David at Blue Mass Group was this very informative and well documented post about the compensation level of public employees in the Commonwealth. The media has been extensively focused on public employees because of the issues raised by several Republican governors around the country. This issue of compensation, as you can see from David's post, is a red herring. There are no teachers or public employees becoming wealthy at the public trough. Public employees are doing their jobs and are being fairly compensated.
The brouhaha about what public employees get paid or what they get for their benefits is a distraction from the reality ...
...that the wealth of this nation goes almost exclusively a few people at the very top. These oligarchs largely control not only the wealth of the nation but also the media and our elected representatives. They don't want any attention focused on the ever widening gap between themselves and everyone else, so we are bombarded with news and opinions seeking to foment division and get the rest of us ripping each other apart over the scraps that we have left.
Wages and benefit levels (real levels, adjusted for inflation) for the vast majority of citizens have been stagnant or declining for the past thirty years. That is true for both public and private employees. Watch John Stewart of the Daily Show expose the double standard being peddled by our media. What more evidence do you need?
Tuesday, March 8, 2011
Massachusetts public employee compensation
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
22 comments:
Bill, if you can respond to this comment.
As it relates to federal taxes, is it true that a very small percentage of the U.S. Population ( truly wealthy) pay 50% of the U.S. Federal tax. What is the percentage, as it relates to the truly wealthy? If this comment is true, what percentage of the U.S. population pay the other 50% of federal tax? A certain percentage of the U.S. population do not pay any federal tax, can you provide this percentage?
I'm looking at this as 100% of taxable federal taxation.
Follow this link to an excellent series of graphs on income and taxes. I think you will find your answer among them.
In Mr. Michaud's letter in today's S-T OP-ED section he honestly and accurately addresses the need for reform of the collective bargaining system. From the municipal union standpoint. The other side of the abuse of the taxpayer is not addressed by Mr. Michaud. That is, of course, the abuse of big business and its incessant attacks on the average taxpayer. Much as you have highlighted in some of the threads you have in this blog Mr. Trimble. Neither of you are wrong. You are both correct. You merely choose to address one of two areas badly needing reform separately. Conservative vs. liberal? Where I would disagree is both areas need to be fixed or the typical taxpayer just continues to assume most of the burden.
So what's the answer? Keep bleeding the middleclass taxpayer dry so public employees can retire with health care benefits and 80% of their 3 highest years for the rest of their lives? The average Joe is struggling to survive with no chance in hell of having enough for retirement but he is expected to pay for someone else to enjoy their golden years. Public employees are over compensated and government is too big. The system cannot sustain itself. You cannot have more people taking from the system than putting into it. The middle class is disappearing, 35% of our population is on some type of welfare, and the only jobs are government jobs. Who is going to pay the bill when you have drained Joe dry???
Bill,
Here is another take on this situation:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2011-03-01-1Apublicworkers01_ST_N.htm
This information highlighted in this website points to the basic flaws typically included in these analyses. First, the article acknowledges the difficulty comparing a police officer's base salary with someone in the private sector. Part of the difficulty in this comparison is that it typically excludes paid overtime. Obviously, an exempt position in the private sector pays no overtime but typically includes a number of unpaid overtime hours. So that is apples and oranges. Next we have teachers who need only a bachelor’s degree for employment (with certification) but are frequently excluded from typical comparisons because they are "more educated". Obviously, as in police officers, they are typically paid more as they achieve more letters behind their names. Does that make them better at their jobs? Studies I see tend to discount that connection.
The other problem I have with this particular website is that I question its objectivity. Anything with Michael Dukakis associated with it along with special interest groups like the teachers associations that fund it, causes me to question the validity of its findings.
My answer to you is continue to pay the benefits, as offered by the town. This was not a union issue, it wasn't collective bargaining that provided these benefits, it was a call made by the town many years ago. I'll allow the town to denies all my benefits, when the town goes belly up. Claim insolvency, and turn the town over to the state. All town employee's fired. All town departments close their doors. Call in the state police.
Public employee compensation has evolved to the point where it is very difficult to directly compare to the private sector. Let me cite the following:
1. Teachers have paid sick and personal days typically in a “use it or don't lose it” contractual obligation. The teacher takes paid time off and is replaced by a substitute at more cost to the municipality. Or collects financial compensation for unused sick and personal days at some point. So, in effect, someone making $71k on their own is not the complete cost of filling that position. Matching their pension contribution along with the aforementioned additional compensation may well drive the cost of filling that teacher slot to over $80k without health benefit costs figured in. In the private sector, the cost of that salaried employee does not change. Therefore, the cost of filling that position in the private sector is base compensation plus the company’s share of payroll taxes in most cases. Yes, there could be a 401k match or bonus, but that typically does not occur these days.
2. Police officers and other municipal employees typically also have paid sick and personal time. So when they are out, the municipality may have no choice but to pay very expensive overtime to someone else to fill that position. Otherwise unused time accrues and is paid at some future date. Plus pension contributions, thier own overtime pay, etc. Again, what is the cost of filling that position? It is the cost of covering it just like with a teacher plus defined benefit costs. Not just what shows up on someone’s W-2.
I have yet to see any compensation comparative analysis address this. Until I do, I assume you need to add at least 10-20% over the W-2 cost of a typical public sector employee to estimate the real cost of filling that spot.
In today's S-T, Mr. Medeiros attempts to reply cogently to Mr. Michaud's summation of reform issues that he believes should be addressed.
In no particular order, Mr. Medeiros attempts to equate the union requirement that the town collect and remit union dues to the collection and payment of health benefits. Not exactly a home run there Mr. Medeiros. The town negotiates a health insurer contract and is responsible for the payment of premiums for it. Does the town negotiate union dues? Then why should it be responsible for union dues collection? Afraid some of the membership might not pay Mr. Medeiros? Of course you are.
The comparison of compensation between public sector employees and private sector employees is another of your "pearls of wisdom"? You claim these union supported studies erroneously compare blue collar and white collar jobs? Prove it Mr. Medeiros.
You don't recall the Democrats trying to block legislation? What happened to the voting process for health care presented by President Obama that got all "loaded up with pork barrel projects" by the Democrats to but their votes for approval?
Not even a nice try there Mr. Medeiros.
If you read the referenced post at Blue Mass Group in the original post, you will find your proof that what Mr. Medeiros says about compensation is true.
QED.
The town also deducts independent 3rd party disability/accident insurance.
To indicate that union dues is the only deduction the town makes for private entities (which Mr. Michaud did) is wrong.
I found Mr. Medeiros' rebuttal informative and respectful.
Mr. Trimble,
I respectfully disagree with the "findings" of the study you reference.
Here is another link that attempts to identify and summarize compensation differences in a very simple and direct way:
http://www.economist.com/blogs/schumpeter/2011/02/government_employer
Remember, we are talking base compensation here, not the cost of filling a position in the private sector as opposed to the public sector. Something that for some very curious reasons, some people refuse to acknowledge.
And Blue Mass Group is non-partisan/independent because why???
Ray Medeiros is a talking head for unions. It was obvious from his letter he was personally attacking Joe Michaud and has little in the way of solutions. Unions in the private sector are all but dead because they were greedy. Corporations said the hell with them because you can't run a business with them. I'll give you an example. A computer at AT&T went down which caused the whole department to go down with it. Everyone in the room knew how to fix it. Unplug the computer, plug it back in & reboot. However, employees were not allowed to fix the problem because a union technician had to do it. End result. Twenty people sat around for 2 hrs. waiting for the union tech to show up who then proceeded to unplug the computer, plug it back in & reboot it. As a business owner I do not want my hands tied by a union while my money goes down the toilet.
You can cry all you want about compensation in the private sector being stagnant but public employees certainly have nothing to complain about.
I still don't understand what makes a public employee so special that he/she deserves so much more than the taxpayers who are paying the salaries. Until someone can give me a rational explanation based on facts not emotion, I will continue to argue that public employees are over-compensated.
I still don't understand what makes a public employee so special??
Cops and firefighters run into the very things you run away from. That alone makes them special.
Since you brought up that you are a "business owner" enlighten me, what type of business do you own and what type of wages do your employees make?
Please try to be honest when replying.
This is how to solve the tax payers concern for saving money.
At the next annual town meeting have a town meeting member make the motion to amend schedule (A) demanding a 5% across the board budgetary reduction for all town departments, including the school department. Schedule A is the salary account. This money, approximately 5.5 million dollars to be returned to the Dartmouth tax payers.
Last Sunday night on 60 minutes there was a piece done on the TEP Charter School in NYC.
No teacher unions, no tenure, and no seniority.
Starting pay is $125k per year with a potential for a bonus of another $25k.
Classroom and end of year evaluations determine the teacher's continuity of employment.
Evaluations are based on teacher ability and student success.
Children who attend are from some of the most troubled areas of NYC. Some had made it to the fifth grade in the public school system and could not read.
The success of the teachers and students in this system was astonishing.
The former Chancellor of the NYC School system was interviewed as part of this piece. Among subjects discussed was the difficulty dealing with under and even non-performing teachers embedded in the unions and civil service.
He made a point that more teachers passed away while employed in NYC than were successfully terminated for lack of job performance issues during his tenure.
These types of findings prove that our system needs reform. This is not about an attack on the middle class as the union leadership would have people believe in a very transparent attempt to cloud the issues and prevent reform.
The sense of urgency that is sweeping the country is about reforming the system to make it more effective and responsive to the taxpayers, their children, and the public in general.
Bureau of Labor Statistics came out with December numbers for total employee compensation in December 2010.
Private industry employees $27.75 per hour
State and local employees $40.28
A stark difference no matter how you cut it. Something will have to give eventually. Cannot continue to ask those with less to continue to subsidize those with more. I wish I was a government employee!
Also very hard to argue with a non partisan government agency charged with gathering this information.
Actually, no. The amount would not be returned to taxpayers. It would be unappropriated money carried on the town's books and eventually become certified as free cash by the state Department of Revenue.
In order for he money to be kept by the taxpayers, an underride would have to be voted by Town Meeting and at a town election.
There are strong feelings on both side of the Union / Public employee issues. If public employees make more than their private sector counterparts there are reasons. Municipal and government jobs were under something called the spoils system about 100 years ago. This system was characterized by corruption. Wages were poor but bribery and graft were prevalent. Civil Service and Unions were a movement away from this system. Higher wages and competitive exams were put in place. The system is not perfect but it is much better now. There are still many places were police are underpaid but a traffic stop or road block will cost you.
There is no profit incentive in the public sector so you can't do an apple to apple comparison. The idea in Capitalism is that competition and profit will promote innovation and excellence.
In the public sector wage and benefits attract educated and qualified people. And anyone who wants a career in public service can take the test and compete for the job. I understand why tax payers feel cheated sometimes. I'm a tax payer too but I would rather see entitlement programs like wefare be reformed before we try and solve our problems on the backs of our employees. If you starve pubic employees sooner or later your going to get what you pay for.
Hey MArch 16th 9:45- where do you get your information from? Schedule A is not the salaries of employees for one. And 2 simply demanding a 5% cut across the board will not make it so. There are laws that are much bigger than the Town of Dartmouth that make such a non-sensical approach illegal.
Bureau of Labor Statistics came out with December numbers for total employee compensation in December 2010.
Those numbers include millions of low wage, part time, and waitress positions which pay minimum wage or lower.
The real data, comparing people of equal education and age shows that government workers make less than their contemporaries all over the country.
If you want to be a government worker so bad, apply!
Over the course of my children attending public schools here, I would provide the following evaluation of approximately 24 teachers who I feel qualified to judge:
1. There were 5 or 6 that were superstars. Some were young and others were long term employees. I cannot say enough good things about this group, their value to the town, and their long term positive effect on the children.
2. There were perhaps a dozen that were good. More parent involvement was required and other outside of school support was also required. Still, I had no problem with this group. Overall, they were fine.
3. There were another 6 or so that ranged from poor in skills and effectiveness to atrocious. Complaints to administration by people I know went nowhere. In fact, the was (at times) questions of vindictive behavior by some of these so-called "teachers". None of the "teachers" in this group were young or inexperienced as I recall.
The last group affected all but the top students negatively from my perspective. The effect could last for years.
The system we have protects the incompetent and penalizes the competent.
I have no problem with financial incentives for those who should be rewarded. It makes me sick to see the incompetent get the same stepped raises as their far more effective peers. Of course, the incompetents surely support the unions. Why would they risk independent and objective evaluations as a basis for job retention? In another time and place, this was termed communism.
That, ladies and gentlemen, is the main reason why we have public employee unions today.
Post a Comment