Mad Mike
Well-known member
The only part of Gov't that works like this are the Canadian Forces. The pay is commensurate with experience and effort, you can be fired if you don't pull your weight, you have fantastic benefits, training and security.And that is the root of the problem. It would be an interesting social experiment to see what happened when those at the public teat reached 51%. No political party could possibly win without saying that they would bow to the public sectors wishes. As the unions all battled each other and based their compensation on the other unions, it would probably be less than a decade before this had gone beyond the point of no return and the entire economy collapsed.
IMO (and I understand that many will not share this opinion) public sector jobs should pay less than their private sector counterparts. What you lose in dollars, you gain in stability (your employer isn't going to bounce cheques or disappear (apart from the IBM pay processing debacle)). If you want to drive a bmw, go work in the private sector. If you want a decent living wage and a chevy, your country wants you. This should apply to politicians too. Go back to the days where pillars of the community were elected and got a stipend of 20K for helping out. Politician should never have been allowed to become a career (especially with the ridiculous pension, severance pay if you don't get your contract renewed, double digit raises, etc).
I'm not sure that PS jobs ought to be paid less than others, but I don't think they should be paid more, particularly when a fraction of that wage would attract the same workforce.
High wages and job protections are not necessarily the Public's friends either. Individually and together they discourage attrition (which has some goodness), however they also inhibit positive attrition -- meaning poor performers, and those with antiquated skills are saved to the detriment of the people they serve and the public purse.
Last edited: