There's no shortage of people who want to be paramedics or nurses or firefighters or police or teachers though, if so many people want to do the job then why do they need to be paid more? Obviously the career is attractive enough that some people just want to do it irrespective of the remuneration, and I know with police and teachers the leave arrangements are pretty attractive and there are plenty of other perks as well.What I find perplexing is absolutely necessary roles like paramedics, nurses, firies, police etc. are paid so poorly compared to trade work.
For example my cousin is a senior constable in the Victorian police force, I work in a warehouse on a gold mine. It's clear between both of us I am paid much more highly - yet the job of a senior constable is much more necessary (to society) and much more dangerous.
Sure warehousing in town is near base level wages and is the norm, my work requires a trade certificate among other certificates / licences like national high risk, crane and dogging etc. etc.(yes folks, stores people are tradies - according to the government). It is a lucrative gig, but that doesn't excuse those more needed getting less money.
Seeing how these required roles are public servant roles, I wouldn't one bit begrudge any of them making more than I do and my tax dollars going toward achieving an appropriate salary / wage for these heroes.
Completely agree with your first paragraph, as an example my cousin does it for job satisfaction over remuneration - one could argue that these wonderful people do their roles more so coz they want to help people. They're noble indeed. I do agree that supply and demand is part of reason for below par wages / salaries for these people.There's no shortage of people who want to be paramedics or nurses or firefighters or police or teachers though, if so many people want to do the job then why do they need to be paid more? Obviously the career is attractive enough that some people just want to do it irrespective of the remuneration, and I know with police and teachers the leave arrangements are pretty attractive and there are plenty of other perks as well.
Meanwhile there are exceedingly few people who are prepared to complete an apprenticeship and then work FIFO on a 4:1 roster on an oil rig, and that's why some boilermakers get paid $300,000 per year. Trades in general are not attractive jobs to a lot of people; the hours are long, the work is hard (manual labour is far, far tougher on the body than any office environment), the job site changes frequently and ongoing work isn't always guaranteed. The only upside to convince new apprentices to take up trades is the pay.
Besides, if we were going to start pointing fingers at professions who do not deserve their salary, the obvious place to start is the real estate industry.
Lol. Its the academic's BS that generally needs to be called out. Look at THEIR unhinged nonsense re supposed "science" with respect to Covid and the "climate crisis".Happens anywhere the ruling class don’t want there bullshit called out by people who have even a fraction of a clue.
Different but equalHi guys interested in your thoughts as I find it puzzling that society still doesn't place the same prestigious value on a trade qualification that they do on a degree.
To me they are different but equal.