The Future of Public Workers
 

This is inevitable in many cities and states moving forward. Is it good? I guess that depends on one's definition of what is good or right for society (taxpayers).

Costa Mesa to lay off nearly half of city workforce, outsource services

"The city of Costa Mesa plans to lay off more than 200 employees and outsource 18 city services by the fall.

The layoffs would cut the city's municipal workforce by 43%. The City Council approved the layoffs in a 4-1 vote late Tuesday night, despite nearly unanimous opposition from the audience.

City officials said pink slips will go out in the next six months. The mayor blamed years of missteps by city staff and rising pension costs."

Read more....

Costa Mesa to lay off nearly half of city workforce, outsource services | L.A. NOW | Los Angeles Times

Re: The Future of Public Workers
 

Trolling again?...Does your employer :rolleyes: know you fck off this much?

Re: The Future of Public Workers
 

Right, it's like a scene out of Goodfellas:

The problem is that now they won't have enough to pay anyone else. Had to shut down a few firehouses to cover those pensions? ****** you, pay me.

But I keep forgetting that this whole business was just dreamed up wholesale by the Koch Brothers and the public employees are blameless. My bad.

Re: The Future of Public Workers
 

One of the dangers of outsourcing is that private companies, while not always concerned about paying their employees well, are often concerned with making more and more profit.

My town outsourced it's ambulance service about 10 years ago even though it was a paid-on-call department with only 4 full time employees. They had graphs and charts and budgets which showed that paying a private ambulance service was going to be cheaper, faster, better and they could sell our two ambulances and close one of our fire stations and TA-DA!! No employees, no insurance, no maintanance, no property = Mo' money for the town!!! Less expense to the taxpayers!! Hurray!!

Worked fine - until the first 2 year contract was up. (Well, not really "fine," because the private ambulance company was not actually located in our town and sometimes the travel time to a call took a bit, well, long - and sometimes they did not have the right kind of ambulance available because they also covered several other towns, too.)

Anyhow, after the first contract was up and went out for bid again it turned out the the ambulance company who had gotten the first contract had bought out the other two competitors and the only company left to "compete" with was too small for our town's needs. Hence, there was no "negotiations," no "competitive bids," no "big savings." The only company in town had a monopoly and jacked their rates to the town outrageously. The town had no choice but to comply since it could not compete on it's own any longer, having sold/fired/closed/given away everything they would have needed to return to business on it's own.

And when the contract came up for bid the second time (2 more years later, since the company would only sign a two year contract) they raised their price high enough that not only is the town paying far more for them than they would have for the semi-volunteer public ambulance service they had disbanded but they had to agree to allow the ambulance company to bill the patient's directly, as well. Up until then emergency ambulance treatment and transport was absorbed by the town which felt that the taxpayers paid a high enough property tax to deserve an occasional free ride in a medical emergency.

The end result? There was no reduction in taxes to the town residents, there was no improvement in the services rendered, there was no money saved, in fact, there is more money being spent, and AND anyone who uses an ambulance is now not only paying for the contracted service through their property taxes, they are getting individually billed for it, as well.

Collaterally, they've lost even more. When the ambulance service was publicly run and supported the employees did a whole lot of community service for free. We attended football games with an ambulance, provided an ambulance plus medics on the scene of all parades, firework displays, little league games, carnivals, etc.. Why wouldn't we? It was our community, these were our kids, this was our parade. We also went into the schools regularily and taught first aid and fire safety classes. We offered free CPR courses several times a year to the public and recertified all town employees yearly. Also free of charge.

Now if the town wants any of that stuff done, they have to pay extra for it. Some of it was covered in the first contract - none of it was covered in any subsequent contract.

It was a smallish town, sure - and maybe more neighborly than a big city might be - but the principal remains the same. Most big cities demand, as part of the employee's union contract, that the employee reside within the city limits. This makes it personal for virtually all employees. They have a vested interest in keeping the streets clean, safe and beautiful. They have a vested interest in keeping the schools up to par since their kids are going to have to attend those schools, too.

Not so for contracted companies who don't give a damn where their employees live - and most of whom (in a big city or a wealthy suburban area) aren't going to pay a wage which allows that employee to live in the more expensive place where they work. There's no loyality, there's no personal stake, there's no nothing.

It's a job.

And a poorly paid one at that.

There are downsides to privitization. These are just a few of them.

It might be good to keep them in mind because with all this talk of budget, budget, budget and the need to get reelected in a year or two I'm pretty sure the politicians aren't considering it.

What do they care? Most of them intend to more on to bigger and better things and places, anyhow.

Re: The Future of Public Workers
 

Also depends on how the outsourcing is executed.

Like most issues, this isn't black and white.

Re: The Future of Public Workers
 

So tax money flows into the coffers of the select wealthy... not sure that's a better solution.

How do we ensure a 100% fair bidding process to allow any American Entrepreneur the opportunity to provide these services?

Re: The Future of Public Workers
 

This is why it is important to keep government focused on the things they are actually supposed to be doing (like public safety). If you expand the amount of non-essential services, then the essential services eventually suffer. To me the tragedy is that pensions and retirement health care for paper-pushers are putting a strain on the system to the detriment of police and firemen. Furthermore, those who abuse the system in any job function (firemen who get disability at a Captain's rate because they were injured on a day when they were covering for him, etc.) are putting all of us at risk because there are simply not enough funds to pay all of them and provide ongoing services at the same level.

Bad, bad times ahead.

Re: The Future of Public Workers
 

My old bud Flex...I love you man!

When you don't like someone's post, you resort to attacking the poster. Is that the best you can do? I honestly thought you were smarter than that Flex?

Just had my review 2 weeks ago and was ranked the top performer in my group. Just had a phone interview with one of the top iconic brands in America that would pay me 40% more than I'm making now...(although I prolly won't get it). Hope that tickles you pink.

Re: The Future of Public Workers
 

KY Jelly? No raise is worth what that job is offering... TRUST ME... :rocker:

Re: The Future of Public Workers
 

And this job may not be worth the risk of accepting it either. Co.'s like this one chew people up and spit them out. I have little interest in getting either chewed up or spit out!

BTW...K-Y?? Funny dude mcgraw!;) Think more along the line of beverages.