High Salaries for police and firefighters

[The_Squid]

If there are many applicants for the job, it's only fair and responsible to the taxpayer paying the bill to lower the wages. It's exploitation to make us pay for something when we could get it at a lower cost.

Will I want those services when I'm in trouble? Yes. Will those personnel also be available at lower wages? Also yes, as evidence by the many applicants for those jobs.

We can use that same theory for doctors and nurses... Why do they get paid well? Let's pay them less. It's not like we would get less competent people if we pay them less, right? They wouldn't leave for places that pay better, would they?

Your logic is severely flawed.

[TimG]

We can use that same theory for doctors and nurses... Why do they get paid well? Let's pay them less.

There are no waiting list for qualified people to work as doctors or nurses. Every available person is hired which suggests that salaries are just right or too low. For jobs where there is a waiting list we can reduce salaries and benefits until the waiting list shrinks. When the number of people wanting the job are only slightly more than number of positions then the wages are at the right level.

[dre]

Where I live the fire department is mostly volunteer with only a small number of paid employees, and I volunteered for a few years in my early twenties. Same goes for many other communities in BC.

It turns out that theres an awful lot of people willing to train for this job and do it for free, Its interesting and fun,

[hitops]

Will those who are hired from those many applicants stick around at lower pay or will they, after five or six years, move on to higher paying FD's?

That could be asked of any job. But the number moving on doesn't matter as long as their are more than enough qualified and capable applicants to fill the need. If the turnover becomes too great to maintain a qualified force or there are unfilled positions, the wages need to be raised.

We can use that same theory for doctors and nurses... Why do they get paid well? Let's pay them less. It's not like we would get less competent people if we pay them less, right? They wouldn't leave for places that pay better, would they?

Yes, they would. And they do, every year. Firefighters don't, because there is an abundance of uneducated, basically healthy eligible people everywhere there is a need for them. Remember your 8 hour wait in emergency, and grandma's 9 month wait for hip replacement? So do most Canadians. Remember the time there were not enough firefighters to handle all the fires and mangled cars?........oh right that never happened. And thus, the logic of it.

Edited December 18, 2013 by hitops

[Boges]

There are no waiting list for qualified people to work as doctors or nurses. Every available person is hired which suggests that salaries are just right or too low. For jobs where there is a waiting list we can reduce salaries and benefits until the waiting list shrinks. When the number of people wanting the job are only slightly more than number of positions then the wages are at the right level.

Don't tell Walmart that.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/20/walmart-acceptance-rate-harvard_n_4303527.html

But I agree that Firefighting, overall, is an overrated profession. It can be dangerous but so can so many other jobs. They won't allow staffing levels to be reduced due to the reduction in dangerous fires so they have to occupy themselves with doing first responder duties and "public awareness".

[bleeding heart]

Well, the argument has been about "market forces"....but it's kind of funny:

Whenever someone claims that "market forces" will correctly determine the "proper" wages....that argument has to ignore all sorts of other "market forces" which can, and often do, undermine the very principle, itself.

As Boges' Walmart story above illustrates with perfection.

[Bonam]

Well, the argument has been about "market forces"....but it's kind of funny:

Whenever someone claims that "market forces" will correctly determine the "proper" wages....that argument has to ignore all sorts of other "market forces" which can, and often do, undermine the very principle, itself.

As Boges' Walmart story above illustrates with perfection.

How so? The story above indicates that there are 23,000 applicants for 600 jobs. With such an overabundance of willing applicants, the principle states you would expect rock bottom wages. And, unsurprisingly, the wages offered are indeed rock bottom. Sounds to me like everything holds up just fine. Where do you see the principle being undermined?

[Argus]

How so? The story above indicates that there are 23,000 applicants for 600 jobs. With such an overabundance of willing applicants, the principle states you would expect rock bottom wages. And, unsurprisingly, the wages offered are indeed rock bottom. Sounds to me like everything holds up just fine. Where do you see the principle being undermined?

The problem is that this can easily be carried to extremes so that, rather than being an indication of the popularity of the job it simply indicates the desperation of the surrounding populace and the lack of alternatives. Has there ever been a shortage of street prostitutes? Nope. Is it a good job? Nope.

[Wilber]

But I agree that Firefighting, overall, is an overrated profession. It can be dangerous but so can so many other jobs. They won't allow staffing levels to be reduced due to the reduction in dangerous fires so they have to occupy themselves with doing first responder duties and "public awareness".

I don't know what departments you are speaking of. Our metropolitan area covers 355 sq kilometers and has a population of 170,000. We have eight fire halls, 4 of which are partially staffed with full time fire fighters, The rest of the fire fighters are paid auxillaries who are on call. We have about 210 police officers of all types and about 100 auxillaries and support staff. That doesn't sound overstaffed to me..

Edited December 19, 2013 by Wilber

[Argus]

I don't know what departments you are speaking of. Our metropolitan area covers 355 sq kilometers and has a population of 170,000. We have eight fire halls, 4 of which are partially staffed with full time fire fighters, The rest of the fire fighters are paid auxillaries who are on call. We have about 210 police officers of all types and about 100 auxillaries and support staff. That doesn't sound overstaffed to me..

You aren't using the right measurements. I don't know if they are overstaffed or not but I would measure by how many hours out of their work time is spent fighting fires or rescuing people from accidents, as opposed to cleaning equipment, training, and going to health calls which should really have only ambulances/paramedics sent. Time of response would be in there too, if they have to drive some distance.

[Wilber]

You aren't using the right measurements. I don't know if they are overstaffed or not but I would measure by how many hours out of their work time is spent fighting fires or rescuing people from accidents, as opposed to cleaning equipment, training, and going to health calls which should really have only ambulances/paramedics sent. Time of response would be in there too, if they have to drive some distance.

You don't think maintaining their equipment, training and responding to other emergency calls is important? Paramedics and ambulances cost money as well and fire departments are used because they can often be the first ones there with adequate training until the paramedics arrive.

Fires and other emergencies don't keep a schedule or always happen in convenient places so I really don't see where you are coming from.

Edited December 19, 2013 by Wilber

[Michael Hardner]

There are no waiting list for qualified people to work as doctors or nurses. Every available person is hired which suggests that salaries are just right or too low.

Before I see where you're going politically with this (and come to think of it, I don't think I have a strong opinion on this but anyway...) you need to acknowledge that the government itself trains people for those positions. Also, I believe some doctors/nurses do go offshore, ie. we have more graduates than jobs in Canada

For jobs where there is a waiting list we can reduce salaries and benefits until the waiting list shrinks. When the number of people wanting the job are only slightly more than number of positions then the wages are at the right level.

The problem with this approach, is that there are always fewer good jobs than people who want them - so a pure supply/demand equation will drive wages down rather quickly. If you want to transition to such an economy then you would need to put in better transition mechanisms.

All of this assumes that 25% of the country does not go into general strike and destroys the infrastructure...

[Boges]

You don't think maintaining their equipment, training and responding to other emergency calls is important? Paramedics and ambulances cost money as well and fire departments are used because they can often be the first ones there with adequate training until the paramedics arrive.

Fires and other emergencies don't keep a schedule or always happen in convenient places so I really don't see where you are coming from.

How about saving money by merging EMS and Fire? They do it in the US. Why does a large truck full of men have to go alarms blazing to a simple medical call. They can beat the Ambulance simply because laws state there has to be a certain response time for fires.

Why not just stick a paramedic in the fire engine?

[Michael Hardner]

Maybe we should drop the deceit that people earn money based on what is right, what is important and so on ? At the basic level - what works is what people will put up with, in the end.

[Wilber]

How about saving money by merging EMS and Fire? They do it in the US. Why does a large truck full of men have to go alarms blazing to a simple medical call. They can beat the Ambulance simply because laws state there has to be a certain response time for fires.

Why not just stick a paramedic in the fire engine?

There are supposed to be minimum response times for ambulances as well but I guess that would be a question for the bean counters. As long as first responders have the appropriate training and equipment, I don't see that it matters much what kind of uniform they wear. You would still need some sort of ambulance service for things like hospital transfers.

[Boges]

There are supposed to be minimum response times for ambulances as well but I guess that would be a question for the bean counters. As long as first responders have the appropriate training and equipment, I don't see that it matters much what kind of uniform they wear. You would still need some sort of ambulance service for things like hospital transfers.

Sure but if Ambulances were positioned strategically like Fire Departments then Medical response times would drop.

[Wilber]

Sure but if Ambulances were positioned strategically like Fire Departments then Medical response times would drop.

I think maybe they do at times. We often used to see one parked by an intersection on the highway half way between Mission and Abbotsford that is known for frequent crashes.

[Boges]

I think maybe they do at times. We often used to see one parked by an intersection on the highway half way between Mission and Abbotsford that is known for frequent crashes.

In Ontario each municipality controls Fire while EMS is a regional service, similar to police. In Toronto Fire has its own Union while the EMS negotiate with outside workers/waste management.

Edited December 19, 2013 by Boges

[overthere]

As with all of our public services, there is no competition in the conventional sense to drive efficiency. The size of the workforce is determined by some bureaucratic means, and the reasons aren't transparent. Individual wage hikes depend on the public's general emotional response to these people, which is favourable.

As with our other public services, we need to create a new subset of the public to look at the facts here. It's difficult, though, as there is much secrecy around budgets and procedures.

Public sector wage hikes have little to do with public perception.

What drives civil service wage hikes is the willingness of management(politicians, ultimately) to restrict wage increases to what the government can afford. Since there is no effective brake on tax increases, there is no accompanying brake on civil service wage hikes. There are rarely votes to be gained from a politician telling staff they are paid enough and won't be getting a raise. Civil service unions see it as natural that their salaries and benefits continually increase, because that is the norm in Canada.

[Bonam]

The problem is that this can easily be carried to extremes so that, rather than being an indication of the popularity of the job it simply indicates the desperation of the surrounding populace and the lack of alternatives. Has there ever been a shortage of street prostitutes? Nope. Is it a good job? Nope.

It's not an indication of the "popularity of the job", rather, it's an indication of the condition of the labour market. In times of economic difficulty, there are more people looking for jobs and fewer job openings, so wages would go down. In times of economic growth, more jobs are created and more people find employment, leaving fewer applicants, driving wages up. That's how it works, how it's always worked.

[dre]

There are no waiting list for qualified people to work as doctors or nurses. Every available person is hired which suggests that salaries are just right or too low. For jobs where there is a waiting list we can reduce salaries and benefits until the waiting list shrinks. When the number of people wanting the job are only slightly more than number of positions then the wages are at the right level.

There is a TON of doctors in Canada that are waiting lists, including lots that have passed our exams. Theres no doctor shortage, theres a residency slot shortage. And there IS large waiting list.

[TimG]

There is a TON of doctors in Canada that are waiting lists, including lots that have passed our exams. Theres no doctor shortage, theres a residency slot shortage. And there IS large waiting list.

I hate to be pedantic but not completing your residency means you are not qualified to be a doctor so you don't refute my claim. Now if you want to start a thread about how artificial barriers to entry inflate the salaries of professionals then we would likely agree. Edited December 20, 2013 by TimG

[dre]

It's not an indication of the "popularity of the job", rather, it's an indication of the condition of the labour market. In times of economic difficulty, there are more people looking for jobs and fewer job openings, so wages would go down. In times of economic growth, more jobs are created and more people find employment, leaving fewer applicants, driving wages up. That's how it works, how it's always worked.

I can see the common sense in what you are saying, and your logic is more or less sound. The problem is thats not what happens in practice. For example wages do not fall during recessions.

Theres a bunch of different theories as to why. Some economists blame organized labor, and some of them blame claim that insurance against wage cuts are built into the way wages are set... meaning the employer pays lower long term wages in exchange for not cutting wages when sales are lower.

The other theory, and the one I find most believable is that forcing workers to take paycuts is poisonous to the cohesion of a business unit. Companies worry about moral and productivity.

Theres lots of papers out there that discuss the reasons behind wage rigidity during economic downturns... Heres a short condensed one.

http://cowles.econ.yale.edu/news/bewley/tfb_00-02_wages.htm

[Argus]

There are supposed to be minimum response times for ambulances as well but I guess that would be a question for the bean counters. As long as first responders have the appropriate training and equipment, I don't see that it matters much what kind of uniform they wear. You would still need some sort of ambulance service for things like hospital transfers.

The problem is that it costs a lot of money to send that big ol truck to every health care emergy call, especially when most of the guys just stand around with their hands in their pockets when they get there. If we could take money from the fire department and put it into ambulance/paramedics we'd decrease their response time to the point we wouldn't need to send fire trucks to health calls. Needless to say, Fire departments and their unions have been strenuously resisting this. Some kind of merger would make sense, imho. A ton of firefighters also have paramedic training. What's wrong with keeping paramedic trucks (small ones) at the firehall and despatching them to health calls without the fire trucks? A number of US cities do this succesfully and have for many years.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QKLu46RRCIA

Edited December 20, 2013 by Argus

[Michael Hardner]

Public sector wage hikes have little to do with public perception.

What drives civil service wage hikes is the willingness of management(politicians, ultimately) to restrict wage increases to what the government can afford. Since there is no effective brake on tax increases, there is no accompanying brake on civil service wage hikes.

You have just attributed wage hikes to tax hikes. Doesn't that right there associate wage hikes to public perception ?