A nation of cronyism
in Close to Politics ·
brightheron64 said:To put it simply, let’s look at it this way.
Most positions within the federal government attract a massive wave of applicants, but here is the reality of what follows... people land the job, maybe even show some early enthusiasm, but before long, they get swallowed whole by the machine, and slowly—thanks to that guaranteed paycheck and total job security—they just sink into the gray monotony that defines bureaucracy in the first place.
Having a permanent contract with a guaranteed salary tends to kill any sense of initiative or drive...
So, if we implemented performance-based pay paired with a bit of relative job insecurity, it would actually spark passion and foster a much higher standard of work among employees. Plus, it makes it significantly easier for the government to trim away the excess weight...
We all said we wanted capitalism, right? Fine, but then let it actually set the rules for every structure, rather than having a system where some people toil day and night without knowing if they'll even have a job tomorrow, while others—in the most polite version of socialism imaginable—just coast through their roles without earning a cent, effectively acting as anchors on the entire system because their lack of productivity drags down everyone else who actually wants to work hard...
Therefore, wherever it can be implemented:
four-year employment contracts
performance-based evaluations
attendance-based metrics
customer satisfaction ratings
....
Once those terms expire, the top 65% of performers based on those scores would retain their positions and see their contracts automatically renewed. Meanwhile, the bottom 35% would be phased out, allowing their spots to be filled by new hires who have gone through a much more rigorous selection process than just mindlessly scanning through resumes...
Sounds perfectly reasonable to me.