HSE CEO Bernard Gloster says disciplinary procedures for public servants are too slow, legally fragile and can last years, calling for a single statutory accountability system across the public sector. He revealed 38 HSE staff were dismissed since 2020, with 17 cases overturned on appeal due to flawed processes. Gloster argues reforms are needed to ensure fair, timely accountability, particularly in cases of serious failure of duty. The overturn rate is frightening especially considering they could be front line staff
Fit-Software892 on
Arrogant, untouchable, incompetent and contempt shown towards the public and the law. They should be easily fired for wrongdoing
sureyouknowurself on
No shit.
Kul_Chee on
Best of luck with that.
TheBaggyDapper on
I hope this inspires a potential conversation about a comprehensive review into current practices followed by a full report circulated as framework to inform a roundtable discussion that can generate a detailed set of proposals for review.
Masamune_ff7 on
I’m sure someone will get right on it.
pgasmaddict on
He is absolutely right, but he has no chance of implementing it while the unions have so much power.
lumpymonkey on
I previously worked in the public sector and have many family members working in it, particularly the HSE. In my own experience I had some great colleagues and some not so great ones as you would get in any workplace, public or private. But then there were some that were lazy and/or incompetent to a level that would be sackable in the private sector and they were never pulled up on it. They just got moved between departments because management didn’t want to actually deal with it.
But that is nothing in comparison to what I’ve heard about the HSE from my family. Everything from barely functional alcoholics often under the influence at work while caring for patients, to blatant racism between colleagues, right the way up to management corruption regarding agency staff. Not a single one of these people have been held accountable in any way for the things they do and I can imagine this is just the tip of the iceberg if I’m hearing these first hand from other people.
killianm97 on
The first person who should be sacked is the CEO of the HSE. CEOs in many organisations are great at distracting from failures by shifting blame downwards to the workers with the least influence, when in reality accountability should really flow up the chain – as they say, the buck stops with him.
Our health service is pretty uniquely shit considering how much money we pump into it, and imo a major reason is the lack of democratic accountability – the heads of most health services across Europe are accountable elected representatives – the Minister for Health. Instead, we have an unaccountable and out-of-touch bureaucrat.
Nervous-Energy-4623 on
Okay start with upper management who actually do have power, if you really want change for the better.
If this is about the bullying in the HSE (paywalled article) then I agree get rid of them immediately, that’s the main thing there should be zero tolerance for.
Final_Tradition_3439 on
How brave of him, to wait until he’s leaving to bring this up.
God forbid he actually tackled the problem during his tenure
alangcarter on
Ah we can call it Enoch’s Law.
Jamnusor on
Who’s this maverick?
Complex_Spare_7278 on
They should do the same for tulsa
sweetsuffrinjasus on
Never a truer statement spoken and I am glad he had the honesty to say it, and the discipline not to make it public while he was in the role.
_LightEmittingDiode_ on
A HSE suit who *actually* wants to enact reform?…
jools4you on
Civil servants have to come up with the process, it will apply to all civil servants not just HSE. So it will never happen because it’s not in their interests. That said there are numerous good workers who leave because of the toxic culture of bad workers. Something has to change other than giving them early retirement with golden handshakes
IntentionFalse8822 on
It isnt just sacking for misconduct. The amount of excess admin staff in the HSE that are utterly useless but cant be gotten rid of is shocking. My wife’s sister works for the HSE. I swear we have no idea what she does. The only thing she says she does might take a couple of hours a week. I won’t go into details in case she could be identified but in essence it is filling out forms for a small number of people. I have filled out one of those forms in another setting for myself and they take maybe 30 minutes. Plus the number of people she deals with that would need the form is small. So she cant be doing more than a couple of them a week taking no more than a couple of hours a week. So what does she do for the rest of the week? Even my wife says she has no idea because her sister is basically useless having been spoiled all her life as the youngest in the family. But she was lucky enough to get a permanent job in the HSE and is therefore untouchable and is given a couple of hours work a week and ignored for the rest of the time. We need to clear out the dead weight throughout the HSE.
AdamOfIzalith on
Anyone in the HSE knows what they do to people who should be sacked: they make tangential roles for them and create departments to beach their careers and climbing aspirations. There needs to be a way of firing those people in administrative roles with power. Unfortunately, someone like Gloster won’t do that because from all I can tell, he’s just content to blame everyone else despite the fact he’s head of the HSE. This is the same man who said when hospitals were struggling that some ground level staff aren’t working hard enough.
11Kram on
I had some experience of this in 30 years in the HSE. Looking back I consider that helping to get rid of a couple of malignant incompetents was some of the most difficult -yet rewarding- tasks I did, and I was not in management, but clinical. Most cases fail because individual HSE managers do not follow standard HR procedures and they deliberately do not keep adequate records. They also expect people involved to make allegations in writing for every incompetent act they witness. These then have to be shared with the incompetent person and the source is usually immediately obvious to that person. The department involved then becomes toxic and dysfunctional. The process of getting enough complaints in writing therefore takes years. To get rid of someone the reality is that a large number of serious complaints is required rather than a single extremely serious one. The easiest thing for lazy managers is to suspend the individual and then take years to investigate and review the problem, while the individual is on full pay and their role requires a replacement.
Willing-Departure115 on
So what will happen here inside the public service: people will nod and genuinely agree that the useless eejits in their midsts should be tossed out. But they will hesitate and get the unions to crimp any real reform, lest it ever caused risk to them. The system that tolerates complete eejits won’t ever touch a decently competent person who also doesn’t want to be pushed.
In my time in the service I saw a lot of really competent people give out about the wastes of space, but almost always comment that at least we’re all covered by the same system.
Longjumping-Rent3396 on
It is difficult to read the exit interview of the outgoing head of the health service without being struck by how disconnected it feels from the reality of the organisation he led. The piece reads less like a reflection on public service and more like a self justifying account, preoccupied with control, discipline, and legal process, while the people the system exists to serve barely register.
What stands out most is the performative nature of the outrage expressed. There is no shortage of regret for failures that occurred before the tenure began, accompanied by carefully worded apologies at a safe historical distance. Yet there is little acknowledgment of the unresolved problems, structural weaknesses, and daily pressures that persisted throughout this period of leadership. The concern appears selective, and the accountability conveniently time limited.
Responsibility is consistently framed downwards. Individuals are scrutinised and managed, while systemic shortcomings are treated as background noise rather than issues requiring decisive ownership from the top. Leadership is presented as adherence to process rather than engagement with outcomes, as though governance itself were the goal rather than a means to improve how the service actually functions.
The deferential tone towards political leadership is also hard to ignore. Rather than acting as an independent steward of a complex public service, the interview suggests a preference for alignment and reassurance. Candour, challenge, and advocacy are noticeably absent.
With no doubt, presumably for many within the system, this interview confirms long held doubts. The indignation feels rehearsed, the legacy thin, and the gap between rhetoric and reality wide. If this marks the end of this period of leadership, few will mourn its passing. The sooner it is left behind, the better for a service in need of honesty, responsibility, and genuine leadership.
miju-irl on
Ironic the CEO of the HSE who oversees mind numbing levels of dysfunction, waste and mismanagement cannot see he would be first on the chopping block (and rightly so).
Fundamental flaw is that if a civil servant can be sacked then they will never make a decision for fear of being sacked. We already have plenty of that inertia at political level.
Also if they are going to introduce private sector conditions they will want to make it with private sector pay (which is equally not going to happen).
Fern_Pub_Radio on
Protecting incompetent lazy or unfit workers
In the Public Sector – isn’t that what the Trade Unions are for?
24 Comments
HSE CEO Bernard Gloster says disciplinary procedures for public servants are too slow, legally fragile and can last years, calling for a single statutory accountability system across the public sector. He revealed 38 HSE staff were dismissed since 2020, with 17 cases overturned on appeal due to flawed processes. Gloster argues reforms are needed to ensure fair, timely accountability, particularly in cases of serious failure of duty. The overturn rate is frightening especially considering they could be front line staff
Arrogant, untouchable, incompetent and contempt shown towards the public and the law. They should be easily fired for wrongdoing
No shit.
Best of luck with that.
I hope this inspires a potential conversation about a comprehensive review into current practices followed by a full report circulated as framework to inform a roundtable discussion that can generate a detailed set of proposals for review.
I’m sure someone will get right on it.
He is absolutely right, but he has no chance of implementing it while the unions have so much power.
I previously worked in the public sector and have many family members working in it, particularly the HSE. In my own experience I had some great colleagues and some not so great ones as you would get in any workplace, public or private. But then there were some that were lazy and/or incompetent to a level that would be sackable in the private sector and they were never pulled up on it. They just got moved between departments because management didn’t want to actually deal with it.
But that is nothing in comparison to what I’ve heard about the HSE from my family. Everything from barely functional alcoholics often under the influence at work while caring for patients, to blatant racism between colleagues, right the way up to management corruption regarding agency staff. Not a single one of these people have been held accountable in any way for the things they do and I can imagine this is just the tip of the iceberg if I’m hearing these first hand from other people.
The first person who should be sacked is the CEO of the HSE. CEOs in many organisations are great at distracting from failures by shifting blame downwards to the workers with the least influence, when in reality accountability should really flow up the chain – as they say, the buck stops with him.
Our health service is pretty uniquely shit considering how much money we pump into it, and imo a major reason is the lack of democratic accountability – the heads of most health services across Europe are accountable elected representatives – the Minister for Health. Instead, we have an unaccountable and out-of-touch bureaucrat.
Okay start with upper management who actually do have power, if you really want change for the better.
If this is about the bullying in the HSE (paywalled article) then I agree get rid of them immediately, that’s the main thing there should be zero tolerance for.
How brave of him, to wait until he’s leaving to bring this up.
God forbid he actually tackled the problem during his tenure
Ah we can call it Enoch’s Law.
Who’s this maverick?
They should do the same for tulsa
Never a truer statement spoken and I am glad he had the honesty to say it, and the discipline not to make it public while he was in the role.
A HSE suit who *actually* wants to enact reform?…
Civil servants have to come up with the process, it will apply to all civil servants not just HSE. So it will never happen because it’s not in their interests. That said there are numerous good workers who leave because of the toxic culture of bad workers. Something has to change other than giving them early retirement with golden handshakes
It isnt just sacking for misconduct. The amount of excess admin staff in the HSE that are utterly useless but cant be gotten rid of is shocking. My wife’s sister works for the HSE. I swear we have no idea what she does. The only thing she says she does might take a couple of hours a week. I won’t go into details in case she could be identified but in essence it is filling out forms for a small number of people. I have filled out one of those forms in another setting for myself and they take maybe 30 minutes. Plus the number of people she deals with that would need the form is small. So she cant be doing more than a couple of them a week taking no more than a couple of hours a week. So what does she do for the rest of the week? Even my wife says she has no idea because her sister is basically useless having been spoiled all her life as the youngest in the family. But she was lucky enough to get a permanent job in the HSE and is therefore untouchable and is given a couple of hours work a week and ignored for the rest of the time. We need to clear out the dead weight throughout the HSE.
Anyone in the HSE knows what they do to people who should be sacked: they make tangential roles for them and create departments to beach their careers and climbing aspirations. There needs to be a way of firing those people in administrative roles with power. Unfortunately, someone like Gloster won’t do that because from all I can tell, he’s just content to blame everyone else despite the fact he’s head of the HSE. This is the same man who said when hospitals were struggling that some ground level staff aren’t working hard enough.
I had some experience of this in 30 years in the HSE. Looking back I consider that helping to get rid of a couple of malignant incompetents was some of the most difficult -yet rewarding- tasks I did, and I was not in management, but clinical. Most cases fail because individual HSE managers do not follow standard HR procedures and they deliberately do not keep adequate records. They also expect people involved to make allegations in writing for every incompetent act they witness. These then have to be shared with the incompetent person and the source is usually immediately obvious to that person. The department involved then becomes toxic and dysfunctional. The process of getting enough complaints in writing therefore takes years. To get rid of someone the reality is that a large number of serious complaints is required rather than a single extremely serious one. The easiest thing for lazy managers is to suspend the individual and then take years to investigate and review the problem, while the individual is on full pay and their role requires a replacement.
So what will happen here inside the public service: people will nod and genuinely agree that the useless eejits in their midsts should be tossed out. But they will hesitate and get the unions to crimp any real reform, lest it ever caused risk to them. The system that tolerates complete eejits won’t ever touch a decently competent person who also doesn’t want to be pushed.
In my time in the service I saw a lot of really competent people give out about the wastes of space, but almost always comment that at least we’re all covered by the same system.
It is difficult to read the exit interview of the outgoing head of the health service without being struck by how disconnected it feels from the reality of the organisation he led. The piece reads less like a reflection on public service and more like a self justifying account, preoccupied with control, discipline, and legal process, while the people the system exists to serve barely register.
What stands out most is the performative nature of the outrage expressed. There is no shortage of regret for failures that occurred before the tenure began, accompanied by carefully worded apologies at a safe historical distance. Yet there is little acknowledgment of the unresolved problems, structural weaknesses, and daily pressures that persisted throughout this period of leadership. The concern appears selective, and the accountability conveniently time limited.
Responsibility is consistently framed downwards. Individuals are scrutinised and managed, while systemic shortcomings are treated as background noise rather than issues requiring decisive ownership from the top. Leadership is presented as adherence to process rather than engagement with outcomes, as though governance itself were the goal rather than a means to improve how the service actually functions.
The deferential tone towards political leadership is also hard to ignore. Rather than acting as an independent steward of a complex public service, the interview suggests a preference for alignment and reassurance. Candour, challenge, and advocacy are noticeably absent.
With no doubt, presumably for many within the system, this interview confirms long held doubts. The indignation feels rehearsed, the legacy thin, and the gap between rhetoric and reality wide. If this marks the end of this period of leadership, few will mourn its passing. The sooner it is left behind, the better for a service in need of honesty, responsibility, and genuine leadership.
Ironic the CEO of the HSE who oversees mind numbing levels of dysfunction, waste and mismanagement cannot see he would be first on the chopping block (and rightly so).
Fundamental flaw is that if a civil servant can be sacked then they will never make a decision for fear of being sacked. We already have plenty of that inertia at political level.
Also if they are going to introduce private sector conditions they will want to make it with private sector pay (which is equally not going to happen).
Protecting incompetent lazy or unfit workers
In the Public Sector – isn’t that what the Trade Unions are for?