Same thing Happened at the IWK in Halifax. Paid off the Franchise fee in record time and the folks working there were happy. My Sister was one of the managers until the do good bunch felt that a successful business on Hospital grounds needed that Union touch. Timmies is now gone from the IWK.Was looking for a thread to drop this into and this one will do - it's close enough.
Scanning the National Post today and came across this article.
It caught my attention because some forty or so years ago, my wife was on a small volunteer committee that ran the thrift shop at the Brandon General Hospital. The thrift shops mandate is to sell suitable new merchandise that people can buy as gifts. (It's not a used clothing type of place - this is everything from candles to large ornaments etc) The profits go into the hospital to buy new equipment such as MRIs.
Anyway they thought about a new way to make money and finally settled on opening a Tim Horton's in the hospital, which they did and which has been raking in the cash ever since making huge profits and was, at least back then, one of the most profitable franchises going. So naturally I said to myself. "How can you lose money on a Timmy's?" The answer in one word is unions. The hourly rate paid at the hospital's Timmy's staff is nearly twice the minimum wage. The balance sheets are in the article.
The issue starkly showcases the trouble with public sector unions for whom the balance sheet for operations are entirely meaningless. If there are losses you just go to the public and claw some additional cash out of it in taxes. There are clearly some public service organizations that have no income generated to base a profit/loss analysis on, but for something like a cafeteria (and at the end of the day that's what a Timmy's is) which sells a service/product to the public, profit should matter. Where I live now is a moderate-sized regional hospital which has a small coffee shop where most of the food comes out of a Japanese style vending machine albeit there is counter staff as well. Like in Brandon, it's run by a hospital volunteer auxiliary which is currently on a campaign to raise a million dollars for new equipment.
It boggles my mind that hospital administrators, like those in Windsor, would run an operation that loses a half million annually.
Public service employment has grown by 31 per cent
- Thread starter daftandbarmy
- Start date
OldSolduer
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 17,251
- Points
- 1,260
And we all wonder why Amazon pulled out of Quebec.
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 13,158
- Points
- 1,260
- Reaction score
- 9,179
- Points
- 1,160
Good piece on the approach PP will have to take with the PS.
MacDougall: Poilievre's cuts to the public service won't be easy to make
Part of the reason the public service got so big under Justin Trudeau is because it took its cues from the man at the top.ottawacitizen.com
The way you manage "marbled fat" is not with the knife but the kettle. You sweat it out. Or render it.
Transfer people to positions their services are required. Make them show up for work every day. Rerole. Assign new duties. Encourage early retirement. Don't replace people who quit or retire.
I understand that Poilievre has said he is not against remote work. I wonder if that is because remote work would be compatible with decentralization.
If you can get the job done while working from home in Orleans why can't it be done from Red Deer?
Yeah all great ideas. I have yet to see his “how”. Last time he and his buddies messed it up nicely.
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 35,555
- Points
- 1,160
The UK having their own issues although I assume the growth was largely due to the policies of the previous Tory government ...
Bloated public sector is damaging economy, warns Andrew Bailey
Bank of England halves GDP forecast in blow to the Chancellor’s growth agenda
Andrew Bailey has warned that Britain’s bloated public sector is dragging down the economy after the Bank of England slashed its 2025 growth forecasts in half.
The Governor of the Bank of England said an increase of half a million workers in the public sector since lockdown had not been matched by a rise in productivity.
It comes after civil servants last week threatened to strike over demands that they return to the office for two days a week.
Speaking after the Bank slashed growth forecasts for 2025 from 1.5pc to 0.75pc, Mr Bailey said: “It is fair to say we have seen an increase in public sector employment. We haven’t seen a commensurate increase in measured public sector output.”
Mr Bailey’s comments came as the Bank cut interest rates to 4.5pc from 4.75pc in a surprise split vote and warned that the economy would narrowly avoid a recession at the turn of the year.
The Bank blamed an “increasing share of employment accounted for by areas where the public sector is the predominant employer such as education, health and public administration” for holding back productivity growth in the past few years.
It added: “Employment in these areas has risen significantly since 2019, particularly in health-related activities, but these sectors have also seen significant declines in their measured productivity per hour. This means that the shift in the composition of total employment towards these areas will have weighed on total productivity.”
Mr Bailey also suggested that record net migration in recent years meant overall productivity growth was even weaker than previously thought.
“We have got more population, we have got more labour force, we have got the same output, so you can only conclude then that you have got lower productivity,” he said.
The intervention will be regarded as an embarrassment for Rachel Reeves, the Chancellor, after she vowed to prioritise growth in a major speech last week.
The Government is expected to preside over a big expansion of the state in the coming years, with more workers on higher salaries funded by a record £40bn tax raid announced last October.
Threadneedle Street also warned that the Chancellor’s public spending splurge risked keeping interest rates higher for longer.
“Higher public sector spending can reduce the amount of capital available for private investment,” it said, which in turn would put “upward pressure” on the borrowing costs needed to ensure inflation remains stable.
Speaking on Thursday, Sir Keir Starmer insisted he was “not satisfied with growth as it is” as he channelled US President Donald Trump by vowing to “build, baby, build” and slash planning red tape for nuclear plants.
“I’m not satisfied with growth as it is,” added the Prime Minister. “I’m determined we’re going to go further ... to turn our economy around.”
Mel Stride, the shadow chancellor, warned that government policies were making working people poorer with fewer jobs, lower wages and higher prices.
“We are heading for ‘Starmflation’ thanks to Labour’s mismanagement,” he said.
Mr Bailey said policymakers would take a “gradual and careful approach to reducing rates further” as he signalled that the impact of higher taxes and Donald Trump’s trade war would affect how quickly the Bank could cut rates going forward.
Public service productivity remains 8.5pc below pre-lockdown levels amid a collapse in output during the pandemic.
Ms Reeves has pledged to boost public spending on the NHS and schools dramatically over the next two years.
Lord Bridges, a senior Conservative peer, warned that weak productivity growth risked blowing an even bigger hole in the public finances.
The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), the government’s tax and spending watchdog, has previously estimated that annual productivity growth that was half a per cent lower will increase borrowing by £40bn a year by the end of the decade.
Lord Bridges said: “Taxpayers are paying more and getting less. If we don’t improve productivity, we risk going deeper and deeper into debt.
“Reeves promised us stability but it is turning into the stability of the graveyard. We are facing a triple whammy of higher prices, higher unemployment and lower growth. We risk seeing a downturn made in Downing Street.”
The OBR believes public sector employment will continue to grow to 6.3m by the end of the decade, up from 5.8m in 2023-24.
Bloated public sector is damaging UK economy, warns Andrew Bailey
Bloated public sector is damaging economy, warns Andrew Bailey
Bank of England halves GDP forecast in blow to the Chancellor’s growth agenda
Andrew Bailey has warned that Britain’s bloated public sector is dragging down the economy after the Bank of England slashed its 2025 growth forecasts in half.
The Governor of the Bank of England said an increase of half a million workers in the public sector since lockdown had not been matched by a rise in productivity.
It comes after civil servants last week threatened to strike over demands that they return to the office for two days a week.
Speaking after the Bank slashed growth forecasts for 2025 from 1.5pc to 0.75pc, Mr Bailey said: “It is fair to say we have seen an increase in public sector employment. We haven’t seen a commensurate increase in measured public sector output.”
Mr Bailey’s comments came as the Bank cut interest rates to 4.5pc from 4.75pc in a surprise split vote and warned that the economy would narrowly avoid a recession at the turn of the year.
The Bank blamed an “increasing share of employment accounted for by areas where the public sector is the predominant employer such as education, health and public administration” for holding back productivity growth in the past few years.
It added: “Employment in these areas has risen significantly since 2019, particularly in health-related activities, but these sectors have also seen significant declines in their measured productivity per hour. This means that the shift in the composition of total employment towards these areas will have weighed on total productivity.”
Mr Bailey also suggested that record net migration in recent years meant overall productivity growth was even weaker than previously thought.
“We have got more population, we have got more labour force, we have got the same output, so you can only conclude then that you have got lower productivity,” he said.
The intervention will be regarded as an embarrassment for Rachel Reeves, the Chancellor, after she vowed to prioritise growth in a major speech last week.
The Government is expected to preside over a big expansion of the state in the coming years, with more workers on higher salaries funded by a record £40bn tax raid announced last October.
Threadneedle Street also warned that the Chancellor’s public spending splurge risked keeping interest rates higher for longer.
“Higher public sector spending can reduce the amount of capital available for private investment,” it said, which in turn would put “upward pressure” on the borrowing costs needed to ensure inflation remains stable.
Speaking on Thursday, Sir Keir Starmer insisted he was “not satisfied with growth as it is” as he channelled US President Donald Trump by vowing to “build, baby, build” and slash planning red tape for nuclear plants.
“I’m not satisfied with growth as it is,” added the Prime Minister. “I’m determined we’re going to go further ... to turn our economy around.”
Mel Stride, the shadow chancellor, warned that government policies were making working people poorer with fewer jobs, lower wages and higher prices.
“We are heading for ‘Starmflation’ thanks to Labour’s mismanagement,” he said.
Mr Bailey said policymakers would take a “gradual and careful approach to reducing rates further” as he signalled that the impact of higher taxes and Donald Trump’s trade war would affect how quickly the Bank could cut rates going forward.
Public service productivity remains 8.5pc below pre-lockdown levels amid a collapse in output during the pandemic.
Ms Reeves has pledged to boost public spending on the NHS and schools dramatically over the next two years.
Lord Bridges, a senior Conservative peer, warned that weak productivity growth risked blowing an even bigger hole in the public finances.
The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), the government’s tax and spending watchdog, has previously estimated that annual productivity growth that was half a per cent lower will increase borrowing by £40bn a year by the end of the decade.
Lord Bridges said: “Taxpayers are paying more and getting less. If we don’t improve productivity, we risk going deeper and deeper into debt.
“Reeves promised us stability but it is turning into the stability of the graveyard. We are facing a triple whammy of higher prices, higher unemployment and lower growth. We risk seeing a downturn made in Downing Street.”
The OBR believes public sector employment will continue to grow to 6.3m by the end of the decade, up from 5.8m in 2023-24.
Bloated public sector is damaging UK economy, warns Andrew Bailey
Alberta Bound
Member
- Reaction score
- 47
- Points
- 430
My experience is that there is some good companies out there. But there are others that get unions because of the owners and managers. Treat people well and they don’t need a union.
McG
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 3,700
- Points
- 1,260
Care must be taken in how this is done. It is interesting how one can find people on this site who believe the CAF still has not recovered from FRP of the ‘90s, people who believe a civilian FRP is the solution to save the public service, and people who believe both.
I have never seen attrition used effectively for work force reductions. We just end up leaving vacant the positions that people retired out of, which leads to keeping people in jobs of lesser importance while not completing work of higher importance jobs. In some cases, specific knowledge or skill requirements cannot be satisfied by deploying somebody already working in the department. This attritional approach also leads to even less willingness to dismiss low performing employees because they will not be replaced.
- Reaction score
- 9,179
- Points
- 1,160
Is there a better solution? Because it seems to me that any assault on any rice bowl is going to prompt a negative response. That is particularly true in unionized environments where dismissal/promotion on merit grounds is often challenged as management favouritism.
Perhaps there is no tidy solution. Perhaps the correct solution always comes down to tossing a hand-grenade into a room and closing the door.
McG
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 3,700
- Points
- 1,260
Make a plan. Don't leave it to fate or handgrenades to decide what the organization will look like.
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 35,555
- Points
- 1,160
There are well known and exercised processes for workforce adjustment, and good leaders (union or otherwise) usually know how to do the right things for the right reasons.
The problem is that if it is being done for political capital it will cause issues. A careful approach is indeed needed but some will want to appease the masses early.
Look south for the effects and legal issues of treating their civil service like a tech start up takeover.
Look south for the effects and legal issues of treating their civil service like a tech start up takeover.
RangerRay
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 4,541
- Points
- 1,260
Yeah, you do it in a more thoughtful and deliberate manner getting rid of dead weight, redundancies and functions that add no value to the department. Reorganize as required to make what’s left run better. Get rid of useless processes. Go ministry by ministry, branch by branch. Identify critical functions and what isn’t.
I’ve been through hack and slash. It led to even more ineffective organizations, usually where field staff are doing more administrative tasks than field work. Not filling vacancies mean work doesn’t get done or get put on someone else’s plate. Then that person leaves and you get their work.
There’s a smart way to do it. But it doesn’t satisfy the bloodthirst of the anti-government crowd.
- Reaction score
- 9,179
- Points
- 1,160
I am sorry. If they exist I have not had the opportunity to observe them in practice.
RangerRay
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 4,541
- Points
- 1,260
Neither have I.
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 35,555
- Points
- 1,160
RangerRay
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 4,541
- Points
- 1,260
Nope, I’ll still be working for a while yet!
foresterab
Full Member
- Reaction score
- 451
- Points
- 880
I've lost track of the number of "re-orgs" and/or layoffs that have happened in my career. Frankly you can almost visually tell the impacts by the age demographics (55+ due to 1995 layoffs) or 35+ due to extended hiring freezes.
That being said...and having lived this in both industry and public service there is often room to trim - how much is the question. For myself the starting point is usually bottom up looking at the following criteria:
1) does a supervisor have a minimum of 5 employees? If not why...there are times where geography comes into play. But nothing worse than linear supervision chains of employee -> senior employee -> local lead -> local manager -> regional manager -> HQ manager -> department ADM...and it's all a straight line.
2) managers must have both a significant number of subordinates, budget responsibility and core program responsibility. If you're missing some of those criteria you're a subject matter expert that might be better off in different role/position.
3) Define the core work. Immigration is dealing with applications and visas, DFO is dealing with fisheries and habitats, CBSA is looking at border security. Start building the pyramids of supervision from the ground level needed to do the core work.
4) once the core structure is established then add in the specialists as needed - CBSA might have drug labs? DFO has biologists focused on recovery plans only, Immigration might have language specialists?
5) if it is a specialist role like languages do you need that person or the skill set? Better to offer a bonus to those with existing skills than hire second positions to do overlap.
6) and this is the huge one. Make a condition of the PA that every employee has to come up with 6 ways to better, more efficiently do their job and then actually list them all for others to see. The amount of internal red tape/manpower waste is huge and in some cases goes back to lack of focus. How many government forms still list fax numbers? How much paper is shuffled vs. electronic documents? What reporting should be automated and is still done manually? Now take those and create crash teams set up to concentrate on removing the easy ones fast (i.e. changing a form to remove fax numbers) and document the changes.
There are lots of internal SOP and processes that can assist make the government, or any industry, more efficient. Part of the trick is knowing that if I am losing a ton of folks due to layoffs/retirements that I rebuild the base (no good having supervisors with no staff under them) to ensure function continues. Acknowledge there is the inertia that slowly spreads between past projects needing resources now completed and future projects coming up...in the public sector you also have government changes (political party, ministerial priorities) affecting things....and keep things focused on both what the core departmental function is and outcome.
That being said...and having lived this in both industry and public service there is often room to trim - how much is the question. For myself the starting point is usually bottom up looking at the following criteria:
1) does a supervisor have a minimum of 5 employees? If not why...there are times where geography comes into play. But nothing worse than linear supervision chains of employee -> senior employee -> local lead -> local manager -> regional manager -> HQ manager -> department ADM...and it's all a straight line.
2) managers must have both a significant number of subordinates, budget responsibility and core program responsibility. If you're missing some of those criteria you're a subject matter expert that might be better off in different role/position.
3) Define the core work. Immigration is dealing with applications and visas, DFO is dealing with fisheries and habitats, CBSA is looking at border security. Start building the pyramids of supervision from the ground level needed to do the core work.
4) once the core structure is established then add in the specialists as needed - CBSA might have drug labs? DFO has biologists focused on recovery plans only, Immigration might have language specialists?
5) if it is a specialist role like languages do you need that person or the skill set? Better to offer a bonus to those with existing skills than hire second positions to do overlap.
6) and this is the huge one. Make a condition of the PA that every employee has to come up with 6 ways to better, more efficiently do their job and then actually list them all for others to see. The amount of internal red tape/manpower waste is huge and in some cases goes back to lack of focus. How many government forms still list fax numbers? How much paper is shuffled vs. electronic documents? What reporting should be automated and is still done manually? Now take those and create crash teams set up to concentrate on removing the easy ones fast (i.e. changing a form to remove fax numbers) and document the changes.
There are lots of internal SOP and processes that can assist make the government, or any industry, more efficient. Part of the trick is knowing that if I am losing a ton of folks due to layoffs/retirements that I rebuild the base (no good having supervisors with no staff under them) to ensure function continues. Acknowledge there is the inertia that slowly spreads between past projects needing resources now completed and future projects coming up...in the public sector you also have government changes (political party, ministerial priorities) affecting things....and keep things focused on both what the core departmental function is and outcome.
Similar threads
