Print this page
Wednesday, 27 February 2013 09:43

Meet your job criteria or leave

Written by  Dale Ferrel
Rate this item
(1 Vote)

Why do people sometimes chose careers with unique demands, then expect their employers to change existing guidelines to suit them? I suspect unions play a big part by their derisive, callous challenging of almost everything.


I venture union leaders must somehow justify their organizations’ existences while appearing to be doing something for the people, many who have no adulation for their questionable behaviour or their lamentable dues.
Without their incoherent, mordant antithesis of what’s already working, unions have no enduring purpose. The reality is that armed forces, police, firemen, customs officers, nurses, emergency response persons and many others must be subject to a clean record, special training, shift work and close scrutiny by the general public. They often deal with negative, dangerous, stressful and demanding issues.
As the saying goes, “That goes with the turf.”
They are paid well for what they must do and endure, as they should be. As an example, an “average” public service job, according to Kevin Page, Canada’s Parliamentary budget officer, costs $114,000 per year. Further, the Canadian Federation of Independent Business claims we spend almost $6,000 per employee, per year on red tape alone; almost double that spent by our U.S. neighbour. How can we possibly withstand more red tape trundled out from unions?
The public expects some employees may need some extra attention from time to time, but also expects if they can’t handle what their jobs demand, there is no room for hypocrisy leading to extra special treatment at every turn. If they are embarrassed by how they must answer some of the questions, employees should have already been requesting help or they should leave for a different job that better suits their abilities, wants and needs.
As an example of what I speak, last October, the Canada Border Services Agency conducted a voluntary survey containing 57 questions for its employees and potential applicants. I believe the questions are necessary to ensure public safety, retain top-notch employees and avoid the potential for blackmail. Questions about drug and alcohol use, abuse of spouse, family or pets, use of prostitutes, gambling, computer habits and such were included and reasonable, given the job requirements.
The NDP’s critic, to no one’s surprise, found the questions absurd and not necessary. The union predictably followed as that refrain was the only choice that could work for them.
I guess they don’t believe Border and Custom Agents need to prove to be honest, reliable, trustworthy or have integrity.
Further, similar questions plus a polygraph exam are apparently acceptable for the RCMP who don’t have a union to muddy the water. That said, think of the issues they still suffer in spite of better screening.
Even more bombastic was the union’s reaction when our border agents were asked to wear name tags. They claimed this exposed their members to unnecessary risks. In reality, if someone wants to track an employee, all they have to do is follow them home from work.
However, an employee wearing a name tag will be much more inclined to behave in a professional manner, and that does matter to they people they serve who pay their wages to do their duty for our country. 

Read 1305 times