LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksFair enough... if you can't stand over your comments I suppose slinking off is the only course of action available to you.Originally Posted by DeathKnell
See ya now...
Fair enough... if you can't stand over your comments I suppose slinking off is the only course of action available to you.
See ya now...
Voters don't decide issues, they decide who will decide issues.
George Will
Ha..
#blows you an air kiss#
Originally Posted by The Red Rose of Cork
I dont care about "the majority of people"
Please will the two of ye get a room!
It is clear now that you are a bluffer who is spouting out of the top of your head. You suggested that it is possible to bring a pay by measured output scheme to the civil service but when it is pointed out to you that is would prove impossible, you persist and then when the obvious is suggested that you bring your proposal to government so that you could make yourself a pretty penny, you slink away, with a silly remark.The comment about 'this country' being disorganised completely overlooks the fact that not a single country in the world have piece work or any other type of pay for measured performance in their public sectors. The reason, it's not possible.
Just because its not there (if thats even true) does NOT mean its not possible. You are the blinkered one Hopi.. You refuse to recognise reform and performance related pay are a necessary adjunct to Public Sector re-adjustment to the new realities. I know its difficult for you and Kev, but denial is the first level of acceptance.. Just keep working thru it man.. We will wait for you...
Its the first step to thinking for yourself and casting off the sense of entitlement thats holding you back..
Originally Posted by The Red Rose of Cork
I dont care about "the majority of people"
No, it's not there because it will not work. Civil servants would be delighted to sit down tomorrow and start to talk about implementing the type of motivational schemes that are being talked about on this thread. They could not loose.
No, what you have proven in your continued negative discourse is the futility of anyone bringing something to the Govt. or the civil service that makes perfect sense in the most effective and efficient organisations and asking them to consider it.
Also, you continue to demonstrate that you do no more than a superficial consideration of other poster's contributions by claiming I suggested a "pay by measured output scheme", when in fact (and I corrected you on this on more than one occasion), I suggested a "pay increase (or increment) by measured contribution (including output however that is measured by the particular role) scheme". I think you have signalled the deathknell on this topic yet again and with Deathknell's advice translated into demonstrated act on your part, I will leave it at that.
We are "they"
Jesus Christ, no other Public Service in the world uses PRP, are they all in denial and blinkered? I know you are desperate to portray Hopi and I as being in some way wallowing in isolation on this particular issue but the fact are the facts and neither you or Oppenheimer have a the ability to acknowledge them.
Voters don't decide issues, they decide who will decide issues.
George Will
You bet your ass we would.
Voters don't decide issues, they decide who will decide issues.
George Will
Unfortunately, the opportunity for painless reform has passed. The govt. has 3 options - raise taxes to pay for public services, cut costs by reducing services, cut costs by reducing public service pay costs either through cutting numbers or reducing rates. Personally I'd reduce services and payroll costs and on the latter I'd lean on pay rates rather than numbers.
If engineers were wrong as often as economists, would anyone fly aeroplanes?
Reply With Quote