Indy,

If you got your way, you'd sack 95% of public servants, you said so yourself. nurses, doctors, teachers, police officers, military personnel, even the bloke who picks up your garbage. I got a better savings idea, how about we sack 95% of the old fart's on welfare like you, particularly those like you, that make ridiculous statements.

Paul1405,
So, what would your solution be regarding non-performing bureaucrats ? You waffle on about Pensioners on $1000/fortnight being a burden yet you don’t seem too perturbed to keep bureaudroids doing even less than pensioners on big salaries plus Massive Taxpayer funded Super? Is it because you’re one of them ?

Indy,

Within any large organisation, such as a public company, or the public service, those employed from management down to the bottom rung will demonstrate various degrees of competencies. These organisations all have mechanisms in place to monitor performance. I at sometime worked for both, and from my experience the rigour of checks and balances is greater in the PS than it was in public companies. In both cases "personality" was very much in play. For a manager to asses ones performance on a scale of 1 to 10 by ticking boxes and writing comments is simply arbitrary. As for in house training, I found there was a greater commitment from the PS to competence training in house, than that demonstrated by private organisations. Can I say what is the level of competency in the PS overall, I don't know, certainly you don't know, or anyone else for that matter. Your's is all a minds eye view, with your 95% nonsense, it simply defies reality.

Paul. The new workplace laws introduced by labor and Greens, there are no performance criteria. You are paid the same for holding the same position no matter the performance. That is what small business is objecting to. If you are in the Public Service, you can now sit in an office and twiddle your thumbs all day and be paid the same as those that carry the workload.

Jose'

Like the other old conservatives on this forum with a bent against the public service in general, you create your own false view of the workings of the PS with your misinformed statements like; "(In) the Public Service, you can now sit in an office and twiddle your thumbs all day and be paid the same as those that carry the workload." In any large organisation there is a cross section of diverse people, some hard working, other lazy, etc, which I believe the lazy are in a minority. Your conservative political mates for their own ideological reasons peddle the notion that all public servants are inherently lazy, inefficient, worthless, people, and those of your bent run with those false beliefs.

peddle the notion that all public servants are inherently lazy, inefficient, worthless, people ….
Paul1405,
There you go again with quoting words no-one is saying. What is being said is the undeniable fact that the Public Service would be more efficiently administered with a far smaller number of bureaucrats.
The excessive number of bureaucrats who got there via the Peter Principle is in fact the brake that brings administrative efficiency to a mere crawl & at times into reverse !