thommo2010 Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 People banging on about the private pretending they wouldn't be happy be happy with a pay rise. It's getting boring guys, we get it. People in the private sector never stop to use the toilet, eat or even sleep. They are beyond super human 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Flint Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 4 hours ago, Roger Mexico said: 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. And yet here we are, potentially on the cusp of a significant staffing review, which so many have called on for so long. Maybe he is just what is needed right now- a slightly distant figure ready to do the hard yards. A good sign this would be the case would be to instruct the DESC to make the identified £3.6m of savings by other means if they won't shut inefficient schools. Let's give him a chance maybe? I understand he's set a very short time frame. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FANDL Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 (edited) 1 hour ago, Derek Flint said: Maybe he is just what is needed right now- a slightly distant figure ready to do the hard yards Many at the time of his appointment painted Mr Ralphs as the ideal patsy to front IOMG headcount savings. He doesn’t really live here and has the profile of someone who will be quite disposable once he’s been used to front a bit of a cull. So rather than Alf be castigated in Tesco’s by exited civil servants for the next 20 years it rather looks like they might have wheeled in Mr Ralphs (who has the clear touch of the Accidental Partridge about him from his published online content) to front something up and then disappear back off into UK public sector land always to be forgotten in Manx folklore. Let’s remember he was at Plymouth Council which seems to be comprised of a similar cabal of high earning self aggrandizing bluffing personalities as here: https://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/news/plymouth-news/plymouths-richest-business-owners-influencers-8752186 (See relevant extract below) And which demonstrated similar levels of corporate governance to here during his time there: https://www.lgcplus.com/finance/finance-chiefs-signature-added-to-75m-deal-after-he-left-council-26-03-2024/ And which also had to find nearly £40M of cost savings last year as well as putting council taxes up because the very same highly paid people had obviously spaffed all the city’s money away: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-64799046 He appears to be highly disposable at first glance and can move back to the UK having received his NI holiday paid by us, his re-location expenses paid by us, and saved a huge amount of tax on his six figure salary, at any time. Edited June 19 by FANDL 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joebean Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 The only way of addressing the size of the PS is via a review conducted by people who have no particular association with the current structure and culture. Such a review must be owned by somebody in Government and maybe the new Chief Officer is the person for the job. Certainly, the likes of the previous, permanent post-holder, Greenhow, would have been totally unable to do it. I would suggest that the review needs to be actually conducted by some external process, with a clear remit. An internal review, particularly led by Departmental heads will, in my opinion achieve very little and will result in huge swathes of report which primarily result in shroud-waving. Any “efficiencies” will be interpreted as service delivery cuts. Real efficiencies don’t involve cuts in delivery; they are about doing more with less resources. It’s difficult work, particularly in organisations that have no culture of efficiency. Any fool can do less with less; it takes talent, courage and application to do more with less and it will be interesting to see how our highly-paid senior civil servants evidence their true abilities come November. The CM’s public statement and follow-up comments are vague and lack any real insight into his expected outcomes. Perhaps, deliberately so. He will know that a strong statement of intent now will just encourage a defensive response. However, a review without any strong sense of purpose will probably achieve little. I also expect that producing real efficiencies and real changes in the way services are delivered on the Isle of Man is going to be a long process, stretching much further than this November. It should have started 15 years ago and my fear is that the reasons it didn’t then still exist now and will act to prevent the actions required in the future. This all needs tough and decisive political and organisational leadership and I struggle to see that now or on the horizon. I hope I’m wrong. 4 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2112 Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 Can anyone actually believe a word that comes out of CM Cannans mouth? I certainly don’t think anything will come out of this civil service/ps head count review. Perhaps a recruitment freeze until the review has been carried out? 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ringy Rose Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 8 hours ago, woolley said: 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 I couldn’t be arsed being your personal Google. As for why headcount has slightly raised, you’d need to look at where the headcount has raised. From a brief glance it appears that headcount has mostly raised in Manx Care, which is to be expected when we were short of doctors and nurses. Beyond that, you tell me why it’s raised, you’re the one exercised by it. But you’re the one saying there’s too much bloat and too many non-jobs, so I’m asking you to name them. I have my own ideas, but I’m not the one making the wild claims. 7 hours ago, Roger Mexico said: You wonder if he was appointed only so Cannan wouldn't always be the stupidest person in any meeting. Bingo. 7 hours ago, Roger Mexico said: Anyone who has since met the guy seems to be astonished by how clueless he is, even by the standards of 'top' civil servants. Whether you like him or not, the one thing you couldn’t say was that Will Greenhow was clueless. Same with Randall when he took over as interim. This new guy? I’m not entirely convinced he could find his own arse with both hands and a map. As for Cannan, I don’t think he’d care about being the bad guy, judging by the way I see him and hear him talk to people he considers beneath him- which is pretty much everyone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTF Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 9 hours ago, Ringy Rose said: It’s a shame Randall wasn’t made CEO permanently, he generally knew what he was doing and knew how to communicate it. which is why they weren't wanted 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 2 hours ago, joebean said: The only way of addressing the size of the PS is via a review conducted by people who have no particular association with the current structure and culture. Such a review must be owned by somebody in Government and maybe the new Chief Officer is the person for the job. Certainly, the likes of the previous, permanent post-holder, Greenhow, would have been totally unable to do it. I would suggest that the review needs to be actually conducted by some external process, with a clear remit. An internal review, particularly led by Departmental heads will, in my opinion achieve very little and will result in huge swathes of report which primarily result in shroud-waving. Any “efficiencies” will be interpreted as service delivery cuts. Real efficiencies don’t involve cuts in delivery; they are about doing more with less resources. It’s difficult work, particularly in organisations that have no culture of efficiency. Any fool can do less with less; it takes talent, courage and application to do more with less and it will be interesting to see how our highly-paid senior civil servants evidence their true abilities come November. The CM’s public statement and follow-up comments are vague and lack any real insight into his expected outcomes. Perhaps, deliberately so. He will know that a strong statement of intent now will just encourage a defensive response. However, a review without any strong sense of purpose will probably achieve little. I also expect that producing real efficiencies and real changes in the way services are delivered on the Isle of Man is going to be a long process, stretching much further than this November. It should have started 15 years ago and my fear is that the reasons it didn’t then still exist now and will act to prevent the actions required in the future. This all needs tough and decisive political and organisational leadership and I struggle to see that now or on the horizon. I hope I’m wrong. It's only around 2 years to the next election. If it can be dragged out for that long by the affected parties, it can be kicked into the long grass and forgotten when the electoral slate is wiped clean and a new administration appointed who may decide (or be convinced that) that they have other priorities. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joebean Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 12 minutes ago, Non-Believer said: It's only around 2 years to the next election. If it can be dragged out for that long by the affected parties, it can be kicked into the long grass and forgotten when the electoral slate is wiped clean and a new administration appointed who may decide (or be convinced that) that they have other priorities. Unfortunately so. This is a process that the CM and Treasury Minister should have started at the beginning of this administration. It’s not a short-term exercise but a lengthy process. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joebean Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 1 hour ago, Ringy Rose said: I couldn’t be arsed being your personal Google. As for why headcount has slightly raised, you’d need to look at where the headcount has raised. From a brief glance it appears that headcount has mostly raised in Manx Care, which is to be expected when we were short of doctors and nurses. Beyond that, you tell me why it’s raised, you’re the one exercised by it. But you’re the one saying there’s too much bloat and too many non-jobs, so I’m asking you to name them. I have my own ideas, but I’m not the one making the wild claims. Bingo. Whether you like him or not, the one thing you couldn’t say was that Will Greenhow was clueless. Same with Randall when he took over as interim. This new guy? I’m not entirely convinced he could find his own arse with both hands and a map. As for Cannan, I don’t think he’d care about being the bad guy, judging by the way I see him and hear him talk to people he considers beneath him- which is pretty much everyone. Greenhow was the head of the CS and advisor to CMs. During this period the CS went nowhere; there were no meaningful reforms; the integrity of the service was questionable; incompetence was appointed and tolerated and spin became the norm. How much of that he was personally responsible for, we don’t know but many would consider his “leadership” to be clueless. It would be nice to have somebody appointed to head the CS who was not a product of the public sector and had some record of achieving change within organisations. We pay the dollar for that kind of experience. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Babydoc Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 Does anyone have historical pay raise data for IOM civil servants please? Thank you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 14 hours ago, Ringy Rose said: I couldn’t be arsed being your personal Google. As for why headcount has slightly raised, you’d need to look at where the headcount has raised. From a brief glance it appears that headcount has mostly raised in Manx Care, which is to be expected when we were short of doctors and nurses. Beyond that, you tell me why it’s raised, you’re the one exercised by it. But you’re the one saying there’s too much bloat and too many non-jobs, so I’m asking you to name them. I have my own ideas, but I’m not the one making the wild claims. No. You were the one asking which services should be cut. In the part of the above post that you somehow forgot to quote, I said that this is a false premise. I would not start by cutting ANY service. I would institute a review of every job that becomes vacant when the holder leaves or retires to see if it is necessary to fill the position with a presumption not to. In this way we can at least make a start on the massive overmanning in the higher reaches of government and concentrate resources on the frontline. This is evolutionary rather than revolutionary. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Banker Posted June 20 Author Share Posted June 20 Maybe unions will reduce their 8% pay demands now they realize that jobs may be lost to cut wages costs https://www.manxradio.com/news/isle-of-man-news/prospect-calls-for-more-clarity-amid-review-of-public-sector-headcount/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted June 20 Share Posted June 20 If the previous Great Untouchable of PS headcount and pay is now to come under "scrutiny", perhaps it might be another indicator as to the state of the national finances? I wonder how all this fits in with Stu Peters' view of, "Now understanding where and why all these people are needed"...? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Flint Posted June 20 Share Posted June 20 The key to any reform is what do you do with the people that might face redundancy? Looking at what might feasibly be privatised or outsourced is a potential start. That's why it is so much bigger than just "justify your existence". The role may be necessary, but is it necessary that government do it? 1 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.