BIGGER IS BETTER !!

It is one of those sayings that does not invite challenge.

In that sense, it is similar to the sentence in Robert Frost’s Poem the Mending Wall: Good Fences Make Good Neighbours.

And yet, when we lived in Toronto in the late 1980s – everyone had a fence, but no one knew their neighbour.

Moving next to Prince Edward Island, we found no fences and yet everyone knew their neighbour.

So maybe … just maybe, ‘good fences do not make good neighbours’.

But of course we are not talking about fences – rather today’s topic is Bigger is Better.  As in the need for more immigration.

I just listened an Expert on a local talk show waxing on about Canada’s “desperate need for immigration” because our birth rate is below replacement value.  “We need immigration if we hope to continue to see our population grow” said he.

But Why, I ask myself, do we need to grow a bigger population?  Presumably the day will come when all of earth’s women will not have a sufficient number of babies to sustain population growth.

What then – do we just all shrivel up and die?

The Day’s Expert went on to say that with a growing population we would need more doctors, nurses, engineers and the like.  And he pointed out that this would lead to a need for even more immigration.  The guy was beside himself with delight at the sound of his words.

But for me the reverse of his statement would also be true - with less immigration – i.e. less growth, Canada’s need for more more professionals would lessen.

Would it not?

The Expert went on to state that Canada currently has a critical need for “skilled workers” and again pointed to increased immigration as the magic wand to rectify this deficiency.

But here too I got to thinking; what about our own workforce.  Currently only 60% of working age are employed. Unemployment is especially chronic amongst our young where nearly 15% unemployment is the norm – twice the national figure for all of working age.

So why not make a greater effort to train our own citizens and provide them with the skills our society so desperately needs? They would benefit along with our society.

Fences may indeed not result in better neighbours and Immigration may not result in a better society.

They may well do … but I would be much happier if these …what I term …Rhetorical Assertions … were at least challenged to endeavour to determine the real truth behind them.

As I see it …

“K.D. Galagher’

 

 

 

This Blog Is Not About …

 

The discrepancy between the average public servant’s salary / benefits and those in the private sector – is plus 42% as determined by the Canadian Federation of Independent Business. 

Or to be more precise – some $114,100 compared to $47,200.

Nor is this Blog about their taking 18.2 sick days per year – some 2.5 times more than their private sector counterparts.

Rather this Blog is about firings an area where the private sector comes in first …for a change.

Each year, on average, 5 to 10 % of private sector employees are let go for ‘unsatisfactory’ work.  Whereas the rate pertaining to federal government employees is a miniscule .06 %.

This is a ratio of approximately 20:1 assuming the lesser value of 5%.

Wow.

Maybe the public sector just has much better employees?

Or maybe not.

Anyway, the President of Treasury Board recently announced that he was going to address this issue via performance appraisals.

Problem is, it won’t work and not just because performance appraisals have been a mandatory part of the functioning of the civil service for years now.

It won’t work simply because performance reviews do not work in the public sector.

And they do not work simply because there is no incentive for them to work – i.e. unlike the private sector there is no profit motivator.

In the private sector, for an organization to continue to exist, it must be profitable and any who get in the way of that, risk having their jobs terminated.

In the public sector – there is no such discipliner; in fact it takes much work for a manager to build a case against the work challenged. 

So why go to the bother of firing someone if there is no  bottom-line reason to do and much work in the doing.

Precisely and that is why Tony Clement’s initiative is headed to failure in this area.

The Tory Government can huff and puff all it wants but at the end of the day, their will be just as many deadbeats in place as there always were.

In fact the very real danger exists that good employees nearing retirement will volunteer for dismissal just to get a redundancy package.

So what would you do Galagher?

Good question.

Given that the rate in the private sector is between 5 and 10%, I would tell government departments that each year they would have to release 2 to 3 % of their non-performers.  Their decisions would have to be backed up by two to three years’ work of unsatisfactory appraisals (which in government means ‘satisfactory’ appraisals) in order to block good employees from trying to take advantage of the system.

This would represent at least a start to unload those employees who like to coast – they are not the majority by any means but there certainly are at least 2 to 3 % in any given year.

Not only would some deadwood finally get addressed but it would also help morale since it is not easy for those many who work hard in government having to watch - even a few - sit back at their desks and retire in place.

Going back to the rates of pay and benefits – an issue this Blog is not about – I would cut these by 20% across the board to avoid layoffs and to bring this important aspect back into a better balance.

Since Canada spent 43.8 Billion in 2011 on 375,000 employees – including the RCMP and the Military – a 20 % reduction would save the Government nearly $9 Billion per annum – a sum that would go along way in helping to eradicate the deficit while taking some of the pressure off ‘you know who’.

As I see it…

‘K.D. Galagher’