 | | Good move I wish government would do this. | |
|
 |  atuarreHere come the drumsPremium
join:2004-02-14
College Station, TX | Re: Good move 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
| 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. | |
|
| | | | Re: Good move 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 | Re: Good move 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 | |
|
| | | | | | Re: Good move 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. | |
|
| | | | | DonLibesPremium,ExMod 2001
join:2003-01-19 | Re: Good move 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. | |
|
| | | | | | | | Re: Good move 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? | |
|
| | | | | 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. | |
|
| | | | | | Re: Good move 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 | 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. | |
|
| pkust
join:2001-08-09
Houston, TX | 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 | |
|
| | | 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. | |
|
 hopeflickerCapitalism breeds greedPremium
join:2003-04-03
Long Beach, CA
kudos:1
1 edit | about time It's about time that these fat pigs executives thought of the little guy. | |
|
| |
|  ThrowDemsOutIf you can't convince 'em, confuse 'emPremium
join:2002-03-03
Mullica Hill, NJ
kudos:4
1 edit | Re: about time said by hopeflicker:It's about time that these fat pigs executives thought of the little guy. You guys don't know how the game is played. Their salaries were frozen. But they will undoubtedly have improved incentive pkgs with stock options that could pay off nicely if the stock rises beyond its current very depressed values. And when TWC is spun off there may even be provisions that vests their stock options without waiting for certain prices to be reached. I've seen pkgs that have been setup that way.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page | |
|
| |  dvd536as Mr. Pink as they comePremium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4 | Re: about time said by ThrowDemsOut:said by hopeflicker:It's about time that these fat pigs executives thought of the little guy. You guys don't know how the game is played. Their salaries were frozen. But they will undoubtedly have improved incentive pkgs with stock options that could pay off nicely if the stock rises beyond its current very depressed values. And when TWC is spun off there may even be provisions that vests their stock options without waiting for certain prices to be reached. I've seen pkgs that have been setup that way. Concur. don't expect to see these execs in soup lines anytime soon!
--
When I gez aju zavateh na nalechoo more new yonooz tonigh molinigh - Ken Lee | |
|
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1 | My evenge If I was working at TW and got that raise cut, you can guarantee I will force productivity down as revenge and make poor decisions, remember I'm an executive. | |
|
|  KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
 ·AT&T DSL Service
| Re: My evenge said by patcat88:If I was working at TW and got that raise cut, you can guarantee I will force productivity down as revenge and make poor decisions, remember I'm an executive. So, you'd just act as you normally would, then? 
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
| |
|
| | What ever... What ever... I guess they need caps so they can get a raise next year. As far government goes, our Congressman and Senator's work hard at spending OUR tax dollars, that's why they voted themselves a raise about a month ago. | |
|
|  RARPSL
join:1999-12-08
Suffern, NY | Re: What ever... said by JusticeDun:As far government goes, our 's work hard at spending OUR tax dollars, that's why they voted themselves a raise about a month ago. I think Congresscritter and Senator raises should only go into effect once the position is filled via an election held AFTER the raise is passed. IOW: All Senators must be reelected (or replaced if they lose the election) first before getting the raise. The same with Congresscritters. They should not be allowed to vote themself a raise but only whoever holds their position (even if it happens to be themself) after their position is next up for election. | |
|
| |  sivranBack to Opera againPremium
join:2003-09-15
Arlington, TX
kudos:1
 ·RoadRunner Cable
2 edits | Re: What ever... Already true. Whenever Reps or Senators vote themselves a pay raise, they're not going to get it unless they get re-elected.
IIRC, it's an actual amendment, or even in the Constitution proper. Maybe I'll go look it up. In any case, it's been that way for a very, very long time.
Hmm, alright, so perhaps it hasn't been so for as long as I thought. The 27th amendment was ratified in 1992. | |
|
| | | RARPSL
join:1999-12-08
Suffern, NY | Re: What ever... said by sivran:Already true. Whenever Reps or Senators vote themselves a pay raise, they're not going to get it unless they get re-elected. IIRC, it's an actual amendment, or even in the Constitution proper. Maybe I'll go look it up. In any case, it's been that way for a very, very long time. Hmm, alright, so perhaps it hasn't been so for as long as I thought. The 27th amendment was ratified in 1992. While a Rep must get reelected to get the raise s/he voted for, this does NOT apply to 66% of the Senators since the raise goes into effect as soon as there is a new election and the new congress is seated. Thus there is a MAJOR Flaw (IMO) since the Senators not up for reelection can still vote themselves a pay raise without needing to run for election (a conflict of interest that this amendment is supposed to avoid). That is why I commented that the raise for Senators should be staggered based on their term. | |
|
 jmn1207Premium
join:2000-07-19
Reston, VA | Give Them Unlimited $alaries I say they should be told they have an infinite amount of money to spend, but only give them $10 every 12 hours if they exceed $10,000 in any given month. Give them a warning letter if they go over this limit, and terminate repeat offenders.  | |
|
| RadioDoc58ef2c0Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11 |  Re: Give Them Unlimited $alaries
| |
|
| | what will really happen When things pick back up, they will all get back pay plus bonuses. Happens all the time. | |
|
| |
| | |
| | | |
| | |
| | |  GooberPremium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
kudos:4 | Re: what will really happen Maybe so, but the vitriol is amazing. It's like a strong envy or jealousy that consumes people.
And, a lot of this comes from people that don't work nearly as hard and have a higher sense of enitlement than the executives they criticise.
I work literally from 7:30 until 7:00 every day and several hours on the weekends. I've taken pay cuts and frozen salaries. This year I took a frozen salary, even through there are only several dozen of us in the corporate offices and over 100K in the workforce, because it "wouldn't look good if we got raises this year." Yet, I worked my butt off. The workers just kept working their shifts.
But hey, let's all stick it to the man. | |
|
| | | | | | Re: what will really happen said by Goober:And, a lot of this comes from people that don't work nearly as hard and have a higher sense of enitlement than the executives they criticise. From what I've seen, most executives don't work nearly as hard as those "lower down the corporate food chain." They are the definition of under-worked and overpaid, unlike folks like myself who are overworked and underpaid; in my case, it is the result of an upper management decision that was made in a vacuum that's left the department understaffed by at least two people and working in a field where always on-call is an old concept.
--
"This is a bus. You know how big a bus is?" | |
|
| GooberPremium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
kudos:4 | Re: what will really happen I suppose it depends on the organization. All of the places I've worked, I've seen executives putting in long hours. Where I work presently, it's those that are further down in the organization that put in basically 8-5 work hours. The exceptions are typically ones that are targeted for raises and promotions and increased responsibility.
My father used to have an acquaintance at his workplace who was always home by 5 for supper my dad would tell me. Yet, my dad was rarely home earlier than 7. 25 years down the road, my father was a corporate VP and eventually CTO of one of the companies largest subs. My father's friend retired as a manager.
I think that if the prevailing mindset is that the executives don't work hard and that they aren't as smart as those who grouse about things all the time, then people need to take a serious second look.
What is it that leads you to believe that the execs don't work as hard/smarter than the underlings? | |
|
| | | | Re: what will really happen said by Goober:What is it that leads you to believe that the execs don't work as hard/smarter than the underlings? I've seen the VP schedules... Let's just say that they put in a lot of time on extra-curricular items, like golf tournaments and fund raisers. That is hardly "work". Meanwhile, I am at work every day, doing to work of probably two people, constantly having to put projects on hold because we are bombarded with more work than the department can handle. Like I said earlier, I'm one of those people whose phone can ring at any hour of any day and I have to be at work ready to solve problems quickly.
As for them not being as smart, that is one of those, depends on the exec judgment calls. I've seen some pretty boneheaded decisions in upper management, totally contrary to what is actually going on. Imagine a hiring freeze that prevents a department from replacing a deceased member of the team. Now you have a team that works less efficiently because work exceeds the available manpower. It comes down to bad decisions eroding confidence.
--
"This is a bus. You know how big a bus is?" | |
|
| | | GooberPremium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
kudos:4
1 edit | Re: what will really happen I suppose it's all perspective from which side of the aisle one sits. Establishing and maintaining relationships are important functions. Work isn't necessarily determined by the amount of physical labor. | |
|
 xdeadhead220, 221, Whatever It Takes.Premium
join:2000-11-08
Mechanicsburg, PA | by freezing them it means they can't go down either. and when they spin off that division, the posts will be redundant but since the wgaes are frozen, they continue to get paid big bucks while still being essentially surplus employees. sweet gig if you can get it. | |
|
|
|
