Trajan
conscientia mille testes
Your use of the word whilst suggests you are English and/or are living elsewhere, so I will assume the substance of your resentful complaint about civil servants living lives of "opulent luxury" reflects a social order other than here in the U.S. Because the salary range and benefit structure of typical American civil service positions has for the past half century closely equated to positions with similar qualifications in the private sector.
The outstanding advantages of civil service are job security and desirable benefits. These advantages exist for the purpose of competing with the private sector in attracting qualifed and competent personnel.
The entry level requirement for my civil service job was a minimum of two years law school. Promotion to supervisory level called for at least a BA or BS. I'm retired now and I can assure you that my salary range did not exceed that of the average college graduate in the private sector. In fact my son-in-law, a union truck driver, who has only a GED received in the military, drives over-the-road for United Parcel Service and earns more than I did. He does put in a lot of overtime but he likes his job and he will retire with a good pension and benefits.
There are some civil service jobs which pay a substantial wage and offer a generous pension with early retirement and excellent benefits, but these are highly stressful jobs or those which involve a substantial risk to life, such as firefighter. I don't know what the average firefighter's salary is but I wouldn't take that job for three times as much. And the fate of over three hundred of them in the 9/11 World Trade Center collapse is one example of why.
So I don't think your impression of civil service is based on the American example.
Yes ,I have heard the "best and brightest" argument used many times in concert with the high wages of public workers. It's bunk.
A few years ago an article in the Bergen Record of NJ ran a story which made a lot of people in the pubic worker sector very angry.
The writer used the borough of Fort Lee. This town,at the foot of the Geo Washington Bridge has a population of about 11,000. The municipal payroll included about 350 people... over 130 were being paid over $100,000 per year. Many of them in mid level administrative jobs, Dept of Public works labor and other non- education required jobs.
The argument supporting the high wages was the Borough need to attract the best and brightest....That's a load of horse manure. The fact of the matter is the unions representing these workers get these wages because the town is powerless to resist union demands. Besides, the union bosses offer political support($$$) to those elected officials who are "cooperative"....
Best and brightest? Bull cookies.
I agree the wages and benefits for municipal workers are high, but the argument that their compensation should be lowered is a canard. Why shouldn't the wages and benefits of private sector workers rise?
Think about the arguments in vogue today. If we cut taxes people will have more money to spend and stimulate the economy. Now consider if the private sector emulated the public one, the salaries between the top and the bottom would be tiered. Supervisors would make 5% more than line staff; managers 5% more than supervisors, Directors 5% more than managers and so on. Only the top dog would make a greater salary, and that would not be one in seven figures.
As more wealth is shared more products and services would sell and the economy would grow, taxes would rise and deficit spending would be a thing of the past.
Envy of public workers benefits and salary is a manufactured one, manufactured by the most wealthy Americans, generally far right and Republican voters who believe they deserve great wealth and those who are not wealthy are morally corrupt.
Corporations and business are no different than union bosses, both bribe public officials for their own benefit.
The idea that bringing down others raises those whose envy is a product of emotional arguments is absurd. If you don't earn enough organize. Capital needs labor so don't be surprised when your demands for higher wages, better benefits and safer working condition reult in your termination. You can be replaced, there are many south of our border ready and willing to take your job and be happy with it. And if you doubt business and industry would do so you live in a fantasy world.
sorry,won't wash.
I worked in both, I was a top performer at a very highly competitive no.1 corp. entity until April 09 and now am a federal/state employee.
the defined pension plan and forever FREE med. care more than makes up for the beating I took as to the difference in take home pay.
aside from all of time I get off and am given, I had to work 6 years before I saw the accrual hours for days off I got straight away.
Working hours? I don't work near as hard and whats more the demands put upon me and most important of all, the expectations are like night and day.
wanna guess why? starts with a U.....