ACT PS Gossip

bloodnut said :

Unfortunately many public servants overestimate their worth which often leads to an overwhelming negativity associated with their own perception of being constantly pissed on and passed over. This inevitably draws cries of – as thumper puts it – nepotism.

yapyapyap – some of you just weren’t meant to be at the top. live with it, smile and enjoy your super.

Working with administrative assistants who have not finished High School but have been made ‘policy officers’, then seeing them try to interpret 800 pages of legislation, or seeing the departmental Chief Financial Officers who was just on the cusp of obtaining an actual qualification in accounting does not particularly fill me with a sense of inadequacy.

It’s not ‘improper’ in the sense that it’s unlawful. These people have applied to the positions that they have been acting in for a year and a half or two, so their effectively the incumbent, the position was gazetted so anyone who reads the gazette cold have applied (WTF), there was a panel comprising the people who acted them there in the first place, and the said that they would consider it a development opportunity to work on something they have never done before (read, something they cannot actually do).

In the private sector, appoint anyone you want and let your firm either crash and burn or succeed. In the public sector, you’re using the public’s money and there should be no nepotism.

I’ve never corrupted anybody – it’s always the other way round, peterh!

I love bagpipes!! It stirs my blood every time. I am pretty much a quarter Scottish, with Douglas and MacDonald and other clans like that mixed in there somewhere.

Not the Campbells though, cos nobody’s forgotten Glencoe.

*chuckle*

oh and i should mention, my sons cover off the family history nicely, one is named for our joint scottish heritage, the other for my irish heritage. and stepfather (stepgramps) has promised to teach them the scottish bagpipes and the irish bagpipes….

mrs peterh is not amused.

Granny said :

Oh, dear ….

: P

Anyway, Merry Christmas, peterh and mrs peterh and the wee bairns! And just remember it’s not how hot you are, it’s how many cookies you have!

*chuckle*

the same to you granny. though i think you are trying to corrupt me – sweet and innocent as I am…

Oh, dear ….

: P

Anyway, Merry Christmas, peterh and mrs peterh and the wee bairns! And just remember it’s not how hot you are, it’s how many cookies you have!

*chuckle*

Granny said :

Skid is wonderful. He’s not the heavy breathing, chainsaw weilding type. Fear not, BerraBoy68!

that we know about anyway….

mate, all good. That’s gold!

Done, BerraBoy.

Skid is wonderful. He’s not the heavy breathing, chainsaw weilding type. Fear not, BerraBoy68!

Yeah, and email me too, Skid, just because.

: )

Granny said :

BerraBoy68 said :

Skidbladnir said :

Initials used to be DR, now DD.
Is your father-in-law a Bill from Kambah, with brothers-in-law called Shaun and Brett?

It just clicked t’other day, why your name seemed familiar.

Holy Crap skid, Spot on! Can you give me a clue as to who you are? Were you a neighbour of Bills in Kambah?

I know who both of you are!

*tee hee*

Skid knows everything, BerraBoy68!

: )

I’ve got to tell you Granny, I’m a little bit freaked out!

Cryptic or what?

Dude, I’d love to know who you are. Can you e-mail me at berraboy68@gmail.com

He does now!

I was a neighbour way back when they lived in Gowrie. 🙂
Bill probably remembers my mother better than me, I have only met you twice, maybe?

BerraBoy68 said :

Skidbladnir said :

Initials used to be DR, now DD.
Is your father-in-law a Bill from Kambah, with brothers-in-law called Shaun and Brett?

It just clicked t’other day, why your name seemed familiar.

Holy Crap skid, Spot on! Can you give me a clue as to who you are? Were you a neighbour of Bills in Kambah?

I know who both of you are!

*tee hee*

Skid knows everything, BerraBoy68!

: )

peterh said :

maybe we should organise a southside RA Catchup at the burns club?? make it on a day that is convenient for all, at least they have decent parking there…

peterh, sounds great!

Skidbladnir said :

Initials used to be DR, now DD.
Is your father-in-law a Bill from Kambah, with brothers-in-law called Shaun and Brett?

It just clicked t’other day, why your name seemed familiar.

Holy Crap skid, Spot on! Can you give me a clue as to who you are? Were you a neighbour of Bills in Kambah?

Initials used to be DR, now DD.
Is your father-in-law a Bill from Kambah, with brothers-in-law called Shaun and Brett?

It just clicked t’other day, why your name seemed familiar.

maybe we should organise a southside RA Catchup at the burns club?? make it on a day that is convenient for all, at least they have decent parking there…

BerraBoy68 said :

*the* not “teh”. Damed christmas fingers…

sounds good. after the silly season, though. not allowed to leave the wife in the clutches of the 3 small hell-raisers until the new year…

*the* not “teh”. Damed christmas fingers…

peterh said :

BerraBoy68 said :

Hey peterh,

QinetiQ yes, but not the old BSG side. Q bought out 3 companies at the same time.

dang! I thought i knew who you were. just have to keep guessing…

or we could meet at teh Burns club for a beer sometime! 😉

Skidbladnir said :

If you’re playing guess who RiotACT people are, I have this feeling BerraBoy68 is married to one of my old neighbours. 😐

Canberra is far too small a world.

Bloody Hell skid, how on earth did you get to the point of guessing you know my wife?

Throw me what you think her initials were and some locations and I’ll let you know if you’re right. Failing that i could just tell you my name, I’m not precious about it and those that followed the Marist issue and/or thread would know it by now.

that would be “fiefdom”

I thought thiefdom was a wonderfully witty portmanteau – a fiefdom of thieves.

If you’re playing guess who RiotACT people are, I have this feeling BerraBoy68 is married to one of my old neighbours. 😐

Canberra is far too small a world.

BerraBoy68 said :

Hey peterh,

QinetiQ yes, but not the old BSG side. Q bought out 3 companies at the same time.

dang! I thought i knew who you were. just have to keep guessing…

Hey peterh,

QinetiQ yes, but not the old BSG side. Q bought out 3 companies at the same time.

Are you working at BSG – QinetiQ?

peterh said :

willo said :

hmm.. i think i know the bloke it was named after……

very interesting thread – if you are in the PS. means squat to me, though, as I work in non-government business. and companies seem to employ family members into roles all the time. it works, and if they have the quals, more the better.

As said earlier, I spent 20 years in the APS (across 5 Departments) and now work for a Private Sector consultancy. When i joined here we had just over 40 employees and was amazed at how many married couples were in this company. We were bought out by a UK company ealier this year (13,000+ employees) and they don’t seems to care who’s married to who either. I also like the fact that the e-mail, web, etc. useage rules are also more open than in the APS. The funnything is like a lot of consultants I still do the majority of my work for the APS, who simply can’t attract or hire the right people for the right role. If the Exec. did their jobs properly and acted in accordance with their own guidelines, including probity and merit rules, I’d have been happy to stay in the APS.

peterh said :

very interesting thread – if you are in the PS. means squat to me, though, as I work in non-government business. and companies seem to employ family members into roles all the time. it works, and if they have the quals, more the better.

Private enterprise is different. Private enterprise has to actually earn their money, and thus if a favour is done for a family member the private enterprise could fail if that is not the best desicion. In the PS however they are operating in a completely isolated environment. They department will probably never fold due to mis-management, at worst a manager could be fired (even then highly unlikely). Given we have no choice but to pay for their services (through taxes) we should be able to know that the best people have been given the job, it’s not just as a favour for a friend.

oh, and Granny, Merry Christmas to you and your family.

willo said :

hmm.. i think i know the bloke it was named after……

I hope you don’t mean me….

very interesting thread – if you are in the PS. means squat to me, though, as I work in non-government business. and companies seem to employ family members into roles all the time. it works, and if they have the quals, more the better.

With respect to our pro-developer Government and its planning processes… it appears this is live and well between PS and private business: Allegedly Stanhope’s brother-in-law is in a senior position in Village Homes (a subsidiary of The Village Building Company).

How coincidental that they’d be chosen as the “best” builders for knocking up loads of our new suburbs (West Macgregor, Stromlo, Tralee to name a few), cutting corners to make a quick buck without insistence on best practice sustainable development controls e.g. mandatory water tanks, solar orientation etc.

Granny is BACK! Merry Christmas!

…and as loquacious as ever.

hmm.. i think i know the bloke it was named after……

willo said :

it is my experience that members of the ps rise to the level of their incompetence….

This phenomenon actually has a name, it’s called ‘The Peter Principle’. From memory it basically states that that people generally rise to their level of competence and then get one more promotion that takes them to their level of incompetence.

Amazing it has a name but there you go…

it is my experience that members of the ps rise to the level of their incompetence….

YapYapYap said :

I posted this not out of sour grapes as I’m not a public servant let alone an applicant for the job and not to grind an axe, but simply because I have a concern over these sort of conflicts of interest. I have no intention in naming anyone, that isn’t my purpose. This isn’t a one-off and these practices are worth exposing. If it gets people talking – good.

The best way of actually exposing and dealing with it would be by actually doing something about the information you have through the official channels. Not much will ever get done by just mentioning it in an internet forum without full details.

Merry Christmas, Jessieduck!

: )

“About it!!!! oR aBoUt it…?

I smell a crackpot….

Are you saying that person a is precluded from obtaining a position just person a is married to person b – even if person a was THE best person for the job?”

Don’t you love it when a pedant takes a shot at one’s grammar, and then fails to proof their post!

I posted this not out of sour grapes as I’m not a public servant let alone an applicant for the job and not to grind an axe, but simply because I have a concern over these sort of conflicts of interest. I have no intention in naming anyone, that isn’t my purpose. This isn’t a one-off and these practices are worth exposing. If it gets people talking – good.

yapyapyap – some of you just weren’t meant to be at the top. live with it, smile and enjoy your super.

Bloodnut, are you ACT PS SES or just an ASS

Believe me, nepotism is alive and well in the public serice.

of course it is – to a small degree. Rather than bandying absolutes, it must be considered relative to other areas such as the private sector where nepotism truly abounds. The APS at least has a strong obligation to imbue transparency. There is also recourse for those who feel this is not adhered to.

Unfortunately many public servants overestimate their worth which often leads to an overwhelming negativity associated with their own perception of being constantly pissed on and passed over. This inevitably draws cries of – as thumper puts it – nepotism.

yapyapyap – some of you just weren’t meant to be at the top. live with it, smile and enjoy your super.

PantsMan said :

If the ACT and its PS could only be moved to a small Pacific island, then AusAID could send some aid workers there to help.

There is just no scrutiny within the ACT PS. The Commissioner for Public Administration is basically just an SES officer in CMD. They just sign the regs under the PSM Act. There is no real independent scrutiny, and there are no things such as a State of the Services report such as those that are prepared in the Commonwealth.

Staff turnover is just rampant in the ACP PS, and having CEOs thinking that if they promote their incompetent friends to their little thiefdoms, because they can and will never leave, just makes things worse.

If you had enough evidence to support the claim that the Chief Executive had been involved or influenced the recruitment of a family member (which the above claim doesn’t provide much info), I would suggest you would supply the information to an Auditor-General either Commonwealth or ACT depending on the jurisdiction of the Department. They would be far more independent than someone such as the “Commissioner for Public Administration” and have more powers for investigating the claims.

The incompetence of the SES in both the ACT PS and the Feds is just astounding. I would have thought that a “performance based contract” would mean that if you did not perform, then you would be demoted back to EL2 top increment. All that happens is that new position is created for them somewhere else when they f#%k up where they are.

My most recent SES Band 2 General Manager would have been well advised to go on the grad program again and learn how to write a ministerial, then possibly read the PSM act; particularly those sections that related to ethical conduct, honesty, integrity etc.

It was decided that this guy needed to move on, so they held a “competitive recruitment process” in another department for a new position that was not advertised in the media, in which the panel could choose to make the appointment based on applications only without interviews, and this guy was appointed the day applications closed! And by all reports, he’s pulling the same stuff in that place he pulled in his former position, albeit with greater disastrous effects.

Unbelievable.

Granny is BACK! Merry Christmas!

As my new hero The Drover says: “Just because it is, doesn’t mean it should be.”

We’ll get around to fixing that one day ….

: )

Believe me, nepotism is alive and well in the public serice.

Totally agree Thumper. I’ve sat in meetings as an EL2 when Branch Heads and Div Heads have instructed me to promote certain people into EL 1 positions. When I objected to this on the grounds of a little ol’ principle called ‘merit’ I was told in no uncertain terms that the people involved were to be acted in the EL1 spots until each felt comfortable in applying for these positions competitively, even if this process took 2-3 years. And yes, this attitude put me on a collision course the the Branch and Div Heads involved. The other thing that sucks in the APS is a general reluctance to fire poor SES officers while APS staff are fair game.

As an example, one of the SES guys in the above story has been cautioned for sleeping with young several APS girls and has had many complaints laid against him for his inappropriate and offensive behavior by other Agency staff and stakeholders for several years. Despite this he’s still employed in the Agency even though his behavior and attitude is public knowledge. I’ve been advised the Executive are wary of sacking him in case it ends up in court (SES dismissals invariably do as they have too much to loose) so they’re just waiting until his contract expires. If he was an APS officer he’d have been gone years ago. One rule for SES another for the workers perhaps…

Clown Killer said :

a friend of mine who was instructed by the FAS in a high-profile federal department on whom to appoint when he was sitting on the panel to recruit to a junior SES position…

I find this problematic. In the APS hierarchy there is no SES level between FAS and AS (the most junior SES position). A scenario as described above implies that SES officers were responsible for recruiting a peer. I doubt very much that would be the case.

Can only speak from Fed PS perspective, but one can be the same level and on the panel. They wouldn’t be the chair, who would be higher. Then there’d be the delegate, who’d generally be higher still. I don’t think it’s wrong to have a “peer” assess whether a lower level applicant is suitable or not, but I admit it might be problematic if an applicant is already at that level.

Clown Killer there are several professional variants in the APS structure.

a friend of mine who was instructed by the FAS in a high-profile federal department on whom to appoint when he was sitting on the panel to recruit to a junior SES position…

I find this problematic. In the APS hierarchy there is no SES level between FAS and AS (the most junior SES position). A scenario as described above implies that SES officers were responsible for recruiting a peer. I doubt very much that would be the case.

Unsurprising. It’s common knowledge that the ACT govt bureaucracy stemmed from the former Department of the Capital Territory, which was renowned as the bottom of the heap from a PS perspective – ie, the crappiest and least desirable department career-wise, where you only worked if you couldn’t get a position in another dept.

Not much has changed, it seems, given the constant flow from ACT to fed depts; and it certainly appears that the ACT community has been reaping a sorry harvest of the poor decision-making (such as this nepotism) and general mediocrity since self-govt!

In my entire PS career I have never had to actually write the word fiefdom, but I have often thought it.

I am still a very smart person. 🙂

C’mon, gis’ a clue? Initials even? Something? Anything? How can it be gossip if there are no clues 🙁

If the ACT and its PS could only be moved to a small Pacific island, then AusAID could send some aid workers there to help.

There is just no scrutiny within the ACT PS. The Commissioner for Public Administration is basically just an SES officer in CMD. They just sign the regs under the PSM Act. There is no real independent scrutiny, and there are no things such as a State of the Services report such as those that are prepared in the Commonwealth.

Staff turnover is just rampant in the ACP PS, and having CEOs thinking that if they promote their incompetent friends to their little thiefdoms, because they can and will never leave, just makes things worse.

PantsMan said :

There is a department in the ACT PS where being personal friends with the CEO seems to help your career chances. Anyone want to take a guess at which one?

Most likely, all of them.

I honestly can’t believe that anyone would be surprised by this situation. I was only in the circus for three years but saw numerous instances of plum jobs and/or consultancies going to the Secretary’s or Minister’s mates.

I’ve had a look through the Gazettes, and found a few potential “partners” who’ve just been given executive contracts. Refer here: http://www.gazettes.act.gov.au.

This may well be a very proper and open process, but it does not look that great.

There is a department in the ACT PS where being personal friends with the CEO seems to help your career chances. Anyone want to take a guess at which one?

Sorry, didn’t read Yap’s post properly the first time. The CEO in this case is a male. I suppose, although it doesn’t matter the partner could be as well.

And what about the situation of the people between the CEO and his/her partner. What kind of perceived or real additional clout will he/she have. Who signs off on performance reviews and bonuses, approves training courses, conferences and the like. Don’t know the Public Service but I can’t help thinking that there will be a real conflict of interest regardless of who determined the person was the best person for the job. They aren’t because they’re the boss’s partner.

As if stepping aside from the panel is going to avoid a nepotistic appointment! Viz a friend of mine who was instructed by the FAS in a high-profile federal department on whom to appoint when he was sitting on the panel to recruit to a junior SES position … he obeyed the instruction (as you do).

I agree Sepi.

I though disagree with you harvyk1.

I still call crackpot as the post is anonymous, there is no real indication of what role the CEO took etc etc. That’s why I disagree with your view harvyk1 – there’s insufficient information in the original post for me to draw the conclusion you have.

I guess my view is that the post shouldn’t be treated seriously because it is *really* light on facts.

I’ll be happy to eat my words if there are more facts added to what started this thread that suggests that a conflict of interest (whether real or percieved) exists.

For all we know the partner was a senior public servant who had been doing his or job very well for a number of years and received the appropriate recognition by an interview panel recommending a promotion – with the CEO appointing them on the recommendation of this interviewing panel.

Gargamel, it does represent a huge conflict of interest. If the CEO thought that their partner was the best person for the job he should have stepped aside and given the power to hire their partner (or another person) to an impartial 3rd party.

From memory the ps handbook (or at least the doco they have sitting around in most gov’t departments) actually states that you should do anything you can to avoid a real or perceived conflict of interest.

Even if hiring ones partner is not a real conflict of interest, there is certainly a perceived one.

You are supposed to exclude yourself from the interview panel if a rellie or close friend applies…

About it!!!! oR aBoUt it…?

I smell a crackpot….

Are you saying that person a is precluded from obtaining a position just person a is married to person b – even if person a was THE best person for the job?