Today's great deep thought is about people who don't do their jobs yet they are able to not only retain those jobs but they get raises as well! Many people in a government run system do just enough to get by (if that!) and will only do what they believe is in the scope of their job. "Going the extra mile" and "doing what it takes to get the job done right" (and efficiently) is not a part of their vocabulary.
This seems to run rampant in the employment sector of state and federal systems whether they be colleges, prisons or other state/federal offices. There's something about the state/federal system that prevents them from being able to get rid of incompetent people. In the private sector, if you don't do your job, you won't have a job, it's that simple.
In a state/federal system, not only can you not get rid of incompetent people but those same incompetents very often get merit raises. I always believed a merit increase was the result of hard work and going above and beyond the call of duty. Say you have an evaluation and there are three choices for your work performance---exceeds, achieves and below achieves. Below means you're not doing your job, achieves means you're doing your job, and exceeds means you're doing MORE than your job, you are going ABOVE and BEYOND the call of duty. Why do scores of "achieve" being given to those who are clearly below that? And why are these people getting merit increases?
What is the value of a merit increase if it goes to people who don't do their jobs properly? It's about fairness. It isn't right to give it to some and not others. Right?
For anyone who works in a state OR federal organization or institution, you're probably shaking your head "yes" right now because you know exactly what I am talking about.