Oh dear! It is not that the services the PCS is proud of having delivered will not generally find much favour with denizens of Samizdata, that prompts me to clip this. It is that this is a disastrous committee-driven ad. They end up showing their members as miserable, whinging, ugly and colourless petty bureaucrats, who want taxpayers to be grateful to pay them more.
Even a minimal government would need officials. And even a big bureaucracy will contain some witty, energetic and attractive people. Sir Humphrey was much closer to being the hero of Yes, Minister than Jim Hacker.
Were I a PCS member then I would want to be represented as someone normal and likeable who cheerfully keeps the wheels of the country turning regardless of all the political shit thrown at me. And I would be looking for the head of whoever signed-off this ad. (Preferably to be displayed on a pole outside the Department of Work and Pensions, though perhaps my view of the possibilities of staff organisations are too influenced by Terry Gilliam’s The Crimson Permanent Assurance.)
Even worse, they look like Tilters
a condition identified by Tim Blair running up to Iraq victory.
ADE
No it will not. Sure, it may attract some such people, but they will not remain such people for very long, or they will not stay. Sir Humphrey’s character was a product of a different era, and even then he probably was a result of creative wishful thinking.
The people in the ad look like they need to be put out of their misery, and not by means of an increased pay.
They ask our permission to rob us even more than they already do. They seek our willing collaboration in the continuation of our victimhood. They ask for our ‘voluntary’ co-operation whilst patting the pocket they’re hiding the gun in.
To me this advert says: “We provide you with al these things, we make the world work without you having to worry about it. Imagine what would happen if we stopped.” Extortion, pure and simple. My reply is “Go ahead, stop. We’ll see who prospers then won’t we?”
As to the picture of misery that is presented in the ad, it fits with their philosophy. Their happiness is irrelevant in their opinion, and to seek it is selfish and evil. They’re not doing this for themselves (oh no) they’re doing it for us. Well I didn’t ask them to, and I don’t want them to. They are unhappy because theya re not working towards their own happiness but towards the happiness of others. We’re all victims, but they wear their victimhood like a badge of honour and use it to wheedle and cajole more production from those of us who can’t (or won’t) see that a society of victims is a dead society.
I see now where we’re going, and find myself wondering how to get off the train.
I apologise for all the recent references to Atlas Shrugged in my recent comments but I’m a latecomer to the party as it were and am finding t difficult not to see parallels in almost everything posted here at the moment. I understand that you will all know these things already and have been seeing the light for a long time, so I ask for your indulgence as I work through the ideas that I have been so recently exposed to.
Whether it is a good or bad advert will be determined by the effect it has, rather than an objective criticism of its artistic merit. I struggle to care less, but it seems unlikely in the current climate that anyone will want to give more taxes to people they don’t know.
However, I would far rather the union attempted to convince the general public (who are their true employers) than simply try to lobby the government behind the scenes for pay rises.
Nothing would make me happier than an advertisement suggesting we make many civil servants redundant, on the grounds that many of them are poor value for money. Perhaps the Libertarian Alliance would consider funding such an advert.
What if these are the most photogenic they could find? Hmmmmmm?
I used to be a member of that Union.
Then one morning I came downstairs and found the guy in the middle stareing back at me from the bathroom mirror, so I resigned from the Civil Service that very day.
I wont have anyone dissing my old Union though. They were bloody marvelous to us members.
Such cunning strategists. They really knew how to hit the Govt where it hurt!
They would call half day Strikes. We members would lose half a days pay, and have twice as much work to do the following day.
Well this used to put the fear of God into the Government. They cant take that sort of punishment for long.
When it came to pay talks, a cowed and beaten Govt would say to us-
Two and a half percent? What for the sterling and indispensable jobs you all do keeping the ship of State on course? We were thinking more like seven and a half percent. Tell you what, why dont we just round it up to Ten percent.
Yes indeed, the most effective Union ever formed, apart from the NUJ.
RAB,
I agree it is an effective union, though this is an example of it not being effective.
I think the reason that PCS strikes tend to be very short is because both government and unions worry about what would happen if they were longer. Neither would be out of a job, and the risk is entirely virtual, which makes it trully terrifying.
It could be massively politically unpopular since the PCS services state clients. It could give a public practical illustration that some bureaucracy is unnecessary, as life continues unencumbered. Or both. Either way, the uncertainty is to be avoided.
This is rather different from what happens in private sector strikes. The risks taken by the parties there are much clearer and capable of financial evaluation.
They “give us” tax credits? “give us”?
WTF?
This ad must be a parody, how else could they have chosen the most cliched looking civil servants?!?
There is something intensely nursery school-ish about this: Today we have helped…
Today we coloured in a picture… Today we sang a song about our friends…
But the picture is pretty disturbing. They look ordinary and everyday. They are ordinary, everyday controllers of our lives. That’s how far state control has got; it’s so everyday, so ordinary.
Wheres the bit that says “Today, we ALMOST met the minimum quota of the job we actually agreed to perform”?
Yep, with “labor” unions like that, soon they’ll be costing the $US73.00/hour that OTHER unskilled workers make as United Auto Workers.
Then again, maybe the idea of labor replacement with robots/on-line form processing isn’t so bad.
“But if we give you a raise, then we won’t have enough cash to pay out the dole for “idol” civil servants!”
THAT ought to do it. Watch them eat their own young THEN.
I liked that tax credit bit too.
I suppose they could have said:
“Take away your hard-earned money and occasionally give some of it back.”
But pithy won over honesty, I guess.
RAB, you are much better looking:-) Seriously though, a good decision. These jobs are not good for the people doing them.
Their office Christmas party must be a riot.
I agree it is an effective union,
I must be losing my touch.
There was me thinking I was taking the piss!
The most hated person in our office was the Union Rep.
She was so ensconced in Union business that she never did any fuckin work!
What is it that PCS-represented shops actually DO???
I mean, today they have helped to protect the environment. I just humped about 100# of beer cans to a recycler.
Today, they have helped to deliver driving tests. The last one I took was conducted by a private not-for-profit[1].
Today they helped to give tax credits. And all this time I thought it was the legislature who set tax rates and named deductions and credits (or the voters at large in places blessed enough to have TABOR)
Today, I have attempted to do someone’s parenting for him. (Memo to all: DO NOT call the police because your kid won’t do his homework. Especially, DO NOT call the police for this when you have plenty of reasons of your own for not wanting The Man in your life.)
Today, I have been used to lend credibility to attempted insurance fraud. (And would that I could prove it.)
Today, I have attempted to educate drivers on the need to come to a full stop at the octagonal red signs that say “stop” on them (often found at intersections and crosswalks) and on the need to not drive when their license is revoked for multiple DUIs.
Today, I pulled a man off of the wife that he was trying to beat, even though she’ll go back to him within a week.
Today, I have solved the mystery of the man who had sex with chickens.
(Well, I didn’t do ALL of that. I wasn’t smart enough to track down the Chickenlover.)
[1] And let me give a shout-out to my homies at the Motorcycle Safety Foundation.
I hope it was consensual. I hate chicken rapists.
Could they at least have smiled, a minimal pretense of being glad to be of service?
I guess smiling was an extra charge under union contracts.
John K:
It’s a literary reference.
And I will not have Ofc. Barbrady mocked. He’s a friend of mine.
“Literary” is what you call it?