"Firms wary about hiring public sector staff"

[Countdown]

bosscerbera said:

Countdown said:

You're absolutely right. This person should ensure he is available for work 3 hours early every day because he's public sector. Being public sector means that you should be at the beck and call of every member of the private sector at all times.

No, whether public sector - or private sector - you have a duty to your paymasters. And don't be thinking that's the 'manager' - in the private sector top of the pyramid is customer not chairman.

And that "duty" is set out within the Job description. There's a minority of people IME who stick rigidly to their JD, most will go above and beyond where practicable (and that applies to both the Private and Public Sector). We are not compulsorily obliged to provide a greater duty of care because we are public sector workers. Perhaps you think we should tug our forelocks every time we serve you ?

Here's an example - next time your customer walks up to you and says "take my kids to the toilet while I wander around your shop" - you think the Customer's right?

Are NEXT going to open up at 6am especially for you? Because you're the customer ? Bolleaux.

bosscerbera said:

[
The public sector has insulated itself from stakeholder accountabilities which is why dross is attracted to it and can survive, even prosper, in it.

This must be galling for you, to see your taxes being abused in this fashion. Maybe you should consider moving elsewhere where the private sector provides everything you get in the UK for the same price ?

[Countdown]

bosscerbera said:

Countdown said:

Depending on the severity of the situation. Our landlord knows this - its in his best interests, especially if the sprinklers go off or there's a water leak. In the example given its easy to blame the worker whereas the IT people and the landlord need to be looking at their own processes.

Perfectly encapsulated mindset.

"...looking at their own processes" - what a load of old bks.

Just open the fking door, it's an emergency. FFS, how hard can it be?

I know what you mean. I went to ATS this morning at 6am because I had a flat tyre. They refused point blank to open up and asked why I didnt use my spare. i told the morons that that was flat as well and it was an "EMERGENCY" and "I paid their wages".

They wouldnt stop laughing - incosiderate bds


ETA You think its bks for them to look at their own processes? So if you were the manager of the IT company you'd do exactly the same thing? What a fantastic contingency plan

I'd suggest maybe a conversation with the Site manager (of the other place) and the landlord might be a useful starting point.

Edited by Countdown on Tuesday 19th April 14:07

Edited by Countdown on Tuesday 19th April 14:10

[Mojooo]

bosscerbera said:

And there we have it... Retailers compete for, and are thankful, for the public's custom. Tosspots in the public sector aren't subject to the same needs to serve at all.

NEXT stores are open long hours to serve a public that is not obliged to visit those stores. Compare that with the close-early, rarely-answer-the-phone public sector dross for which the public has no option but to suffer!

Want longer public sector hours..................... pay more bro.

[Countdown]

Mojooo said:

Want longer public sector hours..................... pay more bro.

The thing is you wouldn't need to.

There's bound to be a call-out system for emergencies such as this. AFAICS the problem lies more with the IT company and the landlord not knowing who to call. Public sector organisations are required to have BCP/Critical Incident management plans. Where was the IT company's ?

[sleep envy]

Countdown said:

bosscerbera said:

Countdown said:

By the same logic should NEXT be expected to open up earlier because "I pay their wages"? Public Sector wokrers get paid to do a job, just because they're "public sector" doesn't mean that they should be "extra grateful" to every taxpayer they deal with.

And there we have it... Retailers compete for, and are thankful, for the public's custom. Tosspots in the public sector aren't subject to the same needs to serve at all.

NEXT stores are open long hours to serve a public that is not obliged to visit those stores. Compare that with the close-early, rarely-answer-the-phone public sector dross for which the public has no option but to suffer!

You're absolutely right. This person should ensure he is available for work 3 hours early every day because he's public sector. Being public sector means that you should be at the beck and call of every member of the private sector at all times.

but they're not at the beckon call of every member of the private sector at all times, just when they're the key holder for the premises and being called in once earlier than usual isn't exactly unreasonable

what would she do if someone higher up the public sector chain wanted to gain access at 8 am, tell them to fk off because it's not 9 am?

[tinman0]

Countdown said:

tinman0 said:

A public servant who should be sympathetic to the needs of the companies and people that pay their wages couldn't be contacted to help a taxpayer out.

By the same logic should NEXT be expected to open up earlier because "I pay their wages"? Public Sector wokrers get paid to do a job, just because they're "public sector" doesn't mean that they should be "extra grateful" to every taxpayer they deal with.

Comparing NEXT to a public servant are two totally different things. You don't have to shop at NEXT. If you are desperate for a pair of undies at 7am in the morning, you could pop into a 24/7 Tescos.

It is down to the owners of the shop whether they want your custom.

But we don't have a choice with public servants. We get to pay their wages whether we like it or not, whether they do a good job or not. There is no choice in the whole matter.

If someone needed entry to our office out of hours, I'd be only too happy to help out; it's called "not being a ". (pardon my language).

[Countdown]

sleep envy said:

but they're not at the beckon call of every member of the private sector at all times, just when they're the key holder for the premises and being called in once earlier than usual isn't exactly unreasonable

You're right - there isn't. Public sector buildings (IME) will have people available specifically for out of hours callouts. In a lot of places nowadays its subcontracted to firms such as Chubb, Guardian, Securicor etc. Its not just for situations described above, its also for things such as dodgy alarms, fire alerts, vandalism etc.

From my reading of it, It sounds like the IT people didnt get hold of the right person or even speak to the keyholder directly. Whatever - its hard to tell. This is why I suggested the It firm review their processes to make sure it doesn't happen again, but some people think thats irrelevant

sleep envy said:

what would she do if someone higher up the public sector chain wanted to gain access at 8 am, tell them to fk off because it's not 9 am?

Depends wholly on the circumstances;

(i) Emergency or pre-arranged then we would ensure the site was open
(ii) If he'she just felt like coming in early and phoned me at 7.45 I'd explain to them that it wasn't practical and it would incur out of hours charges. They could then decide what they wanted to do.

But both options are dependant on them contacting the RIGHT person in the first instance.

[Fittster]

Private Sector IT bods lecturing the public sector about efficiency.....

[sleep envy]

Countdown said:

From my reading of it, It sounds like the IT people didnt get hold of the right person or even speak to the keyholder directly. Whatever - its hard to tell. This is why I suggested the It firm review their processes to make sure it doesn't happen again, but some people think thats irrelevant

sleep envy said:

what would she do if someone higher up the public sector chain wanted to gain access at 8 am, tell them to fk off because it's not 9 am?

Depends wholly on the circumstances;

(i) Emergency or pre-arranged then we would ensure the site was open
(ii) If he'she just felt like coming in early and phoned me at 7.45 I'd explain to them that it wasn't practical and it would incur out of hours charges. They could then decide what they wanted to do.

But both options are dependant on them contacting the RIGHT person in the first instance.

Johnnytheboy said:

They managed eventually to contact someone at the pub sec organisation to be told that the key holder (like everyone else) didn't start until exactly 0900, so they'd all have to wait until then.

"Can't she come in even a bit early this once?"

"No."

"Please? Not even half an hour?"

"No."

"Can you ask her?"

"No."

bit difficult to get hold of the keyholder when they won't ask her

btw - agree that LL should have contact details of all keyholders on site especially if it is a secure site

[Countdown]

tinman0 said:

Comparing NEXT to a public servant are two totally different things. You don't have to shop at NEXT. If you are desperate for a pair of undies at 7am in the morning, you could pop into a 24/7 Tescos.

It is down to the owners of the shop whether they want your custom.

But we don't have a choice with public servants. We get to pay their wages whether we like it or not, whether they do a good job or not. There is no choice in the whole matter.

If someone needed entry to our office out of hours, I'd be only too happy to help out; it's called "not being a ". (pardon my language).

Tinman - the key phrase is "doing their job". In this case "doing their job" is ensuring the office is open at 9.00am. That's what they were contracted for, that's what their line manager has told them to do. God knows why they couldn't get there any earlier (or even knew that they were needed earlier) I agree with your point about helping out but you need to know WHO to speak to and it sounds like neither the IT company nor the landlord knew.

And if we're comparing competency between the two sectors how commpetent is the IT firm when it doesn't even know where the mains distribution board for its electrcity supply is located ?

[bosscerbera]

Countdown said:

Tinman - the key phrase is "doing their job". In this case "doing their job" is ensuring the office is open at 9.00am.

Case closed.

[tinman0]

Countdown said:

Tinman - the key phrase is "doing their job". In this case "doing their job" is ensuring the office is open at 9.00am. That's what they were contracted for, that's what their line manager has told them to do. God knows why they couldn't get there any earlier (or even knew that they were needed earlier) I agree with your point about helping out but you need to know WHO to speak to and it sounds like neither the IT company nor the landlord knew.

If you are a key holder, doing your job from 9am isn't "doing your job".

The whole point of a key holder (especially in a commercial property) is that you are available if entry is required to the building at any time. That's why you are the key holder.

Imagine the Police need entry to the building one evening? Are you seriously telling me that a civil servant is going to tell Plod "we're open at 9am and we're not opening the door any sooner".

Do me a favour.

They knew they could screw someone around with little or no consequences, and that is exactly what they did.

[Countdown]

tinman0 said:

If you are a key holder, doing your job from 9am isn't "doing your job".

The whole point of a key holder (especially in a commercial property) is that you are available if entry is required to the building at any time. That's why you are the key holder.

Imagine the Police need entry to the building one evening? Are you seriously telling me that a civil servant is going to tell Plod "we're open at 9am and we're not opening the door any sooner".

Do me a favour.

They knew they could screw someone around with little or no consequences, and that is exactly what they did.

And that's why this story makes no sense. What you;re suggesting is that

• the person who opens the office at 9am is also the "Out of hours" contact
• the person who took the call knew this
• the person who took the call didn't pass on the instruction to attend because they "knew" the keyholder would not attend.

Think it through;

What's in it for Person 1 not to pass the message on?
What happens to P1 if his line manager finds out?
What's likely to happen to the keyholder if there's a complaint to his line manager? (probably a thread on PH about bullying and harassment )

So we have a 2nd hand story about a keyholder supposedly not being informed about an out-of-hours attendance request by A.N.Other because ANO asumes he/she won't attend? Why didn't ANO just advise the IT company that the KH is on his way and let them twiddle their thumbs?

Its typical PH these days. "My mate told me" is taken for gospel and somebody who has 10 years experience of the procedures is talking rubbish. Fair enough

[tinman0]

Countdown said:

And that's why this story makes no sense. What you;re suggesting is that

• the person who opens the office at 9am is also the "Out of hours" contact
• the person who took the call knew this
• the person who took the call didn't pass on the instruction to attend because they "knew" the keyholder would not attend.

The buck stops with the person who didn't want to contact the key holder.

We have no idea whether the key holder would have attended, as it never got that far.

The failure is in the person who dealt with the call, because they couldn't give a toss. Which is an apt description of the civil service.

[Countdown]

tinman0 said:

The buck stops with the person who didn't want to contact the key holder.

We have no idea whether the key holder would have attended, as it never got that far.

The failure is in the person who dealt with the call, because they couldn't give a toss. Which is an apt description of the civil service.

Of course - because that one person's performance epitomises the whole of the Civil Service.

And perish the thought that you'd get anything like that happening in the Private Sector.

ETA: You don't think any fault lies with the IT company or the landlord ? Is their performance acceptable ? Perhaps you feel they reflect the shining heights of the entire Private sector ?

[mph1977]

tinman0 said:

That's not the point. A public servant who should be sympathetic to the needs of the companies and people that pay their wages couldn't be contacted to help a taxpayer out.

Just about sums the UK up really.

there are only 650 'public servants' in the public sector, the rest are tax paying employees same as any other company ... and Bliar replaced the effective NEDs for them with a a system filled with his political cronies ...

'I pay your wages ' is an instant Attitude Test failure ...

Edited by mph1977 on Tuesday 19th April 16:30

[bosscerbera]

mph1977 said:

there are only 650 'public servants' in the public sector, the rest are tax paying employees same as any other company ... and Bliar replaced the effective NEDs for them with a a system filled with his political cronies ...

'I pay your wages ' is an instant Attitude Test failure ...

Economics failure.

[AndrewW-G]

mph1977 said:

'I pay your wages ' is an instant Attitude Test failure ...

Members of the public are the customers of the "civil" service, the only difference between being a PAYING customer of a shop from the public sector, is that with the shop you have the option of shopping elsewhere . . .

[tinman0]

Countdown said:

Of course - because that one person's performance epitomises the whole of the Civil Service.

But it's not one person though. It's endemic. How about the UK Embassy in Switzerland a few years ago where they wouldn't process an emergency travel document for a lady as they were all at a party one evening. Made her wait till the morning. By the time she got back into the UK her daughter had passed away.

All because someone didn't want to give 30 minutes of their time to help the people they are paid to help!

And before someone says "well a company wouldn't do that", that's horsest in this day and age. Many companies (and employees) will go the extra mile when they can, because they have a reputation to maintain. A good reputation means a happy customer.

As a hotel manager said to us one day, a happy customer will tell 2-3 people about their experience. An unhappy customer will tell 10.

[Sticks.]

mph1977 said:

'I pay your wages ' is an instant Attitude Test failure ...

Edited by mph1977 on Tuesday 19th April 16:30

Certainly a manners-failure. It tends to be used more against pub sec not because the service is necessarily worse, but because customers know that if they use it in the pri sec they've a good chance of being told to feck off, or be charged more, which the pub sec can't do.