HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Ottawa-Gatineau > Business, Politics & the Economy


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted May 1, 2023, 1:10 AM
YOWetal YOWetal is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 7,424
Quote:
Originally Posted by acottawa View Post
PSAC doesn’t do this sort of job. Most PSAC categories have fairly clear private sector or municipal/provincial equivalents.

https://www.canada.ca/en/treasury-bo...sentation.html

A few exceptions of course.
I guess I mean government in general but lots of those jobs still hard to compare. What's the fare pay for a lighthouse keeper?

Quote:
Originally Posted by phil235 View Post
There may be some jobs that are hard to compare, but I don’t buy that these employees are all so specialized or unique that they can’t be compared with others doing similar jobs. If nothing else, you will have comparables in the provincial public services. (Nor do I buy that every private sector admin assistant has more stress than public sector admins).

There is a whole industry of consultants whose job is to classify jobs based on comparing duties and required skills. A company like Hay has a massive database of classifications and could give you market comparables for every job in these bargaining units.

To be clear, I am not saying they are overpaid compared to the private sector. In my experience, those at the lower levels tend to be paid higher than the private sector, while professionals in the public sector are generally paid less than they would make in the private sector, often by a lot.
I'm not saying they can't be compared just the work in many cases is so different it's not an easy one to make. I don't think they are dramatically overpaid or we'd have millions trying to get into the Public Service like India. The reverse also doesn't seem the case or there'd be higher turnover.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted May 1, 2023, 1:13 AM
phil235's Avatar
phil235 phil235 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 4,409
Quote:
Originally Posted by YOWetal View Post
I'm not saying they can't be compared just the work in many cases is so different it's not an easy one to make. I don't think they are dramatically overpaid or we'd have millions trying to get into the Public Service like India. The reverse also doesn't seem the case or there'd be higher turnover.
I think that’s right. Turnover is a relevant data point for sure. If turnover isn’t high, then you are probably in the right ballpark.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted May 1, 2023, 1:29 AM
acottawa acottawa is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 18,636
Quote:
Originally Posted by YOWetal View Post
I guess I mean government in general but lots of those jobs still hard to compare. What's the fare pay for a lighthouse keeper?
It seems to be a maintenance job tasked with maintaining the equipment. I am sure there are lots of private sector equivalents.

https://thespaces.com/fancy-being-a-...nd%20equipment.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted May 1, 2023, 7:32 AM
waterloowarrior's Avatar
waterloowarrior waterloowarrior is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 9,252
Tentative deal for Treasury Board workers
https://workerscantwait.ca/tb-agreement/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted May 1, 2023, 12:35 PM
YOWetal YOWetal is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 7,424
Quote:
Originally Posted by waterloowarrior View Post
Tentative deal for Treasury Board workers
https://workerscantwait.ca/tb-agreement/
So who won?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted May 1, 2023, 1:06 PM
J.OT13's Avatar
J.OT13 J.OT13 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 27,631
Quote:
Originally Posted by YOWetal View Post
So who won?
The peasant public service workers are not informed. Neither are the tax payers. The Union decided the offer is good enough and sent everyone back to work without actually informing them of what they've accepted (or close to accepting) on their behalf.

I'm generally unhappy with PSAC. The time leading up to the strike was all propaganda ("when" we go on strike, not "if members vote to strike", for example), public servants had to jump through a bunch of hoops to vote, they removed on week of voting with little warning (unless you registered for emails, you would not know). Calling the Federal negotiators and Fortier morons and incompetent was not helpful. And saying the Feds don't know how negotiations work when the Feds submitted at least 3 offers, while the Union only budged this week (apparently, and no one is allowed to know by how much), it really rubs me the wrong way.

The 13.5% original ask was relatively reasonable, many other demands are not. It should be up to the employer to decide the work from home or hybrid arraignments, department by department. The Feds' 9% was relatively reasonable as well. Looking forward to hearing what the final offer was.

CRA's ask is not reasonable by any stretch. Feds' shouldn't even bother to respond or negotiate.

If it were up to me, everyone in the public sector, bureaucrats, lawyers, politicians, police, the army, nurses... would all get inflation, full stop. It's unfair that politicians get to vote on their own salaries, cops always get more than everyone else, while public servants have to fight for inflation.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted May 1, 2023, 1:10 PM
J.OT13's Avatar
J.OT13 J.OT13 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 27,631
Deal is finally up. 12.6% over 4 years.

https://psacunion.ca/psac-has-reache...t-pa-sv-tc-and
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted May 1, 2023, 1:31 PM
YOWetal YOWetal is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 7,424
Quote:
Originally Posted by J.OT13 View Post
Deal is finally up. 12.6% over 4 years.

https://psacunion.ca/psac-has-reache...t-pa-sv-tc-and
Plus one time 3.7% making those who went on strike whole and nice bonus for essential workers and scabs.

Sounds like union caved on everything else though allowing appeals and individual circumstances might mean nothing in private sector but be a huge stalling mechanism for public sector workers? I'd guess union had more incentives to make the language stronger than it sounds.

I am surprised PSAC settled the main contract and left CRA. Surely the government can now hunker down and wait them out. They could easily just extend the tax deadline and it seems like people actually "sending out cheques" are deemed essential.

Last edited by YOWetal; May 1, 2023 at 2:30 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted May 1, 2023, 3:19 PM
Richard Eade Richard Eade is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Nepean
Posts: 2,445
The government’s ‘fair’ offer (that was recommended by the Public Interest Commission) was 1.5% for 2021, 4.5% for 2022, and 3% for 2023. This is what the government and media referred to as 9% over 3 years. If the values were compounded, the total increase over the three years is about 9.25%. There was also a cash ‘signing bonus’ offered to each employee, although I have not seen a value for that.

At that point, the union was asking for 4.5% for each of 2021, 2022, and 2023 for its Treasury Board members. This would total 14.1%, compounded, over the three years.

Apparently, the government increased its wage offer and presented the new numbers as their ‘final’ offer this past week-end. I have not read what the numbers were for the ‘final’ offer, but they would have been a bit better than the ‘fair’ offer.

The final agreement is quite similar to the government’s offer. (Indeed, it might be the ‘final’ offer that was made.) It comes with a 1.5% increase for 2021, 4.75 for 2022, and a 3.5% increase for 2023; for a total compounded increase of 10.1% over those three years. The amount of the ‘signing bonus’ is now given as $2,500, per employee.

Was it worth a 12-day strike to get an additional 0.9% for those three years? I can’t say, but the union, it seems, had to make the number look bigger. Therefore, a fourth year was added in, with a 2.25% increase for 2024. This allowed the union to declare that it negotiated a 12.6% increase.

So, now those Treasury Board employees, whose average salary is $67,300, will receive a cheque for the back-pay up until now, plus their ‘signing bonus’. That will be an average of about $7600 (up to May, 2023) – with about $2,200 going back to the government for income taxes.

Although I feel that it was added just to ‘pad the numbers’, I am glad that an increase for 2024 has been included in the deal. If it had not been, then the negotiations for the next agreement would have had to start right away. This gives a year before things (might) get nasty again. Personally, I think that the government will always prefer to negotiate increases based on PAST inflation numbers, rather than trying to guess what is coming. Based on that, I expect that they will not be truly negotiating the next deal until 2026, when the union gets fed-up again.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted May 2, 2023, 2:45 PM
OTownandDown OTownandDown is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 1,592
Maybe we can finally get an 11.5-12.6% decrease in the number of employees to go along with this raise. I don't dispute a raise was needed.

Its astounding the growth in the number of public sector employees these days.

bUt wHo wIlL dO tHe wOrK?? wE HaD tO tRy SO hArD tO pIvOt tO (WorrKinG) aT hOmE.

Population of the federal public service and Canada
Year Public Service Population Canada Percentage

2010 282,980 33,889,236 0.835014398
2011 282,352 34,230,378 0.824857967
2012 278,092 34,592,779 0.803901878
2013 262,817 34,958,216 0.751803238
2014 257,138 35,323,533 0.727950967
2015 257,034 35,611,271 0.721777103
2016 258,979 35,970,303 0.719980035
2017 262,696 36,398,013 0.721731706
2018 273,571 36,898,431 0.741416349
2019 287,983 37,422,946 0.769535888
2020 300,450 37,986,182 0.790945508
2021 319,601 38,124,373 0.838311492
2022 335,957 38,644,920 0.869343241
11% Decrease 299002 38,644,920 0.773715484
36,955
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted May 2, 2023, 2:59 PM
YOWetal YOWetal is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 7,424
Quote:
Originally Posted by OTownandDown View Post
Maybe we can finally get an 11.5-12.6% decrease in the number of employees to go along with this raise. I don't dispute a raise was needed.

Its astounding the growth in the number of public sector employees these days.

bUt wHo wIlL dO tHe wOrK?? wE HaD tO tRy SO hArD tO pIvOt tO (WorrKinG) aT hOmE.

Population of the federal public service and Canada
Year Public Service Population Canada Percentage

2010 282,980 33,889,236 0.835014398
2011 282,352 34,230,378 0.824857967
2012 278,092 34,592,779 0.803901878
2013 262,817 34,958,216 0.751803238
2014 257,138 35,323,533 0.727950967
2015 257,034 35,611,271 0.721777103
2016 258,979 35,970,303 0.719980035
2017 262,696 36,398,013 0.721731706
2018 273,571 36,898,431 0.741416349
2019 287,983 37,422,946 0.769535888
2020 300,450 37,986,182 0.790945508
2021 319,601 38,124,373 0.838311492
2022 335,957 38,644,920 0.869343241
11% Decrease 299002 38,644,920 0.773715484
36,955
Gotta cut some of the litany of new programs in order to do that. Also what do you do in Ottawa that you're cheering for our largest industry to get cut?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted May 2, 2023, 3:12 PM
phil235's Avatar
phil235 phil235 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 4,409
Quote:
Originally Posted by YOWetal View Post
Gotta cut some of the litany of new programs in order to do that. Also what do you do in Ottawa that you're cheering for our largest industry to get cut?
Also, you can't really discuss the size of the public service without looking at the number of consultants in the shadow public service, which has been ballooning for years. The government is at least talking about reducing consulting expenses, which would have a bigger positive impact on budgets than staff cuts (not to mention the impact on public service morale). If you feel that the public service has a lot of waste, I would love to introduce you to the Deloittes and McKinseys of this world. Having dealt with those types of consultants extensively, I particularly enjoy the idea of paying someone who just left the public service three times as much to provide the same advice, with very little stake in the long-term outcome of what they are advising on.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted May 2, 2023, 3:31 PM
RideauRat RideauRat is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 185
Quote:
Originally Posted by OTownandDown View Post
Maybe we can finally get an 11.5-12.6% decrease in the number of employees to go along with this raise. I don't dispute a raise was needed.

Its astounding the growth in the number of public sector employees these days.

bUt wHo wIlL dO tHe wOrK?? wE HaD tO tRy SO hArD tO pIvOt tO (WorrKinG) aT hOmE.

Population of the federal public service and Canada
Year Public Service Population Canada Percentage

2010 282,980 33,889,236 0.835014398
2011 282,352 34,230,378 0.824857967
2012 278,092 34,592,779 0.803901878
2013 262,817 34,958,216 0.751803238
2014 257,138 35,323,533 0.727950967
2015 257,034 35,611,271 0.721777103
2016 258,979 35,970,303 0.719980035
2017 262,696 36,398,013 0.721731706
2018 273,571 36,898,431 0.741416349
2019 287,983 37,422,946 0.769535888
2020 300,450 37,986,182 0.790945508
2021 319,601 38,124,373 0.838311492
2022 335,957 38,644,920 0.869343241
11% Decrease 299002 38,644,920 0.773715484
36,955
while I agree the number of PS workers is exuberantly high for no reason our population did grow little under 9 million people, also, Tech has increased, Society has changed, and so did the Bureaucracy that may of comes along with all of the above. Why aren't more systems like Passport Canada automated? Who knows at this point.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted May 2, 2023, 4:05 PM
HighwayStar's Avatar
HighwayStar HighwayStar is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: PHX (by way of YOW)
Posts: 1,199
Quote:
Originally Posted by phil235 View Post
Also, you can't really discuss the size of the public service without looking at the number of consultants in the shadow public service, which has been ballooning for years. The government is at least talking about reducing consulting expenses, which would have a bigger positive impact on budgets than staff cuts (not to mention the impact on public service morale). If you feel that the public service has a lot of waste, I would love to introduce you to the Deloittes and McKinseys of this world. Having dealt with those types of consultants extensively, I particularly enjoy the idea of paying someone who just left the public service three times as much to provide the same advice, with very little stake in the long-term outcome of what they are advising on.
Not only that, typically the person just "retired" and is collecting full pension in addition to 2-3x the pay. It's nuts.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted May 2, 2023, 4:26 PM
acottawa acottawa is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 18,636
Quote:
Originally Posted by phil235 View Post
Also, you can't really discuss the size of the public service without looking at the number of consultants in the shadow public service, which has been ballooning for years. The government is at least talking about reducing consulting expenses, which would have a bigger positive impact on budgets than staff cuts (not to mention the impact on public service morale). If you feel that the public service has a lot of waste, I would love to introduce you to the Deloittes and McKinseys of this world. Having dealt with those types of consultants extensively, I particularly enjoy the idea of paying someone who just left the public service three times as much to provide the same advice, with very little stake in the long-term outcome of what they are advising on.
Consultants (particularly politically connected consultants) have clearly been misused. But I also don't think it is a question of bureaucrat good, consultant bad.

A consultant, even if they have a higher hourly rate is usually a one off expense. Each new bureaucrat hired is more or less a 5 million dollar lifetime commitment.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted May 2, 2023, 4:28 PM
OTownandDown OTownandDown is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 1,592
I'm... a consultant. lol

I agree the number of consultants HAS ballooned, both consultants retained for one-off projects, and a ridiculous number working 'on contract' on a semi-permanent basis. I suspect the consultants who semi-permanently move in to a desk are not listed in the books in the same way as a full time employee. (I'm not talking about noobs who are 'on contract' and then 'made permanent' I mean consultants who work full time in house, take their $25k/month over 10 months, then leave).

The same has happened at the City of Ottawa, they are full of Colliers employees who have @Ottawa.ca email addresses, and physical desks. Are they actually on the books in the right place, or is the City 'cost cutting' by not having to pay for a retirement fund for Colliers employees?

The problem I'm seeing: Regular employees responsible for the programs I'm consulted on are literal bags of hammers. Speaking to a large group via Teams, it's tough to find a few brain cells to rub together. I do 99% of the work, a single person, and the team of 10 on the other side can't produce anything, don't absorb the information I provide, and the programs and services are delayed, limited in scope to cause additional blowback (and more consulting, year over year, for 10+ years on average), or cancelled altogether.

Its a catch-22 a bit. We need well paid, professional employees in the public service, who specialize in the task. Currently we have low paid pions who move around every 3 years out of boredom (aka 'stress', which is just an existential crisis labelled as stress) and they don't necessarily need prior experience or specialize in a topic, they just need their 'Pion PY3' level to be able to move about at will.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted May 2, 2023, 5:03 PM
YOWetal YOWetal is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 7,424
Quote:
Originally Posted by OTownandDown View Post
I'm... a consultant. lol

I agree the number of consultants HAS ballooned, both consultants retained for one-off projects, and a ridiculous number working 'on contract' on a semi-permanent basis. I suspect the consultants who semi-permanently move in to a desk are not listed in the books in the same way as a full time employee. (I'm not talking about noobs who are 'on contract' and then 'made permanent' I mean consultants who work full time in house, take their $25k/month over 10 months, then leave).

The same has happened at the City of Ottawa, they are full of Colliers employees who have @Ottawa.ca email addresses, and physical desks. Are they actually on the books in the right place, or is the City 'cost cutting' by not having to pay for a retirement fund for Colliers employees?

The problem I'm seeing: Regular employees responsible for the programs I'm consulted on are literal bags of hammers. Speaking to a large group via Teams, it's tough to find a few brain cells to rub together. I do 99% of the work, a single person, and the team of 10 on the other side can't produce anything, don't absorb the information I provide, and the programs and services are delayed, limited in scope to cause additional blowback (and more consulting, year over year, for 10+ years on average), or cancelled altogether.

Its a catch-22 a bit. We need well paid, professional employees in the public service, who specialize in the task. Currently we have low paid pions who move around every 3 years out of boredom (aka 'stress', which is just an existential crisis labelled as stress) and they don't necessarily need prior experience or specialize in a topic, they just need their 'Pion PY3' level to be able to move about at will.
Don't hold back tell us how you really feel.

Highly specialized skills certainly aren't remunerated in the public sphere but then doesn't it make more sense to higher outside specialists for tasks that aren't needed regularly?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted May 2, 2023, 5:30 PM
OTownandDown OTownandDown is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 1,592
Quote:
Originally Posted by YOWetal View Post
Don't hold back tell us how you really feel.

Highly specialized skills certainly aren't remunerated in the public sphere but then doesn't it make more sense to higher outside specialists for tasks that aren't needed regularly?
I've been at essentially the same type of job, different employers, for about 20 years now. And the older generation of baby boomers largely have retired in that span of time.

At the beginning, I learned a lot from the public service employees in those positions, I would say I learned many things have have really helped me in my career.

Over time, the mentality/policy you've described has completely hollowed out the public service, both federally and municipally. To the point where every specialized task is farmed out, and you need 4 employees and two contractors to replace one good one who retired.

Two of the four employees will be off on stress leave or file a human rights complaint for being asked to perform tasks.

Two will be self-righteous go-getters who have 4 hours of coffee 'knowledge sharing' sessions per day, between truly productive 3 hours of work, or they work in the office from 7:30 - 1:00pm as their 'office day'. They also feel the need to work from 11pm-3am because they didn't work a full day, they do this at their home office which was created to pivot for covid, and send most of their emails at that time, and feel overworked because of it, even though it's still only truly 7 hours of production. But of course none of the production is tracked through any sort of quality time tracking either, so it doesn't really matter. For instance, someone I work closely with at PSPC uses the same time tracking online software that I use. I track every 15 minute increment to be billed to a project, and must reach 90% billing each week, with 10% spent on 'Administration' (usually time to do the timesheet, lol). He puts 100% of his time to administration every week, and the time tracking software is used to just track his vacation time. How can management ever tell if there's any efficiency to what he's doing? For me, if I book 100 hours to a proposal with 5 hours of work in it, I've lost 95 hours of profit. If this happens in government, its just a normal Tuesday and nobody knows about it anyways.

The two contractors are paid too much, and do all the production. I once knew a guy who made $40k quarterly, issuing an update report on a subject. He would travel to Ottawa for two days of meetings on the report (report was kinda long, but didn't much change each quarter). He consulted on many other things as well, all around the world (expert) but owned his own condo in Ottawa for his quarterly meeting. Did he need to be writing that report for the government? Perhaps. Is it crazy and am I jealous? Absolutely.

Last edited by OTownandDown; May 2, 2023 at 6:05 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #39  
Old Posted May 2, 2023, 5:40 PM
shelltime shelltime is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2021
Posts: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by OTownandDown View Post
I'm... a consultant. lol

I agree the number of consultants HAS ballooned, both consultants retained for one-off projects, and a ridiculous number working 'on contract' on a semi-permanent basis. I suspect the consultants who semi-permanently move in to a desk are not listed in the books in the same way as a full time employee. (I'm not talking about noobs who are 'on contract' and then 'made permanent' I mean consultants who work full time in house, take their $25k/month over 10 months, then leave).

The same has happened at the City of Ottawa, they are full of Colliers employees who have @Ottawa.ca email addresses, and physical desks. Are they actually on the books in the right place, or is the City 'cost cutting' by not having to pay for a retirement fund for Colliers employees?

The problem I'm seeing: Regular employees responsible for the programs I'm consulted on are literal bags of hammers. Speaking to a large group via Teams, it's tough to find a few brain cells to rub together. I do 99% of the work, a single person, and the team of 10 on the other side can't produce anything, don't absorb the information I provide, and the programs and services are delayed, limited in scope to cause additional blowback (and more consulting, year over year, for 10+ years on average), or cancelled altogether.

Its a catch-22 a bit. We need well paid, professional employees in the public service, who specialize in the task. Currently we have low paid pions who move around every 3 years out of boredom (aka 'stress', which is just an existential crisis labelled as stress) and they don't necessarily need prior experience or specialize in a topic, they just need their 'Pion PY3' level to be able to move about at will.
Lol going off, but yeah when I was at the City in Development Review, my contract was ending and It couldn't get renewed during Steve K's hiring freeze when he became City Manager... So what happened, consultants from WSP and MMM came in 3months at a time picking up the slack because we were so understaffed. They definitely cost the city way more.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #40  
Old Posted May 2, 2023, 5:45 PM
HighwayStar's Avatar
HighwayStar HighwayStar is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: PHX (by way of YOW)
Posts: 1,199
Quote:
Originally Posted by YOWetal View Post
Don't hold back tell us how you really feel.

Highly specialized skills certainly aren't remunerated in the public sphere but then doesn't it make more sense to higher outside specialists for tasks that aren't needed regularly?
I spent 2.5 years consulting for various Federal departments. My consulting consisted of doing the job of various full-time employees who were incapable of producing anything of value.

I'm not painting a broad brush here.. there are a LOT of talented, dedicated, hard working people in the PS.. but I can confirm the only reason I was there was to do the job of FTEs who couldn't do their own job... and I was not alone.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Ottawa-Gatineau > Business, Politics & the Economy
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 6:04 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.