I work for the Queensland Public Service. It isn’t something I would normally bring up on my blog — I don’t like to bring attention to career as a public servant. My views on this blog are mine and have very little to do with my job, other than everything in my life shaping my opinions.
Many of the fine folk who work in the Queensland public sector could be earning a lot more money working in the private sector. A big mix of skills and experience that these people have allows the public service to provide services to Queensland that no private company could. Many departments can’t be profit making – would you expect child safety officers to try and turn a profit? Can you imagine a business surviving long on that business model?
The government pays well and has good employment conditions, but there is a cost as well. Public sector staff work many long hours, and at upper levels with no overtime entitlements. Costs are kept to a minimum at every opportunity in order to provide front line services.
“But you get hours and hours of paid flex time?” I hear people scream. Flex time, or ADOs as they are often called, are hours that you have to work before you can take them off. So you might be required to work a 37.25 hour week, but you work 42 hours. That adds up and eventually you might be lucky to get a day off.
Then again, you might not. Many can’t take a day off as there would be no one else to do their job. Don’t think that flex time just accrues forever either. There is almost always a limit where you lose your hours if you don’t take them. And many workers either feel a duty to not take them or just can’t find the time/get the approval to do so.
This is just in the ‘regular’ public service where you aren’t dealing with front line services. Think about all the child safety officers, housing officers, nurses, teachers and police officers who work long hours for less than they could earn elsewhere.
There will always be those in any workforce who use and abuse systems and entitlements. But don’t let that fool you into thinking that the public sector isn’t full of lazy workers who do little more than drink from the golden goblet and head off at 3pm each day.
Giving workers 2.5% increases in pay each year is an insult. This is LESS than inflation. Add in the expected increases in fuel, electricity and other life essentials and it’s clear to see that it isn’t fair. It’s tough at the moment to keep good workers and this step is going to be another reason for those who are dedicated and stay for the betterment of the state or the clients they serve to pack up and get a better paying job in the private sector.
(Disclaimer: I am a Queensland public servant, but these are my views and not those of my employer, or of my pet llama.)
I’ve been thinking more about the issues I mentioned in my previous post on child discipline. The consensus (that being two commentators, for the record) is that any form of physical discipline is abuse. So it appears that I’m old fashioned and probably should never have children myself. It’s also been suggested to me that physical discipline only comes from the parent’s frustration/anger at the child not following directions. So now I’m wondering, should people need to sit a parenting test and get a licence?
That might seem far fetched and out of touch, but lets think about this for a minute.
It seems that the courts and the child advocate groups have decided that you cannot discipline using excessive physical force. So where is the line in the sand? Some say that any force is excessive. Some say that using a weapon (for example, a belt or a cane) is where the line should be drawn. So already we have a blurred line from which to work from. So lets clear it up.
Lets make it illegal to use any force against a child. No hand smacking, belts, cords, canes, hitting or slapping. Nothing.
Parents are then left with reason, talking, positive parenting techniques and all sorts of other stuff that the Super Nanny would probably prescribe. How is the average Australian parent meant to keep abreast of the currently worlds best discipline techniques? If parents are only to use whatever means the child advocacy groups feel is best, then what options are available?
Lets gather all people who are capable of having a child and license them. Then they can do a course similar to a first aid course, a basic parenting course. Make them sit through a course teaching all the current parenting techniques and demonstrate the use of them through role play. If they pass, they get a licence and are now allowed to have children. Perhaps if you fail you are sterilised temporarily until you can pass. We don’t want just anyone having a child.
What if we make it a requirement to attend a yearly refresher to keep their skills up to date? That’s a revenue raiser for the Government or child advocacy groups, who could tender for the right to teach these courses. Imagine a generation of parents being taught by Hetty Johnson the rights and wrongs of child rearing, as well as the world in general. Sounds like a fun Sunday afternoon.
We need to carefully consider what we teach in these courses though. Twenty years ago people would have laughed to suggest that using a cane or belt on a child would get them into court. Not any more. So what is to say that some of the current worlds best practices are not going to go the same way in another twenty years? Could the naughty step been seen as psychologically damaging to the child in the future, and we’ll have to go to court for using that too?
It has almost gotten to the point where its too hard to have a child and bring them up. Perhaps belting your child is too far. One wack on the bum with a hand would seem to be the level of physical discipline that should be the line. But remember if you give that smack all they have to do is complain and they’ll be taken away to a much better place.
Foster care. Because that’s where we aspire our future generation to go.
Seems being gay doesn’t make you a bad parent after all – at least for penguins.
First item in the “Just Plain Weird” file is a story from the UK’s Daily Mail detailing the exploits of two gay penguins from Polar Land in Harbin, China. It seems being a gay penguin couple is considered as evil as being a married gay couple in Australia. I wonder how you determine a gay penguin from a straight penguin?
Angry penguin doesn't like discrimination. (Source)
It seems the natural urge to be a father was too much for this penguin couple, who were expelled from their colony for stealing other penguin’s eggs.
‘One of the responsibilities of being a male adult is looking after the eggs. Despite the fact that they can’t have eggs naturally, it does not take away their biological drive to be a parent,’ said one [wildlife expert].
Zookeepers have hit back at claims of discrimination, saying that the birds were segregated “not because of discrimination, but so as not to disturb the colony during hatching time.” Perhaps gay penguin sex is loud, messy and just too disturbing for other penguins to see.
In response to complaints from visitors to Polar Land, zookeepers have given the couple eggs from a mother who was an inattentive parent. Zookeepers were amazed to find that they were exemplary parents who are “the best parents in the whole zoo”.
Perhaps humans should take note of nature and reconsider their view on gay and lesbian parents. There are plenty of unloved and uncared for children in need of a bit of love. The sexuality of their parents isn’t going to turn them into psychos. Perhaps we should hope that the system will look after them?
