| Good move I wish government would do this. |
|
 atuarreHere come the drumsPremium
join:2004-02-14
College Station, TX | said by Joedub:I wish government would do this. I think the raise freeze should start at the director level, and go on up from there. |
|
Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
| reply to Joedub
said by Joedub:I wish government would do this. you mean the govt should freeze wages on upper level govt employees or the govt should make companies freeze wages of their "VP and above" employees?
if you mean freeze upper level govt wages, you wouldn't get enough money to pay raises at lower levels - the top salary in a govt agency is for SES, which tops out at around $160K or $180K. |
|
| Well a better solution would be to hire contractors that do the job right the first time.. This would save exponentially more money than pay freezes for upper govt. I got a friend that does subcontracting and one of his projects was government waste and safety. They sure piss away a lot of money. |
|
DonLibesPremium,ExMod 2001
join:2003-01-19 | said by jc100:Well a better solution would be to hire contractors that do the job right the first time.. This would save exponentially more money than pay freezes for upper govt. I got a friend that does subcontracting and one of his projects was government waste and safety. They sure piss away a lot of money. Contracting is not the solution for quality nor is it the solution to saving money. And if you aren't willing to agree that military contracting is a huge example, let's take a simpler one: contractor Bobby Ross, paid $700K/yr as Army's football coach while "leading" the team to a 3-9 season.
»www.recordonline.com/apps/pbcs.d···SPORTS01 |
|
| reply to jc100
Actually I have seen contractors do an even worse job than the govt employees in some cases.
I agree with the wasteful spending. I saw it a ton of wasteful spending for projects the govt would start and than cut it off half way through. Thus making what was complete useless since it was only half completed.
Things that need to change are on both sides.
Govt had to many "chefs and not enough indians" plus they had incompetent employees in decision making roles.
Some of the contract companies I worked for had executives trying to micro manage and make decisions on technology that they had no clue about. |
|
DonLibesPremium,ExMod 2001
join:2003-01-19 | reply to nasadude
said by nasadude:you mean the govt should freeze wages on upper level govt employees or the govt should make companies freeze wages of their "VP and above" employees? if you mean freeze upper level govt wages, you wouldn't get enough money to pay raises at lower levels - the top salary in a govt agency is for SES, which tops out at around $160K or $180K. There are a bunch of federal employees paid more than that. Example: President, VP, Supreme Court justices, Cabinet officials, and a number of House/Senate members. And of course many contractors are paid more. And yes I would consider it a technicality that you want to freeze government employees but not government contractors. |
|
| reply to DonLibes
I Think you misread my post. I am saying since the government contracts substantially, hiring people who do the job right the first time is essential. Often times, government subcontractors outsource to other contractors, and the quality is shit. The government would save EXPONENTIALLY by making sure those they hire have a consistent record of getting things done on time and in good fashion. |
|
| reply to raptor1418
See above on what I meant by hiring contractors right the first time. IE Making sure those they use have a good and consistent record and performance. Often, these contractors outsource and so on. You want to make sure you get one who does the job properly, or you're left with a mess and a lot of paperwork figuring out who to go often.
As for wasteful spending in the government, its endemic. Money grows on trees, didn't you know. Tax payer money is the unlimited cash cow for whatever stupid or half assed project someone wishes to fund today. Change is needed, but it won't happy. Too many of our politicians today got jobs lined up with the very companies who lobby them daily. If they cut off the pork to these companies, where will their millions come from after leaving office = /. |
|
DonLibesPremium,ExMod 2001
join:2003-01-19 | reply to jc100
said by jc100:I Think you misread my post. I am saying since the government contracts substantially, hiring people who do the job right the first time is essential. Often times, government subcontractors outsource to other contractors, and the quality is shit. The government would save EXPONENTIALLY by making sure those they hire have a consistent record of getting things done on time and in good fashion. You're right, I missed that part of your post. My apologies. |
|
| Np. But either which way, waste seems to be the rule rather than the exception. Quite a shame. Would be nice if our government could be fiscally sound like so many others. Several countries in Eastern Europe have balanced budgets and high qualities of life. Sweden is a gleaming example. So why can't we do this? |
|
|
|
pkust
join:2001-08-09
Houston, TX | reply to Joedub
said by Joedub:I wish government would do this. Agreed. Actually, I would like to see all members of Congress, as well as all White House staff and the senior staff of every government agency, work without pay for a few years.
--
Cordially,
Peter Nayland Kust
pkust@tekmedia.com
TEKMedia Communications, Inc.
www.tekmedia.com |
|
| reply to Joedub
i like that idea a lot. congressmen are awfully expensive when you factor in their salary, travel expenses, aids, secretaries, and others expenses. if i was crafty enough, i would even suggest lobbying, but that is a long stretch the expense seems even worse when you start looking at how much work is accomplished and how many days they are actually working. take a look at »www.thecapitol.net/FAQ/cong_numbers.html for how much, woops i mean little, they work. |
|
