Skip Navigation
9 comments
  • As someone who has worked with councils in a technical consultancy capacity; this is not surprising. The expertise within the public sector is diminishing. The salaries are simply not high enough to warrant working there if you are a talented individual.

    There are so many consultants, with a wide range of abilities and skill sets, it can be very difficult to make the best decision on who to choose, and the work doesn't stop. The public still want their "thing" done, weather it is a road build, a hospital upgraded or a park mowed.

    It would be reasonable to have many of the consultants on staff, since some rolls are permanent and ongoing...a 3 year project for a new waste water treatment plant, should have a few engineers on staff to oversee the project, but usually that is also farmed out to consultants.

  • Unpopular opinion: I think it's perfectly reasonable to spend $32k to help you with staffing decisions. One staff member will cost much more than this so if you can identify unnecessary staff it pays for itself.

    I think it's resonable to want someone to look at this. I think it's unreasonable to hire a permanent staff member to do this. A consultant seems a perfect fit, and at $32k it's probably only a month's work and not that much for a large organisation.

    Happy to have my mind changed though.

    • No, I don't think it's necessarily an unpopular opinion. However, why have staff at all?

      • However, why have staff at all?

        Why should a government department have staff? I'm not sure what you're meaning.

9 comments