Passport Delays

F

Firefly

Registered User
Messages
3,520
We still have a backlog well after the strikes/work-to-rule/whatever

The unions have banned overtime and are against the recruitment of 50 temporary workers.

This is ridiculous. Why can't the workers, who were paid for doing nothing during the strike, now do work without payment? At least work overtime. But not allowing temporary staff to clear the backlog tells me the unions have no interest in improving PS efficiencies that they have spoken about.

Roll up the sleeves and process the passports for God sake
 
It's now with the Labour Court.

Staff in the Passport Office have been told not to prioritise any passports but simply to deal with them on a first come first served basis.

The CPSU have said that due to the embargo on recruitment that they are shortstaffed as people who have left have not been replaced and they want the 50 additional posts to be permanent and not part time.

Here's wishing Kieran Mulvey luck !
 
Deiseblue said:
The CPSU have said that due to the embargo on recruitment that they are shortstaffed as people who have left have not been replaced and they want the 50 additional posts to be permanent and not part time.
Click to expand...


Why should the union have any say in whether permanent or temporary staff are hired?
 
Who the hell does the CPSU think they are? If the Government wants to give temporary employment to 50 people, why is a so called trade union blocking them? All most people can hope for at the moment is a temporary contract. It's all my employer and many other companies are doing. Better than having 50 people sitting on the dole for the next couple of months.

My God, we have 13% unemployment and trade unions behave like this.
 
Purple said:
Doed anyone really expect better from them?
Click to expand...

Not really, but after the "talks" the unions were all for PS reform and doing their bit etc...rubbish obviously. Wish the gov had the b*lls to outsource the whole backlog to someone else
 
Firefly said:
Why should the union have any say in whether permanent or temporary staff are hired?
Click to expand...
Because it is their job to protect the terms and conditions of their members. The employer is failing to recruit the vacant posts for permanent staff, and seeking to hire temporary staff instead. Why should there be temporary staff for what will be permanent posts. Demand for passports isn't going to go away, so staff are needed. Why degrade the posts to temporary?

And anyone waiting for passports might want to ask the management team why they stopped the union procedure of prioritising passports for those travelling soon.
 
Why is this function not privatised? It's ridiculous having this done through the public service.
 
Niallers said:
Why is this function not privatised? It's ridiculous having this done through the public service.
Click to expand...
Why would you want to add a profit margin on top of the existing cost? And that's without even thinking about the very obvious security issues involved.
 
My understanding is that there are always 50 temporary staff taken on to cope with seasonal demand. The fact that there are permanent posts unfilled is a separate issue. If there are normally, say, 200 permanent workers plus 50 seasonal and now there are only 180 permanent - yes, the unions may be unhappy that they are down 20 permanent posts, but why embargo the normal practice of employing 50 seasonal employees? Blackmail?
 
Or maybe just employ the temporary staff on a pro rata basis to the numbers of permanent staff. If the numbers of permanent staff have been reduced by 20% then reduce the number of temporary staff that they normally would recruit by 20%. At least get extra bums on seats to sort out the backlog.
 
Complainer said:
Why would you want to add a profit margin on top of the existing cost? And that's without even thinking about the very obvious security issues involved.
Click to expand...

I would be willing to pay a profit margin if I was guaranteed a service and not have to put up with this rubbish. I am willing to bet that a private operater could do the job just as cheaply if not more.

What obvious security issues?
 
My OH's mother worked in the Passport Office every summer for god knows how many years and now they wont take her back on because of this rediculous carry on.
 
Sunny said:
I would be willing to pay a profit margin if I was guaranteed a service and not have to put up with this rubbish. I am willing to bet that a private operater could do the job just as cheaply if not more.
Click to expand...

Well said
 

(1) Which terms and conditions of existing staff are being affected?

(2) Surely the employer should decide on the make up of personell it requires...afterall they are paying the wages. Who says a post is being degraded? There's a backlog that was created by industrial action and the employer wants to hire temporary staff (at additional expense to the taxpayer) to clear this back log

(3) I though it wasthe union who are banning overtime and not allowing the gov to hire temp staff to clear this backlog.
 
Complainer said:
Why would you want to add a profit margin on top of the existing cost? And that's without even thinking about the very obvious security issues involved.
Click to expand...

Lets get real here.

A private company would be able to deliver the passport service cheaper than the Public Service. They would pay their staff the going rate in the private sector for admin staff which would be considarably less than the overpaid public sector staff. The private company would not have to contribute massively to a gold plated pension scheme for it's staff. Any well run private company will weed out wasters and ensure staff and the company structures are as effiecent as possible. We all know that the public sector has some great people but unfortuatley they are held back by too many wasters who couldn't be arsed to do more than the bare minimum to get them through the day.

I cannot see any security issues which cannot be dealt with confidentiality agreements and security checks. Private sectors employees are citizens of the country as well and are no less "special" than public sector employees!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register