Der Minister sagt, „Abnutzung ist das Ziel“, aber „Anpassungen“, die zum öffentlichen Bundesdienst kommen
https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/article/minister-says-attrition-is-the-objective-but-adjustments-coming-to-federal-public-service/
Der Minister sagt, „Abnutzung ist das Ziel“, aber „Anpassungen“, die zum öffentlichen Bundesdienst kommen
https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/article/minister-says-attrition-is-the-objective-but-adjustments-coming-to-federal-public-service/
7 Kommentare
This is just in case people were wondering when the goal post would be moving.
No Cuts > Attrition > Cuts
Why the fuck did I campaign against the conservatives in the first place? I’m feeling quite demoralied these days
I still recall people here insisting that there wouldn’t be lay offs.
See how they never said this during the federal election?
Then it was „elect us to stop Poilievre from doing big cuts; WE will only do them via attrition“
Now post election: „well attrition is the goal of course, but we will have other cuts, too“
***
They really have no excuse. I don’t support Canada Post cuts, but if you DO support them, the case for cuts existed before April 2025. So Carney KNEW he wanted to do these cuts, but had to wait until the voters were locked in and couldn’t change their mind.
It might be more cynical than Trudeau’s broke electoral reform promise!
Ah, the goal posts get moved again.
How long till they just come and say „fuck it, were firing civil servants, deal with it“?
One dirty side of this that doesn’t get enough press is that letting term contracts expire rather than renewing them is technically attrition. It’s not just warm and fuzzy retirement stories.
That term employee might be doing tasks that exist permanently/for the foreseeable future and they may have been renewed 3 times already (or even more because of “stop the clock” measures that stopped terms from being converted to indeterminate) with promises from management of being renewed again or made permanent, but letting them go at the end of their contract isn’t considered a layoff.
I don’t know a single program that has the staffing levels it needs to run the program well. Not replacing retiring/leaving workers will only add weight to the cracking foundation our services are supposed to stand on.
They were all going to cut. The difference is would they all cut based on the results of reviews or would they do it based on ideology and cutting things they don’t like. I still have more faith the liberals will look at the proposals and not just get rid of scientists and close whole agencies that deal in environmental assessment and climate research.
Lead by example and introduce pay cuts to MPs and cabinet members.
cabinet members currently receive $309,700 per year. Regular MPs receive $209,800.
Leader of the opposition gets $309,700 plus free housing.
Surely we can cut that all back.