I couldn't disagree more here, I used to work for a govt institution and the pay was way worse than industry jobs of the same type. Once, many years ago, I interviewed for a corporate job and was offered an 80% bump over my university salary for roughly the same job. Granted the job was in a big city vs my small university town, but the cost of living surveys showed similar prices for nearly everything. I turned down that offer because of a family situation and the fact that my inlaws who lived in that same big city had their car stolen and vandalized that same day.
Anyway, not all govt workers are bad employees. I regularly worked 60+ hour weeks and worked with many who were just as dedicated. I also saw in my last position 3 people in a dept of about 20 were fired for poor performance on the job. It took a little longer than in the corporate world, but was not impossible. We don't have a union in my field, and even if we did, the govt institutions in my state aren't obligated to negotiate with them.
Typically, health and retirement benefits are better in govt, that helps offset generally lower pay. But we didn't get annual bonuses or profit sharing or other similar perks. The best perk we got was that we didn't get payed off at the drop of a hat when budgets were cut (usually jobs just wouldn't get refilled if someone left). We found ways to economize that didn't include giving the employees the sack.
Maybe you should be fighting for better benefits for yourself rather than slamming those who you think have better. My opinion is that we are in a race to the bottom regarding the work and pay of the middle class. The govt employees are doing better in that race, because govt generally runs 5years or so behind the pay/benefits of industry. If this trend ever turns around, you can bet govt jobs will be slow to catch up to industry.
