Politicians' pay should be linked to brokerage house pay, not to civil servant pay

Patslatt1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 18, 2009
Messages
4,269
Restraint on Ireland's extremely generous public sector pay and gold plated pensions has proved impossible because politicians' pay is linked to that of top civil servants. The brazen conflict of interest of politicians in deciding public sector pay will result in a financial crisis on paying those pensions as the population ages over coming decades.See Will unfunded, pay as you go public sector pensions bankrupt the state?
The solution is to link politicians' pay to the earnings of partners in consumer sales oriented businesses such as estate agencies,insurance broking, car dealerships and stock broking. That's because politicians' work is very similar to these occupations.
A major task for politicians in government is to act like brokers as intermediaries between the various interests and factions in society to achieve political compromises. Getting elected requires building networks of supporters just like brokers.
Earnings of brokers and sales people in the above industries vary enormously according to the 80/20 rule of thumb whereby roughly 80% of earnings go to the top 20% of the players. So it wouldn't be easy to select comparators for politicians' pay. Given the great insecurity of elected political office, politicians' pay likely should be compared to that of the top 20%. But their pay shouldn't be so high as to make them indifferent to the cost of living faced by the general public.
 
Last edited:


Lumpy Talbot

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 30, 2015
Messages
29,457
Twitter
No
Politicians will always benchmark themselves to captains of industry. In the same way that captains of industry always think of themselves as generals and in many cases assume they can be successful in politics now that they have been successful in business.

Strictly speaking there is now no real need for professional politicians to exist. We have all the technology we need to vote on issues rather than by party or for some politician as an interpreter.

In twenty to thirty years time the world will be a different place. Very few people will be hurrying for the 7.40 from Dorking to OfficePlatz for that 9.00am meeting, as offices won't exist other than in virtual space. There's no technical reason why offices should exist right now.

I can't think of one technical reason why politicians as a profession should even exist other than as purely ceremonial presences.
 

Patslatt1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 18, 2009
Messages
4,269
Yahoo's last president cancelled working remotely from home. Maybe the teamwork necessary in many businesses was weakened by Yahoo's remote working.
Face to face contact is important in communication given that body language is estimated to be 60% of communicating by psychologists. It would take a very expensive studio to replicate face to face contact. Desktop video links and WhatsApp are far from that standard.
 

Lumpy Talbot

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 30, 2015
Messages
29,457
Twitter
No
Then again the people most likely to say human face-to-face contact is necessary are the ones who are most likely to enjoy meetings. That are a lot of people in offices who like to talk about work but seldom do any themselves.

An old boy made me laugh years ago when he pointed out that meetings were for people who had no friends.
 

Patslatt1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 18, 2009
Messages
4,269
A few companies have meetings where the people stand and the resulting discomfort after a time speeds things up. That practice is unfair to people who find it difficult to stand but I suppose they can ask permission to sit.
 

CatullusV

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 9, 2018
Messages
5,432
Yahoo's last president cancelled working remotely from home. Maybe the teamwork necessary in many businesses was weakened by Yahoo's remote working.
Face to face contact is important in communication given that body language is estimated to be 60% of communicating by psychologists. It would take a very expensive studio to replicate face to face contact. Desktop video links and WhatsApp are far from that standard.
Teleworking is a fantastic thing. There is absolutely no need in many industries to be sitting beside your colleagues. I'm meeting my new boss for the first time tomorrow. He tells me that outside company events, which happen annually in the US, we will likely meet up once or maybe twice a year and that will be in social circumstances.

The company saves a huge amount of money on real estate. Some desks in the UK have an occupancy of nearly two people.

Communication is not an issue at all. There is internal Skype as well as Instant Messaging and that new tech which is the telephone.

In fact, on one project I worked, I felt that I was *too* easily contactable. At times my task bar consisted of tiny icons representing scores of open conversations.

But it works fine.

When you work in a cost centre or a service centre maybe 90% of your interactions are outside the unit you're working in. Your main channels are not with direct colleagues.

You may prefer a system where people clock in, but those days are gone. Thankfully so.

My working day will start with the mess and turmoil of kids getting ready for school. It is impossible to sleep through that. But when they leave at 7:30 I will be reading mails and will be on the job. The company will realise real value from the absence of a commute.

Meanwhile, and stupidly, there will be a company car sitting outside my house.
 

CatullusV

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 9, 2018
Messages
5,432
Restraint on Ireland's extremely generous public sector pay and gold plated pensions has proved impossible because politicians' pay is linked to that of top civil servants. The brazen conflict of interest of politicians in deciding public sector pay will result in a financial crisis on paying those pensions as the population ages over coming decades.See Will unfunded, pay as you go public sector pensions bankrupt the state?
The solution is to link politicians' pay to the earnings of partners in consumer sales oriented businesses such as estate agencies,insurance broking, car dealerships and stock broking. That's because politicians' work is very similar to these occupations.
A major task for politicians in government is to act like brokers as intermediaries between the various interests and factions in society to achieve political compromises. Getting elected requires building networks of supporters just like brokers.
Earnings of brokers and sales people in the above industries vary enormously according to the 80/20 rule of thumb whereby roughly 80% of earnings go to the top 20% of the players. So it wouldn't be easy to select comparators for politicians' pay. Given the great insecurity of elected political office, politicians' pay likely should be compared to that of the top 20%. But their pay shouldn't be so high as to make them indifferent to the cost of living faced by the general public.
By the way, private companies can be really quite wasteful. Would you want a permanent secretary who oversees thousands of staff on the same salary as Michael O'Leary?
 

Patslatt1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 18, 2009
Messages
4,269
By the way, private companies can be really quite wasteful. Would you want a permanent secretary who oversees thousands of staff on the same salary as Michael O'Leary?
Competition in the marktplace keeps salaries realistic except for publicly owned companies with a weak or no controlling shareholder and a weak board of directors where the top layer of maybe five to twenty managers can extract excessive pay. But taking too much in pay and stock options can leave a company vulnerable to hostile takeover bids.
 

Ardillaun

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
12,179
There are things the company might not want an email trail or video recording on but special meetings could be set up for such a purpose. What strikes me is how resistant businesses have been to downsizing the office in the internet age. We haven’t seen the transition to working at home yet which I had expected quite some time ago.
 

Lumpy Talbot

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 30, 2015
Messages
29,457
Twitter
No
I think it is just organisational stasis. There isn't really any technical reason why offices need to exist. It is just that the oldest crew are so used to them that they are a natural offshoot of their perception.

I have in the past had a line manager who was based in Connecticutt while I was based in London, and another time where my line manager was based in Brussels and I was located in Amsterdam.

There would be an awful lot of office space to arrive into a declining market in years to come I suspect.
 

Patslatt1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 18, 2009
Messages
4,269
Maybe people need to go to an office to socialise,especially in Ireland since many pubs started to open late!
 


New Threads

Most Replies

Top