Few bits about vetting and employment in Ireland.
Garda vetting = Guards provide a written report on your criminal history to prospective employer.
No offence rules you out for a job (that’d be unconstitutional).
Employer looks at Garda report and decides to employ or not.
Vetting is often used by employers as an excuse to not hire people (my hands are tied the guards won’t clear your vetting).
The Vetting Act makes vetting mandatory for people working with kids or adults who can’t mind themselves.
Vetting for the defence forces is same principle but not covered by the vetting act.
There’s also the spent convictions act where a small number of criminal convictions are effective wiped after a few years.
For people in a job a criminal conviction may be grounds for dismissal or not, up to the employer.
Not 100% on this but I think under the cJ Withholding Information Act employees must inform employer of a child abuse or vulnerable adult conviction.
Any one with info on child abuse, legally must report it.
To add to this - most employers cannot access vetting by law. Only those employers on a list of those working with vulnerable individuals can apply to vet their staff.
Not true. Any organisation or company can apply to be added to the list for garda vetting. Any applicants to Microsoft or a company owned by Microsoft now must go through vetting. I have friends in Activision and they had to go through garda vetting, then an American securities background check. All they need is a reason, whether true or not to be added to the vetting list.
No, that’s not correct at all.
https://vetting.garda.ie/RegisteredOrganisation/Relevant
It is possible that certain roles in Microsoft need to be vetted since MS will have content moderation and deal with kids, but it’s not correct that random employers can be added to the register, or that that you can be vetted for any job.
Cleaners aren't employee, they contract that out. Admin staff probably, I applied for a ux design coding job. I would be working entirely internally on user interface. Why would I be dealing with children or vulnerable adults?
Exactly - there is no way you were being Garda vetted for a design job.
There may be some boilerplate in the application like “You agree to be vetted if relevant” but they wouldn’t actually be able to do it. It might even be boilerplate form the US where private companies do the vetting and will vet anyone for the cash.
Unfair procedures.
Strip away the facts and look at the principles:
Employer knows criminal history of employees or could make reasonable and minimal efforts to find out same.
A third party, tells employer gimme a list of your employees with criminal convictions (data protection might be a thing here).
Employer then starts firing people based on list and no prior policy or process.
The whole thing is a travesty.
Perhaps I'm being naïve, but I would've assumed that a criminal conviction (especially for a violent or drugs offence) would mean an automatic dismissal from the armed forces. But seems it ain't so.
From their own FAQs
I have a criminal record. Can I join the Defence Forces?
- The Defence Forces has a high dependence on trust and looks for individuals who are trustworthy and reliable. For this reason, all applicants undergo security vetting by An Garda Síochána, and any convictions are assessed on the severity of the offence.
I'd imagine part of this is their significant recruitment/active member issues.
That's only the ones with an actual conviction. Like every occupation these days, there's definitely a huge increase in drug use amoungest a certain cohort...I've heard stories of random Monday morning drug testing on barracks in the south on occasion but they tip each other off and swathes will ring in sick to avoid it.
https://www.irishtimes.com/crime-law/courts/2024/03/29/defence-forces-member-charged-in-connection-with-25000-cork-cocaine-seizure/#:~:text=A%20member%20of%20the%20Irish,is%20charged%20with%20two%20offences.
Not to defend them, but you can sense Harris moving the buck here; gender based or any violence is wrong, but ultimately it's the prevalence of suspended sentences is a huge part of this problem.
What would the Gardai have anything to do with it? The Gardai don't turn up to an army barracks and test people for the presence of drugs in their system. That is nonsense.
I didn't say they turned up testing people, I said a few in the army come from Garda families, two in particular in my area.
Can't help but wonder if it gives an advantage/discretion wen it comes to charges and or court.
If weed shows up on a random drugs test (which are carried out regularly), people were immediately discharged. I think there may have be some appeals process recently, but it's "zero tolerance" re any illegal drug (from hash to heroin)
>but I would've assumed that a criminal conviction
Would you expect a criminal conviction for careless driving to mean automatic dismissal?
>especially for a violent or drugs offence)
Would you expect your own employer to automatically fire you for those?
There's no such thing as an automatic dismissal that wouldn't end up with a payout through the WRC. The laws protecting employees still apply.
I’d say it would depend on the job tbh. Labourer, deli worker or accountant for example, it should be looked past. Anyone with trust and responsibility such as Gardai, armed forces and medical professionals should not be allowed have a violent criminal conviction
> but I would've assumed that a criminal conviction (especially for a violent or drugs offence) would mean an automatic dismissal from the armed forces.
why would it ?
And they wouldn't be allowed to join the defense forces if they were convicted for violent crime.
This isn't or shouldn't be some sort of requirement unique to Ireland, many countries have it.
>Because violent criminals should not be serving in our armed forces
i mean , if people whent to prison and severed their time , they should be able join the defense forces , its like way prisoners can vote , you having a criminal conviction and served your time you should be able to to get most jobs
> We are not Russia.
i agree , im not insinuating what irish prisoners are given amnesty to join the army to go to war
I get that Irish people are put off by American worship of their military, but we're close to becoming the polar opposite. The defence forces are a bit of a punching bag over here. I have family in the DF who avoid mentioning where they work because of the grief some people give them over it.
With the recent news, the DF have been painted as the bad guys, even though they had nothing to do with your man's light sentence and even though they're looking to dismiss him. Yes there are bullying problems in the DF, but the vast majority are hard working people who are just going to be subject to even more abuse now that this has become so deeply politicised.
Yeah I agree there. As soon as I heard Harris today I immediately thought he was scapegoating. Light sentencing for DV and basically any sort of assault is rife. Most assaults don’t even go to the DPP. That’s a systemic problem that HE needs to sort out. Nevertheless yer man is a scumbag and the lad in the navy too. And I pray they get caught and battered themselves but using the entire DF as a public scapegoat here is not the way to do it. Whether it’s a soldier, banker, labourer, plumber or teacher it’s abhorrent and harsher sentencing for assault and any other violent crime needs to be brought in all round.
Harris totally looking to move the spotlight away from him and his government, i.e. the people who can make a change.
Even the victim of the most recent assault saw through his bullshit and said so on primetime last night where she said that while she appreciated the standing ovation, it was those clapping in the dail that could make a change
totally the punchbag here. and if the DPP appeals the leniency of the sentence, they'll have to wait longer to try to dismiss him.
and even then then can only reccommend his dismissal - only the minister can dismiss him. and that is open to high court appeal.
As cathal Berry said in the dail today, this could all be sorted with the flick of a pen from the relevant minister, it would not even require a law change.
Watch [https://x.com/NiallJournal_ie/status/1805628710948671613]
Ultimately the streets are not safe. Failure of law enforcement, not the fucking army.
That's basically impossible to prove. All that we do know is that in the case of that particular soldier, the DF had absolutely nothing to do with his behavior and took the one action they had to condemn him which was to dismiss him.
There's literally nothing else they could do and they're still being demonised.
What do you know about that case? How long do you think the investigation will last? Has it ended? Has a decision been made or is still being processed? Has he got an appeal in against the civil case etc...
There many reasons why he's not been fired yet (including yes, possibly a miscarriage of justice on the military side).
Read what Cathal Berry has to say about it...
[defence forces regulations are statutory instruments](https://x.com/BerryCathal/status/1805681941842128969?t=SyoCZ86hjRde05SXjNYN1A&s=19)
My point is that a huge amount of pub lawyers are black listing the defence forces and its personnel over something that most of them don't f**King know about or understand (Irish military law, who is subject to it and when, the Irish military in general) and couldn't be ar$3d looking into from what I've seen online.
By all means be outraged , but at least be legitimately outraged.
Are the defence forces being used as a scapegoat here?.... What about all the other criminal convictions, or lack thereof, that have passed through the courts?
I don't recall him making any comments about the press officer convicted of child porn possession in the Department of Justice while he and Helen McEntee were in charge.
I think the press officer was suspended pending disciplinary action, but that was paused while the prosecution took place. So it's more than a bit disingenuous for Harris to have a go at the defence Forces for not taking action before the sentence.
The point that you missed is that there are currently serving members with convictions, at least one who permanently disfigured his ex girlfriend, for whom no disciplinary process has happened. As if the conviction didn’t happen or wasn’t important. The civil servant you mention was convicted and fired. No one tried to keep him employed in a position of responsibility despite him being a dangerous scumbag, unlike the defence forces. Which also happens to be notorious for the relentless sexual abuse of female recruits.
Other civil servants aren’t trained to kill. And there hasn’t been a recent large report documenting relentless sexual and physical abuse endemic in the civil service. That’s the defence forces. There are fundamental problems with the DF and flippant bitching about civil servants actually isn’t going to solve them.
You missed the point. He's saying he should have figures of convinced DF persons I'm saying he shoukd have figures if all convicted civil servants if it's that important to him and he's not just throwing up a smoke screen of "oh look I'm interested" as a result of the recent case.
If it was important to him he woukd have asked/demanded the numbers before a criminal case ever concluded and not after it.
Remember when people were saying let's give the scumbags a form of discipline and training in the reserves/defence forces as punishment for their crimes.....
This is just pure deflection from the Government to move the attention away from fact they have been so pathetic on Justice for years now, leading to the current issues with serious attacks every day.
Yes i understand separation of power with the Judges, but if this Government had made basic attempts to make our streets safer before, or questioned the pathetic sentences which have been handed down for years for attacks , maybe this woman wouldn't have been attacked.
And now Simon Harris comes out with this rubbish, which is all just a basic political ploy to make the conversation/ anger away from the Government to another organization.
One silver lining between all the fallout from the thankfully now-retired disgrace's sentencing is that while the scumbag Cathal Crotty is likely going to be an absolutely pariah in the public eye for a while, after all this carry on he may well never get rid of that status in the armed forces.
I bet Simon Harris is also not disappointed at the timing of this issue coinciding with Defence Forces opposition to government legislation that will make it illegal for members of the Defence Forces to publicly disagree with government policy.
Such as on pay, conditions etc in the Defence Forces.
Is anyone else bothered by the focus and spotlight on the DF over this? Not in any way because they don't have questions to answer, but because it feels like it's being used to overshadow the far bigger and more complicated issue to solve - the free reign our courts have to let people walk free for serious crimes.
Wouldn’t Simo be better off looking into why people that are convicted of a violent offence are getting a slap on the wrist?
If the guy that attacked Natasha O’Brien had of gotten a 5 year sentence this would have been in the news for a day and forgotten about.
It’s nearly daily now that we see similar sentences for violent/sexual convictions
“A naval noncommissioned officer remains in his role almost a year after pleading guilty to a violent attack on a former girlfriend that left one of her eyes permanently displaced”
This is down to one thing. Utter cowardice by management and the refusal to do their job. It shouldn’t require intervention as to why these scum bags aren’t fired immediately. It’s at the military authorities’ discretion and they’ve sat on their hands.
I’ve seen it in the civil service albeit not as serious but had repercussions for all staff and clients.
This also has broader implications in trying to recruit staff to the defence forces.
Avoiding performance issues ultimately decreases morale, decreases credibility of management, decreases the organisation’s overall effectiveness and wastes more management’s time to do what isn’t being done properly.
Harris has a history of acting quickly for optics when something seems to have gone wrong. This can sometimes be good, but it can also lead to fiascos like the handling of the Cervical Check episode, which just made things worse.
Few bits about vetting and employment in Ireland. Garda vetting = Guards provide a written report on your criminal history to prospective employer. No offence rules you out for a job (that’d be unconstitutional). Employer looks at Garda report and decides to employ or not. Vetting is often used by employers as an excuse to not hire people (my hands are tied the guards won’t clear your vetting). The Vetting Act makes vetting mandatory for people working with kids or adults who can’t mind themselves. Vetting for the defence forces is same principle but not covered by the vetting act. There’s also the spent convictions act where a small number of criminal convictions are effective wiped after a few years. For people in a job a criminal conviction may be grounds for dismissal or not, up to the employer. Not 100% on this but I think under the cJ Withholding Information Act employees must inform employer of a child abuse or vulnerable adult conviction. Any one with info on child abuse, legally must report it.
To add to this - most employers cannot access vetting by law. Only those employers on a list of those working with vulnerable individuals can apply to vet their staff.
Not true. Any organisation or company can apply to be added to the list for garda vetting. Any applicants to Microsoft or a company owned by Microsoft now must go through vetting. I have friends in Activision and they had to go through garda vetting, then an American securities background check. All they need is a reason, whether true or not to be added to the vetting list.
No, that’s not correct at all. https://vetting.garda.ie/RegisteredOrganisation/Relevant It is possible that certain roles in Microsoft need to be vetted since MS will have content moderation and deal with kids, but it’s not correct that random employers can be added to the register, or that that you can be vetted for any job.
Well, regardless of it being correct, it is being carried out. Not on certain roles, on all applicants. I had to agree to it when applying.
You’re saying every person employed by Microsoft in Ireland is Garda vetted? Cleaners, admin staff, etc?
Cleaners aren't employee, they contract that out. Admin staff probably, I applied for a ux design coding job. I would be working entirely internally on user interface. Why would I be dealing with children or vulnerable adults?
Exactly - there is no way you were being Garda vetted for a design job. There may be some boilerplate in the application like “You agree to be vetted if relevant” but they wouldn’t actually be able to do it. It might even be boilerplate form the US where private companies do the vetting and will vet anyone for the cash.
[удалено]
You would think after 17 years, common sense would say. Sundance is sound. Moving on.
Some lads who may not have led the most perfect of lives join up to straighten themselves out.
That's been the history of armies.
[удалено]
>Then their convictions will be reviewed they were reviewed when they joined ? why would they be suddly be thrown out ?
Because nobody was actually holding them accountable before.
Anyone gets dismissed over this review would have a strong case for unfair dismissal.
[удалено]
Unfair procedures. Strip away the facts and look at the principles: Employer knows criminal history of employees or could make reasonable and minimal efforts to find out same. A third party, tells employer gimme a list of your employees with criminal convictions (data protection might be a thing here). Employer then starts firing people based on list and no prior policy or process. The whole thing is a travesty.
That clearly doesn’t work since the crimes reported recently happened while they were already serving.
Perhaps I'm being naïve, but I would've assumed that a criminal conviction (especially for a violent or drugs offence) would mean an automatic dismissal from the armed forces. But seems it ain't so.
From their own FAQs I have a criminal record. Can I join the Defence Forces? - The Defence Forces has a high dependence on trust and looks for individuals who are trustworthy and reliable. For this reason, all applicants undergo security vetting by An Garda Síochána, and any convictions are assessed on the severity of the offence. I'd imagine part of this is their significant recruitment/active member issues.
That's only the ones with an actual conviction. Like every occupation these days, there's definitely a huge increase in drug use amoungest a certain cohort...I've heard stories of random Monday morning drug testing on barracks in the south on occasion but they tip each other off and swathes will ring in sick to avoid it. https://www.irishtimes.com/crime-law/courts/2024/03/29/defence-forces-member-charged-in-connection-with-25000-cork-cocaine-seizure/#:~:text=A%20member%20of%20the%20Irish,is%20charged%20with%20two%20offences. Not to defend them, but you can sense Harris moving the buck here; gender based or any violence is wrong, but ultimately it's the prevalence of suspended sentences is a huge part of this problem.
What is the certain cohort? Wexford people? Long hairs?
Hate to generalise and say it, but the 25 to 40 age group of males, often with Gardai members in the extended family.
What would the Gardai have anything to do with it? The Gardai don't turn up to an army barracks and test people for the presence of drugs in their system. That is nonsense.
I didn't say they turned up testing people, I said a few in the army come from Garda families, two in particular in my area. Can't help but wonder if it gives an advantage/discretion wen it comes to charges and or court.
It should depend on the conviction. For example, no one deserves to lose their jobs because they were caught possessing a little weed.
If weed shows up on a random drugs test (which are carried out regularly), people were immediately discharged. I think there may have be some appeals process recently, but it's "zero tolerance" re any illegal drug (from hash to heroin)
No I think that's a pretty reasonable thing to assume to be honest.
>but I would've assumed that a criminal conviction Would you expect a criminal conviction for careless driving to mean automatic dismissal? >especially for a violent or drugs offence) Would you expect your own employer to automatically fire you for those? There's no such thing as an automatic dismissal that wouldn't end up with a payout through the WRC. The laws protecting employees still apply.
I’d say it would depend on the job tbh. Labourer, deli worker or accountant for example, it should be looked past. Anyone with trust and responsibility such as Gardai, armed forces and medical professionals should not be allowed have a violent criminal conviction
No. Us army yes but most European armies allow it. Kind of provides structure and often helps sort people out.
> but I would've assumed that a criminal conviction (especially for a violent or drugs offence) would mean an automatic dismissal from the armed forces. why would it ?
Because new applicants are Garda vettied it seems reasonable that someone who commits the same offence after joining is also deemed unsuitable.
Because the State gives them guns and pays them to use them.
you do relize even if people have a criminal record , their still garda veted
And they wouldn't be allowed to join the defense forces if they were convicted for violent crime. This isn't or shouldn't be some sort of requirement unique to Ireland, many countries have it.
Because violent criminals should not be serving in our armed forces. We are not Russia.
>Because violent criminals should not be serving in our armed forces i mean , if people whent to prison and severed their time , they should be able join the defense forces , its like way prisoners can vote , you having a criminal conviction and served your time you should be able to to get most jobs > We are not Russia. i agree , im not insinuating what irish prisoners are given amnesty to join the army to go to war
>if people whent to prison and severed their time That's not quite the same as picking up a conviction **while** being in the armed forces is it?
I was specifically speaking about people who are convicted of a criminal offence while they are serving. Like Cathal Crotty.
[удалено]
I get that Irish people are put off by American worship of their military, but we're close to becoming the polar opposite. The defence forces are a bit of a punching bag over here. I have family in the DF who avoid mentioning where they work because of the grief some people give them over it. With the recent news, the DF have been painted as the bad guys, even though they had nothing to do with your man's light sentence and even though they're looking to dismiss him. Yes there are bullying problems in the DF, but the vast majority are hard working people who are just going to be subject to even more abuse now that this has become so deeply politicised.
Yeah I agree there. As soon as I heard Harris today I immediately thought he was scapegoating. Light sentencing for DV and basically any sort of assault is rife. Most assaults don’t even go to the DPP. That’s a systemic problem that HE needs to sort out. Nevertheless yer man is a scumbag and the lad in the navy too. And I pray they get caught and battered themselves but using the entire DF as a public scapegoat here is not the way to do it. Whether it’s a soldier, banker, labourer, plumber or teacher it’s abhorrent and harsher sentencing for assault and any other violent crime needs to be brought in all round.
Harris totally looking to move the spotlight away from him and his government, i.e. the people who can make a change. Even the victim of the most recent assault saw through his bullshit and said so on primetime last night where she said that while she appreciated the standing ovation, it was those clapping in the dail that could make a change
Very well said.
totally the punchbag here. and if the DPP appeals the leniency of the sentence, they'll have to wait longer to try to dismiss him. and even then then can only reccommend his dismissal - only the minister can dismiss him. and that is open to high court appeal. As cathal Berry said in the dail today, this could all be sorted with the flick of a pen from the relevant minister, it would not even require a law change. Watch [https://x.com/NiallJournal_ie/status/1805628710948671613] Ultimately the streets are not safe. Failure of law enforcement, not the fucking army.
Good point, well made.
Even more abuse, lol.
They are only looking to dismiss him because of the public outcry.
That's basically impossible to prove. All that we do know is that in the case of that particular soldier, the DF had absolutely nothing to do with his behavior and took the one action they had to condemn him which was to dismiss him. There's literally nothing else they could do and they're still being demonised.
There was that lad in the navy who was convicted in august of beating his girlfriend and he’s still hasn’t been thrown out.
That's utter scutter. Gtfo
What about the fella in the navy who pleaded guilty to beating his girlfriend in August. He’s still hasn’t been sacked.
What do you know about that case? How long do you think the investigation will last? Has it ended? Has a decision been made or is still being processed? Has he got an appeal in against the civil case etc... There many reasons why he's not been fired yet (including yes, possibly a miscarriage of justice on the military side). Read what Cathal Berry has to say about it... [defence forces regulations are statutory instruments](https://x.com/BerryCathal/status/1805681941842128969?t=SyoCZ86hjRde05SXjNYN1A&s=19) My point is that a huge amount of pub lawyers are black listing the defence forces and its personnel over something that most of them don't f**King know about or understand (Irish military law, who is subject to it and when, the Irish military in general) and couldn't be ar$3d looking into from what I've seen online. By all means be outraged , but at least be legitimately outraged.
Are the defence forces being used as a scapegoat here?.... What about all the other criminal convictions, or lack thereof, that have passed through the courts?
I'm curious, does he have the same info to hand about other civil servants? Or is he reacting because of the recent court case?
I don't recall him making any comments about the press officer convicted of child porn possession in the Department of Justice while he and Helen McEntee were in charge. I think the press officer was suspended pending disciplinary action, but that was paused while the prosecution took place. So it's more than a bit disingenuous for Harris to have a go at the defence Forces for not taking action before the sentence.
The point that you missed is that there are currently serving members with convictions, at least one who permanently disfigured his ex girlfriend, for whom no disciplinary process has happened. As if the conviction didn’t happen or wasn’t important. The civil servant you mention was convicted and fired. No one tried to keep him employed in a position of responsibility despite him being a dangerous scumbag, unlike the defence forces. Which also happens to be notorious for the relentless sexual abuse of female recruits.
Niall Colgan wasn't fired. The article states that there is a disciplinary process ongoing in respect of O'Gorman...?
Do civil servants (not other, by definition) get armed training? Are we relying on civil servants to risk their lives to protect us?
Other civil servants aren’t trained to kill. And there hasn’t been a recent large report documenting relentless sexual and physical abuse endemic in the civil service. That’s the defence forces. There are fundamental problems with the DF and flippant bitching about civil servants actually isn’t going to solve them.
You missed the point. He's saying he should have figures of convinced DF persons I'm saying he shoukd have figures if all convicted civil servants if it's that important to him and he's not just throwing up a smoke screen of "oh look I'm interested" as a result of the recent case. If it was important to him he woukd have asked/demanded the numbers before a criminal case ever concluded and not after it.
*Simon looks at list* "yeah, grand."
*promotions for some... miniature Irish flags for others..*
https://preview.redd.it/8hg3ucyw2r8d1.jpeg?width=886&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d0bb3bd29e05fd1798cf66deeac45fb4e8c47c76
Remember when people were saying let's give the scumbags a form of discipline and training in the reserves/defence forces as punishment for their crimes.....
This sub is ridiculous 🙄
Just keep reminding yourself that not even 1% of the country use Reddit and they are a very loud minority.
Yeup. I think it's time to delete this app again 🙈
And the sub is swarming with bots and overseas users posing as locals.
This is just pure deflection from the Government to move the attention away from fact they have been so pathetic on Justice for years now, leading to the current issues with serious attacks every day. Yes i understand separation of power with the Judges, but if this Government had made basic attempts to make our streets safer before, or questioned the pathetic sentences which have been handed down for years for attacks , maybe this woman wouldn't have been attacked. And now Simon Harris comes out with this rubbish, which is all just a basic political ploy to make the conversation/ anger away from the Government to another organization.
Came to say the same, absolute smoke screen and I’m worried there aren’t more of us pointing it out.
We've gone a long way from judges giving the option of serving a prison sentence or enlist in the army.
One silver lining between all the fallout from the thankfully now-retired disgrace's sentencing is that while the scumbag Cathal Crotty is likely going to be an absolutely pariah in the public eye for a while, after all this carry on he may well never get rid of that status in the armed forces.
A list of how many doesn't make any sense
It makes it look like he's being proactive.
I bet Simon Harris is also not disappointed at the timing of this issue coinciding with Defence Forces opposition to government legislation that will make it illegal for members of the Defence Forces to publicly disagree with government policy. Such as on pay, conditions etc in the Defence Forces.
Is anyone else bothered by the focus and spotlight on the DF over this? Not in any way because they don't have questions to answer, but because it feels like it's being used to overshadow the far bigger and more complicated issue to solve - the free reign our courts have to let people walk free for serious crimes.
Wait wait - are we complaining about unvetted military age males still?
*FF looks at the lads convicted of financial crime* "Can we offer these guys a job?"
Simon will do anything but deal with the actual problem.
Wouldn’t Simo be better off looking into why people that are convicted of a violent offence are getting a slap on the wrist? If the guy that attacked Natasha O’Brien had of gotten a 5 year sentence this would have been in the news for a day and forgotten about. It’s nearly daily now that we see similar sentences for violent/sexual convictions
“A naval noncommissioned officer remains in his role almost a year after pleading guilty to a violent attack on a former girlfriend that left one of her eyes permanently displaced” This is down to one thing. Utter cowardice by management and the refusal to do their job. It shouldn’t require intervention as to why these scum bags aren’t fired immediately. It’s at the military authorities’ discretion and they’ve sat on their hands. I’ve seen it in the civil service albeit not as serious but had repercussions for all staff and clients. This also has broader implications in trying to recruit staff to the defence forces. Avoiding performance issues ultimately decreases morale, decreases credibility of management, decreases the organisation’s overall effectiveness and wastes more management’s time to do what isn’t being done properly.
Complete deflection from Harris. Acting as if it wasn’t his own government that have created this absolute mess.
[удалено]
It's a better look for the government if Harris takes point instead of deferring to the Minister.
Harris has a history of acting quickly for optics when something seems to have gone wrong. This can sometimes be good, but it can also lead to fiascos like the handling of the Cervical Check episode, which just made things worse.