pamela wrote:

On 16:19 18 Feb 2018, Roger Hayter wrote:

pamela wrote:

On 11:06 18 Feb 2018, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
pamela wrote:
What - offering jobs internally first? You think that only
happens in the public sector?

Public sector jobs should be open to the public. The public
sector belongs to all of us and the public should have a right
to apply for any protected plum jobs.

Right - so the important bit is not the best person for the
job? Just any old layabout who likes the idea of a decent
salary?


The important bit is not to give a job to someone well-connected
but to award it based on their ability to do the job.

To whom is it "important"? A private company is perfectly
entitled to give preference for jobs to the well-connected,
provided it does not thereby break equality laws.

So you *do* want public centre ethics and rules when it suits you!!

The whole point of privatisation (as opposed to government agencies) is
that private rules apply.



We were orginally talking about London Underground which is
effectively an extension of the public sector and suffers from
significant union presence.

Highly paid trainee tube drivers are recruited from internal staff
who have no more experince of train driving than a member of the
public. The job's rewards are negotiated by the union who didn't
want the public to be able to apply.

They may well feel the goodwill it generates compensates for the
smaller pool of applicants. Right or wrong, it is purely their
business, not yours.


--

Roger Hayter