Better pay and conditions will help PS recruitment problems: CPSU
30 April 2008, 11:09am
An Australian National Audit Office report showing the public service is struggling to recruit suitable staff proves more needs to be done to improve pay and conditions.
The ANAO review of public service recruiting practices shows 88 per cent of departments experience difficulty recruiting people with the required skills.
It also shows that while public service employment increased by 6.5 per cent in 2006-07, many APS positions remained unfilled.
CPSU National Secretary Stephen Jones said: "The ANAO report confirms the APS is in a battle for talent, but is losing the war.
"One obvious answer is the APS needs to lift its game in terms of pay and conditions.
"In particular the public service needs to regain its competitive edge as an 'employer of choice' by providing flexible working arrangement that work for families, such as 26 weeks paid maternity leave and better opportunities for life long learning.
"Smart private sector employers are targeting talented public sector staff by offering very competitive study or family friendly packages.
"If the APS wants to stay in the talent game, it will need to regain its position at the cutting edge of flexible employment conditions," said Mr Jones.
According to the CPSU, the ANAO report also underscores the risks associated Government moves to make wholesale cuts to the public service in the upcoming Budget.
"Is now the right time to be sending out a signal that a PS career is a short-term option?" asked Mr Jones.
Fortunately I am nearing 55 and can get out. I have sufficient LSL and rec leave which I am about to use. I have been on-going in the PS for 14 years as an APS6. That was fair enough when I joined but I am a professional have 3 undergrad and 2 relevant masters degrees and after 60 job apps for promotions got nowhere, including being prevented from advancing and bullied by my supervisor (nothing was done). finally the last straw was they allowed someone from outside to apply for a job a month after it closed, the outsider got it an I didn't. My friends 25 year olds earn what I am on and teachers with my years up earn more (especially from VIC with an instant 15% raise). Fortunately I am on the old PSS super. It is the only reason to hang around as i will shortly collect a lifetime pension of half my salary after 17 years service.(thats not available to new starters any more). If Rudd wants to keep older Australians in the workforce they better start treating us better and not de-skilling PS's who have been here a long time and not keep bringing in those from outside without the corporate knowledge who they somehow seem to think are better on merit. (they just got rid of a new staff member after 3 months probation-shows how good the interview process is!)
Posted by:P - 3 May 2008, 5:47pm
I had to take a 3rd day off from a non ongoing job I already had with a company to sit a 3rd interview that took all day .panel situation and waiting around.To get my Social security Job. Had I not been successful I would have ended up unemployed, as my non-ongoing job was less than understanding after 3 absences to attend interviews with another potential employer.Ironic, I would have ended up at social security either way just luckily it wasn't as a dole recipient really a predicament that their recruitment process could have caused. I took a gamble and luckily it paid off. Ironic huh! But really not fair to my non ongoing employer. something wrong with recruitment? I think yes. Also in the 8 years I've been with social security I have seen some fabulously talented and caring colleagues from extraordinarily diverse backgrounds do a fantastic above and beyond the call of duty job, yet we are still the only government department not allowed to put a sign in our offices to say that it is not acceptable for customers to spit swear bash or abuse us. Paid enough? What do you think! I wonder why staff don't stay. And then there is the friends club it's not what you know for promotion it's who you know. They'll swear black and blue that it's not. But we who see it first hand Know the truth.
Posted by:Tracey - 2 May 2008, 8:56am
I agree that something has to be done, too much is being asked of for little of our staff for too little benefit. More stress is put on our front liners and many of our new recruits leave in the first few days. Staff are not being source quickly enough, instead the top are waiting for the original person to leave, then do a case study and maybe in a few months we will get someone who we have to train. This is nonsense and makes it hard on the team involved. We deserve to be paid for the expertise of our knowledge and newcomers deserve to know that their hard work will not come to no availe. I'm suppose to be working class and am only just surviving, no theatre or dinner and many times not enough for the fortnights worth of groceries. Bearing in mind this is not a new problem, simply one that has been ignored for too long and now is out of control. When we do get a pay rise, we always seem to giving up some of our entitled leave that our parents worked so hard to get 15 and 20 years earlier.
Posted by:Ailsa - 1 May 2008, 6:08pm
I agree with the need to review salaries, but spare a thought for those members working in the community sector (which CPSU covers). In comparison our rates are much lower - other than CPI no increases for years. Also, there is much less security of tenure in the not for profit sector with funding changing from year to year. Is the CPSU taking any action (maybe in collaboration with the ASU) to address this?
Posted by:Bill - 1 May 2008, 5:11pm
I can't believe the comments I have read here on this issue. No one has addressed the issue. Instead I read touchy feely drivel. I don't want to know (or for that matter, even care) what the governments problems are. To me its simple, pay more money to attract a better applicant. Business do it so why not the PS? In this current climate it IS all about money. Ask those about to lose their home.
Fortunately I am nearing 55 and can get out. I have sufficient LSL and rec leave which I am about to use.
I have been on-going in the PS for 14 years as an APS6. That was fair enough when I joined but I am a professional have 3 undergrad and 2 relevant masters degrees and after 60 job apps for promotions got nowhere, including being prevented from advancing and bullied by my supervisor (nothing was done). finally the last straw was they allowed someone from outside to apply for a job a month after it closed, the outsider got it an I didn't. My friends 25 year olds earn what I am on and teachers with my years up earn more (especially from VIC with an instant 15% raise).
Fortunately I am on the old PSS super. It is the only reason to hang around as i will shortly collect a lifetime pension of half my salary after 17 years service.(thats not available to new starters any more).
If Rudd wants to keep older Australians in the workforce they better start treating us better and not de-skilling PS's who have been here a long time and not keep bringing in those from outside without the corporate knowledge who they somehow seem to think are better on merit. (they just got rid of a new staff member after 3 months probation-shows how good the interview process is!)
I had to take a 3rd day off from a non ongoing job I already had with a company to sit a 3rd interview that took all day .panel situation and waiting around.To get my Social security Job. Had I not been successful I would have ended up unemployed, as my non-ongoing job was less than understanding after 3 absences to attend interviews with another potential employer.Ironic, I would have ended up at social security either way just luckily it wasn't as a dole recipient really a predicament that their recruitment process could have caused. I took a gamble and luckily it paid off. Ironic huh! But really not fair to my non ongoing employer. something wrong with recruitment? I think yes. Also in the 8 years I've been with social security I have seen some fabulously talented and caring colleagues from extraordinarily diverse backgrounds do a fantastic above and beyond the call of duty job, yet we are still the only government department not allowed to put a sign in our offices to say that it is not acceptable for customers to spit swear bash or abuse us. Paid enough? What do you think!
I wonder why staff don't stay.
And then there is the friends club it's not what you know for promotion it's who you know. They'll swear black and blue that it's not. But we who see it first hand Know the truth.
I agree that something has to be done, too much is being asked of for little of our staff for too little benefit. More stress is put on our front liners and many of our new recruits leave in the first few days. Staff are not being source quickly enough, instead the top are waiting for the original person to leave, then do a case study and maybe in a few months we will get someone who we have to train. This is nonsense and makes it hard on the team involved. We deserve to be paid for the expertise of our knowledge and newcomers deserve to know that their hard work will not come to no availe. I'm suppose to be working class and am only just surviving, no theatre or dinner and many times not enough for the fortnights worth of groceries. Bearing in mind this is not a new problem, simply one that has been ignored for too long and now is out of control. When we do get a pay rise, we always seem to giving up some of our entitled leave that our parents worked so hard to get 15 and 20 years earlier.
I agree with the need to review salaries, but spare a thought for those members working in the community sector (which CPSU covers). In comparison our rates are much lower - other than CPI no increases for years. Also, there is much less security of tenure in the not for profit sector with funding changing from year to year. Is the CPSU taking any action (maybe in collaboration with the ASU) to address this?
I can't believe the comments I have read here on this issue. No one has addressed the issue. Instead I read touchy feely drivel. I don't want to know (or for that matter, even care) what the governments problems are.
To me its simple, pay more money to attract a better applicant. Business do it so why not the PS?
In this current climate it IS all about money. Ask those about to lose their home.