SAFER Grant Shenanigans

As, usual getting the audio of last night's city council meeting up is taking longer than I'd like, but a lot of interesting stuff happened.

So last night Channel 7. The local ABC affiliate was at the city council meeting. Yeah ethically I probably shouldn't do this but I'm going to tell you the, "vibes" I was getting off of everyone.

The cameraman said he was there about something regarding FEMA, and my guess it that probably had something to do with the Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response (SAFER) grant.

See a few months back the fire department applied for the federal grant that would help the city pay their salaries.

Okay, kids this is where it gets complicated.

The city asked for a millage. One of the reasons why they asked for that millage is because without it they would have to lay off workers for Southfield's emergency services.

The SAFER grant as a stipulation for its money would require the city not to layoff any firefighters for the next two years.

The vibe I got is that the city doesn't feel like guaranteeing that. But because of the millage a lot of folks feel they already did.

Also, during the millage campaign, Southfield Fire Chief Peter Healy said, "We are very pleased to secure this grant; however, it is unfortunate that we will not be able to accept it if the May 3 millage does not pass," which implied that if the millage passed the city would accept the Safer grant. For those living under a rock, the millage passed overwhelmingly.

At last night's city council meeting, Councilman Fracassi, said that way back during the campaign he was present when that statement was made and that he had asked the Chief not to do that again after the public meeting. According to the council, The SAFER grant wasn't supposed to a part of the campaign.

Right now the council is in contract negotiations over fire and police and as always the possibility of layoffs is going to be a factor, so the council tried not to talk about the SAFER grant. Like I said accepting the SAFER grant would mean that the council would be guaranteeing that no layoffs would happen in the next two years.

The Changing Workforce

As I said in my Eden of the East post I liked it because it talked about NEETS (Not in Education, Employment, or Training) in a way that wasn't the knee jerk, "They're lazy reaction." That reaction is a pet peeve of mine. Not necessarily because it isn't true. Indeed some individuals occasionally even myself are lazy jerks. The reason why I liked it is because it talked about or at least hinted at the fundamental ways the labor market is changing. What annoys me about that knee jerk reaction I mentioned is that it represents a classic ostrich syndrome.

I will say this again. The fundamental way the labor market works is changing. That affects everything, and as a society we cannot afford to ignore it. Whether it is good or bad, it is something that needs to be examined.

I don't just mean it's hard to get a job. I mean that both what employers and employees expect from each other is completely different than what it was in the past. Heck, what employees and employees expect from each other is starting to become completely different depending on which side of the office desk you sit on. Because of this our entire concept of work is changing.

Telecommuting is becoming more possible and prevalent meaning that less people spend work at work. A contingent workforce of freelancers and independent contractors that holds little loyalty to individual companies is factor. More and more college students and graduates are taking internships that offer very little monetary benefit. Employers are more reluctant to provide employee benefits as well as job training, expecting employees to handle those sides of the equation themselves.

These things are happening yet how individuals think about work and are educated regarding that concept work has not changed or at least has not changed as much as the practiced employee employer covenant. For now these changes are subtle, and therefore ignorable but sooner or later we as a society are going to have to reexamine the relationship between labor and management, the individual and the corporation.

These changes are difficult for everybody, but especially difficult for those, such as the younger generation, attempting to break into a workforce where the rules are in flux. It's no longer as simple as graduate, find a job, come to work on time, get paid.

Many don't find work for the next few years, but for the next few weeks. This especially true for writers, programmers, and designers. It takes an acquired skill set of self-marketing that is seldom mentioned let alone taught.

None of this excuses laziness, however it does postulate that there are new challenges in our labor market that are often not being considered and in some cases are completely ignored.

Note: NEET is not a US government classification, but I felt it could be used descriptively.

P.P.S. Note: I am not using the Japanese definition of NEET rather the name on the tin definition.