1 out of 3 workers in Canada a civil servant?

[jennie]

The BC government had a big show down with its health unions over outsourcing. From the government's perspective they wanted cost savings and would have rather kept the current staff but at lower wage and benefit levels. Unfortunately, the unions refused to discuss wage or benefit cuts which forced the government to lay everyone off and outsource the work. If the unions actually cared about their workers they would have negotiated wage rollbacks in overpaid job categories.

The unions do what the members tell them too. It is a democracy.

Of course, the outsourced workers will have no benefits, no pensions, and will not receive a living wage. They won't be able to afford postsecondary for their kids, will have no retirement earnings and will require public support. I other words, the workforce becomes a net drain on the economy, not a net contributor.

Nice work. We needed to go backwards to the dark ages.

Edited September 4, 2007 by jennie

[Riverwind]

The unions do what the members tell them too. It is a democracy.

The problem with big public sector unions is they represent a wide range of workers with different interests. It was in the best interest of the janitors to accept a wage rollback but their voice was lost amoung the higher skilled workers demanding higher wages.

Of course, the outsourced workers will have no benefits, no pensions, and will not receive a living wage. They won't be able to afford postsecondary for their kids, will have no retirement earnings and will require public support.

That is the how it should be. We set up social programs to help people in need. Government jobs are *not* a social programs. 90% of the problems with the government can be traced to people use 'income re-distribution' and 'social justice' to justify bloated government wages an benefits. Government workers should be paid the market rate for the jobs that they do. Edited September 4, 2007 by Riverwind

[mikedavid00]

No YOU have no idea what people's jobs are. What was yours? If I am not at my desk I am at a meeting. Where are you? Let me guess ... hanging out over someone's desk interrupting their work (which you don't understand) to share your gems of wisdom about how nobody there does anything.

I can understand why you didn't last long!

Firstly, I was there as a student and there for 8 months as a software developer many years back. The projects they had my working on were MAKE WORK. I worked for a Major (like a major in the army). He was french. Almost the whole building was billingual actually. A good 2/3rds at least. *All* the support staff were completely billingual. All of them.

The project I worked on? Well the major wanted a button that he could click at the top of an MS Office applicatoin (Word, PowerPoint, Excel) and he wanted it to automatically paste something in the header and footer because he was too lazy to do it. No I'm not kidding. The other project was an org chart project that never came to fruition despite it going on for several years. They wanted to print out this org chart with peoples pictures in the middle and put it outside the elevators on every floor. Other people said it was a bad idea becuase too many people come and go and it wouldn't work. I never know what happened with that but i'm sure it just died.

It was seriously a joke. Even back then they had 15" LCD's screens and CD burners. Much more than most private companies had at the time.

And it was GOV'T CULTURE to sit at peoples desks and talk for 30 min. It's just what people there did. You should hear all the converstatoins I would over hear on a daily basis. It's funny you mentioned it.

And I will most certainly say that the great majority of people there did absolutely nothing. Nothing in the least. We had 2.5 hours of breaks a day.

But working in the private sector, I can say it's much more rewarding and I have much more control over what goes on. Working at the gov't.. well.. it was a joke. Everyone always on vacation. All make work projects. It really was a joke. There was almost this 'low moral' there because I think people really knew deep down that the building was a lie. It was welfare. Nothing more. They knew they were working a lie.

I worked a lie for 8 months and I appologize to all the tax payers here on the forum for contributing to the waste of our govt.

[jennie]

The problem with big public sector unions is they represent a wide range of workers with different interests. It was in the best interest of the janitors to accept a wage rollback but their voice was lost amoung the higher skilled workers demanding higher wages.

That is the how it should be. We set up social programs to help people in need. Government jobs are *not* a social programs. 90% of the problems with the government can be traced to people use 'income re-distribution' and 'social justice' to justify bloated government wages an benefits. Government workers should be paid the market rate for the jobs that they do.

Let me get this straight: We have to fund a social safety network so that private sector employers can continue to pay poverty wages while reaping huge profits for their shareholders. BS

Sorry ... I do not buy that as the 'ideal' for our society as a whole. It may suit the private sector employers and shareholders as it is just a continuation ... or maybe a throwback to ... the days of the robber barons, but it is NOT what is best for all. It is simply the way of ensuring that the most wealth continues to end up in the hands of the fewest wealthy people and is of absolutely no benefit whatsoever in the progress of humankind.

Edited September 4, 2007 by jennie

[mikedavid00]

We set up social programs to help people in need. Government jobs are *not* a social programs.

I guess that's the crux of my argument. That's why i coined 'white collar welfare'. That's honestly what it was. Take a look. They actually shot a 3 min peice on this issue for CTV news. You'll see real ottawa civil servants and their blaring sense of entitlement:

Video Link

[mikedavid00]

Let me get this straight: We have to fund a social safety network so that private sector employers can continue to pay poverty wages while reaping huge profits for their shareholders. BS

Sorry ... I do not buy that as the 'ideal' for our society as a whole. It may suit the private sector employers and shareholders as it is just a continuation ... or maybe a throwback to ... the days of the robber barons, but it is NOT what is best for all. It is simply the way of ensuring that the most wealth continues to end up in the hands of the fewest wealthy people and is of absolutely no benefit whatsoever in the progress of humankind.

The reason why our wages are so low is becuase we have an excess supply of labor in most parts of Canada due to immigration for the most part. If we stopped needless immigration and moved to a logical system like every other country, wages and home prices would correct themselves and private sector wages wouldn't be that far off from gov't wages.

But I think I'm alone in that opinion.

The gov't pays its workers what it feels their workers deserve for the line of work. When you factor in the dollar value difference to the US, I feel that our gov't wages ARE justified.

I feel our private sector wages for most jobs are too low due to way too much skilled labor, education, and other labor in our market.

When there is not an excess of labor, then you get places like Calgary where you are taking a loss if you work at the gov't.

I'm only saying that the back office gov't jobs for the most party are over staffed and needless and don't serve the publics interest. It more just another form of a welfare program for people with degrees.

Try and get an American to work at the gov't. They will laugh at you. They want healthcare and paycheck.

Here in Canada though.. it.. well it reminds me of Cuba. Those able to get those gov't jobs are elites and 'special'.. it's almost like winning the lottery. Once there, they are in a new world i've gov't workers and parties and insiders and catored events and free tickets.. and man.. i've been around that my whole life.

[jennie]

I guess that's the crux of my argument. That's why i coined 'white collar welfare'. That's honestly what it was. Take a look. They actually shot a 3 min peice on this issue for CTV news. You'll see real ottawa civil servants and their blaring sense of entitlement:

Video Link

The comparison presented of "average" public and private salaries has already been debunked. Without knowing about qualifications, job requirements, parttime-fulltime ... we are comparing apples and potatoes for all we know. My guess is that for comparable educational or professional qualifications, private sector pay is higher. It just happens that the private sector involves more low paying jobs.

What a waste of money, whoever pays for the CTF ... they do nothing but BAD research biased to suit their agenda. Unfortunately, policy or program developed from BAD research can never be good policy or program. It is a real shame people cannot get their better service for their money. Misleading people about the facts does no one any good.

[Riverwind]

Let me get this straight: We have to fund a social safety network so that private sector employers can continue to pay poverty wages while reaping huge profits for their shareholders. BS

Governments hire people to do a job - not provide a social transfer. People should be paid the market rate for the job. Trying to use government jobs as a social program creates all kinds of distortions which ends up costing us more than the social program would.

[jennie]

Governments hire people to do a job - not provide a social transfer. People should be paid the market rate for the job. Trying to use government jobs as a social program creates all kinds of distortions which ends up costing us more than the social program would.

Is it now "a social program" to provide a living wage and pension"? I think not. It is the private sector that is getting away with sloughing off its responsibilities onto the public sector, while the profits go to the wealthy.

The distribution of wealth tells the story, an increasing gap between the very wealthy and the rest of us, with more and more of the world's wealth in fewer and fewer hands, and the rest of us paying the cost of social services for underpaid private sector employees.

Is this your goal? Is this the purpose you espouse? to leave the public with the liabilities of the private sector?

Edited September 4, 2007 by jennie

[Riverwind]

Is it now "a social program" to provide a living wage and pension"? I think not.

If you need to make the 'living wage' argument to justify a salary and benefit package that is significantly higher than the market then you are asking for *charity* not a fair wage.

The distribution of wealth tells the story, an increasing gap between the very wealthy and the rest of us, with more and more of the world's wealth in fewer and fewer hands, and the rest of us paying the cost of social services for underpaid private sector employees.

The world has *always* had a huge income gap but we managed to fool ourselves into believing it did not exists because the low and high income people were conveniently seperated by national borders. Globalization means we can no longer live in our confortable little islands of wealth.

Is this your goal? Is this the purpose you espouse?

Why should the people generate the wealth necessary to pay for government services be expected to pay more because unions demand charity instead of a fair wage?

[mikedavid00]

Why should the people generate the wealth necessary to pay for government services be expected to pay more because unions demand charity instead of a fair wage?

yeah but don't you think that possibly it's the private sector that is paying an unfair wage due to an excess of labor? Look how expensive it is to live in Canada? look at the average american household income.. ours should be around $50k average IMO considering how expensive it is to live in Canada.

The gov't does have a dept where it determines what they feel fair wages are for certain jobs. And I hate to say it... wow i really hate to say this, but I think they are right. If you have a degree and went through school, you shouldn't be working in a call center for $12/h with no benefits.

I think the private sector has far, far too much labor in Canada so this drives down wages and devalues education. The gov't has the luxury of not following this model and paying what they feel are fair wages.

This topic that you 2 are discussing is the very core of my anti-immigration rant. My viewpoint is it drives down wages and devalues education. The gov't seems to be the only fair waged people in Canada. This just isn't the case in the US and we have to ask ourselves why that is?

Edited September 4, 2007 by mikedavid00

[jennie]

If you need to make the 'living wage' argument to justify a salary and benefit package that is significantly higher than the market then you are asking for *charity* not a fair wage.

The world has *always* had a huge income gap but we managed to fool ourselves into believing it did not exists because the low and high income people were conveniently seperated by national borders. Globalization means we can no longer live in our confortable little islands of wealth.

Why should the people generate the wealth necessary to pay for government services be expected to pay more because unions demand charity instead of a fair wage?

I see no point in continuing a discussion when you fail to acknowledge facts.

Case in point:

- The reported study is a FRAUD because the public-private jobs ARE NOT COMPARABLE. Find me a study comparing salaries for professionals in each, and we will see who pays the most.

- The private sector must pay living wages so their employees do not end up on the social assistance rolls. Why should WE pay the cost for below poverty level employment?

The 'comfortable island of wealth' has nothing to do with you or me ... it is the top 5% of the population that has over 50% of the wealth that we need to concern ourselves about ... that and the fact that they are trying to shove their employee responsibilities onto us taxpayers to increase their share of the wealth even more!!!

(And you support and promote this?)

[Riverwind]

The reported study is a FRAUD because the public-private jobs ARE NOT COMPARABLE. Find me a study comparing salaries for professionals in each, and we will see who pays the most.

You would probably find that most professionals get paid more in the private sector but don't have the job security or pension and benefits. In most cases it is not the base pay levels that are the issue - it is the absurd benefit packages. However, when you look at the low skilled jobs you would find the pay scales are also much higher than the private sector.

Why should WE pay the cost for below poverty level employment?

A circular argument. Private sector jobs produce new wealth - public sector jobs require wealth produced by the private sector. The economy would collapse if there were no private sector jobs.

The 'comfortable island of wealth' has nothing to do with you or me ... it is the top 5% of the population that has over 50% of the wealth that we need to concern ourselves about ...

A begger sleeping on the street in Canada makes more money in a day panhandling than most of the world's population and has access to more food and better services.

that and the fact that they are trying to shove their employee responsibilities onto us taxpayers to increase their share of the wealth even more!!!

Employers have no obligation to provide charity to their employees.

[mikedavid00]

You would probably find that most professionals get paid more in the private sector but don't have the job security or pension and benefits.

I simply disagree with this statement. Most professionals reach the ball park, but certainly don't surpass the pay in most cases.

If you work in a tech support based call center, you will get paid $10-$13 an hour.

If you work for a gov't call center essential doing the same thing but with FAR less calls, you are making $60,000 not including all the load of benefits.

I think you meant to say 'executives'. tha'ts where the private sectore might pay more.

[geoffrey]

If you work in a tech support based call center, you will get paid $10-$13 an hour.

That's because they are a dime a dozen.

If you work for a gov't call center essential doing the same thing but with FAR less calls, you are making $60,000 not including all the load of benefits.

In this scenario, I agree. In 95% of others, I'm going to disagree. There is more money to be had in the private sector. If I took a job with the Auditor General's office, I'd make less than I do today. For example.

[msj]

mikedavid00, the reality is that no one here really is going to take your word on anything.

Your ridiculous use of hyperbole added to your pathetic math skills, all while claiming to allegedly knowing how to do research, is laughable at best and sad at worst.

So compare Canada to Cuba or China all you want, and continue to make up numbers without statistical merit, but no one buys it.

[guyser]

mikedavid00, the reality is that no one here really is going to take your word on anything.

Your ridiculous use of hyperbole added to your pathetic math skills, all while claiming to allegedly knowing how to do research, is laughable at best and sad at worst.

So compare Canada to Cuba or China all you want, and continue to make up numbers without statistical merit, but no one buys it.

But but but....I said this at the start...."Ok. So I'm researching and reading up on things as I usually do. I read about everything. Research everything. Read numbers and facts all the time becuase I like to get to the bottom of things and find out the truth. "

[mikedavid00]

That's because they are a dime a dozen.

In this scenario, I agree. In 95% of others, I'm going to disagree. There is more money to be had in the private sector. If I took a job with the Auditor General's office, I'd make less than I do today. For example.

I disagree. You are seing the country through the eyes of Alberta. Alberta makes up a small percent of Canada. Go out East and ask which jobs pay more. Go out in Vancouver or Victoria Island and ask what they would rather have.

Gov't jobs are the cream of the crop here in Canada for the most part. Especially in Ontario and Quebec.

[Pat Coghlan]

Gov't jobs are the cream of the crop here in Canada for the most part. Especially in Ontario and Quebec.

They may be now. They weren't during the tech boom. People left the public service in droves to work at Nortel etc. and make double their salaries. Today, the Nortel people are crying to get into the government.

[Denny]

First off, I don't know that having just under 25% of the work force in the public sector is an extreme. Public sector includes many employers, not just gonvernment, it includes school boards, hospitals, postal service, military, not just what we think of as government workers inhabiting offices and sucking in our tax dollars. Many public sector agencies are now self funding, they rely on sedrvice charges or fees, not taxes. It owld be enlightening to see what the proproti of public sector workdrs in other ocuntr5ies to comapre, and you'd have to add in the high extent of U.S. private secotr educiton and health care to get a fair comparison.

Now, as to their incomes, I think it is true that public sector salaries and benefits unfairly exceed the people they serve. I do not see that dealing with unions holding monopoly powers is fair or just and these unions should be eliminated. It seems rather stupid for the government to allow and even encourage unions for their own employees, when they should be acting on the behalf of the taxpayer and setting up salary polices which reward public sector workers through a form of compulsory arbitration relative to others in the economy of like skill. Since the government makes the rules, why on earth did they ever allow unions in the public sector? Seems mighty dumb, or else our politicians have sold out to the unions. And, such a salary review program should also consder the relative security of public sector work which tends to be stable through inflations or recession. I think the U.S. federal service does not allow strikes, and it seems to retain people well enough.

Some one has commented that public sector upper level management is relatavely incompetent. I can't say that is true, as a close relative was employed by the post office as an executive of sorts and he one day commented that due to his indexed pension, it had a commuted value of over $1.2 million. That is what the present value of the stream of pension payouts was estimated to be with inflation at 3%, from his date of retirement at age 57. That seemed like a fairly competent decison he made to stay in that line of work. Oh, and he also enjoyed 7 weeks of vacation a year. How many private sector execs woudl get that perk? Never had to worry about a competitor stealing the business and leaving him laid off. Oh, and he did get bonuses, over $25,000 per year in good times.

[mikedavid00]

They may be now. They weren't during the tech boom. People left the public service in droves to work at Nortel etc. and make double their salaries. Today, the Nortel people are crying to get into the government.

I know. I was there during the whole thing. People actively left the gov't for more money. I had friends that did the same and wished they didn't.

Gov't work is make work. It's useless nonsense. All of us in Ottawa knew it.

I guess that's the only time Canada became 'American' for a few years. I still feel that Canadian salaries are far too low in the private sector because we have far too much surplus of labor due to immigration. That is my major beef with immigration. Cultural and religious issues are secondary to me.

[bk59]

I still feel that Canadian salaries are far too low in the private sector because we have far too much surplus of labor due to immigration. That is my major beef with immigration. Cultural and religious issues are secondary to me.

I don't suppose that in all of your reading and research you have found anything to back up these claims, have you? Perhaps some statistics that would show that as immigration increased, unemployment also increased by a similar amount? Or perhaps showing that when unemployment was low, immigration numbers were similarly low?

[Pat Coghlan]

I know. I was there during the whole thing. People actively left the gov't for more money. I had friends that did the same and wished they didn't.

I know someone who was working at Nortel recently, got offered a gov't job and told his manager that he was leaving and, in response, the manager offered him a $25K raise (the guy's been out of university only a year). He turned it down, opting for security vs money. Twenty years ago this would have been considered insanity.

Gov't work is make work. It's useless nonsense. All of us in Ottawa knew it.

I guess that's the only time Canada became 'American' for a few years. I still feel that Canadian salaries are far too low in the private sector because we have far too much surplus of labor due to immigration. That is my major beef with immigration. Cultural and religious issues are secondary to me.

We NEED government workers, but the problem is the taxpayer has no control over their numbers and wages.

[mikedavid00]

I don't suppose that in all of your reading and research you have found anything to back up these claims, have you? Perhaps some statistics that would show that as immigration increased, unemployment also increased by a similar amount? Or perhaps showing that when unemployment was low, immigration numbers were similarly low?

Yes I certainly have. Provinding these cites would be too time consuming. We have excess labor which drives down the prices and creates under employment for the private sector.

I'm further suggesting that when 1/4 or 1/3(as I see it) people who work at all have to fund that much of the work force, it's double worse on us private workers and we get less take home money.

Factor in demand of housing due to immigration and bam. Our quality of life as a Canadian just tanked over 15 years.

Just yesterday on the CBC this ethnic legal organization (more gov't employees IMO) filed a report saying that visible minortities have grown in poverty over 300% in the last 6 years or so.. I can't remember and I'm at work so I can't look up the cite right now. This is because there are too few jobs, far too much labor, and those jobs that are around are very low paying.

[jennie]

Yes I certainly have. Provinding these cites would be too time consuming. We have excess labor which drives down the prices and creates under employment for the private sector.

I'm further suggesting that when 1/4 or 1/3(as I see it) people who work at all have to fund that much of the work force, it's double worse on us private workers and we get less take home money.

Factor in demand of housing due to immigration and bam. Our quality of life as a Canadian just tanked over 15 years.

Just yesterday on the CBC this ethnic legal organization (more gov't employees IMO) filed a report saying that visible minortities have grown in poverty over 300% in the last 6 years or so.. I can't remember and I'm at work so I can't look up the cite right now. This is because there are too few jobs, far too much labor, and those jobs that are around are very low paying.

Canada's ability to accommodate immigrants lags behind its ability to admit them. Some, especially the educated and trained, are saying they would not have come if they had known they would have to work as a chambermaid instead of a doctor, etc.

I certainly support any measures that can help resolve this problem. I think the employers need to take more responsibility for training, though. I don't think that can be sloughed off on the government.

Our private sector lags FAR behind other developed nations in the amount of resources put into training their own workforce.