Is the “market discipline” any different for a salaried private industry worker vs. government worker? How?
In my experience it doesn’t matter if they are salaried or not. If the company can be more profitable without that salary…its removed
In fact I’ve seen more salaried people fired as a cost saving measure than hourly
I think this is the kernel of it. Public employees can and do get fired as long as there is justification. Private employees often get fired without justification.
The most rediculous thing I heard from a public employee was that they were pissed the new administration could fire them…“for no reason what so ever!”
I stared at them blankly and went back to my private sector job where they didn’t understand why I wasn’t sympathetic.
I’ll note too that the public employees I’ve seen fired get as much as 2-3 month notice. Private employees get no notice until they are pulled into HR.
To be fair, one of the reasons to take a govt job is for the job security. As long as you do your job and don’t need discipline, you can probably stay till you retire. For this, they generally get paid considerably less than private sector, and as demonstrated in this thread, also get shit on by the public and their bosses more than those in the private sector. These are trade-offs they are willing to take for the job security.
Then the job security gets taken away. They still get paid less than you, still put up with more shit than you do, and now if their boss is an asshole, he can fire them.
They weren’t really looking for sympathy that their circumstances change beyond their control, but they wren’t really looking for blank stares either.
that’s a lot of waffle. It’s far more difficult to fire staff in the public sector.
Maryland, Schaefer
Threats? That’s what passes for discussion with you?
Signe handled this fairly well. I’m not sure why you’d think a salaried employee would be exempt from market discipline.
According to the CBO, federal employees tend to get better compensation than their private sector counterparts, excluding those with a PhD or professional degree.
**Magiver **
You know and understood exactly what I said, yours is a very weak comment designed to drag this thread into a semantic argument over the exact meaning of certain phrases,
Its really an attempt to submerge discussion of facts into a muddy bog of minutiae.
**Crafter Man ** I ain’t gonna let this pass
One thing I used to hate was when we got contractors in who had no additional skills to the on site workforce. The reason, I would end up being paid as a maintenance electrician to watch these individuals doing exactly what I was paid to do, and get the runaround, but worse was that they always leave the site a total shit heap, and worse still, I would absolutely always end up having to refit, reinstall and generally repair the damage they had done both to their own rubbish standard of work, and damage to associated equipment.
The majority of times we had contractors attend, I wish they had been run off site - such were their poor working practices, I remember sending one lot of packing because their welding gear was dangerously unsafe, pretty near as bad as it can get too.
Why did we have these contractors, they might attend as part of a maintenance package when new plant was purchased, or someone needed some specific large job doing that we did not have enough staff to undertake ourselves, and that latter was usually a mistake, because we would have to take as much time as them to put it right.
The only contractors worth using were ones with very specialised skills, such as repair of some of the more exotic diagnosis machines, and those making various measurements and specialised inspection using NDT kit that we were not licensed to operate.
The vast majority of the people I know in the federal government have PhDs or JDs. I’m not claiming at all that the people I know are representative.
The relevant quote from the story is:
As from boyhood up he had shown no signs of possessing any intelligence whatsoever, he had gravitated naturally to England’s civil service, where all that was required of him was to drink tea at four o’clock and between lunch and four to do the Times crossword puzzle.
If there’s a substantive difference between that and “lazy and inefficient”, I’m not aware of what it is. And as for it being a throwaway line, that seems completely irrelevant. He was clearly playing to a well known trope.
That’s interesting. Your link won’t open for me, but I’ll try to look it up.
I recall back in the Clinton admin (Yes, there WAS one! ;)) the studies showed feds were behind, and legislation was enacted to narrow the gap. Except it could be suspended in periods of “emergency” which - surprise, surprise - occurred nearly every year! :rolleyes:
Then a decade or so later, when a lot of middle managers and such in private industry began to lose their jobs, folk began to envy the security of gov’t jobs. I hadn’t kept track of the pendulum swings since.
However, my perception was that many government positions - essentially calling for decent clerical/secretarial/office administrative skills, were hired in at very low grade levels - well below what a capable and motivated applicant could receive in private industry. It often was hard to attract qualified applicants for jobs which - while not terribly complex, did require some attention to detail and initiative.
Wonder how public and private compare on advancement possibilities? A common complaint among lower graded gov’t staff is the lack of advancement possibilities. If their position is graded GS 3-5, they may march up to a grade 5/9 - and then that’s it. Personally, there generally is opportunity for advancement for capable people - with the caveat that advancement often requires the willingness to relocate. Not unlike (I assume) the private sector.
I’ll grant what seems to be a valid and reputable source. But it flies in the face of so much anecdotal data and common knowledge that it’s hard to take at face value.
I go out to eat on my lunch break. I overhear a lot of people as I munch on my meal at Wendy’s or Subway…
I’m a government statistician, which is an area where advanced degrees are valued. (Literally: in my agency, you start at a GS-7 with a bachelor’s, GS-9 with a Master’s, and GS-11 with a doctorate. So that Ph.D. is worth some money, at least at first.) But most of the statisticians in my agency don’t have doctorates. A fair number have masters’ degrees, but I’d be hard-pressed to say whether or not a majority have a master’s or better.
That’s an important point.
Technically my wife is a government worker, she teaches in the public school system. She has more education than me (two Masters), works more hours than me, and is paid less than me. If she lost her job it would be difficult to find a new one since the competition for teaching jobs is fierce here. It would be much easier for me to find a new one.
Public employees also have to watch their step more. It makes better headlines when they are caught misbehaving.
Boy, did this set my bullshit alert off!
Managing contractors is one of the toughest things going, and demonstrates the general stupidity of using contractors on an ongoing basis in all but the most clearly-defined, unchanging circumstances.
Because you’ve got to put in a hell of a lot of man-hours detailing the work that the contractor will do. And then the very tiniest change in what you’re asking of them means that the contract has to be reworked, and that means it has to be approved by the people handling the money.
So instead of going down the hall and telling a colleague, “instead of needing X and Y, we’re going to need X, Y, and Z,” and him saying, “OK, but I’ll need an extra week,” it better be something you don’t need for a few months yet, because it’ll take that long to get your change in requirements (and additional recompense to the contractor) through all the hoops.
And it isn’t a bit easier to hold the contractors responsible than it is to hold Federal employees responsible. If only.
It’s interesting how people interact with the DMV and it’s slow or obnoxious, therefore government workers are all terrible. But when they interact with the cable company? They don’t decide that all private workers are terrible. They decide that the cable company is terrible.
Dang, you are just full of it! (“It” being excellent points in this thread!)
(Still haven’t been able to access that CBO report, even through my own search.) I have a JD, and have worked for private firms (briefly) and for the govt (decades). I do not consider myself under or overpaid - but rather - fairly compensated. I do often feel that I lack adequate resources to perform my expected tasks.
Law is a tough field to compare. I make way less than many senior partners do, but there are a bunch of sole practitioners who do not make great coin. And, I readily admit I never had to put in the outrageous 24-hr days expected of many private firm associates. Many (most?) gov’t lawyers work fewer hours than private counterparts - but they still put in a full 40 hr week (or more). Actually, mine is a judicial position. I’m not sure what the comparable to that is in private industry.
When you talk about public employees, I often think the president at $400K is grossly underpaid compared to CEOs and such. And our state governor at $160K-ish is underpaid - even compared to public employees like state college football/hoops coaches. Would even suggest congressional and judicial pay might be responsible for failing to attract the best and brightest - although, of course, that revolving door can be quite lucrative.