Rudd’s PMs Office
April 16th, 2010 at 12:00 pm by David FarrarKEVIN Rudd has downplayed reports he and his ministers treat staff like dogs as a near-record employee burnout of almost 60 per cent in just more than two years has been revealed.
Despite Mr Rudd pledging to tear up former prime minister John Howard’s hated WorkChoices, 262 ministerial staff – from a total of 444 positions – have departed since Labor came to office.
Three ministers have recorded staff turnover of more than 100 per cent, with Youth and Sport Minister Kate Ellis having 13 departures from a staff of 10. At least one was a part-time university student while several others left to have families.
The Prime Minister himself has lost 28 staff, with Government insiders describing his office as resembling a “transit lounge”.
Rudd is well known as being near impossible to work for. He dreams up crazy ideas and demands they are implemented within days, and has temper tantrums when they are not. His own colleagues resent his style, almost as much as his staff do.
But Mr Rudd said the high pressure of a political office meant it couldn’t be compared to the private sector.
“It’s a tough life. People often have to relocate, there are crazy hours, it’s very intense, people are on the phone wanting X, Y and Z done in a short period of time,” he told Fairfax radio today.
“But I go back to the simple fact: We are elected by the Australian people to do a job.”A staff working year is probably like a dog year, that is it’s probably worth seven years in normal life.
“So if folks stay with me for three or four years, that’s probably 28 or 30 years or more in actual time.”
This is spin. Jobs in Parliament are definitely tough with long hours and an ever changing array of issues. And MPs demands can be frustrating as travel and appointments often change at the last minute. This is why the turnover rate is higher than the normal 10% private sector.
However 60% over two years is very high for any Ministerial office, let alone the PMs Office. The PMs Office is sort of top of the food chain, and it has to be pretty bad for people to leave the office after just a year or two. Most people wait for an election.
Taking John Key’s office as a comparison, I think John has had only two staff leave in two years. One to go overseas and one to have a baby. So Rudd’s claim of a 60% departure rate being normal, is not the case.
Some former staff are privately seething at his management style, claiming he can fly off the handle at a moment’s notice.
Never good to have former staff slag you off. Most former staff of a PM stay ferociously loyal.
Brooklyn Group CEO Brian Russell also queried why Government advisers had left in droves.
`You shouldn’t be having 100 per cent turnover in any team. If you’ve got autocratic management, lack of direction – basic fundamentals – especially in a small group, people will leave,” he said.
Bingo.
Related posts:
- Peter’s Office did know about Air NZ flight
- True Trans-Tasman Mateship
- Key’s office fire bombed
- Office 2010
April 16th, 2010 at 12:09 pm
Usual story. Unions and Labour party officials care about the workers in concept, but in practice they are appalling employers.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 12:23 pm
loved that.
Bingo!
Pity people won’t take a class action against him, that would be good for workers the world over.
A high flier in the dock answering to a magistrate for behaving like a shit head and getting fined for it!
What makes it worse is he pushes his Christianity when it suits him.
look forward to Ryan, PeteG and LUC’s comments on Rudd.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 12:32 pm
PaulL, “Unions and Labour party officials care about the workers in concept, but in practice they are appalling employers.”
I suspect that is because they always believe that looking after people is someone else’s responsibility.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 12:45 pm
Oh dear. Someone needs to point out that there’s an employment market at work, and he’s clearly not a very appealing corner of it.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 12:51 pm
What a pity this was not mentioned when One News reported about workplace bullying last night.
Vote:The story had been out long enough for them to.
April 16th, 2010 at 12:51 pm
With so many departures, why (apparently) so few personal grievances – or their Oz equiv? Most pressure-cooker environments generate PG’s, so does Rudd deliberately manage himself back from that ‘line’, or are the disgruntled counseled against taking any action?
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 1:02 pm
My comments aren’t much to look forward to on this Mike. I don’t follow Aus politics or Rudd very much. This report suggests he could be a bit of an up himself undisciplined dick who doesn’t work with people well. But I don’t have much to base that on.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 1:33 pm
The kind of people who work in parliamentary offices aren’t really the kind to take out a PG – they’re usually party loyalists. They might not like Kevin Rudd, but they’re not all that likely to do something that will cause problems for the party.
By the way – interested that the quote is “near-record”. Wonder who holds the record? The paper pushing this is pretty right wing, I suspect it’s a bit of a beat up. Be embarrassing if Howard holds the record…..
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 1:48 pm
“But Kevin RUDD is a humble man” President OBAMA described him as such only in the last day or so.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 1:52 pm
A collectivist who does not play well with others.
In what way is this is a surprise.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 3:44 pm
MikeNZ suggests:
It’s politicians we’re talking about here, Mike, remember? They write the laws, so the laws absolve them of any personal responsibility.
I’d have loved to have Winston in court quizzing him about how the NZF Parliamentary office was run under Michael Laws – or better yet, Laws himself*. But on paper I was employed by Parliamentary Services, who’d never done a thing wrong, so it was them I had to sue and it was they who’d have been called to answer if it ever got to court.
Naturally, they paid out – handsomely – after only one letter from my barrister rather than have this whole shoddy scheme exposed in public.
No CEO could harangue, abuse, threaten, humiliate and make racial remarks about staff and then say “but it’s XYZ Co that’s the employer – sue the Board and cross examine them”. Only a politcian gets that privilege.
* Closest I came was live on TV3 when Winston said something along the lines of “It’s ridiculous to suggest I’ve turned the office and the party over to Michael… you have no basis for that claim”. And I was able to reply “Other than this letter, signed by you, saying ‘I’m turning the office and the party over to Michael’…” and wave it in the air
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 5:03 pm
But he’s humble. Barky said so.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 5:24 pm
I’m sorry, but any organisation that has a staff turnover of 60% in 2 years is perilously close to a non functioning one.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 6:40 pm
Well his deputy isn’t any better. A snarky little harpy if ever there was one. Considers Helen Clark to be her hero and role model. God Help Australia.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 6:47 pm
Leave Gillard alone, Viking2, it’s not her fault you could land an aircraft on her earlobes.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 7:11 pm
Clueless twat. Of course political life-at-the-top can’t be compared to the private sector. In the private sector you have to actually produce value and achieve things, not fuck about spending money stolen from the populace to chase your half-baked crazy schemes. I also doubt that he treats his staff anywhere near as well as I treat my dog.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 8:47 pm
I’d rather have Julia Gillard running the show any day than Rudd. Rudd is all teflon, he lies about what he’s doing and gets away with it. Julia is the real deal – I dislike her politics, but at least she is clear about what she is doing and what she wants. And she’s actually a smart lady – misguided, but very smart. Ask any of the Liberal politicians who have taken her on in the house – it’s pretty clear who comes out on top. I’d say Julia is first choice when they put the knife in Rudd’s back.
If I ignore what’s good for Australia, and just think about myself, I’m not sure whether I’d rather Rudd or Gillard. Rudd will be hard to beat given the teflon factor, but nobody really likes him, and he comes across as a plonker. I think Gillard would probably be harder to beat because she is very smart and quick on her feet, but then again she does polarise people and that would perhaps help the Libs.
If I’m thinking purely about the political spectacle, then Abbot v’s Gillard is hard to beat. Both conviction politicians, both strong debaters, both prepared to say what they believe and then defend it. That would be a debate I’d be lining up to see (I went to the Abbot v’s Rudd debate, and I reckon Abbot cleaned up – he was far and away the better debater and knew what he was on about. Unfortunately, Rudd played to the damn worm, and his mealy mouthed platitudes are apparently what the “swinging” voters like. )
Vote: