2004-07-19

As for further flux, I am currently retyping my resume so I can get another job. TAFE is great and I love working there, but there is not a future for me there. Being a casual, I can’t apply for any of the permanent jobs. Why? Well, 700 jobs were just cut in the Education Department, and in government, you can’t just fire people. So these 700 people have to be redeployed to somewhere else in the Department, or take paid out redundancy. So any job that comes up, no matter how minor, there are a truckload of applicants and casuals may not apply. So fuck them.

It’s a stupid system that does not take individuals into account, and good people are deleted, whilst useless fuckheads get to keep their cushy jobs. The public are not getting the best service they can, and they most certainly are not getting the best value for dollar. And the whole point is to save the state money by cutting jobs.

I can tell you that a restructure/mass sacking is such lip service to the concept of saving funds.

1) It costs money to conduct a restructure: Special Teams and committees are required to carry out the orders of the Director-General (the boss of Education, below the Minister).

2) The Director-General (DG) was fired half-way through the restructure process and a new one was appointed. Lots of money lost there, as the process changed direction slightly and people were moved around to suit the new DG.

3) The amount of lobbying and PR required to get these kinds of changes ‘through’ are very costly. Someone who may be working in a useful position, supporting the staff of the Department, is now writing pointless documents telling us how well it is all going. Similarly, the Department website needs ongoing updating to reflect these changes, costing money. The web geeks doing this may otherwise be supporting more useful content for the delivery of actual eduction (rather than supporting organisational upheaval)

4) Morale of staff on the ground has fallen, and there are fallen faces a-plenty. This kind of low morale results in increased sick days, a slowing down of process and COSTS MONEY!!

5) Some of the changes in place will increase the steps in a process, lengthen time frames and inconvenience core customers (uh, students!!). Finance documentation for the Hunter is now batch by hand each day and sent to Bathurst for processing. It took 4 weeks for a purchase request to leave my desk and reach the company from which I was buying stuff. Increased delay in payment for company’s dealing with the Department may result in late fees or interest on large invoices. That is, it will cost more money to buy stuff.

6) In some sections, staffing has been halved or deleted altogether, resulting in increased stress and lower morale of staff. This will result in a drop in service and more sick days/days in lieu.

7) While a restructure is on (so far, it has been six months) managers begin clamping down on most work activity and spending, because of the looming uncertainty and the budget tightening. So many things go undone, usually impacting on staff and their ability to do the best job possible. There may be a loss of potential income or expending of funds to pay people who are unable to do anything. This then impacts on the clients (uh, students!!).

8) People get demoralised so leave the organisation with no succession planning and lots of knowledge is lost. It costs money to replace staff and train those replacements. TAFE has spent a lot of money training me, and I am leaving as there is no real hope of employment in the near future. That has cost a lot of money.

These restructures (some of my colleagues have lived through 5!) costs a lot of money and I am not convinced that this model is the best way to recoup public funds.

Working for the government has really shown me the extent of wastage of the public dollar. No one feels responsible, as it isn’t anyone’s money. When you work in the private sector, you are constantly reminded that it’s the bosses money and it needs to be accounted for. In TAFE there is no such obligation. There is obligation for outcomes, but not a lot of emphasis on getting there the best way possible. The system does not allow for innovation or efficient work to be rewarded.