting one, if they don't deserve it.

Few outside the public sector get incremental pay rises.
It's all performance based.

Either this reform is communicated to the unions - once and for all - or we are going to find ourselves back in this quagmire everytime the economy 'ebbs and flows'.

Why doesn't Brendan Howlin enforce this?

Here is the implementation body report.

http://implementationbody.gov.ie/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Second-Progress-Report.pdf


Read it and inform yourself before going on a rant.

Bits_n_Bobs

Interesting piece about the saintly CPSU folk today by Dan O'Brien in the Irish Times.
Full Article:

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2012/0614/1224317876839.html

Basically the reform in question is the removal of the glass panels between the impoverished citizens drawing the dole, and the ordinary decent frontline wuuurkers in the CPSU. It's thought that this might lessen the humiliation of drawing the dole and allow a modicum of dignity for the citizen as he deals with the civil servant.

However the civil servants think this is a very bad thing indeed, and are threatening a strike if it's implemented, an attitude that grosses me out.

The Muppet

Bits_n_Bobs wrote: »

However the civil servants think this is a very bad thing indeed, and are threatening a strike if it's implemented, an attitude that grosses me out.

Perhaps they have reason to think it's a bad idea, why were the panels introduced ?

Have you experience of working in this environment to allow you make an informed opinion of whether these barriers are required or not?

I don't btw but i can imagine if I did the protection would be useful.

Sand

In fairness, I know of one low ranking civil servant who was attacked and wounded by a member of the public reaching in and under the glass panel. I can understand that civil servants might be afraid of being attacked by members of the public if the glass panel was removed.

But Id note that the case I'm aware of occurred despite the glass panel, that members of the public with a grievance could equally wait outside until a civil servant leaves in the evening, and that planning for the worst doesn't always mean best practice.

Lets face it, even if civil servants are protected behind glass panels, the ordinary members of the public are not. Surely the best solution is to deal with the dangerous maniacs rather than only considering it a problem if they interact with a civil servant without a glass panel to defend the civil servant? It might require a re-ordering of priorities in Official Ireland so that low level criminality (i.e. whatever does not impact them) is not tolerated though. Effort...easier to just have glass panels.

Bits_n_Bobs

You're right. Unemployed people are clearly a menace. We should segregate them, maybe give them some sort of badges so we can identify them and set up some area where we contain them.

Actually if we remove their citizenship entirely then the nice people in the cpsu will be able to treat them like the dangerous scum they are.

The Muppet

Bits_n_Bobs wrote: »

You're right. Unemployed people are clearly a menace. We should segregate them, maybe give them some sort of badges so we can identify them and set up some area where we contain them.

Actually if we remove their citizenship entirely then the nice people in the cpsu will be able to treat them like the dangerous scum they are.

Suppose I can take it the answer to my questions is no.

everyone has the right to work in a safe environment.

rumour

The Muppet wrote: »

everyone has the right to work in a safe environment.

Yes lets have some safety legislation and some more safety rights for the army and the fire brigade.

Dannyboy83

Godge wrote: »

Here is the implementation body report.

http://implementationbody.gov.ie/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Second-Progress-Report.pdf


Read it and inform yourself before going on a rant.

:rolleyes:
Here is my post:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=79200728&postcount=1

Read it and inform yourself before jumping to a conclusion.

Godge

Bits_n_Bobs wrote: »

Interesting piece about the saintly CPSU folk today by Dan O'Brien in the Irish Times.
Full Article:

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2012/0614/1224317876839.html

Basically the reform in question is the removal of the glass panels between the impoverished citizens drawing the dole, and the ordinary decent frontline wuuurkers in the CPSU. It's thought that this might lessen the humiliation of drawing the dole and allow a modicum of dignity for the citizen as he deals with the civil servant.

However the civil servants think this is a very bad thing indeed, and are threatening a strike if it's implemented, an attitude that grosses me out.

Eh, don't they have those panels in banks, post offices, motor taxation offices, insurance company offices and anywhere else where similar monetary issues are being dealt with? Why should private sector bank workers be protected by glass panels but public sector social welfare office employees not be similarly protected?

sarumite

Godge wrote: »

Why should private sector bank workers be protected by glass panels but public sector social welfare office employees not be similarly protected?

In fairness, it is rare to hear of armed guys going into to rob the Welfare Office. At least its a rarer event than in banks/post offices.

Head The Wall

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

Brendan Howlin is minister for reform........so why not reform?

I have no problem with people on 100k getting a pay rise - if they deserve it -
and we don't want to see someone on 35k (low earner) getting one, if they don't deserve it.

Few outside the public sector get incremental pay rises.
It's all performance based.

Either this reform is communicated to the unions - once and for all - or we are going to find ourselves back in this quagmire everytime the economy 'ebbs and flows'.

Why doesn't Brendan Howlin enforce this?

How many actual CPSU members received a 14% paycut. As far as I can recall it was around 5% each time and there was also a tax credit for the pension Levy to reduce it further. There is also the matter of payrises received since in the form of increments. We have had CPSU members on here telling us their gross now is higher than 2008 levels.

astrofool

The CPSU asking for pay rises given the state of the public finances is wrong.

Removing glass panels in a feigned effect to confer dignity on the unemployed is equally wrong and stupid.

femur61

Since we have to borrow 20bn every year to keep our PS The CPSU should be telling others in the PS to get realistic. We are a small country 15 times smaller than the UK, France, Germany but yet some e.g consultants get wages far in excess to what their conterparts in these countries are getting. The CPSU should be putting pressure on unions in other areas to stop being greedy.

BigEejit

I was with my wife in the social welfare office in galway and saw a nutter picking up chairs and flaking them against the windows protecting the staff. Roaring at them that he needed more money. I think they need that protection because sooner or later some drugged up lunatic will attack one with a knife.

bleg

BigEejit wrote: »

I was with my wife in the social welfare office in galway and saw a nutter picking up chairs and flaking them against the windows protecting the staff. Roaring at them that he needed more money. I think they need that protection because sooner or later some drugged up lunatic will attack one with a knife.

Meh, there are plenty of robberies involving knives and guns in many different premises around the country. I was held up at gunpoint in a pharmacy. Should all pharmacies/shops put up protective glass?


Anyway, getting back to the original point. Performance based pay increases are the order of the day.

opti0nal

bleg wrote: »

Anyway, getting back to the original point. Performance based pay increases are the order of the day.

And, how would you measure performance, say, for a customer-service person in a dole office?

thebman

I presume this is just a token announcement because of Leo's statement earlier in the week.

woodoo

I agree with keeping the screens, why should a someone be put at risk of assault. I think now is no the time for a payrise though.

jank

opti0nal wrote: »

And, how would you measure performance, say, for a customer-service person in a dole office?

Exactly, not really a skilled job now is it!

golfwallah

opti0nal wrote: »

And, how would you measure performance, say, for a customer-service person in a dole office?

It may not have happened to date in the Irish civil service, but it is, indeed, possible to measure performance for clerical grades. To be effective this would have to happen in the context of an overall performance management process, eventually covering all staff, and I see no reason why this couldn’t be done in the context of the Croke Park Agreement.

And I am not saying this from the point of view of trying to take some sort of advantage over clerical grades. In fact, there are many advantages for the vast majority of employees in a properly implemented performance management process.

It would, perhaps, be seen initially as a way for management to “get one over” on the lower grades and that part needs to be managed as part of a overall change management process- but is certainly is possible.

When you consider that the biggest element of public service expenditure relates to staff costs, there needs to be a lot more attention paid to getting as much as possible for this huge spend in terms of outcomes for the state, the customer and the employee. This includes people development, better teamwork, meaningful goal setting, coaching on the job, ongoing feedback on performance, etc. It also means dealing with poor performers, which is the hard part and the bit that unions become very defensive about. But poor performance relates only to a small proportion of employees and can and should be addressed, rather than be ignored and left to fester, as often happens.

Performance Management Processes are based on the concepts of planning, goal setting, coaching, appraisal and feedback. There is a lot of material available on performance management, for example:

http://www.mpo.gov.mt/downloads/pmpguide.pdf

http://www.cheshire.ie/docs/staff/performance/Competency%20Framework%20-%20Management%20Level.pdf

http://www.oic.gov.ie/en/AboutUs/PolicyDocuments/HumanResourceManagementStrategy/Name,148,en.htm

20Cent

jank wrote: »

Exactly, not really a skilled job now is it!

Dealing with people some of whom are distressed and upset through the labyrinth of the social welfare system requires training, skill and experience.

Oafley Jones

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

Few outside the public sector get incremental pay rises.
It's all performance based.

I'd imagine it's more than you think. Every place I worked while in college had incremental pay rises.. ranging from Dunnes Stores to Apple computers and Flextronics.

opti0nal

golfwallah wrote: »

Performance Management Processes are based on the concepts of planning, goal setting, coaching, appraisal and feedback. There is a lot of material available on performance management, for example:

Sounds great. Could you provide some examples, here, of measurable goals that would be applied to dole clerks?

gerryo777

Bits_n_Bobs wrote: »

You're right. Unemployed people are clearly a menace. We should segregate them, maybe give them some sort of badges so we can identify them and set up some area where we contain them.

Actually if we remove their citizenship entirely then the nice people in the cpsu will be able to treat them like the dangerous scum they are.

Maybe the CPSU would like them to wear a bell or something around their necks, you know, like lepers.
That way, even if they seen/heard them on the street, they could cross to the other side.

PS unions should be banned in this country, they're a disgrace.
The country is broke and yet they continue, and are allowed to continue to hold a gun to the governments head.

The CPA should be scrapped and if people don't like the new conditions set by the elected government trying to balance the books, they know where the airport is.....

gerryo777

Oafley Jones wrote: »

I'd imagine it's more than you think. Every place I worked while in college had incremental pay rises.. ranging from Dunnes Stores to Apple computers and Flextronics.

The private sector can give all the pay rises they want, so what?
Private sector workers are not paid for from exchequer funds.

thebman

Oafley Jones wrote: »

I'd imagine it's more than you think. Every place I worked while in college had incremental pay rises.. ranging from Dunnes Stores to Apple computers and Flextronics.

Go back to the likes of Dunnes and see are they still getting incremental pay rises now though when there is more people applying for the jobs than they need to do them.

bleg

opti0nal wrote: »

And, how would you measure performance, say, for a customer-service person in a dole office?

I'm no expert in the area but here are a few that I can think of off the top of my head:

"Customer" satisfaction - random polling of dole recipients over the phone.
Measuring the time they take to complete a portion of work - are they slower than their co workers or what would be expected.
Bringing ideas/ innovation to the table.

I'm sure if you googled it you'd probably find a whole industry dedicated to looking at business metrics like this...

unit 1

gerryo777 wrote: »

The private sector can give all the pay rises they want, so what?
Private sector workers are not paid for from exchequer funds.

The ones who provide goods and services to any state agency are.
Just as virtually all those who worked in road and public infrastructure were.

There is an obnoxious lust for bloodletting in the ps without acknowledging the silent cull that has already happened, ie those who worked in the labour intensive construction side of government expenditure.

gerryo777

unit 1 wrote: »

The ones who provide goods and services to any state agency are.
Just as virtually all those who worked in road and public infrastructure were.

There is an obnoxious lust for bloodletting in the ps without acknowledging the silent cull that has already happened, ie those who worked in the labour intensive construction side of government expenditure.

An 'obnoxious lust'?

The PS badly need a dose of reality!

The Germans must scoff at us looking for an easing of our debt burden when they see the equivalent PS worker in Ireland being paid about 1/3 more than they are.

The sense of entitlement in our PS, especially from those who have been there for some time is astonishing.

I laughed at the report last week about the 'savings' of €1.5 billion in the PS.

Do they want to be applauded for doing their jobs correctly?

It'll take a long time to claw back the wastage of the last 20 years.

Cuddlesworth

Oafley Jones wrote: »

I'd imagine it's more than you think. Every place I worked while in college had incremental pay rises.. ranging from Dunnes Stores to Apple computers and Flextronics.

Yearly inflation based pay rises, with a tiny percentage towards term of service. That's what they were. If you wanted more then that you had to work hard to get it. Plenty of private company's have both taken reductions in salary and implemented play freezes in the last number of years due to Financial restrictions.

Increments were not and never will be comparable to that. I still don't understand why they were ever implemented in the first place.

opti0nal

bleg wrote: »

I'm no expert in the area but here are a few that I can think of off the top of my head:

Have you any working examples?

bleg wrote: »

I'm sure if you googled it you'd probably find a whole industry dedicated to looking at business metrics like this...

Indeed.

golfwallah

opti0nal wrote: »

Sounds great. Could you provide some examples, here, of measurable goals that would be applied to dole clerks?

I’ve no intention of starting to design measurable goals for dole clerks or anyone else on boards.ie. – that’s the kind of stuff you either design yourself or pay someone with the relevant expertise to facilitate.

Moreover, you don’t just design such a work programme from the sidelines. It requires engagement between the manager and the individual staff members in a management context, where there is acceptance of performance management techniques from top management down. I already provided sample links to obtain more information on the process framework in my earlier post – that is, if you are seriously interested in even beginning to inform yourself. You can also do a lot more web-based research yourself, again, if you want to.

Doing the job takes a lot more time, effort and meaningful engagement by all concerned, once the objectives (e.g. better value for the end customer) are agreed.

But at the end of the day, performance management processes and systems are just tools to help management and teams achieve their goals. To perform effectively, people need a clear understanding of what their job is and have clearly agreed goals. They also need the tools to do the job (e.g. training, competencies, computer systems, business processes, etc.) and it is management’s job to provide such things to enable people to do their jobs.

Of course there will be problems – all change brings about problems and resistance – but, hey, that’s what senior management and their political leaders get paid to do.

In Ireland, however, we keep seeing excuses for inaction – for example, the Sunday Independent today reported problems with implementing performance management because of fear of being accused of bullying:
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/fear-of-bullying-claims-hits-publicsector-reform-3140497.html

This is an indication of lack of support from the very top – starting with our Taoiseach and then his ministers through to the top senior civil servants to whom we are paying so much of hard earned taxpayers money.

opti0nal

golfwallah wrote: »

I’ve no intention of starting to design measurable goals for dole clerks or anyone else on boards.ie. – that’s the kind of stuff you either design yourself or pay someone with the relevant expertise to facilitate.

It sounds very theoretical and you have not put forward one comparable example of where this has been applied.

You have disclosed that this is expensive to do, leaving us uncertain if bringing in yet more expensive consultants will actually result in any savings or improvements. 'Metrics' sounds like more red tape to me.

When dealing with the private sector, one thing I dread more than anything else is being put through to 'customer service'.

Godge

golfwallah wrote: »

I’ve no intention of starting to design measurable goals for dole clerks or anyone else on boards.ie. – that’s the kind of stuff you either design yourself or pay someone with the relevant expertise to facilitate.

Moreover, you don’t just design such a work programme from the sidelines. It requires engagement between the manager and the individual staff members in a management context, where there is acceptance of performance management techniques from top management down. I already provided sample links to obtain more information on the process framework in my earlier post – that is, if you are seriously interested in even beginning to inform yourself. You can also do a lot more web-based research yourself, again, if you want to.

Doing the job takes a lot more time, effort and meaningful engagement by all concerned, once the objectives (e.g. better value for the end customer) are agreed.

But at the end of the day, performance management processes and systems are just tools to help management and teams achieve their goals. To perform effectively, people need a clear understanding of what their job is and have clearly agreed goals. They also need the tools to do the job (e.g. training, competencies, computer systems, business processes, etc.) and it is management’s job to provide such things to enable people to do their jobs.

Of course there will be problems – all change brings about problems and resistance – but, hey, that’s what senior management and their political leaders get paid to do.

In Ireland, however, we keep seeing excuses for inaction – for example, the Sunday Independent today reported problems with implementing performance management because of fear of being accused of bullying:
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/fear-of-bullying-claims-hits-publicsector-reform-3140497.html

This is an indication of lack of support from the very top – starting with our Taoiseach and then his ministers through to the top senior civil servants to whom we are paying so much of hard earned taxpayers money.

Performance-related pay is very much under critical examination. It is seen as one of the key factors in the failure of people working in the financial services sector to see and react to the impending crisis. Wouldn't want to see a repeat of their mistakes in the public sector now, wouldn't we?

Head The Wall

Maybe you have already forgotten about Pat Neary

woodoo

gerryo777 wrote: »

The Germans must scoff at us looking for an easing of our debt burden when they see the equivalent PS worker in Ireland being paid about 1/3 more than they are.

How about backing that statement up. I think its plucked from the top of your head.

golfwallah

opti0nal wrote: »

It sounds very theoretical and you have not put forward one comparable example of where this has been applied.

You have disclosed that this is expensive to do, leaving us uncertain if bringing in yet more expensive consultants will actually result in any savings or improvements. 'Metrics' sounds like more red tape to me.

When dealing with the private sector, one thing I dread more than anything else is being put through to 'customer service'.

It’s not theoretical at all – there’s plenty of material in the public domain to show performance management can and is being implemented.

As regards expense, you don’t just look at the costs of doing something and then decide not to do it – if that were the case, nothing would ever be done. What is relevant is the business case in terms of cost benefit analysis. Doing nothing is always an option, but it is even more expensive to ignore performance that isn’t delivering on customer and employer needs.

Ireland is spending way more than it’s earning and we have plenty of reports and government ministers calling for better value for money and motivating performance. All that’s required is for Government to get on with doing the job they were elected to do.

The opening paragraph of the Public Service (Croke Park) Agreement states: “This Agreement will ensure that the Irish Public Service continues its contribution to the return of economic growth and economic prosperity to Ireland, while delivering excellence in service to the Irish people. This will be done by working together to build an increasingly integrated Public Service which is leaner and more effective, and focussed more on the needs of the citizen”.

It’s easy to print words, not so easy to put them into reality. Now that easily achieved savings from incentivised early retirement have taken place, focus has to move to getting better value for money from existing staff as distinct from preserving old entrenched interests.

This means change – not inertia. But publicly expressed disagreement between FG and Labour ministers on how to achieve this change shows that this is easier said than done. Maybe we need another crisis, where politicians and unions are faced with the abyss, before they are willing to make hard choices and implement the change required “to reduce the deficit to less than 3% of GDP by 2014”.

Continuing market pressure is forcing politicians to face up to these issues more and more.

golfwallah

Godge wrote: »

Performance-related pay is very much under critical examination. It is seen as one of the key factors in the failure of people working in the financial services sector to see and react to the impending crisis. Wouldn't want to see a repeat of their mistakes in the public sector now, wouldn't we?

Non sequitur – the general consensus on the reasons for these failures is inadequate regulation and poor implementation of existing regulation. Performance related pay is a tool to help organisations achieve their goals. If the goal is maximising profits at any cost, regardless of financial regulation, that is the goal that will be achieved.

golfwallah

Head The Wall wrote: »

Maybe you have already forgotten about Pat Neary

The first rule is to select the right people to do the job.

After that, management techniques and tools, such as performance related management, performance related pay, etc., can be used to help get the job done.

But if you select the wrong people or they turn out not to have the competencies required, that is the problem that has to be addressed.