IOM Covid removing restrictions

[Apple]

1 hour ago, P.K. said:

A massive difference between the private and public sector is that in the private sector you are paid to take risks.

In the public sector, despite being paid more than your private sector counterpart, you NEVER take a risk in case it reflects badly on your political masters and damages their chances of re-election with resultant Career Limitation Move implications for yourself.

What's best for the electorate is, of course, an irrelevance...

To some extent this is true but when people's lives and / or well being are at stake potentially then risk assessment and management is a whole new ball game. It's not just for political reasons either - get it wrong and you could blow your whole career if you don't take all the circumstances into account. Seen it happen too often.

Been there, done that. 

 

[Gladys]

1 hour ago, Apple said:

To some extent this is true but when people's lives and / or well being are at stake potentially then risk assessment and management is a whole new ball game. It's not just for political reasons either - get it wrong and you could blow your whole career if you don't take all the circumstances into account. Seen it happen too often.

Been there, done that. 

 

To be honest, public sector is not about taking risk commercially, that is not what they do and nor should they.  That is why dealing with them just seems hard slog.  However, what they should do is risk assess, taking all factors into account, not just the ones that have political currency, and take advice. 

In any risk assessment you need to have a clear objective.  In the private sector it is maximising shareholder returns whilst minimising the vulnerability of that return, through managing commercial, legal, reputational, and socio-economic risk which attends the profit-making activity.  

In the public sector, those objectives are not the same.  They should be more protectionist (public purse, economy, national security, society, health etc) rather than speculative.  Nor are the risks to return quite the same, because unlike the private sector, 'success' cannot be measured purely financially.  

So, the upshot is that comparing public sector performance by private sector measures is unrealistic.  That doesn't mean that there are no common measures, like financial prudence, but the motivation is and should be very different. 

[Cambon]

6 minutes ago, Gladys said:

To be honest, public sector is not about taking risk commercially, that is not what they do and nor should they.  That is why dealing with them just seems hard slog.  However, what they should do is risk assess, taking all factors into account, not just the ones that have political currency, and take advice. 

In any risk assessment you need to have a clear objective.  In the private sector it is maximising shareholder returns whilst minimising the vulnerability of that return, through managing commercial, legal, reputational, and socio-economic risk which attends the profit-making activity.  

In the public sector, those objectives are not the same.  They should be more protectionist (public purse, economy, national security, society, health etc) rather than speculative.  Nor are the risks to return quite the same, because unlike the private sector, 'success' cannot be measured purely financially.  

So, the upshot is that comparing public sector performance by private sector measures is unrealistic.  That doesn't mean that there are no common measures, like financial prudence, but the motivation is and should be very different. 

Spot on, Gladys! 

[Meoir Shee]

3 hours ago, P.K. said:

A massive difference between the private and public sector is that in the private sector you are paid to take risks.

In the public sector, despite being paid more than your private sector counterpart, you NEVER take a risk in case it reflects badly on your political masters and damages their chances of re-election with resultant Career Limitation Move implications for yourself.

What's best for the electorate is, of course, an irrelevance...

Just to clarify, could you please suggest what proportion of private sector employees regularly take ‘risks’, that is exposing themselves to danger as opposed to exposing shareholders to financial loss.

Could you also suggest why the following, predominantly public sector jobs, in your own words, NEVER take a risk:

Fire Officers

Police Officers

Prison Officers

Paramedics

Bomb Disposal Officers

Surgeons

Coastguards

 

 

[finlo]

12 minutes ago, Meoir Shee said:

Just to clarify, could you please suggest what proportion of private sector employees regularly take ‘risks’, that is exposing themselves to danger as opposed to exposing shareholders to financial loss.

Could you also suggest why the following, predominantly public sector jobs, in your own words, NEVER take a risk:

Fire Officers

Police Officers

Prison Officers

Paramedics

Bomb Disposal Officers

Surgeons

Coastguards

 

 

I think Gladys was referring to pen pushers.

[Gladys]

2 minutes ago, finlo said:

I think Gladys was referring to pen pushers.

No, to be fair, the list Meoir Shee gives is entirely consistent with the protectionist objective of governments.  I wasn't just referring to pen pushers, but what the wider objective and, lets face it, the only  role of government should be.  

The problem is when protection of one bit of society is at the cost of others. That is where a proper risk assessment is needed which balances the cost of protecting one part when it  has a deleterious effect on others.  That is not a commercial thought process which is why I disagree with people comparing public sector with private sector.  Sure there are comparable measures, but they do not have comparable imperatives. 

[finlo]

1 hour ago, Gladys said:

No, to be fair, the list Meoir Shee gives is entirely consistent with the protectionist objective of governments.  I wasn't just referring to pen pushers, but what the wider objective and, lets face it, the only  role of government should be.  

The problem is when protection of one bit of society is at the cost of others. That is where a proper risk assessment is needed which balances the cost of protecting one part when it  has a deleterious effect on others.  That is not a commercial thought process which is why I disagree with people comparing public sector with private sector.  Sure there are comparable measures, but they do not have comparable imperatives. 

Actually upon reflection crossing the road poses more danger than those profession's do over here on a daily basis.

[Gladys]

3 minutes ago, finlo said:

Actually upon reflection crossing the road poses more danger than those profession's do over here on a daily basis.

Risk does not necessarily mean exposure to physical danger. 

[finlo]

6 minutes ago, Gladys said:

Risk does not necessarily mean exposure to physical danger. 

Meori shee quoted exposing themselves to danger in his/her post.

Edited April 10, 2021 by finlo

[Nomadic Raptor]

Oh Howard....should be safe, does not mean will be safe when it comes to air bridges, it has this will go wrong written all over it unfortunately ......   concentrate on getting us out of our homes first and normality, and achieving some sort of normality....wasn’t it him that talked about baby steps 😂

[Banker]

16 minutes ago, Nomadic Raptor said:

Oh Howard....should be safe, does not mean will be safe when it comes to air bridges, it has this will go wrong written all over it unfortunately ......   concentrate on getting us out of our homes first and normality, and achieving some sort of normality....wasn’t it him that talked about baby steps 😂

As I stated previously if air bridge is reinstated we will either have to have similar border policies or accept the great Manx public mixing with UK & Jersey visitors who may have done zero isolation depending on which region they traveled from.

https://www.manxradio.com/news/isle-of-man-news/chief-minister-hopeful-for-guernsey-air-bridge-restart/?fbclid=IwAR2dGS8G-wcjlWwqMPUve_-3ALg6k3V4ZEhhcqP9tYyj_mr5N3qccplIR3s

[Nomadic Raptor]

So he might as well just let us out if we are going to be mixing with other people any way 

[Nomadic Raptor]

This extra week is just pointless...one of the lines they have given is to allow teachers to prepare...what have they been doing for the last six weeks? And don’t say teaching because that is simply not true....my boys have video calls every other day at a time that suits the teacher otherwise it gets in the way of their day and no teaching takes place in these calls......last week of term the home schooling was read a chapter a day of a book.......

 

schools have already said in reality they can’t social distance so what are they preparing for....

[Derek Flint]

10 hours ago, Meoir Shee said:

Just to clarify, could you please suggest what proportion of private sector employees regularly take ‘risks’, that is exposing themselves to danger as opposed to exposing shareholders to financial loss.

Could you also suggest why the following, predominantly public sector jobs, in your own words, NEVER take a risk:

Fire Officers

Police Officers

Prison Officers

Paramedics

Bomb Disposal Officers

Surgeons

Coastguards

 

 

That is just wrong. 

Police officers do take risks insofar as they manage them - some quite substantial. It’s Just some are more comfortable with the process, accountability and responsibility than others.

this underpins;

https://www.app.college.police.uk/app-content/risk-2/risk/

[John Wright]

11 minutes ago, Banker said:

As I stated previously if air bridge is reinstated we will either have to have similar border policies or accept the great Manx public mixing with UK & Jersey visitors who may have done zero isolation depending on which region they traveled from.

https://www.manxradio.com/news/isle-of-man-news/chief-minister-hopeful-for-guernsey-air-bridge-restart/?fbclid=IwAR2dGS8G-wcjlWwqMPUve_-3ALg6k3V4ZEhhcqP9tYyj_mr5N3qccplIR3s

That will depend on the questions asked on the exemption form application. Last time. I think Guernsey arrivals had to declare they hadn’t been off Guernsey in the 14 days  prior to arrival here. Expect the same, but with 21 substituted for 14.