Some posters views seem to be : public sector workers - bad, private sector workers - good. This is too simplistic. Which public sector workers are overpaid? It is a cliche at this stage but it is still valid if people really believe that public sector workers have it easy then become one.
I feel like the poster child for this thread. I was a Civil Servant for 8 years, worked in a public sector education/consulting body for 3 years before starting my own business 4 years ago and leaving the public sector.
The truth of the argument is somewhere in the middle. Civil Servants are not as bad as most non-Civil Servants think they are, but neither are they as good as they (we) like to think they are.
First the generalities, most Civil Servants may be well educated, but they are not well trained. Management skills and strategic vision are sadly lacking and it is completely possible to progress through the promotion system to the top of a public sector organisation and never complete a days training on staff supervision or management. That said it is getting better and there have been major developments since I began work in the service, most recently the Performance Management Development System.
Information systems are also underdeveloped, management information is almost non-existent, but there are developments afoot. This does mean that productivity is not even close to that of the private sector. Some work processes are organised terribly. (cYp - thats what the Consultants are for). In my experience there are slackers in the public service, but there are not all that many (and it was my job to find them at one stage).
Clerical Officers are very poorly paid, they are one of the reasons that Family Income Supplement was created - the current starting wage is Euro21,625 - not many people would be willing to leave the private sector for that job. Averages hide a lot and are not relevant. This is just an ISME talking point, ask the head of ISME how much s/he is paid.
Now the specifics.
In my time in the Service I worked in a number of challenging roles. Two examples I worked in Death Grants section where I had to explain every day to distraught parents why the maximum grant payable in respect of a deceased child was 20 quid. I also worked as a Social Welfare Inspector where I had to interview many lovely people (I once had to interview a young lady who was subsequently offered work as an underwear model (I'd have done that one for free). But I was also threatened on numerious occasions, and also had to deal with convicted armed robbers, assorted paramilitaries and people who were just mad as hatters, oh and one guy who told me he had not been looking for work "because I am a suspect in the Veronica Guerin murder" and he was. Others working in the field have been shot, beaten, had their cars and homes damaged.
Looking back I believe I was worth the wage I was paid.
To finish, the change is slow - but there is definitely change coming. I would also be of the belief that the real problem is the size of the organisations in the Public Service - and that many large organisations such as Banks and Insurance companies have similar types of problems.
The Illuminati ...... because payback's a Bit
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
h.
There are 4 ways to spend money.
1: Spend your money on something for yourself
2: Spend you money on something for someone else
3: Spend someone else's money on something for you
4: Spend someone elses's money on something for someone else
The first way is likely to result in the most prudent spend for a well chosen purchase.
The last way is the worst because there's little incentive to be prudent and least likeliehood of selecting a well chosen purchase.
The last way also describes pretty accurately so-called "Public services".
No we don't assign any financial value whatsoever.Originally Posted by Conor
Unless I misunderstand you, you're suggesting we should assign a financial value to the state of incarcerating a prisoner for a year, call it x, then see what price is offered by the service provider, call it y; if y<x, go with it?
If nobody offers (y<x), we're in trouble.
The Government at policy level declares what imprisonment facilities mean:
e.g.
> what environmental conditions are humane
> what is an acceptable escape level
> what educational facilities are required
This is put on more formal legal footing as a contract.
The contract is put out to tender.
The lowest price from a valid response will win.
(as anyone will know from RFTs the above is a simplification)
I'm sure Pax will have plenty to say about it, but as a starting point (and in a perfect world):
Public provision: Cost to state = cost of providing service(X)
Private provision: Cost to state = J( cost of providing service(Y) + profit margin(Z).J is fixed, fixed at tender strike price.
However X and Y above are wholly different terms. A private prison provider wouldn't pay crackerjack overtime month after month, they'd hire extra staff instead etc. They would be paid a fixed price by the State (X+Z) - We'd assume that a private provider will in all likelihood reduce the cost(X) cos they get to keep the Z bit.
And in competition with each other on the bidding process they'll shear as much as X & Z as possible in order to win contract - so overall reducing J.
cYp
"Yawn , am I alive yet ?"
Yes, the bidding process would shave down J alright, and I can happily accept that Y<X - however, this only represents the optimal arrangement for the taxpayer if it can be demonstrated that J<X. This would require an estimation of X to be made, which was my original point (easiest way being to take X as being the cost as it stands, I suppose). And it's certainly the business of the state to provide assurance that outlays of public funds are optimised.
However X and Y above are wholly different terms. A private prison provider wouldn't pay crackerjack overtime month after month, they'd hire extra staff instead etc. They would be paid a fixed price by the State (X+Z) - We'd assume that a private provider will in all likelihood reduce the cost(X) cos they get to keep the Z bit.
And in competition with each other on the bidding process they'll shear as much as X & Z as possible in order to win contract - so overall reducing J.
cYp
This aside, there's always a level of risk (let's call it R) of poor management by the provider - breaches the terms of the contract, bankruptcy, unilaterally withdrawal of the service? This would incur additional costs (let's call them C), and they can be very, very difficult to quantify. So we're now just hoping that (RC)+J<X.
Risks may be fine in private industry, between a client and vendor, but when you're providing essential services to the public they're far less attractive, for obvious reasons. Hence the differences in ethos between the two sectors.
Nothing will motivate the lazy / apathetic / Americanised / west-British types to embrace their culture and the Irish language.
Just throwing this out there but maybe - empirical evidence in the provision of public services showing that it does?
You seem to be confusing command and control communism with socialism. It's a common problem.
One aside - Yugoslavia was a ground-up workers' self-managed, market economy from 1952 until the collapse of Yugoslavia in the late 1980s.
It might surprise you to know that it had the highest rate of economic growth in the world over much of that time period - even higher than Japan during the heyday of the "Japanese economic miracle."
It is a useful example of an employee managed, public enterprise, market economy. *However I would prefer participation and more of the introduction of environmental management into the process as opposed to markets.
--------
*
The Economics of Feasible Socialism (1983)
http://www.powells.com/biblio?PID=27627 ... 0044460155
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m ... ai_4150661
Self-Management and the Crisis of Socialism: The Rose in the Fist of the Present
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
I wouldnt hold up too much of what ISME says, I use to be a member, and with my contribution they went on jollys, wore armani suits and treated the top table members to a lot of misappropration of funds. This is why they dont have a mandate to speak on behalf of the decent business people and never gained credibility again even though they did try..I have no time for unions, or associations who call strike action.. When they themselves divide this country about rubbish speaches. So of the PS want our respect do not go along with the union spin doctors
Rubbish speeches. Typo So if the PS
Time to face down the feudal-lords of the public-sector. In Medieval times, the serfs on the manor had to grind their flour in the lord's mill and pay for the privilege. Likewise, we were until recently forced to acquire our electricity-supplies from the ESB at the highest prices in Europe (which suspiciously went through the roof over the Winter to general horror on Liveline), and continue to be forced to do homage to their lordships in Bus Eireann, Bord Gáis (gas-monopoly), Bus Éireann, Aer Rianta and Bord na Móna. Liberate the serfs from our feudal lords.
Do you write for the Sun?
Time to face down the feudal-lords of the public-sector. In Medieval times, the serfs on the manor had to grind their flour in the lord's mill and pay for the privilege. Likewise, we were until recently forced to acquire our electricity-supplies from the ESB at the highest prices in Europe (which suspiciously went through the roof over the Winter to general horror on Liveline), and continue to be forced to do homage to their lordships in Bus Eireann, Bord Gáis (gas-monopoly), Bus Éireann, Aer Rianta and Bord na Móna. Liberate the serfs from our feudal lords.
'Hello. My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die.'
Inigo Montoya.
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote