Complainer
Registered User
- Messages
- 4,949
Eeesh enough of the vague consultant-speak already. What staff will be cut?Less staff due to synergies
Nonsense - you have the same people, who still require offices, still make phone calls, still print out from their PCs. There are no savings here. On the annual reports, all public bodies are no publishing these to the web only, so the savings here wouldn't buy the biccies for the cabinet meeting.less rented offices, less phone line costs, electricity costs, stationery costs and finance costs due to annual reports etc etc.That's just for a start.
yep, maybe a few less board members all right, but again, those savings won't pay the toilet-roll bill for Anglo/AIB/BOI.Then you have fewer boards so fewer board members for travel expenses and salaries.
More simplistic nonsense. In many cases, these functions have already been integrated. The Dept Justice provides payroll and accounts services to a whole range of Justice agencies already, so there won't be any savings from integration.Fewer payroll runs so a streamlined and more manageable payroll and HR function.
You see that's the problem right there. It is off the top of your head. You have no real understanding of what is actually happening on the ground, no understanding of the role and functions of these organisations, no understanding of the focus and accountability that has come about through these agencies, no understanding of the in-depth expertise of staff but you are quite happy to pontificate on major, structural changes that will have huge impacts on the effectiveness of safety, health, regulation 'off the top of your head'. This is McCreevy-ite stuff, and we all know where his great ideas got us (over a billion down the drain on his decentralisation scam, if I recall correctly).That's off the top of my head.
Ask any one who has ever worked in an Ops function in a decent sized company and they will surely agree with the above and give you many more examples.
rofl.this is going to make a great xmas board game.
Eeesh enough of the vague consultant-speak already. What staff will be cut?
I've managed M&A (mergers and acquistions) projects for one of the largest, most gung-ho, aggressive companies in the world. If I produced this kind of simplistic rubbish as part of my integration plan, I'd have been fired. If you take the work of 3 people and give it to 2, you get 2/3rds of the work done, unless there are very obvious synergies available.Take the work of 3 and give it to two where possible. Much of the time, the two step up to meet the challenge. If not, you hire one person part time. Still savings.
Again, this is facile stuff. Moving three units together into one won't necessarily save money. Sometimes it does, sometimes it don't. It depends hugely on the existing lease conditions, the locations of the buildings, the age of the buildings etc. As it happens, OPW has been doing this stuff for years. Check out Government Offices, The Glen, in Waterford, where Revenue, Dept Ag and HSA all share an existing building. You now want to split these up, with Revenue moving to a Dept Finance building, Ag moving to an Ag building and HSA moving to an Environment building. It makes no senseSimple finance says that if you are renting 3 units and can incorporate into one, you will save on fixed costs such as insurance, lighting and other utilities.
Come on, €50m or maybe if very generous €100m - it is peanuts, a drop in the ocean.Where you can use one type of paper, you save on stationery.
If you are giving someone €20K in expenses to turn up to board meetings you can save €200K for every board of 10 you get rid of. That's a hell of a lot of biscuits. (I took a conservative figure based on Celia Larkin's €30K http://www.tribune.ie/article/2008/aug/24/fee-bonanza-at-taxpayers-expense-for-celia-larkin/ )
Yep, Education did this years ago - all teachers are paid from Dept Ed in Tullamore. Health - Remember PPARS, where the cream of the private sector (Deloittes, IBM et al) leached €220m out of the health boards for a system that never delivered.You say the department of justice have streamlined payroll for its agencies. Then what about health and education?
There is quite a lot you don't see. You don't see the lack of focus and further dilution of accountability that occurs when you lose a dedicated, focussed agency like the RSA or the EPA.I really don't see how H&S is affected.
Generally speaking, with all of these agencies, you have a section of staff in the Government Department who's job is to watch over or liaise with the agency. Say for example, the agency has 30 staff and the Dept has 4 staff watching over them. If the Government Department does the job itself, you save the cost of 4 staff.
I also have a personal view that many of these agencies are over staffed. I think that it would be possible to do a lot of their work with less staff. So in the case of the above, the Government Department could probably do the same job with 15 staff. Some of this is down to being able to do the back office functions such as HR, payroll, procurement etc. rather than having the agency hire separate people for these functions, some of it is down to having greater flexibility/productivity in a larger organisation and to be truthful, some of it is down to eliminating quango type behaviour such as empire building (the larger your staff, the more important you are) and jobs for the boys.
So, in my above mention example we go from having 30 quango staff and 4 civil servants administering this area to having 15 civil servants. A saving of 19 people.
There is a bit more to it than that. These people have more than just an oversight role, including driving through relevant legislation, working with Dept Finance on budget and spending, dealing with the Minister on policy and PQs. There may possibly be some savings possible here, but they are not material in the overall scheme of things.Generally speaking, with all of these agencies, you have a section of staff in the Government Department who's job is to watch over or liaise with the agency. Say for example, the agency has 30 staff and the Dept has 4 staff watching over them. If the Government Department does the job itself, you save the cost of 4 staff.
Your personal view is your personal view. Please let's not base a huge infrastructural change (which has the potential to incur huge cost, huge time, huge energy and divert people from productive work) on your whim. Again, start being specific - name say 3-5 agencies which are overstaffed.I also have a personal view that many of these agencies are over staffed. I think that it would be possible to do a lot of their work with less staff. So in the case of the above, the Government Department could probably do the same job with 15 staff. Some of this is down to being able to do the back office functions such as HR, payroll, procurement etc. rather than having the agency hire separate people for these functions, some of it is down to having greater flexibility/productivity in a larger organisation and to be truthful, some of it is down to eliminating quango type behaviour such as empire building (the larger your staff, the more important you are) and jobs for the boys.
I really hope that the Govt have a sounder basis for their policies than this kind of fiction.So, in my above mention example we go from having 30 quango staff and 4 civil servants administering this area to having 15 civil servants. A saving of 19 people.
I've managed M&A (mergers and acquistions) projects for one of the largest, most gung-ho, aggressive companies in the world.
I find that hard to believe.
Stop argueing and start explaining - what are these 'obvious synergies'? There may well be some synergies on back-office functions (IT, HR etc). But these are small in the overall scheme of things. Many of these synergies have already been achieved without integration, and many more can be achieved without integration.I will argue until the cows come home that "obvious synergies" exist.
I wasn't aware of this - what law are you referring to?-ILIM and Goodbody have to be run sepearately from parent companies under law.
And the VECs have been operating a shared services environment for over 20 years now (see ). Of course there is always room for further development and improvement, but this is not a reason for major structural changes.- All teachers are not paid centrally. There are about 30 VECs outside the net. Hospitals are another example of this.
- €100m isn't peanuts. It wasn't in the good times and it certainly isn't peanuts now.
I'll happily come in and have those "peanuts" for 1% of the savings.
Perhaps those on the outside see things that people inside the system cannot see. That is not me having a go at any one. It is just an observation. The "wood for the trees" idiom is quite apt here.
We're never going to agree on this, are we Complainer? I just can't see how we need a quango for every 5,000 people in this country.
Just for the record - these are the people who brought about a hugely successful social change in Ireland that has been used as an example of best practice worldwide - the elimination of smoking in workplaces. They led this change, which has improved the health of staff and customers in workplaces, and made it possible for families to return to pubs and restaurants. The change has become self-policing. Give them credit for this incredible success.Ha ha. Are they all for real? Not doubting the work done by many but what does the Health and Children Office for Tobacco Control 2002 do??
Just for the record - these are the people who brought about a hugely successful social change in Ireland that has been used as an example of best practice worldwide - the elimination of smoking in workplaces. They led this change, which has improved the health of staff and customers in workplaces, and made it possible for families to return to pubs and restaurants. The change has become self-policing. Give them credit for this incredible success.
As it happens, they were listed for merger with some other Health bodies in the Bord Snip report.
This isn't a question of digging my heels in and resisting change. This is resisting change for the sake of change - change proposed from a position of ignorance - change proposed with no clear understanding of the benefits to be realised.
There are many things that need to be developed and improved in the public sector - wiping out established and successful organisations to sate a media-driven attack on quangos is not a sensible strategy.
I am going to take Complainer at face value and believe him on that.
Moving three units together into one won't necessarily save money. Sometimes it does, sometimes it don't. It depends hugely on the existing lease conditions, the locations of the buildings, the age of the buildings etc. As it happens, OPW has been doing this stuff for years. Check out Government Offices, The Glen, in Waterford, where Revenue, Dept Ag and HSA all share an existing building. You now want to split these up, with Revenue moving to a Dept Finance building, Ag moving to an Ag building and HSA moving to an Environment building. It makes no sense.
Why do you think that AIB run Goodbody's as a seperate operation? Why do Irish Life run ILIM as a seperate operation? Why do multinationals like Johnson & Johnson run Janssen Pharma as a seperate operation?
Integration is not a panacea solution, and may well cause serious damage.
There are many things that need to be developed and improved in the public sector - wiping out established and successful organisations to sate a media-driven attack on quangos is not a sensible strategy.
I wasn't aware of this - what law are you referring to?
Why do we even have a department of health when we have the HSE?Why couldn't the department of health have done exactly the same thing themselves?
we have a lot more than those 2Why do we even have a department of health when we have the HSE?
(Though each appear to be equally mediocre.)
If I wasn't on Complainers ignore list I'd apologise to him directly.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?