[Peetwo]

Fat cat bureaucrats plundering the trough -

A couple of references:

Enough of the Hollowmen & AIOS - FDS!

In the latest Ferryman Sunday ramble sums up the aviation safety bureaucracy 'paradox': 

Kharon - Irresistible force paradox.

"Wiki – “The paradox arises because it rests on two incompatible premises: that there can exist simultaneously such things as irresistible forces and immovable objects. The "paradox" is flawed because if there exists an irresistible force, it follows logically that there cannot be any such thing as an immovable object and vice versa”.

Despite the paradox – we need to move an immovable object. Difficult task; but, move it we must.

Personally I think this could be applied across a much wider spectrum of the Federal bureaucracy and is systematic of more than a decade of successive poor governance and direction at an executive government level,  Sandy dubs it the 'Canberra disease' and Ventus reckons it is a syndrome i.e. "acquired institutionalised ostrichitis syndrome" (AIOS).




 

+

Alexander 1 hour ago

By their silence Qantas, Virgin, Jetstar and Tiger have maintained their three wise monkeys stance (hear no, see no, speak no evil) so as not to offend their master CASA. Much easier to jack up the airfares to pay for the irrational, erratic and costly procedures of an all powerful but dysfunctional bureaucracy than to take a principled stand. Small aviation businesses have been taxed and ground down with unworkable rules so much so that foreign pilots are now hired on the 457 working visa list. John C points to one of the symptoms of bureaucracy, the aversion to egg on face. Very good reasons for this aversion, huge salaries and amazing working conditions. Not to mention that in the scramble by Ministers to distance themselves from responsibility governments of both stripes have created numerous independent statutory bodies like CASA.

What we've been slow to perceive is that they are not public servants at all (not subject to the Public Governance and Service Act), but a new breed of self serving bodies whose main preoccupation is to cover their failings and protect their Minister while indulging on the public purse. Alex in the Rises.

&.. from CASA meets the Press, Thorny quotes a Lead Balloon (aka creampuff) pearler from off the UP... :

Straight out of the Bureaucrat's Big Book of Looking Busy. Chapter 3 of that book, which Chapter is headed Responding to Reports by Looking Busy, is very instructive (reproduced with permission of the copyright holder): 

As we saw in Chapter 2, there are many "look busy" activities that can be undertaken at a bureaucracy's own initiative - conducting "reviews" and "restructuring" and gathering "data" etc. However, external matters may occasionally produce findings and recommendations that may be inconveniently valid and may require "work" to address. We have used the provocative word "work" deliberately, to focus Busy Bureaucrats on the point that although these circumstances create a threat, they also create an opportunity.

The Busy Bureaucrat will be left with a choice on how best to look busy: Reject and cast doubt on the credibility of the report's author/s, findings, data set, sample group, methodology etc, or accept the finding/s recommendation/s in whole or part and "commit to action". The first option is ostensibly attractive because it does not involve work. However, the second option has not only the advantage of making a Busy Bureaucrat look busier when s/he is not (Rule 2 from Chapter 1), but also provides scope for increasing the size of the bureaucracy (Rule 1 from Chapter 1).

The key to taking the opportunity created by this threat, and thereby to look busier and increase the size of the bureacracy, is to commit to impressive action that includes the creation of positions that have the name of the action that the bureaucracy will pretend to take. Examples of those actions follow. We have added efficiency scores, out of 100, that are usually achieved against the "Bigger Bureaucracy", "Look Busy" and "Delay Tactic" criteria discussed in Chapter 1:

- Create new positions that have names like "Stakeholder Engagement Group Manager" and "Industry Relations Officer" - BB: 100; LB 30; DT 100 [Editor's comment: This "action" is often undervalued as a DT. However, the appointees to these positions will always need many months to settle in and get across the facts and the options.]

- Establish a "Stakeholder Engagement Group" that pretends to provide "dedicated stakeholder engagement functions" BB: 10; LB:70; DT:60 [Editor's comment: meetings are always a good 'look busy' tactic but stakeholder groups generally include stakeholders who eventually realise it's just a 'look busy' tactic.]

- Establish an "Advisory Panel" to provide "informed, high-level advice" to be considered and rejected if inconvenient - BB:10; LB:20; DT:100 [Editor's comment: Low BB if, as is usually the case, the panel comprises 'outsiders'. However, solid DT gold.]

- Pretend that "a culture change process is underway to drive continuous improvement and strengthen commitment to consistently meeting service delivery timeframes" - BB:0; LB:40; DT:70 [Editor's comment: A brave option to take, because almost nobody thinks anything but "BS" when they hear "culture change" and "continuous improvement" these days.]

- Develop a new "Service Charter" and pretend that it means something - BB:0; LB: 40; DT: 50 [Editor's comment: A DT to be used as a last resort. Nobody believes this BS any more.]

- Undertake additional research to develop a greater understanding of the issues - BB:20; LB0; DT: 60 [Editor's comment: A good LB option, but its DT value depends on whether the issues are already obvious to even a moron.]

- Revise and Update "key manuals" to ensure there is "standardised, current information on rules, processes and how assessments are undertaken", so these can be used as "evidence" to "prove" that everything is "OK" - BB:10; LB:100; DT 75. [Editor's comment: A potentially rich source of busy work and delay.]

  
Next reference off the AOPA thread goes to the working art of spin & obfuscation of a Machiavellian Mandarin in the construct of the latest version of our Annex 19 SSP...

Speaking of weasel words, I wonder if anyone has taken the time to read the latest edition of Murky Mandarin's bollocks SSP (see HERE)? You know the one that was released with little to no fanfare on the day of the Tamworth rally and three days before Malcolm called the  ridiculous two month election campaign.

Contradiction examples from the SSP.

Eg.1 This is Murky's policy statement which supposedly, among other things, is meant to address government aviation policy:

Australia's State Safety Policy Statement

Australia's aviation safety system plays a vital role in ensuring that Australia has a safe, efficient and competitive aviation industry. Australia will continue to seek closer alignment with International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Standards and Recommended Practices and adopt international best practices in its aviation safety system.

The Australian Government has endorsed the following safety principles that underpin the future aviation safety system:

1. Safety is the primary consideration of Australia's aviation agencies and industry in the performance of their functions;
   
2. The highest safety priority should be afforded to passenger transport operations;
   
3. Australia's regulatory approach and responses are based on a sound assessment of the level of risk associated with particular aviation operations;
   
4. Aviation agencies and industry work closely together to identify aviation safety risks and ensure that the most appropriate methods, practices and technologies are adopted to address and reduce these risks;
   
5. A strong 'just culture' approach underpins information sharing between industry and safety agencies as information sharing assists in preventing future safety events and reflects international best practice;
   
6. Recognition that Australia's safety regulatory system plays an important role in ensuring that Australia has a safe, efficient and competitive aviation industry;
   
7. Australia's aviation regulatory procedures, processes and approach to regulation is fair, transparent and promotes nationally consistent operations;
   
8. Active and ongoing engagement by industry and safety agencies will help inform future regulatory priorities and the development of simpler regulations, standards and orders;
   
9. The safety performance of our aviation safety system will be continuously monitored and measured through the Stat's aggregate safety performance indicators as well as service provider's safety performance indicators; and
   
10. Sufficient financial and human resources for safety management and oversight will be allocated; and staff will be equipped with the proper skills and expertise to discharge their safety oversight and management responsibilities competently.
    

Mike Mrdak
Secretary, Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development
6 May 2016

 
In light of the Mildura Fog duck-up; the ongoing investigation of the broken tail VARA ATR (3 years and counting); and the recent release (after 3 years) of a shambolic investigation into a pushback accident between two RPT jets; I would suggest that the Department and it's responsible agencies are already in direct contravention of No.2 :

"...The highest safety priority should be afforded to passenger transport operations..."    

..etc.

 
Which brings me to the purpose of posting on the Mandarin thread...

With all of the above in mind, today there was a fascinating and somewhat disturbing Oz article on the top Mandarins & their minions high % increases in salary and the question on whether taxpayers are getting value for money...

Bureaucrats eye $1m pay despite flat wage growth

Martin Parkinson, who heads the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet, earns $861,700. Picture: Jono Searle
 
 
[/url][url=http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/bureaucrats-eye-1m-pay-despite-flat-wage-growth/news-story/50d3277374ff0ab27be9dfec457f62fa#]

• David Uren
  
• The Australian
  
• 12:00AM August 24, 2016
  

[img=0x0]http://pixel.tcog.cp1.news.com.au/track/component/author/a5278f379df8dcdf31ded99d61d3d253/?esi=true&t_product=the-australian&t_template=s3/austemp-article_common/vertical/author/widget&td_bio=false[/img]
The pay of many top public servants has soared by 70 per cent since the global financial crisis, with some approaching earnings of $1 million, at a time when growth in average earnings has slowed almost to a standstill.

The cost of running the public service, including the highly ­expensive senior executive layer, has been a candidate for budget savings at both federal and state levels as it does not require legislation for cuts.

However, attempts to close budget deficits have not stopped huge increases in salary for many of those at the top who now earn several hundred thousand dollars a year more than the ministers to whom they report.

Martin Parkinson, who heads the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet, earns $861,700, which is 71.2 per cent more than his predecessor in the Howard government, Peter Shergold, was getting when he stepped down from the position in early 2008.

Malcolm Turnbull earns $517,504 and, when the last round of pay rises was awarded, received an increase of $195 a week. Dr Parkinson’s increase equated to $1132 a week as it included ­deferred increases from the ­Remuneration Tribunal.

Treasury secretary John Fraser earns only slightly less at $840,810, which is about $240,000 more than Ken Henry was getting when he was dealing with the financial crisis. Although Mr Fraser earned vastly more in his previous private sector job as head of global funds management for investment bank UBS, he is still paid more than double the $373,200 earned by Scott Morrison as Treasurer.

Department secretaries had no increase for a number of years, leading to a review in 2009-10, which led to big one-off increases intended to bring them into line with private sector chief executives with similar responsibilities.

Remuneration Tribunal chief John Conde has repeatedly ­defended the pay levels, arguing they take account of the federal budget outlook and general economic conditions.

“The tribunal considers it ­important that remuneration for offices in its jurisdiction is maintained at appropriate levels over the longer term to attract and ­retain people of the calibre ­required for these important high-level ­offices,” Mr Conde said after the last pay rise.

Other huge increases have been handed out to many of the heads of government operations. Federal police commissioner ­Andrew Colvin gets $678,920, which is 81.5 per cent more than Mick Keelty was paid in the position eight years ago.

Over the past eight years, the pay for the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation director-general, currently Duncan Lewis, has risen 73.4 per cent to $626,690.

The electoral commissioner, Tom Rogers, earns $522,240, which is a 75.9 per cent increase over the past eight years. The highest paid public servant is the governor of the Reserve Bank, with its latest annual report showing Glenn Stevens, whose 10-year term finishes next month, earned just more than $1 million last year. The Reserve Bank started disclosing senior salaries only in 2010.

Unlike ordinary wage earners who rely on the earnings of their superannuation fund, many long-serving senior public servants enjoy defined superannuation benefits, providing them with a guaranteed pension equivalent to about 60 per cent of their final salary.

Former NSW treasurer Michael Costa told Sky News’s Bolt Report that, in his experience, there were significant “back office” gains to be made in the public service. “I cannot believe the explosion in SES positions and SES salaries — they could be addressed pretty quickly, but then productivity is the challenge,” Mr Costa said.

“It means changing work conditions, means getting more sensible and flexible labour arrangements. We’ve seen significant real growth in key areas such as education, but no productivity or output gains."

The increases won by senior public service management below the secretary level have been in line with community standards, averaging about 30 per cent over the past eight years, but their level remains elevated. A deputy secretary’s salary is about $390,000 while the first assistant secretary, which is one layer below that, gets $300,000.

The federal government has tried to halt the growth in the numbers of the public service overall and the senior executive service. Since commonwealth public service numbers peaked at 153,464 in 2012, they have fallen 11.1 per cent, while the number of senior executives has dropped 10.2 per cent.

The performance of states has varied widely. NSW has kept growth in its wages bill to only 30.7 per cent over the past eight years, while its number of senior executives has been in decline since 2009. Victoria, by contrast, has 12.9 per cent increase in total public service numbers and a 30 per cent rise in the number of senior executives, which has been enough to boost its total wages bill by 45.5 per cent.

Western Australia, which has experienced a mining boom and bust over the past eight years, is managing with a public service salary bill that has risen by 63.3 per cent, while the ACT and the Northern Territory have both overseen a blowout in public service numbers of more than 20 per cent, with salaries up by 68 per cent.

Additional reporting: Sarah Elks

It is quite often stated that the primary role of M&M, & his minions like Skidmore, is to keep the miniscule's fat out of the fire, after that supposedly they become self-absorbed in diligently adhering to the Bureaucrat's Big Book of Looking Busy. One has to question whether paying these no value adding bureaucratic parasites obscene amounts of taxpayers money is truly in the interest of industry and the travelling public - FDS!  


MTF...P2