Exactly. You can’t understand anything but blaming people, and demanding 80 hour weeks, for less money.

That YOU were (/are) a useless drone…really defines you, nobody else.

So they can be fired double-quick? Yea.

I don’t understand your answer.
I have worked in the public sector, and as long as the boxes were ticked nothing else mattered.
There were no checks, no way to tell who did what and when, just targets, targets, targets. We always hit our targets.
The staff looked good, the line manager looked good, their manager looked good, and the Labour minister looked good.
The poor user, however, was just considered a pain when they complained, or queried why there case was taking so long, and no one could sort it, because more often than not, we had ‘lost’ it,(usually filed under B for bin) It was a running joke.

No one could ‘speak out’ because that was heresy.

I did. You just don’t like my answer.

I don’t excuse underfunding. That’s the problem.

You are describing YOUR work culture, no more, as you attack the concept of pensions again. And of course you think expecting people not producing more with less justifies ending basic employment rights – you called very specifically for firing workers.

You’ve repeatedly blamed anyone but those responsible – the government.

Thank you for your decent reply.

I don’t think it’s been so much that, I couldn’t get you a fresh loaf for 30p,(even though I’d fail) I think it’s been more a case of, here’s 30p go get a fresh loaf, if you can’t just nick one. It won’t come back on us it’ll be the Minister who gets the chop.
If you know what I mean.
That is the culture in many departments, and until those at the bottom have the right to say ‘NO’ to their managers, so as to escalate the issue up the food chain, to the Minister, nothing will be sorted.
Those at the bottom should have a direct link to the appropriate Minister when security procedures are not being followed properly.

Think you find that the border agency has been in decline before the financial crisis under New Labour who also tried to make it more efficient by reducing staff numbers and things have gotten worse since.
“Didn’t one top bod get himself into all sorts of trouble by instructing those working under him to ‘cut corners’?”

That may be true unfortunately it was probably an order higher up the food chain along the lines of sort it out I don’t care how you do it just sort it and thus that was a consequence.
You are right their should be consequences but to give you an example of the problem if I give you 30p and tell you to get me a fresh loaf of bread (which you fail to do) who should bare responsibility you for failing to do your job or me for setting a task that is not possible?

Like I said in my previous comment…
Please try and answer the points I raise.
What is your excuse for the same failings that went on BEFORE the cuts?
What is your excuse for the management being allowed to grow a dangerous work ethic, because they KNEW they could 100% rely on YOUR culture that it would NEVER be them who took the blame for their bad work practices, it would ALWAYS be the Minister that got moved. This ensured the management could continue to fail the staff working under them, fail YOU, fail me, and millions of other people, still on a salary we can only dream of, not forgetting their pensions.
Do YOU think the government, regardless of political party, are right to expect managers to do what is expected of them (I doubt there are fewer managers by the way)and if they do not, should the government be able to replace them with someone who takes the role more seriously?
If you stopped jumping to conclusions about what you think I said, you might realise I BLAME THE MANAGERS!
The staff under them, regardless of how many there are, have no choice but to obey. Subordinates you see.
However, the management have been allowed to do whatever the heck they like, KNOWING it would be the minister who got shifted if a problem got into the public domain.
Under Labour there were SIX Home Secretaries, and that is how the current culture grew.
NO ONE was really accountable.
Hopefully now they will be.

Okay, you want to blame people for not working 80 hour weeks.

That people don’t work themselves in unproductive ways when they’re simply understaffed and thus don’t magically get everything done…well, that’s logic, you ain’t having none of that.

YOUR culture of blaming the workers for understaffing is the wrong one. Of course you want to fire people repeatedly if they refuse to woprk those 80 hour weeks, removing basic protections from staff. And then fire them anyway when they can’t get it done anyway.

Your hatred of workers right is not new, no.

This mess has been going on for years and years. Long before the 2010 General Election, long before the Cuts, so Einstein, what’s you excuse for the shoddy management/staff prior to 2010, when it was a case of MORE staff not doing what they are paid to do?
Didn’t one top bod get himself into all sorts of trouble by instructing those working under him to ‘cut corners’?
Please do not try to make out that this is some new occurrence, because it is not.
Labour had SIX different Home Secretaries, and not one of them were allowed to stay in place long enough to fix it, because when an issue hit the public domain, they were moved.
Thus ensuring the wrong culture took hold in the top ranks, and the ‘issue’ disappeared….. until the next one appeared….Repeated as necessary.

If people are not doing what they should, then there should be consequences, and in this department, they are putting us ALL at risk of harm. So please stop being so ‘precious’ about failing public sector workers who are failing you, as well as me.
Personally, I would much prefer them not to be there.

Ah, so when staff magically can’t do more with fewer numbers and resources, they’re “failing”?

And I see, you’ll whine if your massive firing, and telling the rest that they need to do more work to make up for it leads to strikes.