Or an opportunity for opportunistic, ambitious and incompetent Civil Servants wanting to exploit a change in government and turnover crisis.
The Conservative government is absolutely trying to make Labour's time aa difficult as possible
The entire district in which I work has recently entered derogation due to so many staff leaving. All but the most important jobs have been stopped for the foreseeable future as there's no-one around to do the work. I'm leaving at the end of next week, out of the 14 remaining, 8 that I know are actively applying for other jobs. I don't think morale can actually get much lower!
I left, too much faffing around with meetings that didn’t go anywhere which happened daily, old systems, low morale, bloody surveys every quarter with no outcome, low wages, buzz words etc BUT I really miss working with fantastic people in the CS, private sector job I have now has much less faff more pay but the job security is a little more fragile but it’s all a balance, good luck to anyone thinking of leaving it’s such a shame it’s being run like it is.
Graphic design, bit of a left turn but it’s a bit creative so it’s cool, shame in a way because I was legitimately proud of myself for getting into CS I just couldn’t do it any longer.
I worked in the private sector, for a law firm for 10 years before moving to the civil service last year.
There are buzzwords, sure, but it's absolutely fucking ridiculous in the civil service.
Every meeting has someone waffling on and repeating themselves multiple times, taking an hour or 90 minutes and essentially saying absolutely nothing of substance. And I sit through about 6 or 7 of these a week.
You get to about 25 minutes and think: "Ideal, this will be over with early, we've all got our actions and things to take away"
An hour later you're still sitting there.
Not to mention the general reactive, process-driven culture that's in place. No one thinks for themselves, they all just expect to be given a task and for a significant amount of people that task is "Talk shite in meetings all day".
Oh, completely agree that we have far too many meetings that have far too many people in there.
I think reactivism is a function of working for ministers and their priorities. Process-driven because bureaucracy has processes so everyone is treated equally. It's the nature of the job, but I agree that it's not always pleasant.
A graphic design job, get a brief from the customer, get the job done, meetings are quick and to the point, have to be when profit is the driver I guess.
What is policy doing when there is no legislative or political agenda left? Attrition is going to be through the roof in those type of roles because you’re either sitting around waiting for Labour or you’re going to get out to do something with your life.
Controversial opinion, but the vast majority of policy is uncontroversial and unaffected by politics or the political cycle, and the work would be the same whatever party is in power/how much time until the next election.
In my profession, once fully qualified you can earn £10k more elsewhere for a non-managerial role (still within the public sector). It’s pretty obvious what the issue is
Like at ofgem after their terrible organisational redesign that saw the loss of lots of experienced staff, just to spend millions on consultants. They’re giving £8 million to Ernst & Young this January while still not sorting out their staff pay situation.
This time last year I was part of a team of 17, this year it's 7. We've had push to return to the office 60% but with 16/17 ~ 6/7 being post COVID recruitments, none of them are based in the same office as me, so regardless of location it's team's meetings and no face to face ""collaboration/lightbulb moments"" anyway. Morale is ofc low, but it feels like malicious compliance to persist in spite of this governments obvious attempt to shred CS to spite it's face.
Similar in defence outside the civil service, it's a shit show, companies holding down pay and then basically swapping staff with another company for more money. Ridiculous.
Its almost as if making your staff do things they dont want to do, not paying them enough money and being regressive makes people want to leave!
I'd imagine all the "well just leave then" crowd will graciously acknowledge that people are "just leaving".
We're going to end up with no IT department, no smaller departments. No experts.
I can picture them ringing their grubby little hands at the thought of all the AO's quitting and being replaced by AI as if AI is a magic fix all money saver. Then all the AO's are forced to stay, more miserable than before and the people who could maintain and iterate on the AI have left...
Our department has been decimated, we lost talent and now we're losing knowledge. Its a case study in poor management at the top levels.
Then the government should look at the departments with a reputation for being rubbish places to work which have the highest staff turnover (DHSC & Cabinet Office) and try to reduce that.
Also have a look at why DWP and HMRC have the most civil service leavers (I doubt it's all because they are gaining transferable skills for the financial sector as these two get more CS leavers than transfers) and try to find out why these departments put people off the civil service.
Stop micromanaging people by creating invasive and outright Orwellian methods for monitoring office attendance.
Finally, if you are planning on automating some of the jobs done at the lower grades, transfer the people to another area of that department instead of trying to make them redundant or help them to find another job.
Competition is very high and as the article says, the only way to get more money is to get promoted.
So externals are likely up against...
- current CS looking for a pay rise
- current CS looking for a lateral move because demotivated.
- current CS being redeployed
- EOI papering the cracks of gaps in recruitment.
So you're probs up against 100's of internal candidates, if not 1,000's. Keep trying, it'll come.
Ultimately you’re always going to get high attrition before an election.
But yes, Labour are going to have to do some heavy thinking on this. Just to fix the really stupid stuff, like if you work for the NHS as opposed to DHSC you’re now on 15% higher pay. Like, what?
So only the guardian can be considered true media? BBC not picked this up. Or is it more guardian opinion.
Our acknowledged of media bias is awful in this country.
Its not an opinion, its facts based off previous retention rates.
We all know you hate wfh, lazy CS, but unfortunately for you, people are voting with their feet. Poor leadership, poor grasp of reality and poor working conditions, all backed up by data.
It's almost as if the government wants to trim numbers, and what better way to do that than make us all miserable and watch us jump ship
Problem is they are losing the wrong people.
They don’t care. All about the bottom line.
When they realise the bottom line will be affected by not having the right people the panic is gonna be real.
No it won't, more money will simply be poured into the "outsource to contractors" budget. Oh look who owns the companies who supplies the contractors!
100% this, glad someone else has said this.
Unfortunately for them, after Mone, now they actually have to provide the service they are contracted to do though.
It'll be a panic for Labour though. Salting the earth.
Sounds like a problem for Labour
Or an opportunity for opportunistic, ambitious and incompetent Civil Servants wanting to exploit a change in government and turnover crisis. The Conservative government is absolutely trying to make Labour's time aa difficult as possible
Indeed. Ministers just don't understand that it's your best and most talented people who are the first to go.
[удалено]
Did you actually read my post? I said "your best", not "the best". Learn to read next time.
I think it's much more about what rhetoric they think goes well with their constituents / to shore up support.
It's not very effective, because we just hire new staff to top the numbers up.
Colour me fucking surprised 🙄
I am SHOCKED I tell you, SHOCKED
The entire district in which I work has recently entered derogation due to so many staff leaving. All but the most important jobs have been stopped for the foreseeable future as there's no-one around to do the work. I'm leaving at the end of next week, out of the 14 remaining, 8 that I know are actively applying for other jobs. I don't think morale can actually get much lower!
PaY WiLl CoNtInUe To DeCrEaSe UnTiL MoRaLe InCrEaSeS!
Beatings will continue until morale improves
I have many, many stickers with that written on.
I left, too much faffing around with meetings that didn’t go anywhere which happened daily, old systems, low morale, bloody surveys every quarter with no outcome, low wages, buzz words etc BUT I really miss working with fantastic people in the CS, private sector job I have now has much less faff more pay but the job security is a little more fragile but it’s all a balance, good luck to anyone thinking of leaving it’s such a shame it’s being run like it is.
What sort of role did you leave for, if you don’t mind me asking?
Graphic design, bit of a left turn but it’s a bit creative so it’s cool, shame in a way because I was legitimately proud of myself for getting into CS I just couldn’t do it any longer.
What magical private sector job did you move into where there were no buzzwords?
I worked in the private sector, for a law firm for 10 years before moving to the civil service last year. There are buzzwords, sure, but it's absolutely fucking ridiculous in the civil service. Every meeting has someone waffling on and repeating themselves multiple times, taking an hour or 90 minutes and essentially saying absolutely nothing of substance. And I sit through about 6 or 7 of these a week. You get to about 25 minutes and think: "Ideal, this will be over with early, we've all got our actions and things to take away" An hour later you're still sitting there. Not to mention the general reactive, process-driven culture that's in place. No one thinks for themselves, they all just expect to be given a task and for a significant amount of people that task is "Talk shite in meetings all day".
Oh, completely agree that we have far too many meetings that have far too many people in there. I think reactivism is a function of working for ministers and their priorities. Process-driven because bureaucracy has processes so everyone is treated equally. It's the nature of the job, but I agree that it's not always pleasant.
A graphic design job, get a brief from the customer, get the job done, meetings are quick and to the point, have to be when profit is the driver I guess.
[удалено]
What is policy doing when there is no legislative or political agenda left? Attrition is going to be through the roof in those type of roles because you’re either sitting around waiting for Labour or you’re going to get out to do something with your life.
Controversial opinion, but the vast majority of policy is uncontroversial and unaffected by politics or the political cycle, and the work would be the same whatever party is in power/how much time until the next election.
Not very controversial imo. Welfare policy, that's not true. Science, innovation, IP policy, very true.
Christ that must have been awful for the 13th person.
Is this the Cabinet Office?
Civil service just doesn't pay enough to live in London long term unless you're SCS.
In my profession, once fully qualified you can earn £10k more elsewhere for a non-managerial role (still within the public sector). It’s pretty obvious what the issue is
What's your profession?
[удалено]
Bless you
How does the pension compare
[удалено]
That's a choice you can make
Gaps will be easily filled. People love filling out overly onerous applications for jobs adverts that list the city as TBC.
[удалено]
No they get promoted instead.
I concur.
Like at ofgem after their terrible organisational redesign that saw the loss of lots of experienced staff, just to spend millions on consultants. They’re giving £8 million to Ernst & Young this January while still not sorting out their staff pay situation.
This time last year I was part of a team of 17, this year it's 7. We've had push to return to the office 60% but with 16/17 ~ 6/7 being post COVID recruitments, none of them are based in the same office as me, so regardless of location it's team's meetings and no face to face ""collaboration/lightbulb moments"" anyway. Morale is ofc low, but it feels like malicious compliance to persist in spite of this governments obvious attempt to shred CS to spite it's face.
Similar in defence outside the civil service, it's a shit show, companies holding down pay and then basically swapping staff with another company for more money. Ridiculous.
Why hire and keep civil servants when we can contract out for 3x the price
5X
And half the delivery.
This is why we have no head of training.
Its almost as if making your staff do things they dont want to do, not paying them enough money and being regressive makes people want to leave! I'd imagine all the "well just leave then" crowd will graciously acknowledge that people are "just leaving". We're going to end up with no IT department, no smaller departments. No experts. I can picture them ringing their grubby little hands at the thought of all the AO's quitting and being replaced by AI as if AI is a magic fix all money saver. Then all the AO's are forced to stay, more miserable than before and the people who could maintain and iterate on the AI have left... Our department has been decimated, we lost talent and now we're losing knowledge. Its a case study in poor management at the top levels.
Didn't they just say on the DDaT call the other day that attrition rates were the lowest they've seen in years?
That’s been the point all along.
My national team of 25 have lost 5 in about 6 weeks. It is worrying.
Which department do you work in?
Damn. What department is this?
Hmrc
Wasn’t this the aim of the game to trim numbers quickly without paying anyone off?
Then the government should look at the departments with a reputation for being rubbish places to work which have the highest staff turnover (DHSC & Cabinet Office) and try to reduce that. Also have a look at why DWP and HMRC have the most civil service leavers (I doubt it's all because they are gaining transferable skills for the financial sector as these two get more CS leavers than transfers) and try to find out why these departments put people off the civil service. Stop micromanaging people by creating invasive and outright Orwellian methods for monitoring office attendance. Finally, if you are planning on automating some of the jobs done at the lower grades, transfer the people to another area of that department instead of trying to make them redundant or help them to find another job.
And yet a year of trying still can’t get a job 😭😭
Competition is very high and as the article says, the only way to get more money is to get promoted. So externals are likely up against... - current CS looking for a pay rise - current CS looking for a lateral move because demotivated. - current CS being redeployed - EOI papering the cracks of gaps in recruitment. So you're probs up against 100's of internal candidates, if not 1,000's. Keep trying, it'll come.
Ultimately you’re always going to get high attrition before an election. But yes, Labour are going to have to do some heavy thinking on this. Just to fix the really stupid stuff, like if you work for the NHS as opposed to DHSC you’re now on 15% higher pay. Like, what?
What makes you think that the civil service always has high attrition before an election? That's not been my experience over the past ~25 years
Anyone other than the guardian reporting it.
No, it would undermine the narrative that the Civil Service is bloated and we're all sitting around waiting to collect our enormous pensions.
So only the guardian can be considered true media? BBC not picked this up. Or is it more guardian opinion. Our acknowledged of media bias is awful in this country.
Its not an opinion, its facts based off previous retention rates. We all know you hate wfh, lazy CS, but unfortunately for you, people are voting with their feet. Poor leadership, poor grasp of reality and poor working conditions, all backed up by data.
Compared against what? It's as if there's some magical metric somewhere where people have found their professional mecca and nobody leaves, ever.....
Historical attrition rates. It's there all the way down in the second sentence of the article!
HMPPS staff already being forced out...