Forum Home
PC World Chat
Thread ID: 129090	2013-02-02 06:10:00	Teachers pay - the lack of it.	mzee (3324)	PC World Chat

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
1326134	2013-02-02 08:47:00	I'm not trying to defend Talent2 here, but you do need to be careful about media reports blowing things up and skewing the real issues. Just because there were 147 defects doesn't necessarily mean it shouldn't have gone live - what matters is how many of those were P1 or P2 defects, which based on the media coverage to date it sounds like there weren't any P1s but perhaps 10 P2s, and what the nature of the defects were (ref: [url]. Talent2 stuffed up, and now they want someone else to pay more to fix THEIR own faults, or defects. As mentioned in the linked article. Talent2 has been contracted to deliver the existing project scope for an agreed fixed price ... Talent2 has found it more difficult and more expensive to deliver on its contract commitments than it originally estimated I'm not going to repeat basically What PCTeck posted, but her views are spot on. If you want to have a good read, and not from the news media, look on the www.minedu.govt.nz Plenty of PDF files with some interesting facts.	wainuitech (129)
1326135	2013-02-02 08:55:00	It would be a a very difficult payroll system to construct. Because there are part time and relieving teachers, you have to pay the old caretaker who is at home recovering from a heart attack. There are teachers on standown who have lost their teachers certificate. There are buku schools and teachers and the reason they want a new system was the old one was causing problems. Any you are paying activist commie types who would moan about anything. There so many variables I doubt any system invented by man would that reliable.	prefect (6291)
1326136	2013-02-02 09:19:00	Talent2 stuffed up, and now they want someone else to pay more to fix THEIR own faults, or defects. And if you read my previous post, you will find that I agree with you.	somebody (208)
1326137	2013-02-02 09:25:00	Any you are paying activist commie types who would moan about anything. . Your post made good points until that was said - trying looking in the mirror - not every one is a kiss arse National supporter. We all know what you are more than likely to say if National get the boot this time -- its all their fault, National wouldn't have done that. "This time" its not really any Govt party here in NZ, its the Aussie Talent2 trying to Screw NZ and most in NZ that will end up paying for their screw up. Oh Bo-ho :crying www.nbr.co.nz The Aussie executive also says some members of his team would not want to take another contract with the NZ government. The feeling would be mutual I'm sure ;)	wainuitech (129)
1326138	2013-02-02 09:44:00	The problem is with these new fangled computers. When I worked for the English Electric group, there were some 220,000 employees, well over twice the number of teachers, just a small firm, they used to have wages departments. We were always paid on time. Before that 1960-63 I used to lecture part time one evening a week, (or was it two) at the then Birmingham College of Advanced Technology and there was never any problem with pay, and there would have been thousands of teachers in the Birmingham area on the city pay roll, never any problems with pay or tax deductions etc. So what is up with these Aussie con-artists who can't make up a few pay packets correctly when equipped with all the latest wizz-bang systems? Nothing like a bit of under arm bowling.	mikebartnz (21)
1326139	2013-02-02 09:54:00	:lol: Nice 1 Mike :thumbs: Just reading the comments on that link I posted www.nbr.co.nz #28 :eek: ( bottom of page) Disgruntled employee, BS or truth ?	wainuitech (129)
1326140	2013-02-02 09:56:00	I'm not trying to defend Talent2 here, but you do need to be careful about media reports blowing things up and skewing the real issues. Just because there were 147 defects doesn't necessarily mean it shouldn't have gone live - what matters is how many of those were P1 or P2 defects, which based on the media coverage to date it sounds like there weren't any P1s but perhaps 10 P2s, and what the nature of the defects were (ref: computerworld.co.nz). Plenty of IT projects go-live despite outstanding defects - it's sometimes not worth delaying a project go-live because of a few minor issues that can be fixed after launch, but the key thing is to understand what the defects are and what the implications are of not resolving them before the go/no-go decision is made. People who actually understand the defects and what implications they have need to be part of that go/no-go decision. It seems there were more fundamental issues with this project (Talent2 promised to deliver something for a certain price that they simply couldn't do) that ultimately caused the problems, and not necessarily the number of software defects. Disclaimer: I did not work on Novopay, and do not know anyone who has worked on Novopay, or is involved in any way with the system. I have developed software and if I had such a problem I would be totally embarrassed. The teachers pay isn't the only balls up they have had in NZ there is another outfit that has had on going problems. At the end of the day they couldn't manage a piss up in a pub.	mikebartnz (21)
1326141	2013-02-02 10:37:00	Pay software is a critical system (because EVERYONE is sensitive about their pay) and any changes to said system should be applied after a LOT of testing. This type of software lends itself to a rules-based setup: If Teacher A = x+s+r-t-l, then y (with 'y' being the money direct credited to the bank account). From what I understand of the circumstances around this implementation, they went big-bang. Fatal mistake (but I bet there were bonuses riding on a specific implementation date!). The best way to implement a replacement system, is when the existing system is still running. So, for a couple or three pay periods do a parallel run (Datacom live, Novopay not) and compare the results. Once the results are validated as satisfactory from the parallel run, do a soft launch - maybe go live with one school, do a couple more pay periods and monitor. If everything looks good, expand it to a dozen schools. Run for a couple more weeks like this, while monitoring for any issues. Then expand it to a region. After about 3 - 4 months like this, with no show-stopper issues, it is fairly safe to go live with the remaining schools. Going live with no fallback/rollback options is irresponsible and a half-decent software development company should know this.	johcar (6283)
1326142	2013-02-02 10:40:00	Pay software is a critical system (because EVERYONE is sensitive about their pay) and any changes to said system should be applied after a LOT of testing. This type of software lends itself to a rules-based setup: If Teacher A = x+s+r-t-l, then y (with 'y' being the money direct credited to the bank account). From what I understand of the circumstances around this implementation, they went big-bang. Fatal mistake (but I bet there were bonuses riding on a specific implementation date!). The best way to implement a replacement system, is when the existing system is still running. So, for a couple or three pay periods do a parallel run (Datacom live, Novopay not) and compare the results. Once the results are validated as satisfactory from the parallel run, do a soft launch - maybe go live with one school, do a couple more pay periods and monitor. If everything looks good, expand it to a dozen schools. Run for a couple more weeks like this, while monitoring for any issues. Then expand it to a region. After about 3 - 4 months like this, with no show-stopper issues, it is fairly safe to go live with the remaining schools. Going live with no fallback/rollback options is irresponsible and a half-decent software development company should know this. Can't fault your logic there.	mikebartnz (21)
1326143	2013-02-02 10:43:00	Can't fault your logic there. :D I should hope not - it's what I do for a living (not with pay systems though... But the same principle applies)!!!	johcar (6283)
1 2 3 4 5 6