Coming San Diego Govt Layoffs

[lostcat92120]

I agree. getting rid of some of the fat would be smart. The problem goes deeper than that though. Some agencies are efficient and effective. Ones that actually operate things that people use. Others, just put studies on the shelves. I’ve worked for both public and privet sectors. I honestly think that some public sector environments are much more competitive than private. I am still not sold that private is all the efficient either. I know a lot of people in the private sector that just sit around and do nothing. This increases cost to the buyer or us. But we have to keep people working or we’ll end up like Iraq. A bunch of broke men with no jobs, no income and no family = pissed off a without direction. Not good.

[sdduuuude]

[quote=kewp].. all the anti-government weenies on piggingtons would lose their job at the taco stand anyway.[/quote]

O.o

[sdduuuude]

[quote=kewp].. all the anti-government weenies on piggingtons would lose their job at the taco stand anyway.[/quote]

O.o

[sdduuuude]

[quote=kewp].. all the anti-government weenies on piggingtons would lose their job at the taco stand anyway.[/quote]

O.o

[sdduuuude]

[quote=kewp].. all the anti-government weenies on piggingtons would lose their job at the taco stand anyway.[/quote]

O.o

[sdduuuude]

[quote=kewp].. all the anti-government weenies on piggingtons would lose their job at the taco stand anyway.[/quote]

O.o

[temeculaguy]

In any year, most governments lose about 5% of their staff through retirement, injury, fired or they just quit. If every employee worked 33 years, none were ever hurt, quit or got fired, the yearly loss would be 3% on average. Another issue is most governmental employers have 3-5% of their positions vacant. What typically happens is that they just stop hiring and eliminate or freeze vacant positions. That gets them between a 6% and 10% reduction without handing out a single pink slip. Some of the local governments have seen this coming and have had hiring freezes in effect for months. There might be a few pink slips given out here and there, the unions and media will make a big fuss but it will look worse on paper than it really is, I don’t think the local economy will feel the impact too much.

[temeculaguy]

In any year, most governments lose about 5% of their staff through retirement, injury, fired or they just quit. If every employee worked 33 years, none were ever hurt, quit or got fired, the yearly loss would be 3% on average. Another issue is most governmental employers have 3-5% of their positions vacant. What typically happens is that they just stop hiring and eliminate or freeze vacant positions. That gets them between a 6% and 10% reduction without handing out a single pink slip. Some of the local governments have seen this coming and have had hiring freezes in effect for months. There might be a few pink slips given out here and there, the unions and media will make a big fuss but it will look worse on paper than it really is, I don’t think the local economy will feel the impact too much.

[temeculaguy]

In any year, most governments lose about 5% of their staff through retirement, injury, fired or they just quit. If every employee worked 33 years, none were ever hurt, quit or got fired, the yearly loss would be 3% on average. Another issue is most governmental employers have 3-5% of their positions vacant. What typically happens is that they just stop hiring and eliminate or freeze vacant positions. That gets them between a 6% and 10% reduction without handing out a single pink slip. Some of the local governments have seen this coming and have had hiring freezes in effect for months. There might be a few pink slips given out here and there, the unions and media will make a big fuss but it will look worse on paper than it really is, I don’t think the local economy will feel the impact too much.

[temeculaguy]

In any year, most governments lose about 5% of their staff through retirement, injury, fired or they just quit. If every employee worked 33 years, none were ever hurt, quit or got fired, the yearly loss would be 3% on average. Another issue is most governmental employers have 3-5% of their positions vacant. What typically happens is that they just stop hiring and eliminate or freeze vacant positions. That gets them between a 6% and 10% reduction without handing out a single pink slip. Some of the local governments have seen this coming and have had hiring freezes in effect for months. There might be a few pink slips given out here and there, the unions and media will make a big fuss but it will look worse on paper than it really is, I don’t think the local economy will feel the impact too much.

[temeculaguy]

In any year, most governments lose about 5% of their staff through retirement, injury, fired or they just quit. If every employee worked 33 years, none were ever hurt, quit or got fired, the yearly loss would be 3% on average. Another issue is most governmental employers have 3-5% of their positions vacant. What typically happens is that they just stop hiring and eliminate or freeze vacant positions. That gets them between a 6% and 10% reduction without handing out a single pink slip. Some of the local governments have seen this coming and have had hiring freezes in effect for months. There might be a few pink slips given out here and there, the unions and media will make a big fuss but it will look worse on paper than it really is, I don’t think the local economy will feel the impact too much.

[kewp]

[quote=lostcat92120]I’ve worked for both public and privet sectors. I honestly think that some public sector environments are much more competitive than private. [/quote]

The government put a man on the moon for less than what Goldman-Sachs has lost over the last year.

I’ve worked in both and as far as productivity goes its a wash. It’s certainly easier to get rid of poor performers in the private sector, though.

Edit: In my experience, there is much more corruption in the private sector. Probably because of the tighter control of money and stricter accounting in government.

[kewp]

[quote=lostcat92120]I’ve worked for both public and privet sectors. I honestly think that some public sector environments are much more competitive than private. [/quote]

The government put a man on the moon for less than what Goldman-Sachs has lost over the last year.

I’ve worked in both and as far as productivity goes its a wash. It’s certainly easier to get rid of poor performers in the private sector, though.

Edit: In my experience, there is much more corruption in the private sector. Probably because of the tighter control of money and stricter accounting in government.

[kewp]

[quote=lostcat92120]I’ve worked for both public and privet sectors. I honestly think that some public sector environments are much more competitive than private. [/quote]

The government put a man on the moon for less than what Goldman-Sachs has lost over the last year.

I’ve worked in both and as far as productivity goes its a wash. It’s certainly easier to get rid of poor performers in the private sector, though.

Edit: In my experience, there is much more corruption in the private sector. Probably because of the tighter control of money and stricter accounting in government.

[kewp]

[quote=lostcat92120]I’ve worked for both public and privet sectors. I honestly think that some public sector environments are much more competitive than private. [/quote]

The government put a man on the moon for less than what Goldman-Sachs has lost over the last year.

I’ve worked in both and as far as productivity goes its a wash. It’s certainly easier to get rid of poor performers in the private sector, though.

Edit: In my experience, there is much more corruption in the private sector. Probably because of the tighter control of money and stricter accounting in government.

[Author]

Posts