Kewp, I hate to bring this up question (because frankly I do like you)
….But, I recall a few months (maybe a year ago) you mentioned that you wanted to be working in the public sector because
(1) you felt the job was more stable than the private sector.
(2) the hours were better
Perhaps I’m reading your above comment incorrectly though. It seems like you’re suggesting though that public sector’s benefits should be beefed up,despite this economic climate, because it was never on par was the private sector.
[/quote]
I work for the UC for a number of reasons. The stability and hours are part of but definitely not all of it. Something that is great about University work is that I can leave it at the office at the end of the day and then spend my extra cycles making money day trading after-hours. I also have a fun job and get to use technology (e.g. Gentoo Linux) that I probably couldn’t get away with in a stricter environment.
I’m not at all suggesting that I should be paid twice as much (though it would be nice!). My point is that the pension plan is part of the benefits package. It’s necessary to attract and retain good people.
Remember I was responding to the post above complaining about pampering public sector employees with pensions. Well, I’ll tell you what, I certainly don’t feel pampered living in SD on my current salary. Given that we don’t have a 401k how are state workers supposed to secure their retirements? Have a “Carousel” like in Logan’s Run?
Basically I’m saying from the other side of the fence, I think things are fine how they are. I make my choices, you made yours, don’t hate on me because thanks to Bush your 401k is now a 201k.
