Whats wrong with the Pay Commission anyway?

The 5th Pay Commission was instituted in 1994, covering 3.3 million government employees. In 2008, when the 6th Pay Commission has come out with its recommendations, affecting 4.5 million employees. The financial burden on the government is undoubtedly huge. There is so much talk about the private sector and how they compare to their government counterparts. And expectedly, there is plenty of government bashing all around. I was reading an article in ET recently -
"Those who complain about wasting taxpayers’ money when it comes to civil service salaries need to appreciate that the very same taxpayers bear, in the guise of consumers, the cost of fancier salaries and perks in the private sector as well. If shortage of talent forces company managements to pay the few good people they have astronomical salaries, the cost is passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices of the goods and services the companies produce. The question really is whether the taxpayer/consumer gets value for money or not" (27 March Economic Times)

To me, this seems to be a sensible course to adopt. Especially in the light of a constant bombardment by a largely capitalist media. I know I just branded the media - only for want of a better word. I personally think we all make the mistake of assuming we fully understand the inefficiencies of the government and its causes. We are also falsely lulled into thinking we benefit from the most efficient services and products the private sector can offer. Examples abound as to how mistaken we are (think airport taxes, pricing of brands, ad slots on television etc).

And what about performance? Everyone seems to be saying that performance evaluations are the only way to go for the government sector. Yet, when IBM kicked out 800 trainees some time back, it was projected as a disaster. It probably is one, too - I am only leading on the argument.

Then there are the perks that come with a government job. Some people have rightly called for these perks to be monetised. At least that way, a government employee has the choice to invest his money for long-term security. Why is there job security in the government? Probably for this reason - that if a government employee loses his job and remains jobless, he will probably not survive the financial implications. This holds even for our politicians in power. They are pretty much stripped of everything once they are out of power. Hence, they hedge their risks by being...(you know what).

This is a call for reason. It is easy to condemn the government since it is all pervasive and it is non-responsive even to criticism. But when making judgements, we need more reason, some more cold logic.