Cuts in MOD civvies promised by Cameron

Discussion in 'Current Affairs' started by thingy, Sep 7, 2009.

Welcome to the Navy Net aka Rum Ration

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial RN website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. The Conservatives have promised to make cuts in the number of civil serpents in the MOD following supposed revellations that there are more serpents than members of the Crabs and Pussers Own combined.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/low/uk_politics/8240973.stm

    This is the same party that when last in power made a similar promise then promptly cut the number of reservists, claiming in The Times that reservists were part-time civil servants. I remember because I was one of those cut.... :evil: :x ...11 months short of getting my LS&GC medal! :sad2:

    Watch this space. :roll:
     
  2. Of course 'civil serpents' are an easy target, but does this mean that they are going to increase recruitment to the Services to cover the gaps? Plenty of jobs that used to be done by Armed Forces personnel are now done by MOD civil servants.

    Is it just procurement they're going after, or is it across the board, and will it affect serious outfits like DIS etc?

    Funny that the Lib Dems proposed exactly the same thing last week.
     
  3. I think the real question is will they sack any. The present bunch of numpties has cut a lot of serpents jobs but sacked no one so there are now a lot of serpents being paid to do nothing.

    The real problem they have is actually first to be able to identify what work is really needed and what work is not needed, and then to be able to cull the ones they do not need.
     
  4. I always remember Thatcher the milk snatcher.
     
  5. Purple_twiglet

    Purple_twiglet War Hero Moderator

    This is what I said on ARRSE:

    Reply to topic
    Reply with quote
    Edit/Delete this post

    Re: Tories pledge to get MoD's house in order by axing top brass
    Posted: Mon Sep 07, 2009 10:54 am

    I've posted on this before, but when you break the numbers down, only about 30,000 CS are really employed in office work, the rest do all manner of support work. If you want to cut the CS, then you have to either

    a. Cut whole directorates of office staff, and decide what core defence functions you no longer wish to do. Bear in mind few areas are wholly MOD CS, so you'll be switching off something that we currently need if you do.

    b. Privatise the support posts such as storemen, MPGS and RFA - with the ensuing costs involved.

    c. Muddle through, cutting random posts, watching as the admin staff leave, and the deep specialists take early retirement and then wait for the inevitable HCDC report bemoaning the MOD for the lack of retention in specialist areas such as the DIS.

    Its easy to make pledges such as "Cut the MOD CS", but much more difficult to do this without linking it to a wider SDR.
     
  6. Yep. They could always go down the road of transferring the RFA over to the RN. They'd then cut civil servants, boost RN personnel and number of hulls in one fell swoop. I know that's completely impractical, but it's the kind of thing that looks good to politicians.
     
  7. PT

    With the very greatest of respect you are looking at the problem in the traditional government service way, simply cutting funtions on principle, and where ever possible in the ways that cut the service to the public most.

    What needs to be done is to evaluate all the tasks carried out to identify those that are essential or add value. All others need then to be seriously considered for termination. This needs to be applied across the board even withingf the uniform areas to free up people to fill vacancies. All organisations have fat in them the trick is to identify the fat and get rid of it yet retain the parts that do contribute. I am sure that my lean mean civil employer coulkd cut staff if they put their minds to it without imparing their capability to turn in the required profit.

    And privatising posts is just hiding them not saving money even though very often contractors can provide some services at lower overall costs through more eficient use of manpower.

    One of the great problems in government service be it local or central is that individuals seniority and status tends to be driven by the size of budget they control so when such a large part of costs is manpower letting any go may be effectively demoting oneself.

    In reality the civil service is very good at protecting itself so I feer the Mr Camerons promise is just as empty as the Browm/Darling promise to reduce the number of civil servants overall. Yes they have reduced the number of posts, but sacked no one
     
  8. Peter, from experience I think Twiglet's option C is the most likely to be implemented. A rational analysis of which posts could be cut will take too long, from a political perspective. The media want immediate results, and that is what they'll get. The taxpayer will pay the bill later. Politics is all too often about making rash decisions and paying the price later. Call me a cynic, but........ :roll:
     
  9. The reality is that a commercial orgainsation will make it's descisions in weeks so well within the required window to be seen doing what they said they would, but I agree getting any government organisation to do the job properly in a few weeks is very very unlikely and as ever we will see the back roon boys protected as frontline services collapse.

    My point is that it needn't be that way.
     
  10. True, but if government was run like a commercial organisation we'd currently have the entire Board of Directors (aka the House of Commons) languishing in prison awaiting trial for serial fraud. :twisted:
     
  11. Only 18 months ago the Head Office (because it wasn't just Main Building) went through 'Streamlining'. Pretty much every branch, regardless of function, and including DIS, were streamlined and led to something like a 30% cut in all posts in London.

    Come SDR 2010, how many more posts will go? Twiglet has hit the nail on the head again with his option C. I can vouch that many specialists I've worked with are already contemplating moving on. One round of Streamlining was more than enough.
     
  12. The big push to save has already commenced for MPGS, MGS, and the MDP. All overtime and training courses cut and recruitment stopped. Manpower is being reviewed allover. Next year a huge saving push is required, do they count as MOD civilians because they all wear uniforms but are'nt service personnel?
     
  13. In a similar vein i went for a curry last night with three old shipmates. One of whom had recently applied for FTRS as a PTI at Raleigh 8O

    Anyway the security checks took months (which seems strange considering he had done over 22 and only been out about 2 years) and in the meantime the budget had been cut somewhere and the FTRS door was closed. I guess Raleigh is still short of someone saying "bend, stretch, bend, stretch".
     
  14. Regardless of the political colour and as a general election looms over the horizon they all spout what they think will be vote-winning promises, only to be broken when they gain power. I used to be a keen political animal but having watched the shenanigans of all parties over the last few years I would not trust a politician further than I could spit, which leaves me on the horns of a dilemma as when the time comes I have to vote for someone.
     
  15. A commercial organisation employing nearly half a million people (incl uniforms, CS and contractors) and with a bdget nearing £30Bn would probably make decisions on closing individual business units in a matter of weeks, and that was to an extent the point that P_T made. We can ask FCO and Cabinet Office which business units they want to shut, and functions they want to stop carrying out. It would then get lost in the politisphere.

    fwiw I think we do need to make some wholesale reductions, and I don't see the likely salami slicing approach as a particularly effective way of doing it.
     
  16. The trouble with security checks is the more you have to check the longer it takes!
     
  17. I know what you mean. I take the "Royston Vasey" aproach, this is a local vote for local people so after listening to their hollow words I tend to vote for someone that lives in the actual ward.
     
  18. I had to wait ages for my security check to be completed by Special Branch for my current job, despite having already passed my MOD PV! :roll:
     
  19. Up until very recently vetting status was not easily transferable, as most vetting agencies didn't trust any of the others to do the job properly. There is currently a rationalisation project going on in Cabinet Office that sould introduce some competition in the vetting marketplace with a view to reducing cost and improving performance. However I also understand that some of those involved are pretty hostile to the idea of competition if their pet department doesn't do best...

    Anyway, a clubswinger at Raleigh would need both SC and a CRB check, and the latter is quite a slow process.
     

Share This Page