Computer blunders cost 26 BILLION pounds

Graham_Devon

chucky wrote: »

go and find out how much it costs to employ an IT professional on the job market.
either the public sector pays the market rate or the public sector gets sub-standard employees.

before you went off on your rant - do you even know what the IT role was, software or hardware?
did you stop to think if it was network related or was it a software engineering job?
you don't really know what you're talking about do you?
you've just seen £650 per day and got all giddy and excited. :eek:

£169,000 a year for an "IT Professional" does seem a little on the unbelievable side.

He'd have to be a bit more than a simple Professional. Head of company or something.

chucky

Graham_Devon wrote: »

£169,000 a year for an "IT Professional" does seem a little on the unbelievable side.

i'm not justifying it's rights and wrongs - it is a lot of money but it's the market rate.
if the public sector wants an employee with a specific skill set they have to pay market rate.

it's not head of company at all - here's a quick search of what's out there at the moment
http://www.jobserve.com/JobListing.aspx?shid=13A82A742B9D5EBA94
a lot of them are finance but there are non-finance roles there that just technical.

i was talking London here as well - no idea outside of London.
his project did take him out of London at times but the majority of time it was London based.

and your £169k is less as there would be holidays and sick days to take off - my contractor year is based on 47/48 weeks, it depends on how greedy i am

Andy_L

carolt wrote: »

Do you imagine there are no people in the public sector who work in IT?

There are, but they will be doing thier day job & so aren't avaliable to develop brand new systems

The_White_Horse

i have a friend who is charging the govt 750 a day, for what he describes as "moving a few computers around". he has been on this rate for about 4 years, and it doesn't look like stopping.

He is just glad the public sector are useless and don't realise that they are wasting money hand over foot on people like him.

I reckon a good 60% of IT contractors work for the Govt in some way. If the Govt set a rate of GBP100 a day, most would have to take it or leave it. There are not that many private sector roles on such high rates.

I like to lump contractors and private companies that only deal with the public sector in with all the other public sector scum.

bendix

My firm charges £650 an hour to both public and private sector organisations alike. !!!!!! £650 a day.

The difference, of course, is that the management of private sector companies are far more stringent in the way they use us because - guess what - it's their money they are spending.

The management of public sector organisations by contrast are peopled by idiots who - because they have no ownership of the project or financial stake in the project - manage it completely inefficiently. It's not their money they're spending after all.

avantra

The_White_Horse wrote: »

i have a friend who is charging the govt 750 a day, for what he describes as "moving a few computers around". he has been on this rate for about 4 years, and it doesn't look like stopping.

He is just glad the public sector are useless and don't realise that they are wasting money hand over foot on people like him.

I reckon a good 60% of IT contractors work for the Govt in some way. If the Govt set a rate of GBP100 a day, most would have to take it or leave it. There are not that many private sector roles on such high rates.

I like to lump contractors and private companies that only deal with the public sector in with all the other public sector scum.

I can't agree more, nail, head , hummer etc' :T

I contracted to the NHS for a while (ok pay, £120/day minor IT support contract) and the amount of ££ going to some of the contractors is shameful to put it lightly.
There is so many inflated titles and people hanging around drinking coffee you would think sometime how come they manage to do anything in a day work?

I had first hand experience of loads and loads of projects that starts with a big trumpeting 'blue sky' thinking , dies slowly when the big outsourcing firms (which are contractors after all) run the planning and implementation like a giant octopus that has no idea what each tenticles do while the clients needs and fast pace technology pass them by.

I think in many cases the paper versions were simpler to manage and yes, cheaper, litigation wasn't a problem and security was a bit.. well secure.

Now days an ERP consultant can charge 200k per year to tell the client how and why. I don't know how to spell it to the gov

NOT EVERYTHING CAN BE SORTED BY TECHNOLOGY.

And all in the name of cutting down response time, while we bankrupt ourself in the proccess. :eek:

Old_Slaphead

Presumably the contractors also have a vested interest in dragging the jobs out as long as possible.

This dreadful Government has an aweful lot to answer for - can they do anything efficiently?

moggylover

chucky wrote: »

go and find out how much it costs to employ an IT professional on the job market.
either the public sector pays the market rate or the public sector gets sub-standard employees.

yes it's a lot of money but before you went off on your rant - do you even know what the IT role was, software or hardware?
did you stop to think if it was network related or was it a software engineering job?
you don't really know what you're talking about do you?
but you've just seen £650 per day and got all giddy and excited. :eek:

Seems in this case though, that the public sector paid the "market rate" (heavily marked up because it was taking money from the public purse no doubt;)) and then still got sub-standard employees:D.

Not at all bothered what role your friend has - £650 per day is ridiculous unless he is involved in something truly new and enterprising: and messing around with what someone else has invented and manufactured doesn't tick those boxes for me:D

avantra

Old_Slaphead wrote: »

Presumably the contractors also have a vested interest in dragging the jobs out as long as possible.

This dreadful Government has an aweful lot to answer for - can they do anything efficiently?

They do! I heard it from the horse bragging mouth, moreover in 2005 when the PCT I was contracting for decided to bring in two girls as a permanent member of stuff to take on some of the development work they were a bit naive to say the list and asked the contractor to help with the handover.

Little did the PCT knew that the contractors were making a killing and it wasn't in their interest to kill the golden egg maker.

3 month down the line very little was done, girls were knocking on the doors everyday to ask for info (which was in the contractors brain undocumented) just to be bogged down by unhelpful data.

After 5 month one girl got depressed because of this and signed off sick and the other one took a job with another PCT.

stueyhants

Contractors can be useful to fill short term roles. The problem is many companies/orgainstations seem to employ them long term and get reliant on them.

I've worked with a significant number of contractors in the past (I was one for a while) and in a lot of cases the work produced was poorer than other staff members. Although every now and again I did meet a good one, so you could argue it was down to poor management of the contractors.