In it for the money – How many council workers does it take to cut the grass?

For a long time I've been meaning to write about where modern Left wing politics is going wrong; why the idealistic followers are deluding themselves as their incompetent Leaders attempt to delude everyone else. But obviously it’s a big topic, it’s an over long blogpost let alone a Doctoral thesis or an entire life’s work…

So in a way I've been waiting for the right story or issue to latch on to, something to just let the subject flow and illustrate the situation in modern Left wing politics, particularly in the Western world.

Well there probably have been suitable topics, but the one I have doesn't necessarily encapsulate everything, but it does show up both the reality of what Labour did during their 13 years of power and also what can happen under Left wing regimes of any pretty much any kind.

    North Korea - Extreme Left?

    According to the BBC; so extreme it's actually Right wing... 

On a recent edition of a popular prime time game show in this country, one contestant gave his job title as ‘Monitoring Officer’ for his local council. So far so vague, the presenter clearly wanted some illumination and with light pressing; discovered that the contestant, for a living, checks that the grass has been cut properly… Grass the Council is responsible for and cut by Council employees, of course.

There was a just audible gasp in the crowd, with perhaps a smattering of laughter. The contestant provided only a minor justification, saying it has to be level and so on. The presenter asked if he just went back to the office afterwards and the contestant, clearly mildly embarrassed, could only shrug.  

The answer to that question is more than likely, yes. Possibly completes a report and if at all possible, has a kip before knocking off…

If there were more to the job, surely he would have thought about how to present it? He must have had time to think beforehand, even if one might then falter under those bright studio lights… So let’s just assume that is  pretty much all he does, maybe he does have other ‘monitoring’ responsibilities but clearly grass was most important. Truth is I would hope to God they find him something else to do in the winter…!

    The Grass Monitor assesses the situation…

    ‘Yeah I don’t think there’s much point coming in today…’

Does this situation need dissection? A Council employs someone to monitor their own grass cutters’ work. It’s not left to the grass cutters, no, they obviously can’t be trusted…

    The Monitor finds the job half done...

    This is what happens without close monitoring...! 

So the answer to the title question is one (or more) to cut the grass and one to check it’s been done correctly…

Salary and benefits, to monitor grass…? Build up the pension, retire early if at all possible, I don’t give a s**t whether or not it’s gold plated, it’s a stretch to call it ‘hard-earned’ whatever comes out on retirement!

And of course that is what we hear so much about; ‘hard working public servants’… Do they include the Grass Monitors in that?

    Hardest game in the world…  

    The Monitor seems happy with his day's work...

As I commented on Twitter at the time, there is no justifying a full time position like that, in any economic climate. The notion of ‘non-jobs’ is a staple of Right wing criticism of the public sector, I struggle to recall many clear rebukes from the Left, it seems the commentators are more inclined to ignore it.

Here the BBC try to offer some balance on the subject - Council cuts: Just what is a 'non-job'? Councils try to defend the jobs when directly criticised, a classic in the article regarding 'Diversity Co-Ordinators'; the defence is that the role complies with their obligations under equality legislation. OK, well all companies would have to comply, but is there really a need for a whole separate position...? And therein is the mentality of it.  

How could anyone possibly argue the case for a separate grass monitoring position? It is clear this won't be isolated, not this one role in one council, that in itself would be ridiculous. This is merely a good example.

Now this type of role may have been around a very long time, but this is what happened under Labour. The Labour Government threw money at the public sector and this is the kind of thing that resulted. That’s not to say that no workers in the public sector were pushed into difficult circumstances, but then the existence of a job like this just exemplifies poor management and ludicrous inefficiency.

Probably the most important question that arises from this is why is it still happening? Why wasn't his head first on the block? These are hard times, whichever way you look at it.

If they talk about staff cuts and ‘vital services’ being reduced, well most people are annoyed by reducing policing, nursing, etc, but the fact it is the people feeling the sharp edge of the cuts should be the most indignant of all that this job still exists!

But no, that’s not how it works, no malice towards their fellow workers whatever they might do, perhaps with the exception of managers and HR…

    Protesting Council Workers 

    A message to their managers?

It’s been identified before; the ones making the cuts are the people who should be cut. The Tories don’t make the cuts directly; the budgets constraints are put in place and the manager have to make the decisions. Only the managers and the one eyed supporters of the public sector will overlook the fact that they could easily remove a number of their own positions and reduce their pay and benefits, instead of cutting ‘vital’ services.

The grass monitor must have friends in power…

    It always helps to have friends in power...

    Ed Miliband asking which way to go next...

Here’s a simple management lesson for those in charge at the council; get the monitor out cutting the grass and just add to the job description ‘check it’s level when you’re done’...! He can have a couple of extra quid for that. He’s obviously qualified for the job, but I suppose the actual grass cutting is a different skill set to the assessing of the work…?

    This could get tricky.

    That bit will need to be checked for sure...

It is the world Labour created. While indeed money was made in the private sector and this funded Labour profligacy with the public sector, conditions in the low end of the private sector worsened. Labour may have introduced the minimum wage, but wage inflation was dragged down and the pressure put on workers was steadily increased. At the same time Labour tried to build their idea of a utopian workplace in the public sector, continually increasing wages and staff numbers, and improving conditions. Gordon Brown’s socialist ideals, paid for by the boom in the private sector.

They tried to justify the increasing salaries of managers by claiming they had to compete with the private sector to ‘attract the best talent…’ Utter b*llocks.

With all the money and staff thrown into the public sector, was there really any substantial and noticeable improvement for the average tax payer, let’s say particularly in the case of councils? They’d claim that practices and delivery have changed and improved, but so to has the world of work changed mainly due to technology. It’s essentially circumstantial (like so many of the ‘improvements’ that happened under Labour), not driven by increasing salaries for managers and their ‘management skills’.   

When salaries are compared between the public and private sector, a favourite public sector adage is that they could ‘earn more in the private sector for the same job…’ A line often touted by public sector IT workers, as I've mentioned in a previous post.

Well I wonder how much a ‘grass monitor’ would earn in the private sector…?

Labour did preside over a fair amount of cutting back in certain areas of the public sector. Services were privatised for instance and in fact early on when the comparisons between wages in the sectors were highlighted many defenders of the public sector pointed to the workers who’d been affected by privatisation, they were the low paid, cleaners for example. So this increased the average wage in the public sector and essentially vice versa, though the complexities of private sector wages were never touched upon. To many the ‘private sector’ means bankers and estate agents, or so it seems…

When Labour promised a "Future fair for all” in the 2010 general election, that certainly meant ‘fair’ for the Grass Monitor, but what about those facing cuts or being privatised? One must assume they meant ‘fair’ in a different respect…

    Labour's comic book Manifesto cover for 2010 

    There was a lot of grass in Labour's vision of the future...

This is a good example of the fallacy and delusions of Left wing politics; this is what would happen under a Left wing regime of any kind. Who knows one day maybe it won’t matter, in a changing world with rapid technological advances, but in the here and now, it matters.  

When workplace decisions are not based on the needs of a business and the pressures of a market, of any kind, they are or should be based initially on function, but then after that, they’re based on the whims and prejudices of those in charge.

It’s just jobs for the boys and if a business can afford a load of hangers on then so be it, but in state institutions, the rest of society are supporting it. It is a feature of any Left wing or Statist regime; the people in power will make themselves comfortable and surround themselves with favoured parties. Right wing governments will do the same thing, governments of any kind, but this is an argument against the self righteous, holier than thou Left…   

So what’s the difference between the bloated state institutions created by the Leaders of ‘the people’ and the old establishment? Just the entry requirements change a little and people are still potentially born into it; it’s never what you know, always who you know…

    North Korea's Finest

  

    Clearly his favourites...

So in the current remnants of Labour’s regime, the 'Grass Monitor' remains… Of course a further characteristic of the public sector in full flow is that when you’re in, you’re in. You’d have to go so far as to kill someone to be sacked, and even then…

It has changed over the years and into the current climate, but claims about the likes of teachers (Have just 20 teachers been dismissed for incompetency in 40years?) have given some indication of what it can still be like and I've seen the evidence in the workplace.

I know social workers have long been under pressure in terms of time and resources, this has been raised again recently with new government initiatives for graduates, and is just one example of so very many, where you have to question wouldn't the money be better spent in social services than in the ‘grass management’?

    Social Workers on Strike

    Barking up the wrong tree...?

The Left frame the argument in defence of the public sector as it exists, in terms of both individual lives - the jobs and the wider economic benefits of those jobs. It is ignoring and excusing poor management, this argument isn't about economics and has nothing to do with 'austerity'; there does need to be investment to stimulate the economy and 'vital services' should remain. This is about having the state functioning effectively, removing incompetence, inefficiency and the bias and self interest in poor management. Public money should be spent wisely, not just thrown at state institutions...

As I mentioned why not have the ‘monitoring’ role as a function of a different job with wider remit, if it is then I'd like to hear how and why that wasn't clear? I'm sure the defence would be that the role does have more functions, but it was apparent ‘grass’ is the most significant and it shouldn't be like that, that’s the wrong way round.

In terms of grass cutting obviously there are private sector equivalents we can compare with, I wonder how many gardening firms employ a grass monitor…? Well if they are making enough money and want a monitor then that is their business, it can’t be and shouldn't be justified at the expense of the tax payer.

 

Just as the Left say the Tories distract from their failings and the Bankers by saying look at the public sector, so to do the Left distract from this kind of state extravagance, for that is what it is, by saying look how much money those rich people have and look at the Tories protecting them....!

But the Left fundamentally do not care about this kind of situation; everyone should have a job, and it is in that world where some will slave away and others will sit back and enjoy the benefits, one way or the other.

Some slave, while others live easy lives? Kind of sounds like a Right wing regime...? The BBC's Panorama would probably say that such a regime is by definition; as linked above, the programme claimed North Korea was so Totalitarian that it was actually more like the Nazis and therefore not Communism.

    Obedient North Koreans

    When Communism goes bad...?

It was a pointless attempt at a technical definition, the fact is the same s**t ends happening whatever the original intentions, however noble...

Leftist politicians and commentators must assume they will keep their comfortable positions 'when the revolution comes', over here… Owen Jones for instance, he's bound to be Junior Minister for Propaganda. Can't imagine him getting hands dirty.

    A Champagne Socialist in Training...?

    Owen celebrates his new role in the Ministry of Propaganda...

As I was writing this post Liam “There’s no money left” Byrne has raised the issue of ‘full employment’, a classic policy of the post war social democratic years. There is nothing wrong with it as an aim, and forgetting any notions of Right wing views of unemployment, you’d have thought most governments would see low unemployment as desirable. But how would Labour go about achieving full employment? More Grass Monitors? Fair for all?  

You think Liam Byrne gives a s**t who’s doing what, as long as the stats look good? 

    Liam Byrne is asked how many grass monitors Councils need?

    ‘You think I give a f**k about anything other than my career?!’

Shouldn't the actual people cutting the grass be the most insulted of all? They work harder and probably earn less… Do they even know, does the Monitor do his ‘work’ surreptitiously…?

    As the grass cutters take a break...

    The Grass Monitor takes evasive action...