[BBC News] Civil staff reject zero pay rise

[manxy]

Reads like "Bullshit bingo" to me.

 

I have appraised staff in the past based on meeting the demands of the job. Not esoteric bullshit aimed at making me look good.

 

It's amazingly long winded and time consuming.

Whether it affects anyone who is good or bad at there job is unknown to me and have often wondered as to how such a complicated form existed in the first place.

I'm sure a much easier and straight forward appraisal form exists and if someone can suggest an easier form to the Government, then please go ahead.

[manshimajin]

Slightly off topic - but about the service focus.

 

When my mother had to go into a hospital in the UK I happened on one visit to have a look at a document they had proudly placed in the cafeteria. It was the "Mission, Vision and Values" plus the key strategies for the particular Hospital Trust.

 

I could not believe it at first, but it did not mention patients or their families...and the strategies were all about things like "professional development", "building programmes" and "improvements to staff facilities".

 

The same hospital had signs up around the place warning visitors that 'abuse of staff' would not be tolerated. No wonder they had to have them. The level of care reflected the MVV.

 

When 'service' becomes 'self-serving' there is a real problem in the management of the system. There are excellent managers out there but not at that hospital.

 

IMO from the work I do, when you have too many chiefs 'self serving' proliferates and a particular problem kicks in which is the "manager" who is simply there but adds nothing at all to what is going on - just slows things down. A built in generator of failure.

[P.K.]

It's important to remember that "The Mission Statement", "The Vision" and "The Core Values" are created by the upper management levels frequently along with some "Ideas People" imported by the Jefe who has heard about them from a "Peer Gathering and Information Exchange" in his local golf club.

 

Graculus very stupidly took a pop at me without realising that I'm fully aware of the huge amount of bs that floats around uk companies in a desperate attempt to keep the top floor's noses in the trough. I find the "Mission Statement" an excellent indicator of just how far removed from the customer the first line is liable to be. The more detached from reality it is the tougher the job is going to be. No question...

 

At the end of the day no customers = no company. BUT that's never going to be the criteria for the Public Service because with Public Servants the customer has nowhere else to go. QED.

[manxy]

It's important to remember that "The Mission Statement", "The Vision" and "The Core Values" are created by the upper management levels frequently along with some "Ideas People" imported by the Jefe who has heard about them from a "Peer Gathering and Information Exchange" in his local golf club.

 

Graculus very stupidly took a pop at me without realising that I'm fully aware of the huge amount of bs that floats around uk companies in a desperate attempt to keep the top floor's noses in the trough. I find the "Mission Statement" an excellent indicator of just how far removed from the customer the first line is liable to be. The more detached from reality it is the tougher the job is going to be. No question...

 

At the end of the day no customers = no company. BUT that's never going to be the criteria for the Public Service because with Public Servants the customer has nowhere else to go. QED.

good point

[triskelion]

Back on track...I don't think it is limited to emergency staff though. I have had some very helpful and efficient service from front-line staff in a number of departments that has quickly fixed issues for me, or explained what I needed to do. I wonder, looking at that bit earlier in the thread, what the need is for so many highly paid staff who I assume are either 'chiefs' or 'specialists'.

 

IMO one of the challenges for public servants is to decide who their clients really are. I am pretty sure that most of the front line staff will say the public (as in Public Service) but the more senior ones may wonder if it is the public, politicians, or other public servants. They should recognise that their most important customers are members of the public without whom they would neither have a job nor an income. Others are secondary to this.

 

Maybe they also need to understand that they should be there to help the public not to attempt to control it.

You could resolve those sort of things through proper performance related pay and have a real customer service focus.

You are both over-simplifying the issue here, and attempting to apply an approach designed to attract clients and maximise turnover to a diverse grouping of organisations that aren't actually trying to sell anything.

 

Nurses aren't going to use the words 'client' or 'public;' they are going to refer to their patients. They aren't going to slack off because there's no competition with other hospitals. Is a 'real customer service focus' appropriate for the prison service? Or traffic wardens? Or the DAFF guys who manage the plantations?

 

As evidenced by the pensions reform debacle, using the generalising (and condescending) term 'public servants' serves only to confuse the issue. In terms of pay especially it is in my opinion bizarre that the salaries for civil servants are negotiated en-mass, with a single union involved. Similarly to the bus supervisor dispute, Prospect has managed to evade any public sympathy for its members by following the tired old line of 'Are members aren't happy and want more money.' This to me suggests yet another anachronistic structure from a time of a smaller number of people working for the Government, much like the employer vs employee structure of the Whitby Council.

[manxy]

You are both over-simplifying the issue here, and attempting to apply an approach designed to attract clients and maximise turnover to a diverse grouping of organisations that aren't actually trying to sell anything.

 

You are right. However I think in this thread we have all used the words 'Civil Service' in a broad context. I actually feel very bad that nurses or firemen, or teachers might be getting a pay freeze. Those are essential jobs where considerable skills are needed to support the community. I think the issue linked to this is that there is a whole 'couldn't give a shit' layer of non essential government jobs which have expanded in the last 15 years and where the money is now being wasted and which, frankly, we could lose tomorrow without any impact of services or anyone's life.

 

Government is bloated and overgrown and a considerable part of its operations could be peeled back without any loss to anyone (apart from those currently being overpaid to act in those roles).

[slinkydevil]

You are both over-simplifying the issue here, and attempting to apply an approach designed to attract clients and maximise turnover to a diverse grouping of organisations that aren't actually trying to sell anything.

 

You are right. However I think in this thread we have all used the words 'Civil Service' in a broad context. I actually feel very bad that nurses or firemen, or teachers might be getting a pay freeze. Those are essential jobs where considerable skills are needed to support the community. I think the issue linked to this is that there is a whole 'couldn't give a shit' layer of non essential government jobs which have expanded in the last 15 years and where the money is now being wasted and which, frankly, we could lose tomorrow without any impact of services or anyone's life.

 

Government is bloated and overgrown and a considerable part of its operations could be peeled back without any loss to anyone (apart from those currently being overpaid to act in those roles).

 

Which neatly takes this thread back to page one and my post:

 

Okay you can have a pay rise but 1000 of you have to go.

 

http://www.manxforums.com/forums/index.php...st&p=469528

[manxy]

You are both over-simplifying the issue here, and attempting to apply an approach designed to attract clients and maximise turnover to a diverse grouping of organisations that aren't actually trying to sell anything.

 

You are right. However I think in this thread we have all used the words 'Civil Service' in a broad context. I actually feel very bad that nurses or firemen, or teachers might be getting a pay freeze. Those are essential jobs where considerable skills are needed to support the community. I think the issue linked to this is that there is a whole 'couldn't give a shit' layer of non essential government jobs which have expanded in the last 15 years and where the money is now being wasted and which, frankly, we could lose tomorrow without any impact of services or anyone's life.

 

Government is bloated and overgrown and a considerable part of its operations could be peeled back without any loss to anyone (apart from those currently being overpaid to act in those roles).

 

Which neatly takes this thread back to page one and my post:

 

Okay you can have a pay rise but 1000 of you have to go.

 

http://www.manxforums.com/forums/index.php...st&p=469528

Which 1,000, what departments and what status?

I'm not trying to be funny, especially on this board, but if we put a 1,000 people on the dole, would it have an impact on society? (I don't know and genuinely asking)

[triskelion]

Government is bloated and overgrown and a considerable part of its operations could be peeled back without any loss to anyone (apart from those currently being overpaid to act in those roles).

Such as though?

 

I'm ever more convinced that this 'unnecessary layer of Government bureaucracy' only really exists in unreasonably anti-Government rhetoric, and politicians trying to capitalise on this.

 

Much more likely is that, like with any organisation, the time-wasters and alleged non-jobbers are dispersed throughout, rather than forming any discernable layer. To be honest, I am probably guilty of over-simplification myself, in that I too have implied that are some untouchable roles. For example, it might well be acceptable to cut down on the numbers of police if this is compensated by administrative staff doing the administrative tasks officers were previously burdened with.

 

Reminds me of a complaint by David Cameron during PMQs that police officers have to fill out 'a foot-long form' every time they make an arrest. I imagine it sounded quite impressive when supported by the sycophantic baying of his parliamentary party. It is distinctly less so when you consider that this means '1 side of A4.'