RE: Federal workers more likely to die of natural causes, than be fired for poor performance

RE: Federal workers more likely to die of natural causes, than be fired for poor performance (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Federal workers more likely to die of natural causes, than be fired for poor performance (7/22/2011 8:57:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cloudboy There is "less government" in Afghanistan, why don't you move there. You will find relaxed gun laws as well. Because I love it here. If people working to improve it bothers you, perhaps youre the one that doesnt. And what do gun laws have to do with anything?

imperatrixx -> RE: Federal workers more likely to die of natural causes, than be fired for poor performance (7/22/2011 9:34:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic To be accurate, Impera, my plan would be to essentially end government work as a lifetime career path for the overwhelming majority. Why, exactly? Why emulate the private sector in this regard? 50 or 60 years ago, any job could be a lifetime career path for someone, whether it was factory work or work as an accountant, a lot of people got a job in their 20's or 30's and stayed, either working their way up the ladder or simply showing up reliably to their job, putting in a reliable performance, and retiring with that company. Now, people switch jobs so often that HR people find it suspicious to have worked in one place for so long...and what do we have? A shrinking middle class where both partners work instead of one. It's clearly worked so well. Here's the weird thing...that high turnover doesn't improve the bureaucracy. It's actually the opposite, that sort of job hopping lowers people's connection and identification with their employer, there's less investment in the job and high turnover leads to lower performance and lower morale. It's weird, you'll find a bunch of pamphlets like these about how to keep your employees for longer, but none about how to fire more of them.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Federal workers more likely to die of natural causes, than be fired for poor performance (7/22/2011 9:46:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: imperatrixx where both partners work instead of one. That is at least as much a social phenomenon as an economic one, and has far reaching consequences far beyond the affluence that two income households initially produced.

imperatrixx -> RE: Federal workers more likely to die of natural causes, than be fired for poor performance (7/22/2011 9:46:57 PM)
True...if anything, I got the cause and effect wrong...doubling the workforce helped make it as disposable as it is.

Termyn8or -> RE: Federal workers more likely to die of natural causes, than be fired for poor performance (7/22/2011 10:10:32 PM)
FR Ain't nobody ever heard of "civil service" ? The civil service exam ? I should try it, just to see what's in it. It must be fucking hilarious. T^T

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Federal workers more likely to die of natural causes, than be fired for poor performance (7/22/2011 10:17:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Termyn8or FR Ain't nobody ever heard of "civil service" ? The civil service exam ? I should try it, just to see what's in it. It must be fucking hilarious. T^T There is a whole range of Civil service exams depending on the occupation being hired for. Im sure there are several you wouldnt have a chance of passing.

TheHeretic -> RE: Federal workers more likely to die of natural causes, than be fired for poor performance (7/23/2011 12:14:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: imperatrixx quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic To be accurate, Impera, my plan would be to essentially end government work as a lifetime career path for the overwhelming majority. Why, exactly? To decrease long-term costs, for one thing, but also as a general improvement to the social order. To root out and destroy the entitlement mentality cancer. To restore the notion that the job is actually about serving the public and the public good, rather than rushing off the required form 27B stroke 6, before spending a week out of the office for diversity and sensitivity training. Also, to broaden the base of people who have experience working in or for government somewhere, and so will vote with greater comprehension. Because I can't think of a single reason why having a vast, tenured bureaucrat class is an improvement to the great American experiment. Because I can't think of a single reason why driving a water truck for the city should ever be a career.

imperatrixx -> RE: Federal workers more likely to die of natural causes, than be fired for poor performance (7/23/2011 3:00:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Because I can't think of a single reason why driving a water truck for the city should ever be a career. Well, you have this guy, without any professional training. He's going to be working for about 40 or 50 years in his lifetime. Is there any specific reason why he should have to change jobs every 5 years, having to organize things like pensions and health insurance (if he's lucky enough to get a job with health insurance) instead of staying in one job for 50 years? If the guy's a decent worker, who does his job well, shows up on time, never takes sick days unless he's genuinely sick, etc...you're basically saying that since he's not educated enough to have a real career, any sense of job security he might have should be artificially removed. That we should root out the idea that being a consistent, reliable worker shouldn't give you any sense of "entitlement" to keep your job, in fact, we should constantly shake things up just so people don't get too secure in knowing that if they work hard they'll be able to maintain a steady job in one place. And the icing on the cake is that you actually think that will help restore America's middle class?

philosophy -> RE: Federal workers more likely to die of natural causes, than be fired for poor performance (7/23/2011 7:14:29 PM)
"To decrease long-term costs, for one thing, but also as a general improvement to the social order. To root out and destroy the entitlement mentality cancer" ...and I thought social engineering was a liberal vice.

Owner59 -> RE: Federal workers more likely to die of natural causes, than be fired for poor performance (7/23/2011 8:03:28 PM)
Newty just recently said that folks don`t want conservative social engineering any more than they want it from liberals,.....and got hammered. And it`s usually the dopes calling the loudest for "smaller government" that scream the loudest when ~their particular~service is cut or ~their~ benefit is threatened. Some of the loudest proponents of capitalism,Wall Street, were there with their hands out,asking for government help. The notion that government has to be made smaller,that it is the problem,is just simplistic dogma. It`s a trick really,because for the connected and well fed aren`t going to suffer any type of lose.It`ll be the poor kid who can`t get medical help or someone else who`s vulnerable that`ll get screwed.

dcnovice -> RE: Federal workers more likely to die of natural causes, than be fired for poor performance (7/23/2011 8:26:55 PM)
FR I'm not sure how useful personal observations are, but I'll offer them to take or leave. (a) Having seen the ruthlessness of office politics, particularly when folks covet someone's high salary and don't want to have to pay severance, I'm not entirely convinced that those fired for "poor performance" are necessarily poor performers. (b) In the federal workplace I know best, there were seven layoffs this year and one death. I can attest personally for the fine performance of three of the folks who got laid off.

domiguy -> RE: Federal workers more likely to die of natural causes, than be fired for poor performance (7/23/2011 9:06:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: cloudboy There is "less government" in Afghanistan, why don't you move there. You will find relaxed gun laws as well. Because I love it here. If people working to improve it bothers you, perhaps youre the one that doesnt. And what do gun laws have to do with anything? Lol..wilbur is "working" to improve our lives. What a condescending piece of work, he be. Don't forget, wilbur was a medic in 'Nam he feels a higher calling to help people in distress.

TheHeretic -> RE: Federal workers more likely to die of natural causes, than be fired for poor performance (7/23/2011 10:05:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy ...and I thought social engineering was a liberal vice. Phil! [:D] Nope. It's the civilizing nature of civilization, itself. Whether it is for good or ill depends entirely on how it is used.

imperatrixx -> RE: Federal workers more likely to die of natural causes, than be fired for poor performance (7/24/2011 12:08:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Whether it is for good or ill depends entirely on how it is used. Yeah, those nasty liberals use it to give health care and social security nets...if only they could focus on more constructive things like firing people, keeping wages low, and decreasing job security.

rulemylife -> RE: Federal workers more likely to die of natural causes, than be fired for poor performance (7/24/2011 7:18:24 AM)
Oh for fuck's sake. Really? San Francisco State University management professor John Sullivan, an expert on employee turnover, says the low departure rates show a failure to release poor performers and those with obsolete skills. "Rather than indicating something positive, rates below 1% in the firing and layoff components would indicate a serious management problem," he says. If I have to listen to one more expert on this board I am going to have to bang my head on the wall until I'm unconscious. Does anyone know an expert in head-banging?

TheHeretic -> RE: Federal workers more likely to die of natural causes, than be fired for poor performance (7/24/2011 7:38:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: imperatrixx Yeah, those nasty liberals use it to give health care and social security nets...if only they could focus on more constructive things like firing people, keeping wages low, and decreasing job security. There you go, Impera. Throw in your earlier assertion that the government should be providing better jobs for life (at taxpayer expense) to the unskilled, than they could ever get in the private (productive) sector of the economy, and you have exactly the sort of social engineering that creates a citizenry which relies on gov't to care for them, rather than encouraging the people to be self-motivated, innovative, and flexible enough to embrace the changing challenges of a fast moving world. Why do you think that increasing dependency on the government would be a good thing? Do you think we would all be better off in a nanny state?

kat321 -> RE: Federal workers more likely to die of natural causes, than be fired for poor performance (7/24/2011 7:52:24 AM)
Beware of blanket policies.... Public sector workers in this country also include civilians working as translators in intelligence departments, professional medical personnel, law federal law enforcement including homeland security and other highly educated workers whose value to their positions increase with time in service (the terms institutional knowledge/history come to mind). While it might be wonderfully fun to increase costs and see what damage can be done to the country by firing all these these highly-skilled public sector employees at regular intervals, I suggest we avoid it... or at least amend some people's thinking to the point where they realize that driving a truck isn't the only public sector job out there.

imperatrixx -> RE: Federal workers more likely to die of natural causes, than be fired for poor performance (7/24/2011 8:14:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic There you go, Impera. Throw in your earlier assertion that the government should be providing better jobs for life (at taxpayer expense) to the unskilled, than they could ever get in the private (productive) sector of the economy, and you have exactly the sort of social engineering that creates a citizenry which relies on gov't to care for them, rather than encouraging the people to be self-motivated, innovative, and flexible enough to embrace the changing challenges of a fast moving world. Why do you think that increasing dependency on the government would be a good thing? Do you think we would all be better off in a nanny state? First of all, having people keep their jobs isn't increasing dependency on government. These jobs need to be done. The people doing them will likely not have professional training (because those people work in their professions). The only problem you seem to have is that the government isn't focusing on the bottom line at the expense of employees. Here's a thought. Why not just outsource those jobs to China and India? My father works at the Social Security department, managing people's benefits and claims. Some guy in India could totally do that. It would be way cheaper, and emulate the private sector's ability to turn record profits by sending money outside the US. I mean, if you want to fire a bunch of US citizens just to make things cheaper, why not go all the way? Who needs American labor anyway? Fuck those people and their stupid dependancy on the government for giving them a fair wage and job security. Lazy bastards think that just because they come to work and do their job, they deserve to keep it? Ugh. You're pissing me off. You want to cut corners just to cut them, you want to take the cheap route just to take it, and most disgustingly you're opposed to the American Dream...you know, the one most people want...a steady job, a house of their own, and the ability to provide for their children. Really, if you think that a person going to work every day, working hard, and doing their job well is "being taken care of by the government" in a nanny state, your thinking is warped. Most people believe in a fair wage for a fair day's work, not just seeing who they can get for the cheapest...and the government paying people for working is a lot less nanny state than the government paying 20% of their workforce unemployment benefits every year...or welfare or food stamps for the people who were perfectly capable of keeping their job but can't find a new one in this economy. I get it if you want to run a business like that...I might disagree with it but I can understand the level of selfishness needed to exploit others if you're making a personal profit. But I can not for the life of me understand why you think that creating a class of wage slaves, getting laid off and going from job to job, hoping there's something for them, is any way to run a great nation that is supposed to be a beacon of light for the rest of the world.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Federal workers more likely to die of natural causes, than be fired for poor performance (7/24/2011 8:17:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife Oh for fuck's sake. Really? San Francisco State University management professor John Sullivan, an expert on employee turnover, says the low departure rates show a failure to release poor performers and those with obsolete skills. "Rather than indicating something positive, rates below 1% in the firing and layoff components would indicate a serious management problem," he says. If I have to listen to one more expert on this board I am going to have to bang my head on the wall until I'm unconscious. quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy Sorry, but with businesses averaging 10% turnover in normal economies, there is virutally always room to lose 3% without firing good workers.

TheHeretic -> RE: Federal workers more likely to die of natural causes, than be fired for poor performance (7/24/2011 9:39:30 AM)
I'm pissing you off, Impera? I'd suggest you get over it. Maybe the problem is your own cognitive dissonance, as you try to try to equate the nanny-state goals of "giving" people health care and lifetime jobs, and a nice comfy hammock of a safety net, while insisting it somehow supports a positive work ethic, and that breeding an entitlement mentality is a way for society to advance, rather than stagnating. Also, where are you coming up with outsource to India, nonsense? Are my ideas so far beyond your grasp that you need to invent positions to assign me, that you do feel competent to attack?

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625