why are we allowed to get away with those large pensions and greece are not?

[Purple]

Originally Posted by Complainer

I What I'm trying to do is to find serious, credible solutions to our very, very serious crisis - solutions that minimise impacts on public services, and the many, many people who depend on public services.

and yet in nearly 5 thousand posts I have never seen you outline what you think should be done. In fact when asked to do so you decline citing a lack of understanding of the facts by other posters. You are excellent at picking holes in other posters suggestions yet you have never offered your own.

I hope your attitude is not typical of those working in the public sector. No, I retract that; I am glad that your attitude is not typical of those working in the Public Sector as I believe there has been real progress in reforming now the whole PS operates and that is a result of work done by people with a positive attitude who are willing to engage in constructive discussion. If their attitude was as negative and obstructionist as yours we’d have gone nowhere.

[NOAH]

is it true that no one and i mean no one ever gets dismissed from the PS on poor performance?

noah

[Purple]

Originally Posted by NOAH

is it true that no one and i mean no one ever gets dismissed from the PS on poor performance?

noah

What's that got to do with pensions?

[Complainer]

Originally Posted by NOAH

is it true that no one and i mean no one ever gets dismissed from the PS on poor performance?

noah

No, it's not true - another myth.

[Birroc]

Originally Posted by Complainer

No, it's not true - another myth.

Very difficult to get dismissed for poor performance you'll have to admit. Especially if a union member.

I remember a particularly useless and disruptive individual being promoted because it was the only way to get him moved to a new section

[ontour]

Originally Posted by Complainer

Increments are paid to those who achieve their performance objectives.

Are all public sector workers subject to performance objectives to obtain increments?

I recall hearing over the last few weeks that a person who receives a review that they did not meet objectives still gets the increment. I believe that a rating of 3 is meeting objective. A rating of 2 is a need for improvement but still yields an increment. There is a rating of 1 which I believe was applied to 11 public sector workers last year. I would be happy to be corrected that it is the higher achievers that are the recipients of available funds.

[Knuttell]

Originally Posted by Birroc

I remember a particularly useless and disruptive individual being promoted because it was the only way to get him moved to a new section

Aren't these numpties normally sent to a rubber room?

To promote such a troublesome individual explains an awful lot about why we are where we are.

My Wife works for the PS and the stories I have heard just could not be tolerated in the private sector and yes it is almost virtually impossible to be sacked from the CS/PS.

The Public sector really needs Michael O Leary to go in there and make it efficient,mark my words it will come to that sooner rather than later and honestly most hard working PS workers would be delighted to see someone like him sort out the inefficiencies and sack those that hide behind hard working functioning public servants.

[Deiseblue]

I think I should preface this post by saying that employees whether public or private should endeavour to do the best job possible.

Having worked across the private sector spectrum I could tell tales of dossing that would make your toes curl - mainly based on consumption of alcohol , gambling , sleeping on the job ( literally ) & attendance at sporting fixtures ( during working hours )

Have I seen people sacked - never , I have seen the very few who were carpeted over various offences reprimanded.

The largest Irish indigenous employers whether public or private have always seemed very forgiving of their less productive employees - perhaps in the hope that maturity , peer pressure & training will improve performance - traditionally firing someone seemed to be the last & little used option.

[shnaek]

Originally Posted by NOAH

is it true that no one and i mean no one ever gets dismissed from the PS on poor performance?

noah

A certain financial regulator didn't get dismissed for poor performance, but instead ended up with a very handsome payout indeed, and an obscene pension to boot. But maybe the PS definition of poor performance is just different to the dictionary definition.

[Deiseblue]

Originally Posted by shnaek

A certain financial regulator didn't get dismissed for poor performance, but instead ended up with a very handsome payout indeed, and an obscene pension to boot. But maybe the PS definition of poor performance is just different to the dictionary definition.

A payout dwarfed by that paid to Messrs Goggin & Sheedy - perhaps the definition of poor performance is more widespread ?

[shnaek]

Originally Posted by Deiseblue

A payout dwarfed by that paid to Messrs Goggin & Sheedy - perhaps the definition of poor performance is more widespread ?

The culture in the banks and the PS are very very similar. Both are highly unionised. And any time the banks get into trouble the PS move to save them. They may as well be one and the same, both protected sectors.

[Deiseblue]

Originally Posted by shnaek

The culture in the banks and the PS are very very similar. Both are highly unionised. And any time the banks get into trouble the PS move to save them. They may as well be one and the same, both protected sectors.

The rampant greed embedded in our Banking system came to the fore during our boom years when the Banks could not have been seen as anything but Private Sector - that culture could not be more different to the PS who are charged with providing services to the state & it's citizens.

The Government protected the Banks - not the PS.

Both sectors protected - yes but they continue to be hugely culturally diverse.

Messes Goggin & Sheedy were certainly not Union members nor could they ever have been described as Public Sector employees !

[shnaek]

Originally Posted by Deiseblue

The Government protected the Banks - not the PS.

The government is the PS - the ministers are only puppets. Nothing moves without departmental say so.
But I don't want to come across as anti-PS. There are many fine workers in there. It is not acceptable though, for certain higher PS workers to get payoffs amounting to over half a million upon retirement when we are broke. These are the stories that get highlighted in Europe, and make us look like we are taking the mick.

[Sunny]

The pay offs to both bankers, top civil servants and Executives in general in the Private, semi-state and public sectors are all disgusting. There is zero accountability when you reach a certain level in this Country. And apparently there is nothing that can be done because they have 'contract entitlements'. Tell that to all the ordinary private and public sector workers who had their t&c's changed. Ask ordinary bank staff who will be lucky to recieve any sort of redundancy package how they feel as the executives in charge waltz off to enjoy their pay offs and pensions. That none of them invested in their own shares I am willing to bet unlike ordinary workers.

Who do you think Senior Civil Sevants were benchmarking themselves against when they kept bleeting on about how under paid they were.

[Purple]

Originally Posted by Sunny

The pay offs to both bankers, top civil servants and Executives in general in the Private, semi-state and public sectors are all disgusting.

Who do you think Senior Civil Sevants were benchmarking themselves against when they kept bleeting on about how under paid they were.

big +1 to that.

[Shawady]

Originally Posted by shnaek

It is not acceptable though, for certain higher PS workers to get payoffs amounting to over half a million upon retirement when we are broke.

As someone who works in the civil service, I agree.
I can't understand either, why senior secetary generals and politicians can retire so early on full pension. Why not calculate on 40 years service like most people in the public sector.
I think there was a case last week of the SG of Education going at 53, although I believe she did not take some severence pay she was entitled to.

[Firefly]

I can't understand either why any civil service worker gets a tax-free lumpsum when they have a pension that would cost over 1m to fund ready and waiting for them.

[Purple]

Originally Posted by Firefly

I can't understand either why any civil service worker gets a tax-free lumpsum when they have a pension that would cost over 1m to fund ready and waiting for them.

Because that's what they signed up to when they took the job; job security and a great pension but not massive pay.
I think the pension levy has gone a long way to putting the whole public sector pension issue to bed. It’s still a great deal but not what it used to be.

The very large pay out’s/pay off’s for people like Neary are the exception, not the rule. The same applies to the top brass in the banks.

[Delboy]

Originally Posted by ontour

Are all public sector workers subject to performance objectives to obtain increments?

I recall hearing over the last few weeks that a person who receives a review that they did not meet objectives still gets the increment. I believe that a rating of 3 is meeting objective. A rating of 2 is a need for improvement but still yields an increment. There is a rating of 1 which I believe was applied to 11 public sector workers last year. I would be happy to be corrected that it is the higher achievers that are the recipients of available funds.

increments are awarded regardless, until you hit the top of your scale and thats that. Then you either get promoted or wangle a regrading, in which case the increments start again depending where on the new scale you've landed

[Delboy]

Originally Posted by Knuttell

Aren't these numpties normally sent to a rubber room?

To promote such a troublesome individual explains an awful lot about why we are where we are.

My Wife works for the PS and the stories I have heard just could not be tolerated in the private sector and yes it is almost virtually impossible to be sacked from the CS/PS.

The Public sector really needs Michael O Leary to go in there and make it efficient,mark my words it will come to that sooner rather than later and honestly most hard working PS workers would be delighted to see someone like him sort out the inefficiencies and sack those that hide behind hard working functioning public servants.

you try not to 'promote' them but sometimes it's the only way to get them moved. Maybe get them a regrading.
Or if your lucky, the section your moving them to has'nt done a 'background check'....i.e. Section X has a vacancy and you may have a surplus/someone who refuses to co-operate with new ways of working etc. You convince them that the move is good for them (some agree that it would be, others will only go if there's a regrading but the new section might'nt agree to that). So you ring the boss at Section X and say you have someone that might be of interest that would be worth talking to about the vacancy. You then cross your fingers and hope that the boss of Section X does'nt start ringing around the org. asking questions about what people have heard of the person in question. The good bosses always do ring around, the less interested don't! The move then happens or not.
And so the merry round goes on as eventually Section X gets in a new boss who immediately see's there's a lot of deadwood in the place......!!!