MINISTER FOR Public Expenditure and Reform Brendan Howlin is considering imposing sanctions on senior civil servants who fail to take a more active role in managing the underperformance of their staff. It sounds impressive. But, in a system where “buggins turn” still exists, senior managers are no more likely than their underperforming staff to respond to such a threat. We can, however, hope.
Abuses involving performance-related pay awards within the Civil Service are well documented. Introduced some decades ago as part of a modernisation programme, the awards quickly evolved into near-universal entitlements. Public criticisms brought a revised system in 2004. Within years, however, underperformance levels that could have reached 30 per cent were being returned at 3 per cent. The reasons: unacceptable performance denied the recipient an annual increment and managers found the system “burdensome”. The prospect of becoming unpopular clearly weighted more heavily with some managers than their formal responsibilities.
An examination of the performance-related pay/promotions system by the Comptroller and Auditor General in 2011 offered little hope for improvement. Concern was expressed that pay and advancement decisions did not reflect actual performance; that increments were paid in advance of performance assessments and that senior managers were not sufficiently engaged. Increments now cost the State €40 million a year.
Buying off public service unions became almost fashionable under the leadership of Bertie Ahern. Benchmarking provided generous awards for all, despite studies showing that private sector pay lagged the public sector. In addition, a range of annual increments and special responsibility awards emerged. These found their way into the pay and conditions of TDs and Senators at Leinster House, attracting pension entitlements. So, everybody was happy.
A more efficient and productive Civil Service is in everybody’s interest, including those employed within various departments. The evidence, over many years, points to many senior civil servants who are either unwilling or unable to manage their staff. Fewer than one-in-five civil servants believe laziness or incompetence is being appropriately addressed, according to an internal survey. That dire conclusion undercuts morale. It also demands determined remedial action.
