Folk are "astonished" that the culling of "back office" jobs is resulting in the loss of jobs that "should have ben recognised as a basic duty. ... And that we're gradually going to discover that a lot of 'non front-line' jobs that got cut were actually important."
Why on earth is this astonishing? It is entirely predictable. At times like this you might have asked yourself:"What would Sir Humphrey do?" And your answer would be that, when ordered to "cut jobs," it wouldn't be back-office jobs he'd be cutting.
So don't go acting surprised. 'Cos I told you all this back in April:
1 comment:
Looks like you were right. A friend whose wife’s a specialist surgeon told me yesterday there’s even a freeze on renewing the contracts of frontline doctors and nurses, despite the massive staff shortages and wait lists in the public system. Although it may not be purely empire building is the motive in this case, but the health bureaucracy whose jobs are under threat trying to cause some destruction on their way out, out of spite.
Post a Comment