Castiel said:
think it's quite the opposite, most people realise that the cuts are necessary. Short term pain for long term gain makes perfect sense to me.
Hold on a second. Imagine the scenario, each year your department makes more efficiency changes and cost savings than other departments. But never at the detriment of the service that is provided.
Now all of a sudden that department is told that because of failings of some other department in another company (nothing to do with them) the savings that are made each year are nowhere near enough.
The problem is, for this lean, efficiently run department, it is already lean with its own costcutting so when its turn comes where it is forced to make X savings (X being a random number based on how big the ****** is)
It cannot do much except reduce the service and make people redundant. service suffers, customers suffer and not because that department was slovenly, or even if the company itself was poorly run....
No unfortunately somebody somewhere else had (and still does) a stranglehold on the economic lifeblood of the nation...and unfortunately when you gamble for giggles with large amounts of numbers on a screen that has the unfortunate side-effect of shafting everyone else.
So no actually these cuts in my opinion are not logical and not necessary. Does it make sense to punish and reduce a service which is meeting all targets? Does it make sense to suddenly change the targets so as to make them impossible to achieve (without the aforementioned reduction of service and job losses)
It is no more necessary than if some malicious sick person says "if you dont put your hand into the garbage disposal i will kill your brother" So i guess it seems necessary
to do what this madman asks right?
Thats why we should not be making these cuts (certainly not to this level) because consider the source. Do you punish those who are law-abiding, save money, are efficient? OR do you punish those whose arrogance and greed caused this whole calamity.....
