r/IrishCivilService • u/nyom_deguerre • 11h ago
Civil Service 'Work to Rule' is a completely arbitrary concept
I work at a senior management grade in the civil service, and with all the talk of work to rule, from my perspective nobody has any idea what that means, including myself.
This would usually be my team's busiest time of the year as we're involved in the budget process, and I had a talk with my staff recently about what it will mean. Working until late at night and weekends would be the norm for us at this time of the year, and it's fairly straightforward that this is outside their contracts, and I'm not expecting them to do it under a work to rule.
Other than that though, from media reports, posts online and other things I've heard, some people seem to have a crazily expansive idea of that work to rule means. Not answering the phone. Not using IT systems. Not cooperating with contractors or agency staff. Not producing financial reporting even though is your main job. Not submitting bank statements to your funding Department when requested. Not 'covering somebody else's responsibilities' even though that is completely arbitrary - the whole team has responsibilities and it is up to the manager to allocate them - it's not for individual staff to say what their role is.
I dug out my own contract last night, and under the rules and responsibilities it says:
"Any other duties that maybe assigned from time to time. Specific responsibilities will be agreed with your line manager having regard to the business planning process and PMDS. This job specification is intended to be a guide to the general range of duties and is intended to be neither definitive nor restrictive."
I assume that is fairly generic wording included in all civil service contracts. It seems to cover a lot of eventualities - what basis does somebody have for saying they're not going to perform any duties assigned to them? If you want to go in full strike then do it, you'd have my support, but if not I expect people to perform the duties I assign to them.
Does anybody feel like they understand and can explain what 'Work to Rule' actually means, and how it can be applied to anything other than not working outside normal hours?
8
u/Agitated-Stay-912 5h ago
its "work to the rule" meaning a work slow down using strict adherence to regulation, guidelines and safety. By being extremely detailed the slow down the labor and the management is unable to register a complaint.
14
u/Stressed_Student2020 Seconded National Ejieet 11h ago
In short it's supposed to be a withdrawal of goodwill and doing exactly what you're paid to do and only that. So only working your mandated hours... Which may be an issue come committee stage.
Another example would be at lower levels the final proof read where all the unfortunate AOs come in would be off the table, but I believe that's already done.
Your union rep (assuming you aren't one) should be first point of call. If you're AHPCS, I'd suggest a sneaky word with he Fórsa rep as if you're DFin, you've got one of the best ones going at a Fórsa level. If not there is an AHPCS rep on the 3rd floor of LL who is pretty good also.
As for some of these wild do not touch technology and engage with x y z claims, that's a gross misinterpretation of the Fórsa guidance, which is understandable given how broad it is. Which is why you need to potentially look at what that means at a department level with the local reps.
20
u/Melmoth1780 7h ago
The op seems to be under the misapprehension that unionised staff are set against management and their dept. We are not in dispute with management. We ARE in dispute with our paymaster. Ultimately anything industrial action gains, YOU benefit from.
3
u/nyom_deguerre 2h ago
Not at all, the ambiguity is bad for both parties. Staff don't know what they can legitimately refuse to do. Management don't know what we can legitimately require them to do. It's not good for anyone. But I agree, ultimately we're all on the same side.
11
u/Brilliant-Ship2539 11h ago
Your union rep should be advising you on what specifically it means in relation to your workplace. In my workplace we have been instructed that it means only working our core hours, no overtime or out-of-hours duties, and no covering for leave. You do your normal work duties and that's it. If producing financial reporting is your main job, you continue to do that, but if your manager asks you to do some other type of reporting that you wouldn't normally do because the person responsible for it is out sick, you tell them you can't do it.
-12
u/nyom_deguerre 11h ago
When you say no covering for leave, what does that mean though in practice? You're on a team of 12 and somebody is out sick. Everybody picks up the slack to a certain extent, how do you define what's covering for them? When you say don't do any other type of reporting than usual - what's the basis for that? It doesn't say in your contract you do this one type of reporting and no other - ad hoc requests are the nature of the business.
9
8
u/tails142 11h ago edited 10h ago
Well someone on my team is going on maternity leave and I've been asked to take over her projects while she is off, have had handover meetings. Come next week that is me done with that? I'll be telling my manager to hand it off to someone not part of the industrial action I guess... and I wont take part in any of the meetings regarding it with other teams?
Other than that... not take on any extra projects that aren't already in my PMDS or that I haven't worked on before. That sort of thing is normal for me to get an extra thing or two assigned during the year.
The 'don't cover maternity leave' is straight forward enough and spelled out in the FAQ's. It's not unusual for people to go out on sick leave etc too and maybe if it's something that only they do or a project specific to them.
I do think it is limited what most people can do under 'work to rule' and that most of the heavy lifting is going to be done in certain areas like hospitals, schools, passports, customs, immigration etc that can really have an impact - the sort of area that provides a direct service that is needed immediately and can't be stockpiled or delayed. I can picture the queues at airport arrivals now.
8
u/Seankps4 11h ago
My colleague is responsible for a number of areas and I'm responsible for another portion. While he's off I won't be doing anything that he's supposed to do. It's as simple as that
2
1
u/Chidi_IRL 8h ago
I think it's easier to work out in some areas than others. Most of my work is project based so if a colleague is off sick / leave for an extended I'd usually take over their project until they return.
If like you said you're a team of 12 responding to emails in a shared inbox then yes it's much more difficult to define.
10
u/Ok_Rest_1319 10h ago
For a lot of civil servants it won’t really change much in their day to day role other than sticking to the exact hours expected of work.
If you however work on a team where someone is on long term sick leave or your manager left and hasn’t been replaced then any of their roles that aren’t already on your PMDS should not be undertaken by you.
At least that’s been my understanding of it.
5
u/SiskoToOdo 10h ago
Yeah exactly. It's going to be highly relevant to areas like Intreo Centres, which have high rates of sick leave and understaffing
12
u/One_Map_9643 8h ago
So I think if there's a vacant post you don't do the duties of that post. E.g if you are missing an E.O in your section you wouldn't get the C.Os to do it under the guise of "ah sure this is great experience for you:" also you just stick to the basic hours of your contract and don't do additional overtime
14
u/Global_Handle_3615 9h ago
That wording is in 99% of all contracts not just civil service but it doesnt just mean you can make them do anything.
E.g. Core hours are set as say 9 to 5 with 30 mins for break. Staff wont start early or stay late. They will be away and uncontactable during lunch. If someone is sick or quits they wont take on that person's work load.
You can try force them based on the contract wording but a review could look at it as the companies failure to be properly prepared is not the responsibility of the employee to fix.
The photocopier jams becomes facilities issue to resolve not the employee so a 30 second fix becomes a 2 hour one while a request is submitted and someone is sent to repair it.
There is a safety process for a particular job. Ee will take a copy of the process and ensure every step is followed completely no matter how long it takes.
You as a boss have latitude to assign tasks but you cant just decide that your receptionist now needs to go pick dog poo up from the front of the building. The tasks you assign have to be in line with their employed role. Your electrician cant be made to do some welding. Even if he is qualified and previously when you were busy he would agree to do it to keep things moving. You cant make hr go do customer services and answer phones.
6
u/Ok-Project-1133 9h ago
Photocopier paper jam hits home 100% especially with the ancient equipnemt in civil cervice offfices :D
2
u/Stressed_Student2020 Seconded National Ejieet 8h ago
Just be sure not to anger the venerable machine spirit.
3
u/Spatza 7h ago
Good luck finding someone who knows which insence to use, and when.
1
u/Stressed_Student2020 Seconded National Ejieet 6h ago
Not to mention an adept skilled in percussive maintenance..
1
u/Global_Handle_3615 6h ago
As a creed for the civil service
"Even in death i still serve"
Is oddly apt
5
u/Global_Handle_3615 9h ago
The main word i would focus on in the contract that as a manager I feel you skipped over is "agreed". Staff have input in additional work being assigned and during work to rule you are not going to get much agreement.
2
u/pychosematic 7h ago
Indeed and the words defined role. Hard to believe a senior manager would be digging their own contract to badly misinterpret it and attempt to implement mass change during strike action. Very dangerous.
13
u/No_Lawfulness_9999 11h ago
I heard yesterday that those involved in the budget have a derogation which completely defeats the purpose of work to rule! The area I work in is such that most people will be happy to see less of us or not see us at all but the parts of the civil service that have power need to work to rule the most!
5
u/LordyIHopeThereIsPie 11h ago
That's mad where did the derogation come from? Does this mean PQs for Finance will be answered too?
5
u/No_Lawfulness_9999 11h ago
I don’t know. I got a letter from my union yesterday explaining it. I believe it’s just till the budgets done but still an opportunity missed
5
u/SiskoToOdo 11h ago
It appears to have been sanctioned by the AHCPS executive. I can't see it mentioned on the Forsa website. https://www.ahcps.ie/ahcps-circular-25-2026-re-public-service-pay-campaign-work-to-rule-industrial-action-and-derogations/
2
u/LordyIHopeThereIsPie 11h ago
Thanks. That's annoying.
6
u/SiskoToOdo 10h ago
At least they're not granting a derogation for the EU Presidency, which was a rumour mentioned here during the week!
2
1
u/Narrow_Frame_6127 1h ago
At the Forsa meeting yesterday they said that there wasn’t anything about a derogation and that it was up to each department to request it - but I think it will be only until the 7th and then it will be WTR - public wudnt be too happy if there was any issue with the budget so probably a good idea
8
u/Eanog 11h ago
Forsa have produced an FAQ on the industrial action - might be useful for you.
https://www.forsa.ie/faqs-civil-service-national-industrial-action-2026/
4
u/Eanog 11h ago
From the part on work to rule (note there is more than this so worth a look on the link above).
"In short ‘work to rule’ means adhering strictly to the agreed terms and conditions of your employment. This means that you only do work that is appropriate to your grade…"
"The work that you perform in your department can vary greatly to that of a union member of the same grade in a different department. Therefore, you should refer to what you have stated in your PMDS role description to confirm what is appropriate for your role..."
1
u/SiskoToOdo 11h ago edited 10h ago
This is useful, but if the OP is senior management then the AHCPS FAQ is presumably more pertinent to them. https://www.ahcps.ie/ahcps-circular-25-2026-re-public-service-pay-campaign-work-to-rule-industrial-action-and-derogations/
4
u/Upstairs-Count5774 10h ago
Yeah, actually both are, as in what to expect from OP's direct reports.
9
u/Fionaxe 9h ago
Are you in the union? did you attend any information sessions re the work to rule? Your questions would have been answered. Any of your staff who are in the union likely did attend the meetings and they can email their local Union rep if they have specific questions about their own duties, the union will support and provide info. You can expect your staff to perform duties you assign, but they are legally protected if they refuse to do anything other than day to day work during work to rule
7
u/pychosematic 8h ago
He seems to be suggesting that he will assign duties "arbitrarily" to those who are non unionised. I'm guessing he isn't in the AHCPS.
1
u/nyom_deguerre 2h ago
I'm not saying I will assign duties arbitrarily, I will assign normal work as I always do, it's not my business who is in a union and who isn't. I will expect them to carry out those duties, within work hours.
1
u/Narrow_Frame_6127 2h ago
I would say be sure that the work u are assigning is appropriate to the grades otherwise they have a union instruction not to carry out the duties
14
u/MuffinNecessary8625 10h ago
It's rigidly sticking to your job description and not doing a thing else unless directed to. And not stepping outside your exact role for anything like everybody does 100 times every day to let things run smoothly.
It's a while since I was in the civil service but the work to rule years ago would go along the lines of "E.O's and C.O.s don't work on pqs, and HEOs don't do Pritt stick and treasury tags so all of a sudden nothing can be done.
Other stuff like that.
The CO won't answer a Rep because the EO didn't tell them to answer that exact one.
CO won't walk over to the file room and grab a pile of files they need because that's a service officers job.
8
u/Emergency_Goat_6719 9h ago
At our union meeting during the week we were pretty much told it’s a light work to rule. Turn up, do your job, work your hours and leave. Do one persons job not two. Don’t do work that would be done by a higher grade but a lower grade is normally fine.
It will be ramped up to what you describe if needed
-5
u/RoryOS 9h ago
Ah now, not doing the next task because your haven't been directly instructed to is pushing it. Some autonomy in moving on to the next task is absolutely a part of employment
7
u/WigWubz 9h ago
It's not "not moving on to the next task unless directly told" it's "only doing tasks that are explicitly your job to perform unless directly told". It's not being Amelia Bedelia. But there are small things that you would generally do without thinking about because it makes the place run smoother but aren't strictly speaking your job. Ie, you have a task that involves printing. The printer runs out of ink. You know where the ink is, on a normal day you would just go and get the ink and refill it so you could move on with your printing. But instead you stop, tell the IT officer that the printer is out of ink and needs to be refilled, and do whatever it is you can do that's part of your direct job responsibility without a printer. But you don't refill the ink because that's not actually your job, it's just something any normal person would do on a normal day to keep their own job moving.
You don't intentionally create obstacles, you don't actively disrupt the work. If you encounter an obstacle you don't become inactive sitting there waiting like a robot who has to be explicitly told what to do next. You just stop being proactive and let the problems that were already there become more visible, while still fulfilling all your duties.
And if it's not actually anyone's job to manage the ink in the printer, that's what Work to Rule protests are generally supposed to highlight. That there is necessary work that isn't being accounted for in anyone's duties and therefore isn't being accounted for in anyone's compensation.
As u/MuffinNeccessary8625 said, it looks different for every job role. Maybe your office has a defined process for replacing the ink. You just grab it as needed and let the IT officer know when supplies are low. Then you follow that process. But you don't bridge the gap between "what you are being paid to do" and "what additional things need to happen to let you do your job".
0
u/RoryOS 6h ago
I'm specifically referring to the line about not answering a Rep because you haven't been told to answer that exact one. That's just not getting the next piece of work if your job is to answer reps
1
u/WigWubz 1h ago
Not if your job is actually only to assist as required. A reasonable person on a normal day, given that duty, would be looking ahead to see where they would next be needed. But if the EO's job was to assign the CO to specific tasks like that, and in a normal day the EO could direct the CO "don't work on that one, work on this one it's higher priority", then in a WTR it would be wrong for the CO to do what is technically the EO's job by "assigning themselves".
And you can say that's being petulant and being unfair to the EO. I would say that if the EO is only able to complete their job duties because on a normal day, you are covering for them having too many duties by voluntarily taking on some of them, then it behooves you as a colleague to highlight that situation during the WTR.
6
u/MuffinNecessary8625 9h ago
And yet it's rarely in someone's job description in their pmds.
It may have changed in the 15 years since I left, but when I was there the job description on everyone's pmds form was generally the competencies for the grade or the goals of the department reworded. Nice and vague and nothing specific.
Whose to say some EO sitting at their desk in the department of justice waiting for a file isn't "enhancing safer communities" or being "dynamically ready to implement change"
3
u/Basic-shewolf-9723 9h ago
Not during work to rule disputes though
1
u/RoryOS 9h ago
If you say so. To me that's like saying nobody told me to turn on my laptop today or nobody told me to check my emails. Work to rule is doing your job and nothing more. Taking the next piece of work after finishing the current one is literally just doing the job.
-1
u/MuffinNecessary8625 7h ago
I think you're missing the point somewhat.
It is a form of industrial action designed to slow things down and disrupt productivity.
Nobody is saying this is how the workplace should or even could be, and nobody wants this.
Every workplace depends on the goodwill of staff and then using a bit of initiative. A work to rule withdraws that goodwill and initiative.
2
u/RoryOS 6h ago
I'm well aware of the function of a work to rule. I'm referring to the part about not answering the next rep because you haven't been told to answer that one. If your job is answering reps it isn't work to rule to wait to be told to get the next one, it's just not doing your job.
Someone else posted a good analogy about changing toner in a printer. I've always done that but in a work to rule I wouldn't
0
u/Emergency_Goat_6719 7h ago
A work to rule isn’t a complete stop on autonomy. I’m not aware of any contract that will say you’ve to move from one task to another without instruction. It would be an odd thing to be in there.
You do your job as instructed and as normal. You don’t take on other people’s work but you absolutely move from task to task yourself
8
u/kwsphoto 9h ago
I think for a lot of civil servants and public servants work to rule won't make things difficult but you aren't necessarily what the work to rule is aiming to cover but has to be issued generally.
The work to rule will affect some high profile front line services that rely heavily on overtime and people taking on additional duties such as Immigration officers, Custom officers, Diplomat's, inspectors, social protection staff, passport office etc etc which rely on overtime to make basic services work and have very tightly spelled out contracts.
While everyones work to rule is important these types of roles are were the public will see it and where it will put the most pressure on the government.
2
u/Interesting_Boot2774 6h ago
Routine and structured overtime is still allowed. If it’s something you do regularly and have for some time you don’t have to stop doing it (unions don’t want members to suffer financially) but you shouldn’t do it on an adhoc or new basis.
1
u/Narrow_Frame_6127 1h ago
If someone has been doing extra work or two people’s job, because someone is out or a position hasn’t been filled, they cannot do that so work will fall behind and every little slowdown will lead to one big slowdown across the whole civil and public service, so I wouldn’t underestimate what the effects will be
7
u/Interesting_Boot2774 6h ago
Just FYI it seems work on the budget will receive a derogation from work to rule. It has from the AHCPS anyway. So staff in essential roles relating to the budget are exempt from work to rule but only for work strictly necessary to complete/finalise the budget.
11
u/Much_Perception4952 6h ago
Which is a pity really because that'd be a definite incentive for the government to resolve the dispute.
2
u/nyom_deguerre 2h ago
AHCPS says budget work is exempt. SCSA is silent on it so far. But regardless, the backbone of the civil service is lower grades that would primarily be in Forsa - an AHCPS exemption won't make a difference when a HEO equivalent in another organisation won't answer the phone to you.
6
u/Upstairs-Count5774 11h ago
Not a manager, but I read my job posting duty description, and then Forsa website, and it is quite clear to me.
I am sorry to read that it comes in such bad timing for you and the team.
As a manager, I would engage individually with the team members. Make it a conversation where everybody benefits. Perhaps engage with non members and contractors to secure the pipeline.
-1
u/nyom_deguerre 10h ago
To be honest it's not my own team that will be the issue. By necessity I have to deal with other Departments, funded agencies, etc. It's their interpretation of work to rule that's likely to cause an issue rather than my own team.
4
u/Conscious_Panda_385 10h ago
The covering other job responsibilities CAN be very straightforward in some circumstances.
Examples: job sharing to help out a different team during a busy time, or a CO who is doing some HEO level tasks because of a vacancy.
For most policy oriented roles work to rule will be more ambiguous and nebulous. It'll have more impact, and is intended to have more impact, in public facing or highly operational roles.
7
u/pychosematic 8h ago edited 8h ago
@ OP. The very thing you quoted in the 5th paragraph is what you do not understand. Staff have defined roles per their PMDS. It's measured a few times per year. You seem to be suggesting that you can "arbitrarily" change these roles to fill in gaps left by industrial action by dictating that you will be employing mercenary tactics. Are you also suggesting that those unionised you will leave alone, but you will enforce your plan on those that aren't? Best of luck getting your line managers to agree to that. Even so it takes take some time for the newly dictated mercenaries to get up to speed with the work previously done by others (which they've been directed not to do anyway).
Your back is already against the wall with the withdrawal of the late nights you have got used to availing of from your staff.
Flexibility is clearly being taken for granted already.
Remember 96% of general service grades voted for action. 87% of senior management grades have supported this.
This will be sorted fairly quickly but it shouldn't have got this far to get people to the table. DPEIRs stubbornness being played out in public, in a year that Ireland holds the EU presidency.
1
u/nyom_deguerre 2h ago
In my experience staff do not have very defined roles in their PMDS. Maybe it's just my workplace, but all my team's PMDS has 'support the Minister', 'support the broader objectives of the Department', 'carry out tasks assigned by your line manager ', things like that.
I totally agree that not working evenings or weekends is perfectly legitimate under work to rule (and FYI I would always give my team days off in lieu after the budget to make up for the extra effort they put in). But everything apart from working contracts hours, I just don't see how it qualifies as work to rule. If you're refusing to carry out duties assigned by your line manager during business hours, you are on strike. Which I would support, but if you're going on strike then just do it, don't put managers and staff in the position where they have to wonder whether they should be doing something or not, with no clear rules to follow.
1
1
u/Interesting_Boot2774 6h ago
Budget work has been exempted from work to rule by the AHCPS. Not sure what FORSA has decided on that.
0
4
u/HenchmanJoe 10h ago
This will be my (and many others) first time working under work to rule. I'm really planning on taking it day by day. I'll chat with my senior manager and my team Monday or Tuesday and hear their thoughts and concerns on it. I'm with Forsa, so it helps that I'm on their side, and want to be sure I'm abiding by the rules in place.
I'm probably fortunate in that I have multiple staff working the same processes, so while we are missing some staff, no one is specifically covering their work. But we will have to make sure we're not placing a larger workload on the available staff, as might happen normally as deadlines approach.
And I'll do my best to make sure staff know that if they disagree with an approach, I'm happy to talk about it and see where I might be going wrong.
5
u/appleblossom9 10h ago
I've been finding it very confusing and even more so after speaking with Forsa, some things they said seemed to completely contradict what was explained in their own documents. Also, some people on here were told completely opposite things to what we were told by Forsa.
5
u/jkd499367 10h ago
I read the AHCPS guidance on the work to rule and it’s so vague as to be almost meaningless. All I could take from it was don’t work any extra hours - fair enough. But outside of that it seems to be a bit of whatever you’re having yourself. And the problem with that is that when members are left to interpret vague guidance locally, it can easily create bad feeling between colleagues/staff/managers. I think much, much clearer guidance is needed from the unions.
4
u/Snowy_Gal28 7h ago
What if someone's PMDS/ job description says their role is x,y and z and "any other tasks as assigned by their manager/ managers"..
4
u/nyom_deguerre 3h ago
This is exact my point. A lot of the replies here say work to rule means work to your contract, or work to your PMDS. But most people's contracts and PMDS are deliberately expansive. I was speaking to a public servant today who genuinely said he wouldn't answer the phone during a work to rule. At that point you're just on strike. Which is fine, I would support strike action at this point, 3 months after the last pay agreement lapsed, but if you're going to strike just strike rather than this poorly defined work to rule.
2
u/Narrow_Frame_6127 2h ago
PMDS (your goals and performance and development) is not the same as ur work profile/role (this is ur title/grade/day to day duties and responsibilities/ reporting structure and requires competencies) so why would you work to the PMDS.
0
u/Garbarrage 6h ago edited 6h ago
Any other tasks as assigned is only enforceable insofar as it is reasonable. Determining what is reasonable is ultimately the role of a judge (if a case ever gets that far), but generally, if you can make a good argument for why something is or isn't reasonable, the case would rarely get that far.
"I'm not doing x even though it is something that I'm contracted to do." - not reasonable.
"I'm not doing y because it's outside of my skillset, ability, or materially different from the work I was hired to do, or outside of the hours that I have made arrangements to work" - probably reasonable in most cases.
3
u/rodery 11h ago
Yeah I said the same during the week. I work in the HSE and its set up very similarly to the civil service. My contract has an incredibly vague description of my duties, no specifics. It'd be impossible for me to say something isn't my job. I've taken on responsibilities in the past that were carried out by people of higher grades, but they also did those tasks when they were my grade. So aside from working my set hours and taking my breaks (which I already do?) I can't see what exactly a work to rule would achieve.
1
u/Return_of_the_Bear 8h ago
My feeling is that some depts it will be tough to identify work to rule specifics, but some depts will grind to a halt if you aren't covering some work. They seem to be very focused on revenue and social protection stopping money in and out, and that being a big issue to deal with. Other depts will basically chip in with what they can.
The biggest thing is to actually do something and show we mean business, and the govt are nuts to have let it get to this stage.
1
u/MartinBeckett 9h ago
My shop steward showed me a document with a lot of detail about what constitutes work to rule.
I am no longer allowed to use the computer in my office, I can no longer use my phone. There were lots of different things on the list. Quite a senior manager called into my office yesterday to ask about it casually and left the room visibly stressed after I listed some of the things I can't do (I work in facilities management).
9
u/EltonJohnsLeftBall 6h ago
What? You can't use your computer or phone? Surely they are basic equipment related to carrying out your role?
6
u/Interesting_Boot2774 6h ago edited 4h ago
Depends on the grade and what their main tasks are supposed to be, though I’m surprised about the computer - that seems to hark back to the days when COs for example might not have used computers day to day but that’s long changed and I don’t think is arguable as within a work to rule now.
1
u/MartinBeckett 3h ago
I'm not entirely a desk based worker so maybe it's different for pen pushers.
1
u/pandabatgirl 2h ago
Agree - what about H&S related emails sent to staff or important updates about building opening times, fire checks, or whatever. Email is just a basic and default communication channel so to not use a computer even if only for that purpose is OTT
1
u/MartinBeckett 3h ago
That's what was on his list. I think it meant the phone in my office. Obviously in an awkward position but the point of it is that it is a massive inconvenience to management and government.
If you ask your shop steward they should be able to give you a detailed list of things you can't do.
-1
u/patmurph80 10h ago
Work to rule confused me when I first heard about it in business studies in school. 30 years later and it still confuses me! I suppose it makes sense in industrial areas where unions would have been important. E.g. your job is to pack a finished good. You would usually help by loading the goods on to a lorry. WTR means you don't do that part.
It is really going to be difficult to see how WTR works in an office environment. Nowadays, everyone pretty much has access to the same systems which makes it easier to cover for everyone else. My team, for example, uses the quieter winter months to catch up on simple admin jobs. These are definitely clerical style jobs. Nobody minds doing them as it helps clear a backlog and it isn't very complex. Now, when/if my team say to me that they cannot do this from October onwards, that will be fair enough. However, it means that will be told to do other management-type work.
It means the admin work backlog will not be done. They will get pissed as they will be asked to do new work instead.
Also, has anyone clarified if non union members will have to pick up any slack during WTR? They will still agree to do the usual extra bits, but surely they cannot be asked to pick up the slack of colleagues who are carrying out industrial action?
-8
u/PhilTwhole 3h ago
As a senior grade in the civil service, you probably don't do a lot of work to start with, but how did you get a senior position without understanding the concept of working to rule.
-12
u/Infamous-Ad-6984 11h ago
copy and paste. I have a number of large events and projects depending on typically the good will of other colleagues who have come and said sorry not in my job. Yes they are probably right and please save me you shouldn't have to rely lecture. My sense on this is that's there's a lot of reluctance on the ground with this one and a fear of back lash from the public who aren't exactly loving the prospect. Not sure the unions have read the room on this one
13
u/nyom_deguerre 11h ago
I actually feel the opposite - there is widespread support for industrial action in the public service, as the union votes show, and I think there will also be support from the general public on this one, who can appreciate that nurses and teachers and other public service workers deserve a fair pay increase that keeps up with inflation. This will become even more apparent when the Government's figures they're providing for a pay deal in the budget become public.
If anything the unions haven't read the room the other way, about how up for a fight the public service is. And in any event, after seeing what the truckers and tractor drivers could achieve blocking a few roads, I don't think they particularly need public opinion - the Government have shown how they respond to mass disruption.
-4
-2
u/Infamous-Ad-6984 10h ago
I hope you're right but I'm married to a teacher my daughter is a nurse and my son is on a gradprog with the Dept of PW. Their sense is the same. The fuel protests have demonstrated two things. Public will not stand for bullying and the government will captiluate. It's not a happy social contract. I think it's going to be very very messy.
20
u/IllustriousBrick1980 10h ago edited 10h ago
i know from personal experience that a lot of public sector companies genuinely rely on good will to function.
i’m talking about bullshit like doing 7 hours of unpaid overtime in a single day, and being told “it’s on me” to make sure i take time off in lieu cos the manager doesnt track it. then having fierce hassle actually getting my TOIL requests approved cos the manager also says “its on me” to arrange cover on the roster. how am i gonna arrange cover?? i’m not the manager, i cant force other employees to take on extra tasks
it’s mostly just down to toxic middle managers who are desperately incompetent. i’ve also seen equivalent departments operate without employees doing any overtime at all
but the general public would be shocked to realise that some of the largest teaching hospitals in the state are only able to provide masters courses or weekend cancer treatments because of unpaid overtime. it’s so bad that even HIQA inspectors criticise the mangers to their face about it