Posted on 07/20/2011 1:14:17 PM PDT by Hojczyk
LOL, at my PO they've instituted what must be the most insanely inefficient customer service strategy I've ever seen: they used to have a worker poll the interminable lines to see if anyone had business that didn't require a terminal, such as picking up held mail, buying stamps, etc.
Now, they have an employee going through the line asking what people need and writing it down on a slip of paper to bring to the person at the counter.
Today, there was no line, and as I walked to the open counter space, a woman intercepted me and asked what I needed, for which I replied that I was sending a package priority mail and needed delivery confirmation and insurance, and stated that no, there was nothing explosive, liquid, perishable, whatever.
Mind you, she did this walking by my side all the way to the counter. I actually had to finish talking to her as the counter guy waited.
She then handed him the slip with all of the info I just told her.
Only a US government agency would think that having two employees doing the job of one, only more slowly, is an improvement in productivity.
A fews times when there has been a line, it was painfully obvious to everyone that sticking the guy with the note pad behind one of the empty spaces behind the counter would be far more efficient.
I can barely contain my laughter when I see it in action.
Let’s analyze this logically.
Say we assume that the federal government does magically manage to hire only the perfectly competent sorts who don’t ever need to be fired.
Why wouldn’t business emulate that? I mean it’s not like a FOIA request wouldn’t make them have to spill the beans on the process.
If there was a consistent policy which weeded out incompetence, why would only the government use it? The suggestion that such a thing is likely is utterly preposterous on its face.
So either businesses want to hire incompetent people so they can later fire them (and waste money in the mean time on an unproductive worker) on a deliberate basis, or the government does hire incompetent people like everyone else does, and yet never fires them.
Given the existence of federal employment guidelines and how much of a bear it is to fire a government employee, I rather expect the latter to be the explanation. Logic would agree with my assumption.
As for your assertion that being 35 weeds out all the incompetent people, well then where do they all go? Is there a landfill somewhere filled to the brim with the remains of those incompetent people who are summarily disposed of before they reach this exceptional age of 35?
Now, go through that list and see how many of them are applicable to the federal workforce.
We are NOT speaking of state and local government slugs BTW.
The less than 35 crowd end up going from low paid private sector job to low paid private sector job, or from jail to jail
>Take a look at why private sector people get fired. There are probably 10 big reasons.
>Now, go through that list and see how many of them are applicable to the federal workforce.
Incompetent and lazy and the two big ones I can thing of. Nothing makes federal employees immune to those faults.
>The less than 35 crowd end up going from low paid private sector job to low paid private sector job, or from jail to jail
You seem to intersect with a really odd portion of the population. This is not my experience at all. Then again I tend to hang out more with those with bachelor degrees and higher, so that tilts things.
That's the part of the 35 year old crowd I'm talking about ~ and you want to talk about the choirboys or something.
Again, I have to question the segment of the population you are familiar with.
The majority of people don’t have felony convictions. I have no idea why you are fixated on such things. As such anyone without a felony is hardly a choirboy. They are normal.
Two things that don't rank high are laziness and incompetent.
One of the top items was "respectfully disagreeing with a supervisor" and "refusing to do an unlawful act".
Hmm.
So, what is it people want in the private sector?
The biggest item was "evasiveness".
“evasiveness” as a reason for getting fired ~ not for getting a job.
That’s amusing. I suspect you’re looking at a survey of what people were fired said. I’m pretty sure employers wouldn’t not agree with that assessment.
Much like if you surveyed felons, most would claim they were not guilty. Don’t think I’d buy it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.