Quote:
Originally Posted by MarchHare
It's not the cost of living in Alberta that drives up public sector wages compared to other provinces, it's competition for human resources with the private sector. If we want to attract intelligent, capable people to work in the public service, then the government has to offer a compensation package comparable to what an employee with similar education/experience working in the private sector would earn. If we were to pay government employees a pittance, then the only people who would choose to work in the public sector are those who are are incapable of finding work in the private sector due to lack of competence or intelligence.
|
That presumes that employees can move easily between the public and private sectors, that their educations and work experience are transferable. Which is true of some public sector jobs, but not of many others.
Teaching is by far the best job available for those who studied humanities, social sciences, and fine arts in university. Even during the boom, people with sociology and English literature degrees were almost unemployable in the private sector. And if they did have jobs, they sure as heck weren't making $70k or $80k. The jokes about Starbucks being staffed by people who have a Masters in Anthropology is rooted in truths about the employability of graduates without technical skills.
To me, a far better way of assessing if you're paying enough is to look at how many qualified candidates are applying for entry-level positions. If there was an extreme shortage of teachers in Alberta in the last 10 years, if school boards were having difficulty filling entry-level positions as substitutes, then yes, salaries needed to go up. Same with nurses, police, firefighters, etc.
But regardless, if we want public sector salaries to be tied to the private sector job market in good times, then they should be tied to the job market in bad times too. In the private sector, employers are finding they can hire good people even if they pay 20 per cent less than they did two years ago. Shouldn't this be the same in the public sector? And if the one of the benefits of the public sector is to avoid the volatility of booms and busts, then we're back to the matter of why we pay a premium to teachers during a boom. Either public sector compensation follows the cycles of the private sector or it doesn't. Public sector employees can't expect to have their cake and eat it too.