Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking
An increase in costs without a matching increase in income leads to a decrease in profits.
It takes a fixed amount of time to perform certain functions, eg refuse collection. When dealing with a person on the telephone with a complaint or query, it takes time. If there are more efficient ways of doing something, it will only be the private sector that bothers with it.
|
“Only the private sector”
What absolute nonsense. In the workplace very few actions take “fixed” amounts of time. There’s also fatigue, attention span and a wide range of other factors that give human beings variable productivity at different points throughout the working day. Your ignorance on these matters is frankly startling.
---------- Post added at 23:14 ---------- Previous post was at 23:11 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carth
You don't see the challenge of paying 300 people the same money to work 32 hours instead of 40, and the wages further required to employ extra workers to cover the 'missing' hours?
|
If each was as productive in 32 hours, the starting premise of the post you quoted, as 40 there’d be no need for additional staff. Just the rota adjusted to give cover across the 168 hours of the week. With 300 staff that shouldn’t be too hard.