Lorne Gunter recently wrote a column on the Harper government's plan to cut sick leave for federal staffers. In his typically venomous style, Gunter concludes the federal public service is too large following a report from the Parliamentary Budget Officer(pdf) showing there is little added cost to sick leave beyond a person's salary. Gunter reckons if there is not a replacement called in to backfill positions they must not be essential to the work of government and positions should be cut. This train of thought has not travelled far from the station but beyond being poorly thought out — it's destructive.
In his 2006 paper, Innovation in the public sector: spare tyres and fourth plinths, Wayne Parsons explains redundancy in government is in place to ensure the government never fails. Unlike the private sector, which allows and even encourages failure, governments don't have the option to go bankrupt, layoff all the employees, and be replaced by a better, smarter government. Imagine the chaos if all the work of government was halted and restarted as often as new start ups go bankrupt. A robust civil service is akin to driving with a spare tire. It costs a little more to have a spare but when it's needed the savings are vast.
Much of the work of government requires at least a degree of expertise and can not, and should not, be covered off by anyone not familiar with the work when a person is sick for a day or three. Were we to follow Gunter's advice and slash the number of civil servants, the work of government would be impacted. Workloads would increase and every sick day would cause delays in projects, extreme increases in cost to temporarily hire a subject matter expert, or, more likely, both. With a robust civil service, colleagues are familiar with one another's work and can carry on while a peer is absent for a short period. This allows work to stay on track and projects to be completed in a timely manner.
An even more insidious effect of a lean public service is the inability to innovate. Innovation can only occur where there is room for failure. The private sector excels at innovation precisely because it allows for failure. Civil servants are free to innovate and experiment when there are fail-safes in place to ensure work is completed even if the innovation is not successful. When these measures are removed, the public service cannot experiment and will not be able to provide increasingly sophisticated products. As technology rapidly changes delivery methods and expectations, it is more important now than ever that we encourage innovation in the public sector by ensuring a robust civil service.
