Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Impact of DF or DOD Policies

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • It all goes back to the heirarchy of needs (Maslow https://www.simplypsychology.org/maslow.html).
    Wages, working hours etc are a physiological need. Until this is rectified then all the good morale and team spirit isn't worth an ounce. Deficiency needs are a motivator when all other needs are unmet.
    For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by DeV View Post
      It is a lot more basic than that (not saying it isn’t a factor), it is to do with how the organisation treats people. People are the key enabler of the organisation to undertake its taskings. Have a look at the climate surveys.

      2015 https://assets.gov.ie/24237/a1cdb05f...6b26f7c9c0.pdf
      2016 https://assets.gov.ie/24192/c276cb4f...3f2b9826f8.pdf

      Also look at the PSPC research https://paycommission.gov.ie/wp-cont...nce-Forces.pdf


      Everyone in the DF could be on €100,000 a year and there would still be major issues
      These surveys including the PSPC are a waste of time and are only a post mortem on a corpse. Nobody within the PSPC has a workable knowledge of how a PDF should run. Producing esoteric graphs and assumptions from asking personnel about their state of mind will always create bias either pro or con the matter in hand. Everyone will never be on the 100k but plenty will have trouble looking after themselves and their families. What is needed is a Work and Time Study by an organisation with Military experience. The major issue is the continued Spartan outlook and lack of Departmental support to modernise in a positive manner. The diminished care structure within the PDF at a Medical level and downsizing Military units over the last decade is a hole in the bath and continued leakage.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by ancientmariner View Post
        In any retention factors in organisations such as Defence Forces, the importance of the working environment as a whole is critical. Obviously dress, accommodation, and the realism of what you are within the organisation are factors. The main problem with our PDF is that there is a visible streak of a Spartanism and frugality permeating the main Departments. This leads to half equipped units, including ships, and units at all levels. Settling for inferior options or forcing delays and deferments of crucial items, or equipping in one area at the expense of losing expenditure in another area of functional necessity. This leads to disillusionment and a constant need to operate a "First up best dressed" operational protocol. In all , hand to mouth and embarrassing.
        Wholeheartedly agree here. For too long the Defence Forces has thrived on it's "make do" attitude. We get by with what we have, not what we need, because, well, it's better than nothing.
        We get our uniforms and boots from the cheapest bidder, yet still there are shortages in basic gear.
        We drive our vehicles into the ground, then replace them with whatever the civvy supplier was keen to get rid of, instead of selecting something actually fit for purpose.
        Corps Directorates draw up great plans of how to modernise our armoured fleet in line with best international practice, only for some civil service manager with an arts degree to decide "No, you don't need that, here's something else I saw on the back of a magazine, you will get that instead".
        The Naval service, possibly due to their remoteness from Newbridge, managed to pull off a stroke, replacing four small 1970s built OPVs, with 6 modern ones, with heavier armament than their predecessors. There was suggestions that they instead of newbuilds, take instead ten year old RN ships, with lighter armament and smaller profiles, but declined, wisely. They were being pushed to arm the new ships with 1940s era 40mm main armament (which we had just bought for the old ships) but this too was pushed aside.
        The only thing they have failed to control is the exit of highly qualified staff to better paying civvy jobs with better T&C, that has no relevance to their expertise. ALdi could open its own cargo fleet if it wanted to, it has so many ex Navy Officers and Other ranks in its staff.
        Every military is struggling to recruit in the current economic climate. The T&C cannot compete with civvy street. But that doesn't mean the DoD/DF shouldn't try. The recent attempt to lure recently retired members back was particularly insulting, offering the opposite to that offered to former HSE workers, in terms of pension entitlements, and including a getout clause that tied you to a fixed term, something nobody else was doing.
        It's like the DoD didn't really want them back.
        For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by ancientmariner View Post
          These surveys including the PSPC are a waste of time and are only a post mortem on a corpse. Nobody within the PSPC has a workable knowledge of how a PDF should run. Producing esoteric graphs and assumptions from asking personnel about their state of mind will always create bias either pro or con the matter in hand. Everyone will never be on the 100k but plenty will have trouble looking after themselves and their families. What is needed is a Work and Time Study by an organisation with Military experience. The major issue is the continued Spartan outlook and lack of Departmental support to modernise in a positive manner. The diminished care structure within the PDF at a Medical level and downsizing Military units over the last decade is a hole in the bath and continued leakage.
          As far as judging things on their merits the PSPC received a negative submission from ISME pleading that there should be no increases in the public service pay as they are considered " Unjustified ". The commission from the outset was got at and had to consider other interests . Such Commissions are window dressing with inherent biases and susceptible to inputs from outside the matter in hand.

          Comment


          • ISME are just worried that if the public sector get anything more, they might have to start paying private sector staff something close to a living wage.
            Likewise, anything involving ICTU is doomed to failure, as you cannot have a representative body that represents management and employees get a good deal for both.
            For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

            Comment


            • Have a look at the findings from those groups and what was said. The climate survey especially as they could say what they liked and everyone was encouraged to participate.

              Also have a look at the ODF annual reports and see the same issues cropping up year after year.

              Pay and allowances is definitely an issue but if pay was doubled in the morning there would still be people in Accomodiation that you wouldn’t put a dog in, people getting annual reports (effecting their careers for promotion, overseas, retention etc) who they have never met, unfair procedures for selection for courses, a huge paperwork burden, etc etc

              Comment


              • Originally posted by DeV View Post
                Have a look at the findings from those groups and what was said. The climate survey especially as they could say what they liked and everyone was encouraged to participate.

                Also have a look at the ODF annual reports and see the same issues cropping up year after year.

                Pay and allowances is definitely an issue but if pay was doubled in the morning there would still be people in Accomodiation that you wouldn’t put a dog in, people getting annual reports (effecting their careers for promotion, overseas, retention etc) who they have never met, unfair procedures for selection for courses, a huge paperwork burden, etc etc
                You are on the money with your last sentence which implies that our system is open to, at very least, careless decision making and a need for stronger leadership in dealing with matters associated with living conditions , education, training opportunities , and ensuring units are fit for purpose. Pay must also be a factor as it is perceived to be insufficient especially when outside rents are higher then E 200 weekly.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by ancientmariner View Post
                  You are on the money with your last sentence which implies that our system is open to, at very least, careless decision making and a need for stronger leadership in dealing with matters associated with living conditions , education, training opportunities , and ensuring units are fit for purpose. Pay must also be a factor as it is perceived to be insufficient especially when outside rents are higher then E 200 weekly.
                  It’s all in those reports

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by na grohmiti View Post
                    ISME are just worried that if the public sector get anything more, they might have to start paying private sector staff something close to a living wage.
                    Likewise, anything involving ICTU is doomed to failure, as you cannot have a representative body that represents management and employees get a good deal for both.
                    RACO are not looking to join ICTU.In fact they are actively opposing PDFORRAs associate membership as is every serving senior Officer and a good bunch of the retired ones.Lobbying TD's etc to pull the rug out from under PDFORRA.Arguing for a UK style Armed Forces Pay commission.An organisation that produces an Annual report that consistently gets ignored as it is not legally binding.Yeah.Let's get one of those.

                    The party line that this is all to do with fear of the PDF going out on strike is nonsense as the Minister has been given written assurances that won't ever happen.

                    All to do with losing control. Nothing more. Anyway let's wait to hear what Europe says about it.Again.
                    Last edited by apod; 27 May 2020, 23:24.
                    "Let us be clear about three facts. First, all battles and all wars are won in the end by the infantryman. Secondly, the infantryman always bears the brunt. His casualties are heavier, he suffers greater extremes of discomfort and fatigue than the other arms. Thirdly, the art of the infantryman is less stereotyped and far harder to acquire in modern war than that of any other arm." ------- Field Marshall Wavell, April 1945.

                    Comment


                    • This report as usual shows how little the Government consider the Reserve.

                      A report entitled
                      Defence Forces: Remuneration,Recruitment and Retention
                      makes no mention of the Reserve, even though it is just as part of the DF as our Permanent Colleagues ; each of the topics are just as worthy in their own right for us as the PDF .
                      "Are they trying to shoot down the other drone? "

                      "No, they're trying to fly the tank"

                      Comment


                      • Just finished watching the webinar on Military air transport and one of the topics raised in the panel discussion was the absence of any defence policy of any sort here up to the first white paper, and the shambolic progress being made on the most recent white paper.
                        We engage in box ticking exercises in defence without any coordinated plan. We have things, like a reserve, because everyone else has them, but put no thought into how these things should be used.
                        Our overseas aid budget is larger than our defence budget. Both should work hand in hand.
                        Iur state was formed by the two rival sides in the civil war becoming political parties that have remained foremost in government since, both of whom went a long way to distance themselves from anything military once they took office, and this became our de facto defence status since.
                        It was refreshing to watch, and to know that some of Ireland's top academics are on the same page as most of us here with regards to defence. More so that one of the newest TDs, who may have a key role in forming the next government, is all over it.
                        For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

                        Comment


                        • Ref the Civil War. Since it’s end, the Civil Service has treated the DF as a threat to the State

                          Comment


                          • Hard to say why. The early civil service were mostly former british civil service, and the national army acted to protect the admin functions of the free state while the anti treaty side did what it could to interfere with their work.
                            For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by na grohmiti View Post
                              Hard to say why. The early civil service were mostly former british civil service, and the national army acted to protect the admin functions of the free state while the anti treaty side did what it could to interfere with their work.
                              “Army Mutiny” 1924 ?

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by DeV View Post
                                “Army Mutiny” 1924 ?
                                I was at a dinner once with a former Sec Gen of Dept Finance who, at the time, controlled all of what are now the TLAC processes. He regaled the table with the story of how he chaired a selection panel for Sec Gen Defence at which, when asked what the role of the Dept of Defence was, one of the candidates replied "to prevent the Army having enough resources to mount a coup".

                                When the laughter died down he said that "the real joke was that we gave him the job".

                                I knew both men and he was correct.
                                “The nation that will insist on drawing a broad line of demarcation between the fighting man and the thinking man is liable to find its fighting done by fools and its thinking done by cowards.”
                                ― Thucydides

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X