P.K. Posted June 18 Share Posted June 18 2 hours ago, swoopy2110 said: Good news! Alf has asked the CEO and the chief officer team to conduct an efficiency review into headcount and delivery across central Government departments and report back to him in November. You'll be able to count on 1 hand (and won't even need that) the number of job reductions that will come from this task. An internal audit, which is what this will be, is not doing things professionally. It's a whitewash... 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twitch Posted June 18 Share Posted June 18 2 minutes ago, P.K. said: An internal audit, which is what this will be, is not doing things professionally. It's a whitewash... And the resultant headcount after the exercise? Think of a number and put a + sign in front of it... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Banker Posted June 18 Author Share Posted June 18 (edited) 37 minutes ago, Meoir Shee said: How on earth are you going to measure the output of a Nurse? Fire Officer? Traffic Warden? Youth Worker? Paramedic? Primary School Teacher? Administrator at the Manx Museum? Lifeguard at the NSC? Porter at Nobles? How do you measure the output of a private sector worker? Especially Bankers? The amount they get bailed out by taxpayers? £23bn was it? You can easily measure any job with established systems which will tell you how many hours a normal competent person should take to do a particular job eg write a report, prepare court reports etc etc. There will be set out numbers for nurses per population etc but as we know there’s not enough at present. Private sector including banks have been using work measurements tools for many years, if you don’t meet competency requirements/targets if applicable you do get a pay rise and if it continues the disciplinary process ramps up. Edited June 18 by Banker 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Ram Posted June 18 Share Posted June 18 2 minutes ago, Banker said: You can easily measure any job with established systems which will tell you how many hours a normal competent person should take to do a particular job eg write a report, prepare court reports etc etc. There will be set out numbers for nurses per population etc but as we know there’s not enough at present. Private sector including banks have been using work measurements tools for many years, if you don’t meet competency requirements/targets if applicable you do get a pay rise and if it continues the disciplinary process ramps up. Are you still in employment or are you retired? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
english zloty Posted June 18 Share Posted June 18 51 minutes ago, Two-lane said: Thanks. https://hr.gov.im/pip/ I did not see any indication if it is bought-in or home-made. Nevertheless it is a fairly new system, so the need for a deep-clean of the data seems strange. Cannan's comment that "a full audit and cleanse of PiP," for a system that does payroll is a bit worrying. My conclusion is either the system is poorly designed, or that they allowed the database to get out of control. Pip is an out of the box system widely used which govt adapted to ensure it never worked as intended. the project took years to rollout, ran over budget and was never fully utilised. im guessing since the original project it has become a GIGO behemoth that no one controls properly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted June 18 Share Posted June 18 7 minutes ago, Banker said: You can easily measure any job with established systems which will tell you how many hours a normal competent person should take to do a particular job eg write a report, prepare court reports etc etc. There will be set out numbers for nurses per population etc but as we know there’s not enough at present. Private sector including banks have been using work measurements tools for many years, if you don’t meet competency requirements/targets if applicable you do get a pay rise and if it continues the disciplinary process ramps up. @Banker Actually a proper review should begin by identifying the outputs and putting a value on them. Only after making sure they're a necessary function to the business do you start to look at how they're produced. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted June 18 Share Posted June 18 1 hour ago, Non-Believer said: I'm not inuding them as annual leave. They are however non-working days. Like weekends? Not sure what point you are making tbh. 21 days annual leave is pretty typical isn't it, in any job. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTF Posted June 18 Share Posted June 18 4 hours ago, swoopy2110 said: Good news! Alf has asked the CEO and the chief officer team to conduct an efficiency review into headcount and delivery across central Government departments and report back to him in November. and after this great waste of time the head count will increase by 500 within 2 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Buggane Posted June 18 Share Posted June 18 You have forgotten the extra headcount needed to perform the internal audit. Most likely relocating killing two birds with one stone and easily manipulated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ringy Rose Posted June 18 Share Posted June 18 (edited) 5 hours ago, swoopy2110 said: Alf has asked the CEO and the chief officer team to conduct an efficiency review into headcount The CEO and the Chief Officer Team are the biggest part of the problem. Always have been. Last time we had “efficiency savings” we let a load of air traffic controllers go but kept Ann Reynolds. That’s where your real civil service bloat is. Ralphs is another one who’s come from the UK but not come over properly, he doesn’t live here, he still lives in Plymouth and works “hybrid”. He was previously a senior manager at the failed Plymouth Council and before that he worked for Crapita. I bet there’s no “efficiency review” into his pay packet, which isn’t on the standard civil service scale. I’ve seen the email Ralphs sent round today and it was an absolute disgrace. As for Cannan, he thinks he’s Margaret Thatcher but he’s really a Temu version of Liz Truss. Edited June 18 by Ringy Rose 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
english zloty Posted June 18 Share Posted June 18 27 minutes ago, Ringy Rose said: The CEO and the Chief Officer Team are the biggest part of the problem. Always have been. Last time we had “efficiency savings” we let a load of air traffic controllers go but kept Ann Reynolds. That’s where your real civil service bloat is. Ralphs is another one who’s come from the UK but not come over properly, he doesn’t live here, he still lives in Plymouth and works “hybrid”. He was previously a senior manager at the failed Plymouth Council and before that he worked for Crapita. I bet there’s no “efficiency review” into his pay packet, which isn’t on the standard civil service scale. I’ve seen the email Ralphs sent round today and it was an absolute disgrace. As for Cannan, he thinks he’s Margaret Thatcher but he’s really a Temu version of Liz Truss. all of my CS friends say Ralph is a waste of space. From what i can see, all he has done is recruit more folk to do his job for him 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarndyce Posted June 18 Share Posted June 18 34 minutes ago, Ringy Rose said: The CEO and the Chief Officer Team are the biggest part of the problem. Always have been. Last time we had “efficiency savings” we let a load of air traffic controllers go but kept Ann Reynolds. That’s where your real civil service bloat is. ⬆️ This. With knobs on… Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ringy Rose Posted June 18 Share Posted June 18 10 minutes ago, english zloty said: all of my CS friends say Ralph is a waste of space That’s pretty much what I’ve heard too. Never here, never available, never showing any interest in anything or anyone. I’m not entirely convinced he could point to the island on a map. It’s a shame Randall wasn’t made CEO permanently, he generally knew what he was doing and knew how to communicate it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted June 18 Share Posted June 18 On 6/11/2024 at 8:36 AM, Ringy Rose said: Everyone on here wanking on about “bloat and efficiency” never manage to actually explain which staff they’d cut and how they’d do that without affecting service delivery. Funny that. Seeing as a review appears to be the topic of the moment, although it obviously won't amount to anything, I'm dredging this up from the beginning of the thread. The following is along the lines of what it would take even to make a start. I don't think that @Ringy Rose came back to me on it. Funny that. ========= OK. Tell us why the headcount has risen by more than 500 since March 2016 during what was supposed to be a time of belt-tightening. The first line of defence from the government bureaucracy is always "which service would you cut?" It's bullshit. As newly appointed CM or Treasury Minister, I wouldn't necessarily cut any service, but I would certainly demand an explanation as to what the hell is going on. Nobody is telling me that the constant expansion is to meet pressing public need for a static population. Regularly, jobs are advertised that are clearly pointless vanity projects, and mainly in the interest of empire building. There is very clearly no political or Treasury control, and the CS bosses do exactly as they like at the taxpayers' expense. It isn't good enough. Every person who leaves or retires should have their job assessed by an independent time and motion study before leaving to see exactly what they do. Then a decision can be taken whether to replace the role with a presumption not to. If the role is necessary, then redeployment should be the first option rather than new recruitment. An aspiration for a 10% reduction in headcount and cost over the first 5 years would be a starting point. The public service should wake up and get behind an initiative like this, because when the money runs out, they are going to be the first to suffer with wholesale sackings and unpaid pensions. I appreciate that some work very hard, too hard in fact, but there are those who don't, or who work in meaningless functions. I agree that the people we need should be supported and well remunerated. There are simply too damned many of them, and it has to be addressed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted June 18 Share Posted June 18 1 hour ago, english zloty said: all of my CS friends say Ralph is a waste of space. From what i can see, all he has done is recruit more folk to do his job for him It's interesting that as soon as he was appointed, the vast majority of us were completely bemused why someone so obviously unsuitable, even from their own CV, had been chosen. As I said a couple of times in that topic, the only explanation is that he was put in position as another Nick Black, someone weak and ineffective so those under him could do whatever they want and be protected from scrutiny. And as the Chief Secretary/CEO is now nominally the line manager for all the other Departmental CEOs, that's basically everyone. Anyone who has since met the guy seems to be astonished by how clueless he is, even by the standards of 'top' civil servants. You wonder if he was appointed only so Cannan wouldn't always be the stupidest person in any meeting. He also seems quite touchy and quick to take offence when challenged, no matter how politely or factually. Which I suppose is to expected in someone appointed way over their abilities. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.