Dáil Éireann Debate, Thursday - 26 October 2023
11. Deputy Robert Troy asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform whether, in the context of the public sector pay negotiations, performance review will form part of the negotiations; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [47018/23]
View answerWhen does the Minister intend to commence the public sector pay talks? Has he a timeframe for when he would like them to conclude? What period will the pay negotiations cover? Critically, as part of these talks, will he ensure that performance review forms a part of the pay talks?
These are all excellent questions which I will be in a position to answer a little later in relation to the duration of the wage agreement, the issues that will be covered off within it and the policy matters that will be included within it.
To touch on some of the answers I can give at this point, first, I hope to be in a position to engage through my officials with the public sector bodies in the coming weeks in relation to a successor to Building Momentum because I believe that these wage agreements, over many years now, have provided a really important framework for stability in relation to wages and industrial relations within our country that has served us well. I will make every effort to reach agreement and do so in a way that is appropriate and delivers good value for the taxpayer.
On the specific question, which is on performance reviews, every agreement since 2010 has acknowledged the importance of performance management to public service reform and modernisation. In the Croke Park Agreement, the parties committed to significantly improve performance management across the public service. Successive agreements since then have continued to build on this and have strengthened the performance management system within our civil and public service. That has led to the system in place at the moment, namely the performance management and development system, PMDS, which I think has played a meaningful role in allowing staff and managers to align the needs of our public service overall with individual performance.
I welcome the Minister’s confirmation that talks will commence in coming weeks. I agree that wage agreements have provided stability and avoided industrial unrest over recent decades. That is to be welcomed. It is important that these talks are fair and that they deliver value for the taxpayer and that any increases are proportionate, that is, that those in the middle and lower incomes get the greatest increase because those are the people who need it most.
It is critical we have an adequate performance review stitched in. I hear what he said about previous performance reviews over the last years but I am told the performance review categories have reduced from five categories to two. Currently, the only categories for staff appraisal are that they are performing satisfactorily or non-satisfactorily. That is not satisfactory. We need to ensure we have proper appraisals in place for our public sector to ensure that we are also getting value for money.
That is the system that has been in place since 2016. There is pretty binary clarity indicated in whether someone is performing in their job or not. There is merit in that approach. In any case, we have committed to review the system that is in place. In the renewal action plan for the Civil Service which the Government has agreed, action step 3 commits us to a review of the Civil Service performance management policy and culture to look at how we can deal with issues of individual performance. We will have a further look at this next year.
I welcome that because I do not think it is right that it is either satisfactory or non-satisfactory. That does not recognise people who are exceptional, who are working hard and need to be rewarded and equally it does not call out those people who are performing below par. We need a mechanism where people who are performing below par are brought up, encouraged and supported to ensure the public is getting an adequate public service.
Earlier this year, I published a Bill, the Local Authority Public Administration Bill, which would introduce timeframes for when people who contact local authorities can expect to hear back. I hope the Minister could look at taking on some of the elements of that Bill. I hope that would encourage people working in our public sector to realise there is an expectation that when people contact them, they will get an answer in a timely fashion. I welcome the Minister saying today that the performance review element of the public sector negotiations will look at the bizarre situation where someone is either performing satisfactorily or non-satisfactorily.
I take on board the point made by the Deputy. I can see the merits of a more graduated way of doing it. Before I entered public life myself and became a politician, I saw how these performance reviews worked and they were graded. It works very well in other employers. I will make sure this is looked at in the context of the review of the system next year. Return times, that is when clients and customers of public services get a call back or follow up on the issue they raise, should be in place. If it needs legislation to do that, I will look at the legislation Deputy Troy has proposed. I expect the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage, Deputy Darragh O’Brien, is particularly aware of it given his responsibility for local authorities. Other public services have key performance indicators, KPIs, which look at how quickly those who raise issues with our public services get a response. That is the bare minimum that should be in place.
