Another one bites the dust

[Roger Mexico]

2 hours ago, Numbnuts said:

Yes and in Blacks case he wasnt old enough to access his pension so I'm positive he was given a sum to go. 

Black went under the 'old' regime though, when Greenhow was still running things and the new CoMin had barely started (had Crookall made his departure a condition of taking the job?).  There were hints in the latest departures that such generosity was no longer automatic.  Though Longworth would have been entitled to retire anyway.

[Banker]

7 hours ago, Ghost Ship said:

Speaking from my public sector (NHS) experience in the UK, of course you shouldn't get any sort of payout at all if you simply resign.  You just get paid what you are owed up to your resignation date.  (Plus any amounts outstanding like leave not taken).

But if you retire, I'd be amazed if you didn't get a lump sum if you'd been a member of the pension scheme.

When I retired from the NHS under what was known as the "1995 scheme", you could get a maximum* annual pension of half your final salary** PLUS a lump sum of three times your annual pension.

So I would expect anyone who retires from the IoM civil service and who was a member of whatever the relevant pension scheme*** to get a lump sum "payout" in addition to their annual pension.  (Or whatever the terms of the scheme*** entitle them to.)

 

* Worked out as 1/80th of your final pay for each year of service in the scheme, up to a maximum of 40 years service.

**  Not quite as simple as final salary but close enough

***  And assuming IoM CS pension scheme is vaguely similar to corresponding UK public sector schemes.  (Most UK public sector schemes used to be very similar, but they aren't any more.  What somebody gets when they retire depends on what they are entitled to under their pension scheme.)

But as has been pointed out on many occasions you can not access your pension without actuarial reductions  until you reach normal retirement age for schemes ie 65 for most, different for police, firemen .

 

[english zloty]

4 hours ago, Roger Mexico said:

Black went under the 'old' regime though, when Greenhow was still running things and the new CoMin had barely started (had Crookall made his departure a condition of taking the job?).  There were hints in the latest departures that such generosity was no longer automatic.  Though Longworth would have been entitled to retire anyway.

I know for a fact the terms of some of the NDA. @Stu Peters look up Mutually Assured Resignation as that's probably how it's been done. Nothing to do with retirement lump sums. Resign today and get £X or fight us in Court and potentially lose everything.

On behalf of the public you could ask how many and how much has been or will be paid out In the past six months. I think that passes the FOI test? 

[Happier diner]

8 hours ago, SpunkCookie said:

Why don’t you ask the question in Keys Stu? The perception from the public is that all these recent ‘leavers and retirees’ with immediate effect have been given 12-18 month salary. Employees at that level will probably gain more financially by accepting this than pursuing an unfair dismissal case which probably maxes out at less money than their annual salary.  The tax payer should be made aware if the CS is paying off employees, rather than holding them to account over performance. Then appointing other people into the same post, effectively paying 2 people for 12-18 month to do the same job.

Its more complicated then that I think. If a CS is made redundant he/she may be entitled to redundancy pay. If they have been employed a long time it can add up to quite a package.

There may be other inducements to 'go quietly'. I think they are known as non disclosure agreements. Such inducements might be, e.g an extra year on pension. Paid notice periods, gardening leave, whatever. Its not unique to IOM Gov. It happens the world over, public and private industries and services.

[Newsdesk]

3 minutes ago, english zloty said:

I know for a fact the terms of some of the NDA. @Stu Peters look up Mutually Assured Resignation as that's probably how it's been done. Nothing to do with retirement lump sums. Resign today and get £X or fight us in Court and potentially lose everything.

On behalf of the public you could ask how many and how much has been or will be paid out In the past six months. I think that passes the FOI test? 

That wouldn’t be surprising. It’s exactly how it’s done in the commercial world. I agree “How many Mutually Assured Resignations has the IOM government accepted in the last six or twelve months and how much has been paid out in these instances” should be answerable. Over to you Stu. You’re the MHK. 

[Banker]

Just now, Newsdesk said:

That wouldn’t be surprising. It’s exactly how it’s done in the commercial world. I agree “How many Mutually Assured Resignations has the IOM government accepted in the last six or twelve months and how much has been paid out in these instances” should be answerable. Over to you Stu. You’re the MHK. 

The MARs scheme is normally when the role is not being replaced as you have the demonstrate the financial benefits within 3/5 years are greater than payment which wouldn’t be the case if role replaced 

[english zloty]

34 minutes ago, Banker said:

The MARs scheme is normally when the role is not being replaced as you have the demonstrate the financial benefits within 3/5 years are greater than payment which wouldn’t be the case if role replaced 

In theory, but everyone knows govt doesn't stick to its own rules where it suits. Perhaps just ask "how many NDA with payment being made" then 

[Ghost Ship]

2 hours ago, Banker said:

But as has been pointed out on many occasions you can not access your pension without actuarial reductions  until you reach normal retirement age for schemes ie 65 for most, different for police, firemen .

 

But Longworth has reached normal retirement age, hasn't he?

And even if he hasn't spent all of his career on the IoM (which I'm certain he hasn't) I'm sure he would have been able to transfer previous service into the IoM pension scheme from whatever UK scheme he had been in?

(We are talking about Longworth in this context aren't we?)

Edit:  Ah.  I realise some people may not be talking exclusively about Longworth.  Yes - if you retire before your normal retrement age your pension benefits will be reduced.

Edited June 15, 2022 by Ghost Ship

[Ghost Ship]

9 hours ago, Stu Peters said:

Thank you - that was always my understanding. It was the use of the word 'payoff' that concerned me. Like it or not, if your pension scheme includes a lump sum on retirement that's a different thing.

I wouldn't ask questions in Keys about specific cases unless I had significant concerns, and even then I'm not sure I'd be entitled to an answer.

Yes.  I think it's unfortunate when people talk about being "paid off" - with all the implications that that has - when they might just be talking about a pension benefit that somebody is contractually entitled  to.

And as a former public sector worker myself, I think that all senior public sector employees should have written into their contracts a clause to the effect that if they get any extra-contractual benefits (ie a possibly questionable  "pay off" above and beyond their pension entitlement) on their departure, then those details should be made public so that the taxpayer knows what the departure has cost them

There shouldn't be any confidential departure terms.  It should all be entirely open and above board on both sides.  That way the employer can get rid of underperforming staff without "paying them off", and underperforming staff can't blackmail the employer into "paying them off".

And if people don't want a job on those terms, don't apply in the first place...

Edited June 15, 2022 by Ghost Ship

[0bserver]

And another one gone... 

https://gef.im/2022/06/15/climate-change-director-quits/

Very much a non-job so hopefully they won't try to replace him.

Edited June 15, 2022 by 0bserver

[Amadeus]

 

[Gladys]

Just now, Amadeus said:

 

Which department? 

[WTF]

12 minutes ago, Gladys said:

Which department? 

he used to be in dolge/defa,   moved away for a while and then  came back into defa much to the dislike of many staff who were glad he left in the first place. i'm not sure which department is celebrating today though.

[SleepyJoe]

24 minutes ago, 0bserver said:

And another one gone... 

https://gef.im/2022/06/15/climate-change-director-quits/

Very much a non-job so hopefully they won't try to replace him.

Decent guy

Is climate change response to be suspended?

[0bserver]

3 minutes ago, SleepyJoe said:

Decent guy

Is climate change response to be suspended?

I'm sure he was a decent person. Just the role itself is a non-job. 

Scrapping our own response and adopting best international practices would be far more cost effective.