Alberta Politics Thread v2

[V]

Originally Posted by GGG

Salaries should be set based on supply and demand.

Of course it should. But that's such a difficult concept for both sides to understand. The incessant need to somehow tie public sector salaries to the private sector is on both sides of the argument. People are upset when they lose income and the public sector doesn't. Then the unions get upset when the private sectors outpace the public sector. How is any of that relevant?

When the public sector has difficulty filling positions with the appropriate employees they should raise compensation. When they have a glut of people trying to get in they should freeze salaries.

[CaptainCrunch]

So the new appointee Ed Wittingham received a $225,000 grant from Tides



https://fairquestions.typepad.com/fi...s225-000-h.pdf

[Regorium]

400k is such a pathetic number for executive level people that I'm a bit outraged that there is outrage about it.

As I continue in my career (in the private sector), I really don't see any major issues with regards to public sector compensation when compared to my own.

I think the most overpaid public sector employees are doctors, but that's definitely an unpopular opinion.

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Here's a list of 100 CEOs of Calgary-based companies who are almost all making $1 mil or over in total compensation. I would expect many 100s more who are making half a mil.

https://calgaryherald.com/business/l...ites-last-year

But you said "thousands" of people in the private sector were making well over 400K? This list shows less than 100 CEO's making somewhere in that range, and lots of that compensation is LTI (of which the value is nebulous, could be 0 or could be more)

This would suggest to me that maybe a few hundred people, maximum, making that much? Probably less than that assuming CEO's are the highest paid executives.

It's significantly less than what you implied.

[burn_this_city]

100 CEO positions probably have 5 VPs below each, plus director level positions. 1000s certainly not out question.

https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2018/0...da_a_23385825/

Top 1% in Calgary is $450k.

[GordonBlue]

Originally Posted by Regorium

400k is such a pathetic number for executive level people that I'm a bit outraged that there is outrage about it.

As I continue in my career (in the private sector), I really don't see any major issues with regards to public sector compensation when compared to my own.

I think the most overpaid public sector employees are doctors, but that's definitely an unpopular opinion.

I notice when people comment on "outrageous salaries" they, like Mbates did, mention the outliers.

In the area where I worked, not one person made over $100,000 including value of benefits. we're talking about 200 people. just an example out of tens of thousands of employees, of course.

people forget the majority of staff are regular joes doing regular jobs.

none of us were raking it in compared to the private sector. none of us were/are on the sunshine list.

[Muta]

Originally Posted by Regorium

400k is such a pathetic number for executive level people that I'm a bit outraged that there is outrage about it.

No kidding. Wasn't that the starting salary for junior employees in O+G companies when times were good?

[burn_this_city]

893,000 people in the Calgary workforce, 1% nets 8,900 pulling $450k.

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

893,000 people in the Calgary workforce, 1% nets 8,900 pulling $450k.

The 1% number is the average income though? So you would have to net out the large outliers making more than that.

The median is what we are looking for.

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

893,000 people in the Calgary workforce, 1% nets 8,900 pulling $450k.

Also the average income earner in the 1% in Canada earns 100K per year off dividends/investments.

So their salary average would be around 350K before investment income.

Again the most important thing is the median income to find the numbers.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

Also the average income earner in the 1% in Canada earns 100K per year off dividends/investments.

So their salary average would be around 350K before investment income.

Again the most important thing is the median income to find the numbers.

You have a source for these stats?

[Matata]

Getting an engineering job with the government is basically considered working retirement: 10-20% wage buff compared to industry, the best benefits program, no timesheets or much accountability, 7.5 hr workdays, but the grind of endless bureaucracy still pushes some out of these cozy jobs.


I dream of spending the last decade of my career making $120k/yr at a government job, work 3-4 hours/day and spend the rest filling an office with my farts. Might even be able to convince them to let me do it from home.

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by Matata

Getting an engineering job with the government is basically considered working retirement: 10-20% wage buff compared to industry, the best benefits program, no timesheets or much accountability, 7.5 hr workdays, but the grind of endless bureaucracy still pushes some out of these cozy jobs.


I dream of spending the last decade of my career making $120k/yr at a government job, work 3-4 hours/day and spend the rest filling an office with my farts. Might even be able to convince them to let me do it from home.

Have you ever actually worked for government or is this just how you imagine it to be?

[Matata]

dp

[Matata]

Originally Posted by Makarov

Have you ever actually worked for government or is this just how you imagine it to be?

I've worked with people who had these jobs and left due to soul sapping bureaucracy and inability to get anything done.


Plus I've seen plenty of job postings, but it's damn near impossible to even get an interview for those jobs. That's why I'd expect it to be towards the end of career that I'd have a contact base that could get my foot in the door.


Social workers are even more dramatic, it's like a 60% wage hike and half the work when you get on with the city.

[puckedoff]

Even at the low end jobs the City pays way too much. Guy I know made 75% more switching from a regular golf course to working at a City course - and he was doing less work. Not sure why the City can't find a way to incent their managers to focus on costs the same way a business would.

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by Matata

I've worked with people who had these jobs and left due to soul sapping bureaucracy and inability to get anything done.

That isn't actually evidence of "cushiness" though. Indeed, one might argue that working in such a soul-sapping bureaucracy where it is difficult to get things done might warrant a pay premium.

Originally Posted by Matata

Plus I've seen plenty of job postings, but it's damn near impossible to even get an interview for those jobs. That's why I'd expect it to be towards the end of career that I'd have a contact base that could get my foot in the door.

Again, not very persuasive evidence that these jobs are a "cushy semi-retirement". There could be many factors which make vacancies highly competitive: high quality of work, stability, job security, etc.

Originally Posted by Matata

Social workers are even more dramatic, it's like a 60% wage hike and half the work when you get on with the city.

Again, unless you are a social worker (I take it that you are an engineer) who has worked for government (you have admitted that you have not), I'm not sure what your source of this knowledge could possibly be.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Matata

Plus I've seen plenty of job postings, but it's damn near impossible to even get an interview for those jobs. That's why I'd expect it to be towards the end of career that I'd have a contact base that could get my foot in the door.

I've applied for dozens of government jobs that I was qualified for. Never got so much as a call on any of them. Always wondered what the deal was.

From what I've since learned from talking to people who work for the government:

1) People rarely leave, so there's very little turnover.
2) They tend to be highly desirable jobs in terms of security, benefits, and pensions, so each opening gets hundreds of applicants.
3) Most positions are filled internally with a person from another team or government agency.

Basically, you need some kind of an inside connection to even get an interview for a government job.

[Matata]

Originally Posted by Makarov

...

Again, unless you are a social worker (I take it that you are an engineer) who has worked for government (you have admitted that you have not), I'm not sure what your source of this knowledge could possibly be.

My SO is a social worker and interviewed with the city ~1 year ago. She was making ~$50k/yr, the city job was $80k and was an identical job with a lower case load and less responsibilities.


We're pretty sure she only got the interview because the city needs to put on a facade that they aren'y only giving these jobs to people who are already well connected with the city government.

[Matata]

No one who's ever worked in my field for government ever corrected me when I called it a working retirement, they mostly said "lol, pretty much."