Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Or they had a better skill set, better attitude toward the world and the citizens of their jurisdiction etc etc etc. Sometimes people are just more qualified and pleasant to work with. My guess is if you look at government hires in your jurisdictions you would see a lot of folks hired who resemble you and were just more desirable candidates so they got hired.
Pfft, not in Governmen jobs. It's who you know and then pass a test if one is even taken. It's also if your employer likes you or wants someone else (friend, relative, etc. etc.) in your place. Skills come later if considered and that even depends on the job and title. I'm sorry but you do not know about Government jobs. What you describe is more for private sector jobs not Government.
Pfft, not in Governmen jobs. It's who you know and then pass a test if one is even taken. It's also if your employer likes you or wants someone else (friend, relative, etc. etc.) in your place. Skills come later if considered and that even depends on the job and title. I'm sorry but you do not know about Government jobs. What you describe is more for private sector jobs not Government.
Your right 36 1/2 years in governrment with twenty plus in an administrative capacity and having hired hundreds doesn't qualify me to know much about government jobs. Remember as an administrator/manager you are still responsible for the production standards of your department/operations. I do know many who cried they were picked on when they didn't get the job but you what? It was them and folks skilled at hiring can tell the whiners because they often complain about their previous job and boss. I will grant you that at lower skill set government jobs where skills acquired are perhaps not as critical objectivity may not be as critical in hiring. Custodians can often be trained in a short period of time.
To a degree, there is favoritism at play in certain sectors of government. We have a long thread somewhere on CD listing numerous instances of abuse. This may be more true in lower level positions.
Or they had a better skill set, better attitude toward the world and the citizens of their jurisdiction etc etc etc. Sometimes people are just more qualified and pleasant to work with. My guess is if you look at government hires in your jurisdictions you would see a lot of folks hired who resemble you and were just more desirable candidates so they got hired.
Have you even been reading my posts? Let me break it down so that you can understand it better:
1. When I graduated from college, the government in my area, was NOT hiring ANYONE in my field. It did not matter how good your skill set, attitide toward the world, how pleasant you were to work with, etc. There were NO JOBS and they were NOT HIRING ANYONE.
2. Where I live, the government only hires people to entry level jobs, and promotes within. Unless you get a job straight out of college (see #1), they will NOT hire you. Even if one is willing to work at an entry level job later in life, they will NOT get hired since they are "overqualified".
3. Where I live, it is basically impossible for a white male to get a government job, due to affirmative action requirements.
I don't know why people are posting that the private sector positions make more than the government jobs. That has been proven to be false long ago. Government jobs always pay more especially when you take benefits into consideration.
Gov't workers get their retirement pensions and the average private sector does not. That is why all the cities are going bankrupt. They can't keep up with pensions from the city employee pensions. In California they are supporting 4 police forces. 3 retired 1 working. It is not sustainable.
Not all the sities are goping bankrupt anymore than all manufacturing is going bankrupt .Congress had hearings on just this not long ago i state of the states.Sure some are in troubler but not as high a per centage as private pensio polnas and there are alot of those. Not every public sector job has the benefits that you read about or are under funded.the sited pension in troublwe with states were California and Illnosis because they have not contributed and have way generous plans. Its really no different than the case with the auto unionslthey milked tha cow dry but other penisons have not and are well funded. One needs t look at them one by one has they vary so much.
Ed drove a bus; and yes he did work for ss for 10 years. I have a better education, etc. Same income. Did I have a 'cheesy' employer - no! He gets 10 years ss benefits and a public pension for the other 25.
I am afraid you chose poorly! Life is choices. Maybe it doesn't seem "fair", but it is what it is.
You have move beyond your circumastances and make the best with what you have. Otherwise, you will end up unhappy the rest of your days.
Have you even been reading my posts? Let me break it down so that you can understand it better:
1. When I graduated from college, the government in my area, was NOT hiring ANYONE in my field. It did not matter how good your skill set, attitide toward the world, how pleasant you were to work with, etc. There were NO JOBS and they were NOT HIRING ANYONE.
2. Where I live, the government only hires people to entry level jobs, and promotes within. Unless you get a job straight out of college (see #1), they will NOT hire you. Even if one is willing to work at an entry level job later in life, they will NOT get hired since they are "overqualified".
3. Where I live, it is basically impossible for a white male to get a government job, due to affirmative action requirements.
Stop judging someone you don't know!
You made the decision to stay where you live, for your own reasons. That was the choice. Not right or wrong, just YOUR choice.
Pfft, not in Governmen jobs. It's who you know and then pass a test if one is even taken. It's also if your employer likes you or wants someone else (friend, relative, etc. etc.) in your place. Skills come later if considered and that even depends on the job and title. I'm sorry but you do not know about Government jobs. What you describe is more for private sector jobs not Government.
Ok, this is so over the top its not even funny.
I work for a state agency. First, you don't even get an interview with us unless you have a Bachelor's degree. All of our positions require college degrees.
Second, our entry level employees, with a degree, start at about 36k a year. Upper level management averages 52k a year, the only person in our agency that makes more than 60k is our Director, and we have 24 people with Masters, 2 Phd's. That is with a staff of less than 60. So no one is getting rich here.
To address the OP, We all contribute to SS, so does the state, we also have a mandatory 6 percent deducted for our pension contribution and can choose to participate in the 459 plan.
We all make choices, if you choose to go to the private sector, not contribute to retirement, work for the government, go military or whatever, that is the CHOICE you made.
In any case, I think maybe by now the OP may realize that he would have been more wise to just post about the differences between his and his friend's retirement packages and open the situation to discussion rather than stating how "unfair" it is. Because fairness has nothing to do with it.
It's unfair I don't have Donald Trump's money but hey, what are you gonnna do?
I didn't take the OP as particularly whiney; more as a commentary or observation. No one had a crystal ball back in the day--who knew that companies would renege on their promises? For example, my mom retired from HP--the benefits she was promised have evaporated, and the company isn't even bankrupt. The government, on the other hand, has a never-ending source of revenue to pay their obligations. That would be you and me.
While I think people should get what they've been promised, I don't see how, going forward, these pensions are sustainable. Retiring at 55 and collecting 3/4 of your salary (as one poster on these boards claimed (s)he did) needs to stop. There should be a fra applicable to pensions as well. Probably is, by now.
One only has to wtach to see that pension vary as to the fiacl situawtion they are in. There were congressional hearings on state penison and i was surprised that with some exceptions that the vast majoprity were well fund;especially compared to private pensions.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
