Author
|
Topic: No to minimum wage hikes, yes to 40% pay raises for execs
|
|
|
|
|
jas
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9529
|
posted 09 August 2008 08:43 PM
quote: Originally posted by Fartful Codger: Well, I think it's fucking outrageous. Look, I actually agree that we should pay quality people what they're worth. This includes giving MLAs decent salaries and it includes giving top bureaucrats good compensation.
Actually, I don't agree with this philosophy at all. If these people can command these high salaries in the private sector, then that's where they should be. Why aren't they there? Usually because they're no longer top game in their field and they get an appointment in the public service. The public service used to be about public service. It's not about big taxpayer-subsidized salaries. Campbell's constant meddling with the remuneration scale has nothing to do with paying people what they're "worth". Nor do I approve of overly large salaries for MLAs. For one thing, it offers an incentive to public service that should not be there. And for another, it raises the bar such that certain types of people - potential representatives of you and I - might be excluded simply based on economic class or perception of "success". Modelling government remuneration on corporate remuneration is misguided. Yes, we don't want our public reps to be bought by private interests, but I don't think a system in which they earn scores of thousands more than the bulk of their constituents do is at all democratic. Government salaries should be indexed to average or median income for the region in question (in this case, the province as a whole - I don't mean the individual ridings), and bonuses or increments should be based on performance: if government's doing a good job and citizens are benefitting from a thriving and sustainable economy that has long term viability, then a modest raise may be appropriate. If things aren't doing so well, and many people are suffering, a raise would not be available. This is why people business types like Gordon Campbell do not belong in government. They don't understand the difference.
From: the world we want | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
MCunningBC
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14903
|
posted 12 August 2008 10:35 PM
quote: Originally posted by jas: The public service used to be about public service. It's not about big taxpayer-subsidized salaries. Campbell's constant meddling with the remuneration scale has nothing to do with paying people what they're "worth".Nor do I approve of overly large salaries for MLAs. For one thing, it offers an incentive to public service that should not be there. And for another, it raises the bar such that certain types of people - potential representatives of you and I - might be excluded simply based on economic class or perception of "success". Modelling government remuneration on corporate remuneration is misguided. Yes, we don't want our public reps to be bought by private interests, but I don't think a system in which they earn scores of thousands more than the bulk of their constituents do is at all democratic. Government salaries should be indexed to average or median income for the region in question (in this case, the province as a whole - I don't mean the individual ridings), and bonuses or increments should be based on performance: if government's doing a good job and citizens are benefitting from a thriving and sustainable economy that has long term viability, then a modest raise may be appropriate. If things aren't doing so well, and many people are suffering, a raise would not be available.
This is a very detailed set of considerations, with a lot of hedging and some contradictions. OTOH, you say compensation must be high enough that bribery isn't attactive to government officials, but OTOH, the salaries and increases must be such that legislators make average pay, which in BC right now is about $21 or $22 per hour across all occupations. IOWs, about $40 to $45 thousand per year.
From: BC | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Politics101
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8962
|
posted 22 September 2008 03:30 PM
Noticed this press release about the raises today on the government web site - so here it is; quote: VICTORIA – The salaries of every deputy and assistant deputy minister in the BC Public Service have now been reviewed and decisions have been made on the actual salary levels assigned to each individual executive member under the new compensation framework introduced in August.As a result of this review, effective Aug. 1 the average actual pay for deputy ministers is $217,758, representing an average increase of just over seven per cent. The average salary under the new framework for assistant deputy ministers is $157,608, representing an average increase of 21 per cent. The deputy minister to the Premier has opted not to accept any increase in salary at this time. The increases provided also reflect that the value of the salary holdback has been increased from five per cent to 10 per cent of each executive’s annual pay. The holdback of each executive’s salary is dependent on their performance on a series of specific measures linked to building the corporate human resources of the BC Public Service. In real terms, that means on average up to almost $22,000 of deputy minister salaries and $16,000 in assistant deputy minister salaries are at risk if performance measures are not met. B.C. is the only jurisdiction to have such a system in place to ensure ongoing performance. Prior to the 2008 adjustment, assistant deputy minister salaries ranked tenth in Canada among other provinces and the federal government, and deputy minister salaries ranked sixth. Under the new framework, the maximum achievable salaries for both levels of executives in B.C. rank third in Canada, providing greater flexibility to be competitive in a tight labour market. With the decisions on actual salary levels, the actual average salaries for B.C. deputy ministers and assistant deputy ministers are estimated to now rank fifth amongst the other Canadian jurisdictions. From now on, the deputy minister compensation framework will be set at 83 per cent of federal salaries and will be subject to the same regular review cycle to ensure ongoing competitiveness. Forecasts show that within 10 years over 65 per cent of assistant deputy ministers and 51 per cent of deputy ministers will be eligible to retire. In a tight labour market, compensation levels are one key factor in ensuring the BC Public Service is able to recruit and retain suitably qualified senior professionals.
From: Vancouver | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|