Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
The Masked Tulip

Welsh Nhs Undergoes Massive Reorganisation

Recommended Posts

I was not sure whether to stick this in the Welsh Public Sector or the NHS thread as it crosses over both... so here you go.

There is a major conference this week in North Wales between the various Welsh Local Govts as they sit down and bang their heads over the coming budget cuts, the inevitable job cuts and, well, it seems like they are trying to come up with a plan to stop both - DOH!

The Welsh meeja is reporting this and there is a fascinating editorial in the Western Mail today about all of this.

Basically, unknown to myself and most people I know, the Welsh NHS underwent a massive reorganisation last year. One result is that apparently loads of managers earning 100K and more either found their departments cut or their own staff roles were eliminated.

Reading the above you would think there would have been job cuts.

Nope - not one according to the Western Mail.

Apparently many of these 100K plus managers are still in position, still being paid even though their roles have gone. No one has fired them.

The Western Mail editorial today is calling upon the Welsh Assembly to begin cutting jobs in order to balance the budget and the economy. It is almost begging the Welsh politicians to see the economic reality and begin the job cuts.

It alludes that those in the Welsh Assembly are doing everything they can not to fire people.

Apparently 70% of Welsh GDP is now dependent upon the Public Sector.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently 70% of Welsh GDP is now dependent upon the Public Sector.

I'm never sure what this means - if, say, 25% of the population was public sector, would that imply that 44% of the economy was dependent? (the original 25%, plus the 25% contribution they make to the rest of the economy - aka 'buying stuff').

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Public spending in Wales per Capita is 112% of the UK average. Public spending in London per Capita is 115%. Doesn't seem so bad now does it!?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was not sure whether to stick this in the Welsh Public Sector or the NHS thread as it crosses over both... so here you go.

There is a major conference this week in North Wales between the various Welsh Local Govts as they sit down and bang their heads over the coming budget cuts, the inevitable job cuts and, well, it seems like they are trying to come up with a plan to stop both - DOH!

The Welsh meeja is reporting this and there is a fascinating editorial in the Western Mail today about all of this.

Basically, unknown to myself and most people I know, the Welsh NHS underwent a massive reorganisation last year. One result is that apparently loads of managers earning 100K and more either found their departments cut or their own staff roles were eliminated.

Reading the above you would think there would have been job cuts.

Nope - not one according to the Western Mail.

Apparently many of these 100K plus managers are still in position, still being paid even though their roles have gone. No one has fired them.

The Western Mail editorial today is calling upon the Welsh Assembly to begin cutting jobs in order to balance the budget and the economy. It is almost begging the Welsh politicians to see the economic reality and begin the job cuts.

It alludes that those in the Welsh Assembly are doing everything they can not to fire people.

Apparently 70% of Welsh GDP is now dependent upon the Public Sector.

It's an organisational culture thing according to my contacts - no managers or HR depts in the NHS have the b*lls to sack anyone apart from contract cleaners, they just move them tzo a job they hope they won't like and pray that they'll leave.

I daresay they will have to get tougher, quite soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Public spending in Wales per Capita is 112% of the UK average. Public spending in London per Capita is 115%. Doesn't seem so bad now does it!?

Seems bad to me. If the average Londoner pays 135% of the UK average in taxes and the average Welshman pays only 86% of the average tax, doesn't that still make you scrounging sheep-bothering scum?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems bad to me. If the average Londoner pays 135% of the UK average in taxes and the average Welshman pays only 86% of the average tax, doesn't that still make you scrounging sheep-bothering scum?

Hey chav,

Where do you get your figures from?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

TMT, I hadn't spotted this thread when  I posted my thread about "is the coalition making the wrong sort of cuts",  but in essence i think this thread is an example of that.

Instead of cutting people (90% of the cost), the public sector will cut everything else first. 

The net is you end up with suregeons without operating theatres, radiaotheripists with our cyclotrons,radiographers without Xray machines and MRI systems, and booking clerks without a booking system.

Apply this across the public sector and you'll end up with 6 million people doing nothing, and a budget saving of about 10%.

The cuts need to come headcount, not it projects and services. Make the public sector workers work harder, and for longer and leave the capital assets and equipment alone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A senior Welsh Assembly bod told me this has been going on for a long time - pools of workers not working yet receiving full salary - a zero redundancy policy.

Also, I agree they will cut everything other than jobs - I left the public sector because I was working with a joke budget. Never again. I hate the culture and the mindset more than you can imagine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A senior Welsh Assembly bod told me this has been going on for a long time - pools of workers not working yet receiving full salary - a zero redundancy policy.

Also, I agree they will cut everything other than jobs - I left the public sector because I was working with a joke budget. Never again. I hate the culture and the mindset more than you can imagine.

I know an ex public sector worker, the stories he tells me of the work ethic in a council are quite disturbing really. There are many hateful ways of spunking public money - all of which are flagrantly doctrinated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Public spending in Wales per Capita is 112% of the UK average. Public spending in London per Capita is 115%. Doesn't seem so bad now does it!?

London gets the high-grade spending. National government and top civil service, that in turn support high-value, high-margin, high-paying industries. And all the biggest taxpayer-funded tourist things: national museums, theatre, etc, etc. And big prestige projects like that dome to regenerate east London, and that olympics to regenerate east London (and *** knows what next to regenerate east London).

Everywhere else just gets the leftovers. Some more than others, as the Wales figure indicates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 TMT, I hadn't spotted this thread when  I posted my thread about "is the coalition making the wrong sort of cuts",  but in essence i think this thread is an example of that.

Is it? How is something done last year in Wales the responsibility of the coalition? Apart from Cameron's absurd promises to ringfence the NHS!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A senior Welsh Assembly bod told me this has been going on for a long time - pools of workers not working yet receiving full salary - a zero redundancy policy.

Also, I agree they will cut everything other than jobs - I left the public sector because I was working with a joke budget. Never again. I hate the culture and the mindset more than you can imagine.

Heard the same from someone who works in the Assembly. She quoted a figure of three thousand !!! What a fücking disgrace.

That was well over a year ago so it's probably higher by now.

Sad really. Very pro-devolution myself but as soon as any politiician gets power they spünk it on themselves or their empire.

One of the first things they did was order a new assembly building for tens of millions even though Swansea offfered them a place for free.

Same in Scotland where it ended ten times over budget at £440m.

I imagine it's the same the world over. These people need to be watched carefully.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another thing that came out yesterday weas that when Rhodri Morgan announced his 'bonfire of the QUANGOs' and he brought the Welsh Development Agency in to the Welsh Assembly direct control it did not result in job cuts and cost savings.

Oh no - apparently it resulted in a few hundred extra people being taken on, more layers of civil servants and several hundred more million in costs.

Nuts - but so typical!

I had the misfortune a few years of going of visiting an incredibly depressing building in Cardiff - you know, one of those places where you swear never to go go again. The walls, ceiling and floors were a disgusting nicotine colour throughout and the place was gloomy.

Whilst waiting outside in the early morning for my colleagues to arrive I watched hundreds of the staff entering at about 8.30AM and most looked miserabled, fed-up and depressed from their body language. No wonder when I saw inside.

This was the place where all the Welsh NHS buildings were recorded. It was frightening in how old fashioned it was.

Apart from the nicotine stained affect many of the offices were dimly lit and there were row upon row of staff hunced over boxes full of prescriptions tpying the details of each into computers. Were these Windows XP boxes? No,

Were they Windows 2000? No. Not even 98 or 95. Not even Windows 3.1. These were the old fashioned green screen jobs which, by that time, were already illegal under EU Law.

Everything in that building was just miserable and I felt so sorry for anyone working there. It was unhealthy to mind and body and Soul IMPO.

I forget the details but apparently they changed the way the prescriptions were inputted every few months - changed something on the prescriptions also - just to make sure that the staff were kept on their toes and that it was nigh on impossible to modernise.

Why was this?

Well, allegedly, it was a major public sector employer in the constituency of a certain MP/AM dynasty and any modernisation of the IT systems and/or the way prescriptions were handed would result in massive job losses - which obviously were politcially and electorally unacceptable.

I suspect this mentality is common throughout Wales.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it? How is something done last year in Wales the responsibility of the coalition? Apart from Cameron's absurd promises to ringfence the NHS!

Yes, I agree with porca - Wales is run by the lot in Cardiff Bay now and hence why I fear things are really bad and will get worse.

I think, purely for political reasons, both Plaid and Labour have revelled in more people being on the public sector books than Brown did. Even now, they are refusing to make any job cuts and are openly talking about not implementing any cuts until next year even though they have les money this year than last.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's an organisational culture thing according to my contacts - no managers or HR depts in the NHS have the b*lls to sack anyone apart from contract cleaners, they just move them tzo a job they hope they won't like and pray that they'll leave.

I daresay they will have to get tougher, quite soon.

This is not true. I know many NHS trusts have been making managerial staff redundant at all levels, including directors.

The difficulty with dismissing high earners is nothing to do with HR or anyone else having b*lls, in any event , it demonstrates how little your contact knows if he thinks it's HR departments or managers who decide to dismiss those earning over £100k.

The problem with dismissing high earners is that they've usually been in the public sector for many years so they are entitled to massive redundancy payments.

The choice is: make a high earner redundant now for, say £300,000 of tax payers money or keep them on the book for a year to see if you/they can find another job. If they find another job, they don't get the pay out. The employer is in a difficult situation because it can't afford to make the payout. It will want to string out the notice in the hope another job is found or a secondment or anything else.

Also if these high earners are over 50 (which many of them will be), due to the terms of the redundancy/retirement policy, if they are made redundant they are entitled to their pension in full immediately on termination. This means that if you make a high earner redundant at, say, 51 it could cost the public purse close to a million pounds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's an organisational culture thing according to my contacts - no managers or HR depts in the NHS have the b*lls to sack anyone apart from contract cleaners, they just move them tzo a job they hope they won't like and pray that they'll leave.

I daresay they will have to get tougher, quite soon.

Cripes, that sounds eerily familiar to our gaff. Last year we get a new head of Recruitment & HR, during the first round of restructuring (top-down) there were a number of senior HR posts (most of them typical non-jobs) that were either dissolved or changed so that the existing staff (circa 50k pa) had to reinterview for their posts; around four staff members weren't deemed 'good enough' for their current roles so were got rid of and (spookily) replaced by the new boss' old staff at her previous NHS Trust. The biggest kick in the balls was that the exit-bound deadwood simply had 'new' roles created for them in other departments. So to recap, we have a number of cr*p staff on silly wages; replaced them but retain the cr*p ones on the Trust payroll.

Brilliant.

Edited by Sibley's Love Child

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cripes, that sounds eerily familiar to our gaff. Last year we get a new head of Recruitment & HR, during the first round of restructuring (top-down) there were a number of senior HR posts (most of them typical non-jobs) that were either dissolved or changed so that the existing staff (circa 50k) had to reinterview for their posts; around four staff members weren't deemed 'good enough' for their current roles so were got rid of and (spookily) replaced by the new boss' old staff at her previous NHS Trust. The biggest kick in the balls was that the exit-bound deadwood simply had 'new' roles created for them in other departments. So to recap, we have a number of cr*p staff on silly wages; replaced them but retain the cr*p ones on the Trust payroll.

Brilliant.

This thread is in danger of turning into a Daily Mail article. :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is not true. I know many NHS trusts have been making managerial staff redundant at all levels, including directors.

The difficulty with dismissing high earners is nothing to do with HR or anyone else having b*lls, in any event , it demonstrates how little your contact knows if he thinks it's HR departments or managers who decide to dismiss those earning over £100k.

The problem with dismissing high earners is that they've usually been in the public sector for many years so they are entitled to massive redundancy payments.

The choice is: make a high earner redundant now for, say £300,000 of tax payers money or keep them on the book for a year to see if you/they can find another job. If they find another job, they don't get the pay out. The employer is in a difficult situation because it can't afford to make the payout. It will want to string out the notice in the hope another job is found or a secondment or anything else.

Also if these high earners are over 50 (which many of them will be), due to the terms of the redundancy/retirement policy, if they are made redundant they are entitled to their pension in full immediately on termination. This means that if you make a high earner redundant at, say, 51 it could cost the public purse close to a million pounds.

Yep, nail on the head there. They're simply too expensive to sack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Also if these high earners are over 50 (which many of them will be), due to the terms of the redundancy/retirement policy, if they are made redundant they are entitled to their pension in full immediately on termination. This means that if you make a high earner redundant at, say, 51 it could cost the public purse close to a million pounds.

I've been pointing out this for ages.

If you make someone take early retirement, they still cost the taxpayer the same money.

Someone on £50k will only be receiving 60% of their salary after tax and NI etc, so when they retire on 60% of final salary they get the same money.

There is a solution to this, which you will see as the redundancys start... they will make the youngest redundant first, as they have fewer rights.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been pointing out this for ages.

If you make someone take early retirement, they still cost the taxpayer the same money.

Someone on £50k will only be receiving 60% of their salary after tax and NI etc, so when they retire on 60% of final salary they get the same money.

There is a solution to this, which you will see as the redundancys start... they will make the youngest redundant first, as they have fewer rights.

I think England will find out next Tuesday. Wales will probably continue in denial for another year at least. No idea about Scotland and NI.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been pointing out this for ages.

If you make someone take early retirement, they still cost the taxpayer the same money.

Someone on £50k will only be receiving 60% of their salary after tax and NI etc, so when they retire on 60% of final salary they get the same money.

There is a solution to this, which you will see as the redundancys start... they will make the youngest redundant first, as they have fewer rights.

That's correct. The result is that you get very high earners with no job to do because their public sector employer can't afford to make them redundant.

I know a person 'seconded' to do non-existent jobs at the Department of Health (with very little to do) for two years on well over £150k a year, waiting for a chief exec position to come up. I also know of a 'director of experience' on over £150k at a health authority with no staff working on a project that no one cares about simply because her redundancy payment would be eye-watering for the employer.

It's not that common, but it is a big problem when services merge or, as we shall find out, when services are down-sized. The system relied on redundant high-earners (directors/chief execs, etc) finding jobs elsewhere. It breaks down when there's no where for them to go.

It costs almost as much to keep them employed as it does to make them redundant (particularly for those with a long length of service and over 50). In addition, if you make them redundant the employer has to pay a large lump sum payment on termination. With belts being tightened, many employers can't afford the lump sum. Therefore, they can't afford to make the high earner redundant and it's more cost effective (at least in the short to medium term) to keep them on the books.

This is the reality of the situation. Or you could choose to believe that HR don't have the balls/its all middle management's fault/nurses are being sacked to keep managers in employment or whatever sh!te the ill-informed Daily Mail are peddling this week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 145 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.