"Firms wary about hiring public sector staff"

[Fittster]

Kermit power said:

Fittster said:

After a jolly holiday in German where he bumped into Bismark the stupid liberal decided that it would be a good idea to replicate the compulsory National Insurance scheme in the UK. During his watch you also have the foundation of the NHS.

If you want a politician who loved spending fortunes start with Churchill

Neither of those things are intrinsically bad though. It's taken a few decades of mismanagement to create the monster we have today.

Yes they are. Once you decide on compulsory enrollment into a welfare system the seeds of destruction are sown.

[Johnnytheboy]

Kermit power said:

And this would be as opposed to the stunning job the MOD performed in the past, would it?

Don't the MOD have something funny like 25,000 people working just in procurement?

Give me an office, a PA and an order pad and I'd do it for them.

PA: The army want a weapon.
Me: What are the Americans using right now?
PA: Weapon A
Me: What are the Americans currently developing?
PA: Weapon B
Me: Can we afford Weapon B or afford to wait until it's ready?
PA: No, and no.
Me: We'll order Weapon A, pass me a purchase order pad.

Job done.

Kermit power said:

It's interesting to note that this is much the same problem which I and other posters have noticed when bidding to the public sector for IT projects. Everything has to be done by jumping through lots of bureaucratic hoops positioned in exactly the correct sequence by people who don't actually have the first clue of what they want delivering to them.

We're doing a tender at the mo for a County Council which is driving us mad. It's beyond wordy. E.g. 1,000 words on our company's biodiversity policy FFS. There's an ability to put questions to them when we can't figure out what they mean; the answers tell me they don't either. One bit of the spec looked really familiar - I compared it to an abortive NVQ I did in our chosen field; they'd lifted the body of text word for word from wherever my previous employer had.

[Digga]

I think the bigger problem - not just for the UK - had been the dogged adherence to a 'democratic' system, in which the core economic strategy (or lack of) is dictated by politicians with no expertise whatsoever in the field, pandering to the whims of the masses, most of whom are not capable of running their own finances, let alone the long term fiscal management of a nation.

[adycav]

A long time ago a consultant psychiatrist told me that the NHS's primary aim (as Europe's single largest employer of folk) was to pay people so that they could buy stuff. Treating the sick was a by-product.

[slipstream 1985]

Murph7355 said:

Only 4 out of 10 are nervous?

If I were in the public sector I'd be heartened it's that low!

maybe only 4 in 10 turned up on the day that memo was distributed?

[Kermit power]

Fittster said:

Kermit power said:

Fittster said:

After a jolly holiday in German where he bumped into Bismark the stupid liberal decided that it would be a good idea to replicate the compulsory National Insurance scheme in the UK. During his watch you also have the foundation of the NHS.

If you want a politician who loved spending fortunes start with Churchill

Neither of those things are intrinsically bad though. It's taken a few decades of mismanagement to create the monster we have today.

Yes they are. Once you decide on compulsory enrollment into a welfare system the seeds of destruction are sown.

Why?

[hidetheelephants]

Saddle bum said:

I have see the results of previous staff reductions in MoD. Thousands of years worth of experience were shed in staff losses in the early 1990s and as a result MoD is no longer an "Intelligent Customer". It has become unable to manage projects effectively and the monumental cock-ups gleefully reported in the mail and others will continue.

Slightly OT, but I don't care; once upon a time in land far, far away, I attended an assessment day for joining the MOD as a project engineer shortly after I graduated. I was rejected(and therefore have sour grapes, but whatever), and the feedback given to me was that I was technically very competent and above average, but that my interpersonal skills were only adequate. To earn this accolade I had been a bit brisk with the actor pretending to be a MOD contractor in a meeting scenario; he was waffling and repeating himself and I politely(I thought) cut him off and moved to my next question. WTF? It kind of summed up everything that I perceived as going wrong with the MOD at the time, and history seems to vindicate this view; even if they want to yank contractors' chains, project engineers are discouraged from doing so.

[Saddle bum]

Kermit power said:

Have you ever heard of a little thing called Nimrod?

Get your facts right, boy.

Nimrod was an established airframe. The problems were nearly all software related and can be placed at the door of the main contractor. As a result of this and others, "Cost Plus" contracts were banned and PMs got the power to hammer contractors.

Never let the truth get in the way of prejudice.

[hidetheelephants]

Saddle bum said:

Get your facts right, boy.

Nimrod was an established airframe. The problems were nearly all software related and can be placed at the door of the main contractor. As a result of this and others, "Cost Plus" contracts were banned and PMs got the power to hammer contractors.

Never let the truth get in the way of prejudice.

It didn't work; contractors simply frontload the costs into the initial bids instead. If anything this results in things costing more. The nature of defence equipment is bespoke, and 'commercial off the shelf' is rarely anything of the kind; arguments to the contrary are flying in the face of the evidence of several decades of defence procurement FUBARs.

Also, the AEW3 software was one of the few bits that worked; the intractable problems were:

- the airframe was too small; everything had to be shoehorned in, and the cooling burden meant only half the fuel load could be used
- the chosen processor was too slow
- the databus couldn't cope with the amount of data

Edited by hidetheelephants on Friday 15th April 20:39

[WhoseGeneration]

Kermit power said:

Fittster said:

Kermit power said:

Fittster said:

After a jolly holiday in German where he bumped into Bismark the stupid liberal decided that it would be a good idea to replicate the compulsory National Insurance scheme in the UK. During his watch you also have the foundation of the NHS.

If you want a politician who loved spending fortunes start with Churchill

Neither of those things are intrinsically bad though. It's taken a few decades of mismanagement to create the monster we have today.

Yes they are. Once you decide on compulsory enrollment into a welfare system the seeds of destruction are sown.

Why?

Ian Hislop fronted an interesting documentary, many years ago, on Channel 4, iirc, about the birth of the NHS.
Suddenly, many appeared asking for the now "free" entitlements.
Now, whilst I'm not against the NHS, I do think that it has contributed to our current "rights" society, with many not appreciating their personal responsibility for their own health.

[hidetheelephants]

WhoseGeneration said:

Ian Hislop fronted an interesting documentary, many years ago, on Channel 4, iirc, about the birth of the NHS.
Suddenly, many appeared asking for the now "free" entitlements.
Now, whilst I'm not against the NHS, I do think that it has contributed to our current "rights" society, with many not appreciating their personal responsibility for their own health.

When something does not cost anything, it is not valued.

[Kermit power]

Saddle bum said:

Kermit power said:

Have you ever heard of a little thing called Nimrod?

Get your facts right, boy.

Nimrod was an established airframe. The problems were nearly all software related and can be placed at the door of the main contractor. As a result of this and others, "Cost Plus" contracts were banned and PMs got the power to hammer contractors.

Never let the truth get in the way of prejudice.

So who took the decision to sign off on a project to develop completely new technology in the first place, rather than using proven components available off the shelf? Probably not the contractor's software designers.

Who decided to save money by commissioning a project to adapt an already elderly airframe which proved too small to carry all the equipment required? Probably not the contractor's software designers.

Who decided to overrule the apparent RAF preference at the time for acquiring Boeing E-3As? Probably not the contractor's software designers.

Who was responsible for not actually finalising which version of the airframe was to be delivered on the contract after major revisions in 1977? Probably not the contractor's software designers.

Who was it that decided to have one branch of the RAF responsible for project-managing the development of the airframe and another branch responsible for project-managing the electronics, meaning that nobody in the customer organisation had an overall view of the project beyond quarterly review meetings? Probably not the contractor's software designers.

Who was it who decided that the RAF officers filling the above project manager roles on such a complex project should still be rotated in service every two years, just as they'd really got to grips with all the complexities? Probably not the contractor's software designers.

But hey, if you want to believe that's all down to software problems, you go ahead and believe that.

[deadslow]

Usually the conflicting interests of the business owner/worker/customer manage to balance each other to provide good service at a good price, or die.

In the public sector there is a)no profit incentive and b)the customer is mainly facing a monopolistic choice, therefore cannot 'go elsewhere'.

Ergo the main driver in this sector is the interest of the workers, hence the sector is over staffed, over paid, over pensioned, under worked, resentful of customers.

We hire quite a lot of them, but often they soon drift away when expected to 'work' for every penny.

[bucksmanuk]

I'll second what Kermit Power said above
I hope to God I never ever have to work with defence procuremnt people again. In my craeer I have been annoyed by the RAF, Royal Navy, USAF, US Navy, and the last, the Korean Navy, all as bad as each other.

My sister can give you chapter and verse about dealing with a large city council social services department. Scandalous, How do these people keep their jobs?

[whoami]

bucksmanuk said:

How do these people keep their jobs?

Thankfully, this will rapidly become less of a problem.

[Ruskie]

There have been some unfair generalisations about public sector workers in this thread.

I work in the public sector and I am proud to do so. I work very hard to provide the best service I can.

To those making sweeping statements about public sector workers just think who you would call in an emergency and be thankful that person is not motivated by money but by the desire to help people in need.

[Ozzie Osmond]

hidetheelephants said:

When something does not cost anything, it is not valued.

Which leaves the tricky question of children.

They don't cost anything yet parents seem to value them.....

[stitched]

Saddle bum said:

As most public sector workers, especially in middle management positions, are better trained than those in the private sector, one can understand the animosity towards them. The public sector has more funds to ensure a wider training regime, whilst most commercial organisations hire in the expertise they require rather than train for it.

Non professional senior management in the private sector are nothing short of barrow boys in a smart suit. The senior Civil Service are all degree trained and are bloody good at their job, albeit considering they are answering to politicians, who are, in general, woeful when it comes to academic achievement.

I think you may find sir that those who excel in the private sector do so due to talent and intelligence, precluding the need for training .
I would be willing to bet a great deal that few if any of the highly trained public sector would succeed as a barrowboy.

[don4l]

Ruskie said:

There have been some unfair generalisations about public sector workers in this thread.

I work in the public sector and I am proud to do so. I work very hard to provide the best service I can.

To those making sweeping statements about public sector workers just think who you would call in an emergency and be thankful that person is not motivated by money but by the desire to help people in need.

I don't wish to appear rude, but how many sick days have you had in the lest two years?


Don
--

[pugwash4x4]

Ruskie said:

There have been some unfair generalisations about public sector workers in this thread.

I work in the public sector and I am proud to do so. I work very hard to provide the best service I can.

To those making sweeping statements about public sector workers just think who you would call in an emergency and be thankful that person is not motivated by money but by the desire to help people in need.

My motivation is to do the VERY best job i can, knowing that this will keep my customers happy (which is a hell of a thrill), and in turn earn me more money.

No one works in the public sector for free- and judging by the number of strikes you guys have over pay, it seems that money really IS a big motivator (and i don't think that's a bad thing- but at least be honest!)