A modest proposal on public service pay to help tackle the ballooning deficit

[mpare]

You know, I think that 20% is an eminently reasonable number, but the target is wrong. Ask yourself, what group controls the vast majority of the worlds wealth? Could they afford to give up 20% of that for the common good?

Just a thought...

I don't disagree with you. The top 1% enjoys most of collective, economic pie. One might reasonably argue, therefore, that they should put up a much greater contribution to fighting the economic hurdle that is facing us. Not only do they have the means to do so, but the recovery of the economy will benefit them the most.

[mpare]

But the whole point is that the private sector is already feeling the pain, but the public sector is largely not.

I'd like to unpack that. You assume that the public sector workers are not "feeling the pain." Of course they are. For those who continue to work from home, and most that I know are doing so, then they are being remunerated for their work, just like the private sector workers who continue to work. At the same time, most of the public sector workers will, I suspect, not collect any of the monies being made available by our governments to sustain the economy. In that respect at least, they do not represent a potential liability to the country. As well, if one is unhappy with the remuneration paid to public sector workers, that's an issue that should be addressed on its own merits, and certainly not when obfuscated by a "it's for the benefit of the country" argument.

[trunckslammer1]

As Arthur would say, the reason private sector wages - bottom 80%(?) has not kept up with public sector wages is because the unions in the private sector had been declawed, whereas those in the public sector had been empowered.

This has lead to an inequity of pay. CEO's of prive sector making over 2000X the average pay of their employees. I am sure our top civil servants do not come close t0 20X the average wage of those below them

We should not be complaining about public sector wages as now, more then ever, they are doing all they can to help us - whether in health care or making sure our claims for all of the benefits are processed timely to ensure we get the monies we need to survive.

As bcampb00 noted above, there are other ways to raise the taxes needed. I for one, would like to see the GST up another 2 points to where it was before Harper - IMO - a political move to slash 2 points. Same as Alberta putting in a Sales Tax

[luv2kruz]

I'd like to unpack that. You assume that the public sector workers are not "feeling the pain." Of course they are. For those who continue to work from home, and most that I know are doing so, then they are being remunerated for their work, just like the private sector workers who continue to work. At the same time, most of the public sector workers will, I suspect, not collect any of the monies being made available by our governments to sustain the economy. In that respect at least, they do not represent a potential liability to the country. As well, if one is unhappy with the remuneration paid to public sector workers, that's an issue that should be addressed on its own merits, and certainly not when obfuscated by a "it's for the benefit of the country" argument.

I respectfully disagree.

1. Of the 1 million+ Canadians that applied for EI or support payments, how many of those were public sector workers? Very few I would imagine. So yes, there are both private sector and public sector people working from home and still getting paid, but the vast majority of the economic impact is being felt in the private sector so far.
2. We've had other threads discussing the public sector vs private sector pay issues (i.e. teachers thread), and I agree it is a large topic that merits discussion on its own, but I would maintain it still is the right time (maybe not immediately now, but in the short future) that these issues be discussed and actioned for the public sector. The private sector is making rapid adjustments to pay and employment under the argument of 'for the benefit and survival of the businesses' and I see no reason why the same adjustments can't be made to the public sector 'for the benefit and survival of the country'. Without those corresponding adjustments to the public sector, then I would say the situation is not equitable for each side.

[seetrout699]

I am sure you are correct about tax increases coming. I think your suggested forms of tax increase won’t come close to paying the bills (who even has capital gains anymore). I think that areas the government will have to come after for sufficient tax increases will be:

1. Taxing dividends as ordinary income.
2. Taxing capital gains on principal residences (well beyond the existing land transfer taxes).
3. Estate taxes (at much higher rates than existing probate fees).

That might produce some tax revenue in the range of what might be needed.

Ask the idiot running the US how to make things fairer for eveyone and how to obtain tax revenues [or not] and then do the exact opposite and you would be off to some type of reasonable starting point.

[MrAdam]

To paraphrase some of the comments in here ...”why shouldn’t public sector share the burden of lost wages and increased government debt”

The idea behind that argument seems a lot like capitalism needed during good economic times and socialism is needed during bad times. I’m curious about the people (not necessarily who commented or are on TGN) who would actually support this if they would have been supportive of giving 20% more in taxes had the budget indicated it was needed.

I’m a little biased as a a public sector employee but that’s the job I chose. Like many people who chose to work the private sector when choosing my career I factored in job security, pensions and “limited” salary not based on commission or any other contributing factor.

[seetrout699]

I think we should all share in the pain of this crisis. It can never be an equal thing, but I don't think the public sector should be exempt.

I don't know if 20% is the right number, and I don't see an argument for making it permanent.

I didn't vote because I'm only partially in favour.

How dare anyone attack the almost 100% fully insulated [ from everything] world of most government employees !!

[ace in the hazard]

I'd like to unpack that. You assume that the public sector workers are not "feeling the pain." Of course they are. For those who continue to work from home, and most that I know are doing so, then they are being remunerated for their work, just like the private sector workers who continue to work. At the same time, most of the public sector workers will, I suspect, not collect any of the monies being made available by our governments to sustain the economy. In that respect at least, they do not represent a potential liability to the country. As well, if one is unhappy with the remuneration paid to public sector workers, that's an issue that should be addressed on its own merits, and certainly not when obfuscated by a "it's for the benefit of the country" argument.

I'm not typically part of the "everyone else gets paid too much for what they do" crowd, but I do get the argument here. Most private sector workers are going to be facing reduced incomes for a while and the government will be putting less in the tax coffers while expenditures are going way up.

I doubt anyone is suggesting that nurses or other health care workers take a pay cut right now but I can understand why some are arguing that teachers/bureaucrats etc should sharing some of the burden of something that affects everyone.

[luv2kruz]

I'm not typically part of the "everyone else gets paid too much for what they do" crowd, but I do get the argument here. Most private sector workers are going to be facing reduced incomes for a while and the government will be putting less in the tax coffers while expenditures are going way up.

I doubt anyone is suggesting that nurses or other health care workers take a pay cut right now but I can understand why some are arguing that teachers/bureaucrats etc should sharing some of the burden of something that affects everyone.

Just to add to that, lots of CEOs and executives in the oil patch are cutting wages by 10-20% for themselves. Even though it is likely only temporary, it is an important symbolic cut when they are asking others in their organization to endure pain for the benefit of the company. I agree front line workers like health care and first responders should not be touched, but at least the bureaucrats in all levels of government should make the same symbolic cuts when they see the rest of Canada suffering as much as they are. It sends the right message.

[mpare]

Just to add to that, lots of CEOs and executives in the oil patch are cutting wages by 10-20% for themselves. Even though it is likely only temporary, it is an important symbolic cut when they are asking others in their organization to endure pain for the benefit of the company. I agree front line workers like health care and first responders should not be touched, but at least the bureaucrats in all levels of government should make the same symbolic cuts when they see the rest of Canada suffering as much as they are. It sends the right message.

The psychological benefits arguments may be the strongest. Let me think about that.

[bcampb00]

Why not just up the GST. It is widely agreed as the most fair tax going.

It would discourage consumption at a time it is needed most and is highly regressive. If Canada is to make meaningful progress on new "revenue sources", they will have to go after the well to do. The three suggested areas achieve that.

[wongmb]

I can never agree with targeting the 1%, cuz its not a question of what they can afford or not. Otherwise what is the purpose of capitalism vs communism ? I am far from a 1%, but my dignity and intergrity said I should not feel entitled to share their wealth whether in good times or bad.

As for public employee taking a hair cut temporary, it has its credibility. Why is someone not work at an essential post (eg community center program coordinator) being paid a 100% while sitting in home. I like to see their pay being cut, with the money saved channel towards funding the overtime pay for UI and CRA staff which are working over to process claims etc

[Fredk]

I'm not typically part of the "everyone else gets paid too much for what they do" crowd, but I do get the argument here. Most private sector workers are going to be facing reduced incomes for a while and the government will be putting less in the tax coffers while expenditures are going way up.

I doubt anyone is suggesting that nurses or other health care workers take a pay cut right now but I can understand why some are arguing that teachers/bureaucrats etc should sharing some of the burden of something that affects everyone.

OK, but why single out this particular group? If you are going to single out, why not the group that has by far benefited the most from our current economic system?

[Fredk]

I can never agree with targeting the 1%, cuz its not a question of what they can afford or not. Otherwise what is the purpose of capitalism vs communism ? I am far from a 1%, but my dignity and intergrity said I should not feel entitled to share their wealth whether in good times or bad.

...

That is a very good question.

[golfingtime]

To paraphrase some of the comments in here ...”why shouldn’t public sector share the burden of lost wages and increased government debt”

The idea behind that argument seems a lot like capitalism needed during good economic times and socialism is needed during bad times. I’m curious about the people (not necessarily who commented or are on TGN) who would actually support this if they would have been supportive of giving 20% more in taxes had the budget indicated it was needed.

I’m a little biased as a a public sector employee but that’s the job I chose. Like many people who chose to work the private sector when choosing my career I factored in job security, pensions and “limited” salary not based on commission or any other contributing factor.

Sorry how did you make this decision in your early 20's (I was obviously too stoopid)? Are you a teacher? That is a chosen vocation & good for you. Or are you a child of public sector workers & had jobs related growing up?

Heck it wasn't until my late 30's that I made a wage similar to those similar in the Public Sector.

Some just stumble into the Public sector & there, just like the Private sector you have every opportunity to advance (sometimes much easier based on seniority rules), earn higher salaries & have great job security.