What's on your mind?

[navybsn]

48 minutes ago, JonoBlade said:

Sounds like a case of fundamentally misunderstanding technology.

When I started my new job they gave me a brand new iPhone. I never turn it on except when I have to activate a security request to log into something periodically. So dumb. 

For $1700 each piece, government purchasing departments could support an ethical phone supplier like Fairphone. They have the weight to make a difference, but instead go with the big corporations which are completely unethical and presumably have the salespeople to take the right person out to dinner and service them with hookers.

Many people regardless of discipline in positions that direct purchasing budgets, especially in government service, make questionable decisions. I will say however that there are many regulations when it comes to purchasing that dictate what and who you can buy from. So basically, your hands are tied by folks much higher on the food chain (legislators). I would agree though that more scrutiny on who is issued what is the right angle. I have a government issued phone myself, but I only ever use it when on travel. I do need it, but it only sees use a few days a year.

[GoatmasterGeneral]

9 hours ago, JonoBlade said:

Electric cars have a big carbon footprint to make, but not to operate (unless electricity comes from dirty sources) compared to a gasoline vehicle. There are other ethical considerations like where the battery parts come from, but extra research in that area over the last hundred years probably could have solved those problems easily so it wouldn't be an issue today.

However, electric cars should never have been the answer anyway, for the reason above (too many people, too many cars and roads). Car companies still want to sell the same number of cars and convince you you need a new one every year or two. The business model has not changed and is based on seeking infinite growth as it always was. The solution should be shared ownership which even a backwater like Tassie can adopt if there were the political will to do so.

Always worth coming back to proportional emissions and asking yourself how you could make a positive change in your own life with minimal impact on actual lifestyle/happiness:

It's interesting that aviation is 1.9% which is pretty insignificant. I've seen a few articles recently calling out rich people for use of private jets. I mean, rich people who use private jets are dicks that get no sympathy from me, but their contribution to the climate crisis is irrelevant. It just gets everyone else thinking that it is those rich fuckers' fault and not theirs. But make no mistake my friends, it is your fault. 

Road transport is significant. These figures do not include emissions from the manufacturing of motor vehicles or other transport equipment – this is included in ‘Energy use in Industry’.  Therefore, switching to electric cars and trucks powered from clean energy sources is a significant impact. Perhaps it even makes my "shared ownership" model unnecessary. However, having less cars/trucks with greater utilisation makes for less road wear and better use of manufacturing resources.

Energy use in buildings? Smaller buildings/better utilisation. Working from home is great for that. My firm now has a much smaller central London office which has greater utilisation via hot desking.

Live in a modest house/apartment with no more room than you need for your max 2 children. The third impregnation and later gets coat hanger justice. I live in a low rise apartment complex with 38 other units and shared grounds. 

Agriculture/land use? Plant based diet. This reduces deforestation and enables efficient land utilisation. At 49 I have physiological age of 30. However, I'm happy to keep a bow/arrows and fishing line handy for societal collapse.

It's all so easy without resorting to evil socialism. Just takes some politicians with fucking balls.

Seems that semi-automatic motorcycles on average get 87 mpg (37 kpl) so that'd be my solution. Not sure how I'd get my three reusable bags full of groceries and a couple-a 12-packs of beer or two baskets of dirty laundry on there though. I'd need a little trailer or a sidecar for my cargo and my 9 year old and that would no doubt fuck my mileage.

EVs are much dirtier to produce than their ICE counterparts, (I suppose that's mainly because of the batteries) but EV's seem to pass the break even point for producing less emissions over their working lifetime than ICEVs once you've driven 15,000 miles (24,000 kms) which many people typically manage to do in 1 to 2 years.

The only concern I have is the range. Places you need to go can be farther apart and require driving longer distances than you effective range depending on where you live and what you do. Most places in the states outside of the largest urban areas have pathetic excuses for public transit options so we have no choice but to drive everywhere. A range of 150 to 200 miles on a charge seems a bit limiting. When I Google how long it takes to fully charge your EV I get anywhere from 30 minutes to half a day which I'll assume means 12 hours. Not feasible to go on a road trip if every time you've driven 3 hours you have to stop and wait 12 hours to recharge your battery. If it were just a 30 minute recharge time that'd be more reasonable if still pretty annoying.

But I'd sooner walk everywhere and give up driving altogether than give up eating meat. By your graph, livestock and manure produce half the emissions of agrigulture & deforestation. Not to mention the production of fertilizer and pesticides which are I suspect might be included under industry. 

[Dead1]

9 hours ago, navybsn said:

Many people regardless of discipline in positions that direct purchasing budgets, especially in government service, make questionable decisions. I will say however that there are many regulations when it comes to purchasing that dictate what and who you can buy from. So basically, your hands are tied by folks much higher on the food chain (legislators). I would agree though that more scrutiny on who is issued what is the right angle. I have a government issued phone myself, but I only ever use it when on travel. I do need it, but it only sees use a few days a year.

We have no functioning regulations at all.

We do have rules on paper eg spending limits, supply contracts, approval chains etc.

But adherence is non existent and pretty much voluntary.  There are no repercussions for not following them.  

Even budgets are voluntary eg one service was given $10 million per snnum  for new services

Their plan will cost $16 million pa to run. This isn't scope creep- it is the initial plan.  I have advised every one up the chain of this.  No one cares.

Given all senior managers are mainly nurses or doctors,they don't care about finances or financial accountability and transparency.  They don't even care about service delivery.

 

Indeed two senior executives eho got caught engaged in fraud, corruption and data manipulation were merely stood down with expectation they would quietly resign.  No charges laid.

[Thatguy]

And in other news.

We are currently celebrating The Festival of the Boot, when too much footie is just barely enough.

I don't care who wins the NRL as long as it's not Penrith. Newie would do.

I don't care who wins the AFL at all.

But I will watch as much as I am able because I am a stupid owner of a Y chromosome.

[GoatmasterGeneral]

10 minutes ago, Thatguy said:

We are currently celebrating The Festival of the Boot

Thought you were gonna say it's Italian night at the Arabella Cafe.

[AlSymerz]

The idea that you don't care for either finals series but are compelled to watch it is something you should see a doctor about.

I don't even know who's in the final series (either code) this year. I have heard some results but it's not information I have retained.

[MarkhantonioYeatts]

KARMA TO BURN - Live

 

[Thatguy]

2 hours ago, GoatmasterGeneral said:

Thought you were gonna say it's Italian night at the Arabella Cafe.

That was last week. get with the program.

[RelentlessOblivion]

3 hours ago, Thatguy said:

And in other news.

We are currently celebrating The Festival of the Boot, when too much footie is just barely enough.

I don't care who wins the NRL as long as it's not Penrith. Newie would do.

I don't care who wins the AFL at all.

But I will watch as much as I am able because I am a stupid owner of a Y chromosome.

I’m the opposite, could not care any less about the rugby, AFL though I’m watching like it’s my religion, tonight especially fills that unique blend of dread and hope reserved solely for the fanatical supporter, particularly one who’s team has the unenviable task of playing and away Qualifying Final

[Dead1]

A multimillionaire CEO at the Australian Financial Review Property Summit talks about how it's necessary to ramp up unemployment, bring pain to the economy and to destroy employees/workers self worth.  This piece of shit is a rich property developer worth $677 million.

 

Note corporate profits are through the roof.

 

Corporate leaders and the rich are the bad guys.  There's no denying that.  Any poor/working class or even middle class defending modern neoliberal capitalism is what Lenin called a "useful idiot."

 

 Speaking of Lenin, more and more I think we need a global repeat of what happened in St Petersburg in 1917.  

 

 

 

[AlSymerz]

I agree with the dude about arrogant workers.

I was talking to the hay cutter I've used for the last decade yesterday and he says he's already back logged because he can't get enough workers and his current staff are running backwards even before the season really kicks off. Where my my sis-in-law is (government department) they need 50+ people to work phones but can't get anyone because no one wants to deal with the general public who constantly get angry and abusive on the phone. And I usually get one of the local agencies to find me a few people to do odd jobs like spraying and weed control in the spring/early summer and at $50 an hour I can't get anyone because farm work is too hard.

 

[Dead1]

30 minutes ago, AlSymerz said:

I agree with the dude about arrogant workers.

I was talking to the hay cutter I've used for the last decade yesterday and he says he's already back logged because he can't get enough workers and his current staff are running backwards even before the season really kicks off. WAnd I usually get one of the local agencies to find me a few people to do odd jobs like spraying and weed control in the spring/early summer and at $50 an hour I can't get anyone because farm work is too hard.

 

You want to play capitalism well then you have to pay employees more.  It's the laws of supply and demand.

Always find it hilarious capitalists (including small business people) want to get the big bucks but don't want to pay their workers for it.

And why is it OK for big corporations to jack up their prices but not for workers to demand better pay and conditions for their labour?

 

Quote

here my my sis-in-law is (government department) they need 50+ people to work phones but can't get anyone because no one wants to deal with the general public who constantly get angry and abusive on the phone.

So people should put up with being treated like shit?

And the amazing thought that has never crossed the minds of senior executives including those in government - offer better service and you won't have as many angry customers.

But that involves investing serious money and probably some hard work by those executives.  And we can't have that.

It's cheaper to offer shit service and then have some crappy helpline to act as a safety valve and the illusion of doing something.

 

 

As for tradies near every tradie I know used to work 6-7 days a week. When it's not working on site, it's at home getting quotes, invoicing, servicing equipment, picking up supplies etc (probably like your life on the farm).  Most of that is unpaid work.  (And then one carpenter I knew being required to do some free work on his boss's house over weekend just to keep his job).

One builder I knew quit well before COVID and became a garden maintenance guy because he literally never saw his kids.

So I guess it's only fair they want some work-life balance.

What's wrong with that?  Why should we slave 50-70 hours a week?    In the 19th and 20th centuries people were literally killed fighting for better working conditions.

Why should people still keep working in shit conditions?  Why should they accept abuse from customers or employers?  Why should they do unpaid overtime?  Why should they let their bosses run their lives?

 

Also what do you think about this?  1700 illegally sacked workers just won a court appeal against QANTAS for their sacking. The airline was deliberately trying to water down their rights and protections.

Is that arrogant workers?  Or should the workers just suck it up and get lower paid jobs with the new contractors?  

 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-09-13/high-court-rules-in-qantas-twu-battle-over-ground-crew-staff/102848684

 

But more critically can you see why more and more employees no longer offer any loyalty to their employer?  The system is breaking down.  For every action there is a reaction.  Rich fucks rorting  workers and eroding their livelihoods over 30 years would eventually lead to those same workers thinking "fuck you". 

 

And with death of unions and collective bargaining in many workplaces, most workers are doing the only thing they can - silent quitting, ceasing to do unpaid overtime and taking advantage of the flexible working arrangements (eg lower hours) companies themselves championed for 40 years. 

[AlSymerz]

I pay what I'm supposed to according to the law, which makes the rest of your wage argument pointless.

No, people should have to put up with shit in their job but while the general public continue to be cunts someone has to deal with them or government services don't get delivered. Better service requires more staff to run things better, more staff can't be achieved while people wont take the well paying jobs offered. It's catch 22, but by all means if you've got a way to solve the problem of people being cunts that actually works propose it, otherwise it's just more hot air.

Who said anything about expecting others to work a 70 hour week?

 

[Dead1]

1 hour ago, AlSymerz said:

I pay what I'm supposed to according to the law, which makes the rest of your wage argument pointless.

 

Actually you can pay more.  Awards are the bare minimum for each industry/profession.  You can enter individual bargaining agreements and choose to pay more.

Like most Australian employers, you are choosing not to do it.  I can't blame people for not then wanting to work for you.

 

Quote

No, people should have to put up with shit in their job but while the general public continue to be cunts someone has to deal with them or government services don't get delivered. Better service requires more staff to run things better, more staff can't be achieved while people wont take the well paying jobs offered. It's catch 22, but by all means if you've got a way to solve the problem of people being cunts that actually works propose it, otherwise it's just more hot air.

Better services usually require better management of resources and better service design. 

You can throw as much money and staff as you want at a service but at some point there is no value added.  In my department we are now the most bloated we've ever been.  Are services better delivered?  Fuck no.

You can throw as many nurses at a mental health patient but if the nurses are demoralised and demotivated because their bosses do as they please and make life difficult for them, then they won't put much effort in.  If you see your bosses not turning up to work on time, not doing any real work and then promoting people based on friendship you're not going to be happy and perform well.

Unrealistic KPIs don't help either.  

Call centres are notorious for it (there's several here in Launceston and everyone from my wife, my ex-brother-in-law, several friends and colleagues have worked in them). 

 

In my job I am more and more unmotivated.  My pay and conditions are excellent.

But what I do is of no value as my bosses don't act on anything that I do, refuse to make any decisions, barely turn up to work, don't communicate and play political games.  

Blow back is some of my colleagues are now refusing to do work they're paid for unless they got more "support" (ie underlings to delegate all the shit work).  And I am sitting here wasting time on Metal Forum!

The expectation from bosses is do the work and shut up even if what they are doing is corrupt or even dangerous.

 

It wasn't like this in 2005 when I started in government (though private was).

 

 

Quote

Who said anything about expecting others to work a 70 hour week?

I added it in cause it is an expectation with a lot of employers to do additional hours and often unpaid.  One of my first jobs required dozens of hours of unpaid overtime a fortnight including on public holidays.  I refused to do it and left.  I guess that made me arrogant and I should have just put up with it.

[AlSymerz]

You have no idea what I do and don't do. I pay what I am legally obliged to pay for the work as outlined in the job description. If people work harder, they get a bonus, if they don't, they don't come back. I'm currently in talks with an agency about hiring a group of special needs people who wouldn't ordinarily be offered such work, because most of those people actually want to work and are happy to be employed, But in doing so it appears I need to pay 1, maybe 2 supervisors, depending on how many workers I get, because there is chemicals involved. But you keep assuming the worst while it makes you feel better.

So I see you don't have an actual solution to government workers being treated like shit.

 

[Dead1]

40 minutes ago, AlSymerz said:

You have no idea what I do and don't do. I pay what I am legally obliged to pay for the work as outlined in the job description. If people work harder, they get a bonus, if they don't, they don't come back. I'm currently in talks with an agency about hiring a group of special needs people who wouldn't ordinarily be offered such work, because most of those people actually want to work and are happy to be employed, But in doing so it appears I need to pay 1, maybe 2 supervisors, depending on how many workers I get, because there is chemicals involved. But you keep assuming the worst while it makes you feel better.

No I don't know what you pay.  But "legally obliged to pay" generally means paying Award rates in Australia.  As stated those are minimums, not prescribed rates.  

(Now I don't know if paying over Awards rates would impact your profitability too much.  But that is capitalism).

 

Quote

 

So I see you don't have an actual solution to government workers being treated like shit.

 

No idea what line of work your sister in law is.  Call centre could be anything.

But to be honest from what I can see, improving how people treat government employees requires following.

 

Some of its macro, some of its micro:

 

1. Services designed to actually deliver outcomes.    Services should be part of a holistic system.  We know for example financial stability is linked to mental and physical health.

So services should be designed as part of a whole system designed to meet some sort of standard of living.  

2.  Greater transparency

3. Greater accountability for leadership including ministers.

4. Greater promotion of actual equality.  If system is perceived to be unequal or unfair, people will be hostile from onset.

5. Reducing emphasis on risk management.

6. Greater communication between services.

7. Reducing number of service providers and reducing complexity.  Currently many of our services are a messy intertangled web.  You can get bounced around a fair bit trying to access services.

8. Reducing crony capitalism (eg what happened with QANTAS)  as well as emphasis on corporate profitability (eg electricity and gas supply).

9. Reinvest in public education instead of private education (fucking scrap private schools entirely).  

10. Actually implement deliverable KPIs, review them and then fix things that don't work (blame cultures are not good).

11. Some cultural re-brainwashing might be necessary.  We live in an over-tolerant society - ie we are expected to tolerate everything including bad behaviour (customer is right mentality which is very corporate/capitalist).  Introduce penalties for nasty behaviour.  Again be transparent about it.  If Bob didn't pay his power bill, was offered an authentically helpful set of solutions and then told the government person to go fuck themselves then department is no longer obliged to help them.

12. Oh and design services to be sustainable.  Fuck me, I've seen some unsustainable doozies that we've implemented over the years.  Literally designed to fail if 1 person goes on sick leave or services expected to go permanently but funded on 1-3 year funding cycles.

 

13. I could keep going.  I periodically try to do some of that stuff at my work.  I used to do more.

But when my suggestion and hard work gets flushed down the toilet because some manager doesn't like the fact I've pointed out their pet project is unsustainable or they're stripping duplicating services or they refuse a reasonably full proof yet simple solution in favour of some convoluted personal idea with many potential points of failure then I give up.

 

 

TL:DR

- Make services simpler for plebs

- Actually deliver what is expected/promised

- Be accountable for your fuck ups.  But citizens should be accountable for their behaviour too.

- People with full stomach and safe roof over heads are far less likely to be angry or arseholes.  Society seriously needs to reintroduce some 1930-60s social democracy concepts to alleviate these issues.

[AlSymerz]

You still haven't solved the biggest problem of them all. Some people are just cunts. If people stopped being so fucking entitled, stop treating other people like shit and started being reasonable improvements that you mention could not just be implemented but may even have a chance of working.

 

 

[Dead1]

Yep some people are just cunts.

Hence the need for sanctions to keep them somewhat in line.  Ideally these should be social sanctions ie social repercussions of acting outside of norms (eg ostracization, sense of humiliation and embarrassment).

However in a hyper-individualistic fragmented society, social sanctions no longer work.

 

So make them actual sanctions - ie client was rude so the staff member terminates their engagement with the client.

 

But also true cunts are reasonably rare.

 

Entitlement in the workplace is indeed a big problem.  But IME it didn't start with low level shit kickers.  It started with high level managers whose salaries became insane, who delegated more and more work whilst pushing for things that made life harder for workers.

High level execs never used to earn as much as they do now.  In 1965 a CEO might earn 15 times more than their average workers.  Obviously wealthy but not as obnoxious as it is now (351 times average wages).  In fact executive remuneration grew 1322% since 1978 compared to only 78% for workers (in America - Aussie stats also show this but can't be arsed looking for them).  Executives don't even have to grow revenue anymore to get bonuses which are tied to share prices.

 

But executives did more work back then and also tended to get sacked if they fucked up.  Now they swan around in meetings and get golden parachutes if they fuck up.

Hence entitlement.

This sense of entitlement then trickled down and has now reached the workers and it's only now viewed as a problem.

 

Part of the solution is to lead by example - smash executive and high level managerial salary to more acceptable levels, make them responsible for failures. 

Apply same to everyone.  Hard for workers to refuse to work or meet deadlines if the now much less paid executive got sacked for failing to reach KPIs.  

 

Oh and the current system entrenches social welfare.  My mother-in-law is on a pension and can't afford to really live on it.  Hence she wants to work.  However they start slashing your pension if you earn any amount of money.

 

Current aged pension is $1,096.70 per fortnight for a single person which is $28,000 a year which is well below $69,888 median income.

If you're a couple, amount is reduced to $826.70 per person ($21,494 per annum, combined $43,000).

 

But if you work and earn more than $204 per fortnight ($360 combined for couples), they start cutting your pension.

So you have some segment of population that would like to still keep working in some fashion, you can't because they don't gain anything for doing it.  It just increases their vulnerability because low hour work is often casual.

 

Same applies for the unemployed.  A single person on unemployment benefits gets $693.10 per fortnight ($18,020 per annum).  And if they earn more than $150 per fortnight in paid work, they lose welfare.  Easier then to stay on welfare.

 

In my 20s I used to work and lose money. After petrol and cutbacks to welfare, I was about $50 worse off a week!   I kept a job simply because it made me more employable.  

[AlSymerz]

Centerlink tried sanctions on people about 2 decades ago and it was deemed illegal so I don't know that any government department would be allowed to actually do it. For some it would definitely work, shit for some just being told to fuck off and calm the fuck down might actually work but again governments just wouldn't allow such things.

Entitlement is something people from all walks of life have. It's not always the same entitlement, often it's vastly different but it exists everywhere and that makes it harder for all humans to get along. I've seen CEO's with it, I've seen mid level workers with it, I've seen shit kickers with it. We're all humans, we all have it to some degree, even those who deny having it, and we all let it escape when it suits us. I don't think there is one group who displays it worse than another, but there is definitely people who display it worse than others.

 

[Dead1]

15 minutes ago, AlSymerz said:

Centerlink tried sanctions on people about 2 decades ago and it was deemed illegal so I don't know that any government department would be allowed to actually do it. For some it would definitely work, shit for some just being told to fuck off and calm the fuck down might actually work but again governments just wouldn't allow such things.

 

 

Government makes the laws so any illegality is due to their own lack of understanding of their own legal systems.  Again it's overcomplicated.  

Our legal system is basically overcomplicated and dysfunctional.  

 

One of the big problems in Australia is that government services are now a dumping ground for the lower socio-economic.  Eg middle-upper class will access mental health through private providers who won't admit lower socio-economic types. These private providers are still government funded to some degree (NDIS might be 100%, other healthcare might be 50% or less).

Government services are  not allowed to say no.  Hence you get some lower socio economic person stuck on a waiting list for underfunded overbooked government operators whilst the middle-upper class go their government subsidised private providers.

 

Quote

 

Entitlement is something people from all walks of life have. It's not always the same entitlement, often it's vastly different but it exists everywhere and that makes it harder for all humans to get along. I've seen CEO's with it, I've seen mid level workers with it, I've seen shit kickers with it. We're all humans, we all have it to some degree, even those who deny having it, and we all let it escape when it suits us. I don't think there is one group who displays it worse than another, but there is definitely people who display it worse than others.

 

I think today most people are entitled.  It's endemic.  

 

The shit people can get away with now and the shit people expect is a lot more than what it was when I started working at the turn of the century.

 

 

 

[AlSymerz]

Government might make the laws but they still have to be sensible and fair, cutting someone off from government services isn't like stopping a kid from going on a school excursion. There can be real world ramifications from cutting services to people the government doesn't like. Not to mention that there is always two sides to every story, he said she said stories would fill the courts in no time as people used the free legal system to fight cases that shouldn't even go to court.

 

[RelentlessOblivion]

I can’t believe it’s week seven of my course already, so far so good

[Dead1]

16 hours ago, AlSymerz said:

Government might make the laws but they still have to be sensible and fair, cutting someone off from government services isn't like stopping a kid from going on a school excursion. There can be real world ramifications from cutting services to people the government doesn't like.

 

That's the point.  It's called responsibility and it's something most Australians never encounter much and certainly avoid if it comes their way.  The system has to be carrot and stick - ie there are rewards for participating properly in society and repercussions for not.

 

As mentioned government run services are now a dumping ground for people from lower socio-economic backgrounds, a lot of whom are bogans with no concept of acceptable social interaction. 

Better funded private services just say no and cut people off (even if those services are government funded).  I think government services should have a right to not offer service to difficult people who refuse to behave appropriately.

 

Perhaps forcing private providers to accept more difficult clients would help alleviate pressure on government run services. 

 

Or even better nationalise all health and education.

 

 

 

Quote

Not to mention that there is always two sides to every story, he said she said stories would fill the courts in no time as people used the free legal system to fight cases that shouldn't even go to court.

However thanks to The solution here is simple - record every call centre interaction (they probably already do) and have video surveillance in reception/public areas and key interaction areas (eg meeting rooms) (I'm also not 100% on privacy (or in fact many other stupid western concepts).

 

That way you have evidence.

[AlSymerz]

Evidence means nothing in court these days. Government departments have been recording calls since the 80's, they've had CCVT footage since the 90's. Yet people still cause problems. If it became a system where people had to go to court to get their services reinstated there would a whole bunch of government hating lawyers all tying up the system with stupid cases that solve nothing. There is already a shit load of court cases happening around the country against government departments for people who feel they've been wronged, that would spiral out of control if the government was suddenly able to make up their own rules and hit people where it hurts.

There is no easy answer to any of this. Sure the government is rotten from the top down, but it's not the entire government, therefore just getting rid of top tier staff isn't going to solve anything. Even if the the could weed out the shit,  many of those would have to be replaced, a time consuming and expensive task. It's also a task that is doomed to repeat it's own history because employment of managers in government departments is so poorly handled under most circumstances.

Then at the very bottom of the pit is abusive and threatening customers. Such customers have risen something like 55% since the pandemic and when you're dealing with 10K or more calls a day that's a lot of grumpy people abusing staff. Again it's not all the customers but they can't just get rid of the problem ones.

Somewhere in the middle there is a bunch of grunts working to solve problems they can't solve in 5 minutes and get sick of being abused just because someone had to wait on hold for 30 minutes. There will of course be a percentage will be dead weight or workers shit at their job, in the middle too, that goes without saying, but no rule change can fix those all those issues. Maybe it would be nice if someone tried, but it's not going to happen while the system is working, even if it's working badly.

[Dead1]

2 hours ago, AlSymerz said:

Evidence means nothing in court these days. Government departments have been recording calls since the 80's, they've had CCVT footage since the 90's. Yet people still cause problems. If it became a system where people had to go to court to get their services reinstated there would a whole bunch of government hating lawyers all tying up the system with stupid cases that solve nothing. There is already a shit load of court cases happening around the country against government departments for people who feel they've been wronged, that would spiral out of control if the government was suddenly able to make up their own rules and hit people where it hurts.

 

The problem is an archaic bastardised legal system that again is mainly driven by financial concerns.  

Note you could funnel these people to ombudsmen or other complaints bodies.

I am a firm believer we need more social democracy but we also need a bit more Victorian style draconianism.

(Note I am not an Australian (government recently made that painfully clear) and my value set is closer to that of Jugoslav socialism and Balkans barbarism than Anglo-Saxon niceties).
 

Quote

Sure the government is rotten from the top down, but it's not the entire government, therefore just getting rid of top tier staff isn't going to solve anything. Even if the the could weed out the shit,  many of those would have to be replaced, a time consuming and expensive task. It's also a task that is doomed to repeat it's own history because employment of managers in government departments is so poorly handled under most circumstances.

 

True on all accounts.

But it's increasingly more and more of the government services that are shit or corrupt or deliberately neutered.  It's been happening for 30 years.

Government no longer even maintains institutional knowledge on areas that are exclusive to government (eg defence or trade or running hospitals) and now hires private consultants for everything. 

Privatisation has seen the best move out of government and set up their own services (government funded of course - basically middle class welfare at its worst).

 

Hence you're left with basically the useless ones in many government services.

 

Eg here in Tasmania, good quality nurses and doctors no longer want to work in public health.  So we employ third rate staff from third world or really junior people with no experience.    The senior staff are usually useless dregs or lazy fucks or political animals out for career development.

Anyone good leaves the service.

The mentality is bums on seats. 

 

Quote

Then at the very bottom of the pit is abusive and threatening customers. Such customers have risen something like 55% since the pandemic and when you're dealing with 10K or more calls a day that's a lot of grumpy people abusing staff. Again it's not all the customers but they can't just get rid of the problem ones.

My father used to say people need either fear of God or fear of government to stay in line.  And people no longer fear God and increasingly don't fear government.  They don't even fear the old social sanctions/stigma.

They are now hyper individuals who are convinced the world revolves around them and they should be given everything they believe is due to them.

 

Quote

 

Somewhere in the middle there is a bunch of grunts working to solve problems they can't solve in 5 minutes and get sick of being abused just because someone had to wait on hold for 30 minutes. There will of course be a percentage will be dead weight or workers shit at their job, in the middle too, that goes without saying, but no rule change can fix those all those issues. Maybe it would be nice if someone tried, but it's not going to happen while the system is working, even if it's working badly.

 

Hence my point services are badly designed, don't have clear or realistic outputs/KPIs, aren't managed properly and the people running them are often useless or lazy or don't care.

If the system was efficient, you probably wouldn't have a as many people calling call centres/help lines.  They wouldn't be on hold for 30 minutes (or more).

You'd still get entitled cunts because the government and media have spent 40 years forcing neoliberal dogma down our throats - literally a culture of "I do what I want" and "fuck everyone else."  (Literally every single Disney storyline is essentially this - "You have to accept who I am, I don't have to compromise and there are no repercussions for what I do").

They call this freedom.