Grass is greener, taller and tastier for government workers on their side of the fence
The controversy surrounding public compensation packages is heating up. Governor Snyder’s report on public employee compensation has put public unions on the defensive.
Union leaders are going on the offensive with the position that their “degreed” membership isn’t compensated as well as private employees holding college degrees. In effect, this indicates many government employees are under- employed and thus underpaid, which begs the question: Why do they stay if the grass is that much greener on the private side of the fence?
Union leaders may be treading on thin ice with this latest collective bargaining offensive. It reflects a slight of hand technique with the intent to distract and misdirect.
When private companies are in the red with revenue to cost ratios, they take action to bring costs in line with revenue, or fail. Employees are usually cooperative in their sacrifice to survive such a financial crisis because they are economically and emotionally invested in the company’s survival.
Are government workers really in a position to compare themselves to the private sector workforce, which has lost upwards of hundreds of thousands of jobs in the last couple of years, and suffered significantly greater economic hardship than the public sector their tax dollars support?
According to Governor Snyder’s report, the grass is not only greener on public lands, but it’s taller and tastier too. Frank Dalimonte Ann Arbor
Comments
pragmatic
Mon, Feb 14, 2011 : 9:41 p.m.
I do agree with this opinion and believe that government workers can make concessions in their benefits, particularly health care and pension. I work for the City and am very happy with not only the pay and benefits, but the job security that a government job provides. Like the author pointed out, during tough economic times in the private sector companies have to make tough decisions regarding pay and staffing or run the risk of going out of business. Not so with government. We should pay more for our health care and the reirement age should be increased to at least 55 years old for all. The city should also look to privatize more of their services. This would definitely improve the efficiency of our operation.
snapshot
Thu, Feb 17, 2011 : 5:48 a.m.
John B. must be a public employee with that kind of gambling money in his pocket.
John B.
Mon, Feb 14, 2011 : 11:49 p.m.
I'll bet fifty bucks that you don't really work for the City. Make that a c-note....
fjord
Mon, Feb 14, 2011 : 2:04 p.m.
Once again, AnnArbor.com brings us another set of Republican talking points based on fudged numbers and apples-to-orange comparisons, and another group of willing lapdogs in the comments section, ready to repeat these falsehoods ad nauseam until they become the accepted "truth." Public employees are just the latest scapegoats for the GOP, following teachers, unions, and countless others. Who's next? The GOP won't rest until they've bankrupted the country, destroyed its infrastructure, driven even more people out of work and into breadlines (and then cut funding for those breadlines), created a two-class society (the VERY rich 1% and the destitute 99%), and installed a corporate/fascist theocracy to tell us how to live our lives, all in the name of what they call "freedom." Would everyone just stop listening to these cranks? More importantly, could you stop voting for them?
snapshot
Thu, Feb 17, 2011 : 5:47 a.m.
I would suggest you start doing a little independent research rather than regurgitation union propaganda.
John B.
Wed, Feb 16, 2011 : 12:38 a.m.
Post of the year, so far!
aanonliberal
Mon, Feb 14, 2011 : 1:34 p.m.
Does anyone see people abandoning the private sector jobs and flooding the "public sector jobs"? NO. Why because public sector jobs include shift work (being away from your family on holidays, working nights, etc) Anyone care to compare the life expectancy of a cop, fireman and your private sector jobs? Most cops and firefighters don't live until they are in their 80's. And some talk about extending the age for cops and firefighters to retire???? Anyone really want a 64 year old cop responding to your house when a bad guy breaks in? or a 64 year old firefighter trying to drag a hose to put out your house?? didn't think so. Pay the public sector like you pay for your home, auto and life insurance. The best you can afford so that when you need it you are not sorry you didn't "buy" more.
snapshot
Thu, Feb 17, 2011 : 5:44 a.m.
Scare tactics and falsehoods. Where's the beef?
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Mon, Feb 14, 2011 : 12:09 p.m.
alphaalpha wrote: "At $107,000 per year, the average total compensation of city employees is approximately twice the $57,000 national average. " As he almost always does, alphaalpha is simply making it up, equating private sector pay to public sector compensation. And because we've been down this path before, it raises questions as to why A2.com continues to allow its web pages to be used as a source of such purposeful misinformation. There are two issues here. First, the $107K per year he cites for public sector pay is pay + benefits + costs of employment (e.g, payroll tax paid by employer). The $57K he cites for private sector workers is pay only. So his numbers are purposefully (purposefully as he's been told this before) misleading. Second, as alphaalpha KNOWS, the BLS website from which he draws this data says that the data cannot be used in this manner. At <a href="http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.tn.htm" rel='nofollow'>http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.tn.htm</a>: "Compensation cost levels in state and local government should not be directly compared with levels in private industry. Differences between these sectors stem from factors such as variation in work activities and occupational structures. Manufacturing and sales, for example, make up a large part of private industry work activities but are rare in state and local government. Management, professional, and administrative support occupations (including teachers) account for two-thirds of the state and local government workforce, compared with two-fifths of private industry." Because alphaalpha wildly misrepresents the truth, and because he uses numbers in such a way that the source of those says they cannot be used, one can only conclude he cannot make his case using fair numbers in a statistically appropriate manner. Good Night and Good Luck
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Mon, Feb 14, 2011 : 10:18 p.m.
Really? Who pays for the private sector? Answer for the economically challenged: those in the public AND private sectors who buy the goods and services. And as a taxpayer I'm willing to pay more in taxes so that teacher, cops, and fire personnel are appropriately compensated apropos of the inmportant jobs they do; so that our roads and other infrastructure don't look like that of a third world country, thereby discouraging job growth; so that our K-12 schools can move into the 21st century; so that our public university system, one of the nation's best, remains so and a potential economic engine for the state if used properly. Guess we have different priorities. You want pennies in your pocket. I want our state to invest in itself for the 21st century. You want to eat our seed corn. I want to plant it. Oh well. Good Night and Good Luck
braggslaw
Mon, Feb 14, 2011 : 5:44 p.m.
One big difference, the private sector pays for the public sector. As a taxpayer I want fewer state employees. One man - one vote.
John Q
Mon, Feb 14, 2011 : 4:16 a.m.
Anyone seen the mad rush of people leaving the private sector to get these cushy public sector jobs? Me neither.
snapshot
Thu, Feb 17, 2011 : 5:40 a.m.
You must not read.
maxdoinel
Mon, Feb 14, 2011 : 2:45 a.m.
The question here, in Wisconsin, and elsewhere, is not, "Why are public employees getting (or seeming to get) better compensation than those in the private sector?" but "Why can't everyone get the same benefits that public employees get (or seem to get)?" If it's true that unions have helped public employees get better paying, more stable positions, why are people in the private sector forming unions?" One answer to this latter question seems evident from some of these responses: unions have become some sort of evil bogey man in the eyes of many. The flaws in capitalism are now blamed on unions. A pity, because this scapegoating seems just as overly simplistic as all previous scapegoating.
snapshot
Thu, Feb 17, 2011 : 5:38 a.m.
Unions have become too powerful, uncompromising, and a serious obstacle to accountibility, creativity, and productivity. They are, simply put, bad for business, and bad for the taxpayers. Especially public unions.
DonBee
Mon, Feb 14, 2011 : 2:17 a.m.
Based on the ruling by the Michigan Civil Service Commission, Public Workers don't have to worry. Pass a law to change their compensation and the Commission will roll it back. Look at what happened to the 3 percent contribution to retiree health care. Passed, signed under Governor Granholm. Reviewed by the Commission and rolled back. Go ahead, change their compensation, the commission will just put it back where it was.
snapshot
Thu, Feb 17, 2011 : 5:35 a.m.
I didn't know this could be done. How does a "commission" of any sort overrule legislation? Maybe we need a presidential "executive order" to circumvent union monopolies.
AlphaAlpha
Mon, Feb 14, 2011 : 1:05 a.m.
"The real question is, how much can we cut and still get the job done." Approximately 50%. Good BLS data show the average total compensation in the US is ~$57,000 per year; the wide range of jobs with the city is reasonably similar to the range in the private sector; thus, the compensation levels can be reasonably similar as well. At $107,000 per year, the average total compensation of city employees is approximately twice the $57,000 national average. Similar jobs are already performed elsewhere, at substantially lower cost; thus, compensation reductions of ~50% could be made while still "getting the job done". Subsequent cost savings of ~$35,000,000 per year just in Ann Arbor will allow, simultaneously: the hiring of additional city staff to enhance service to the citizens; substantially lower taxes for citizens; money for projects currently deemed infeasible due to high labor costs. All by simply allowing competitive compensation packages.
Mush
Mon, Feb 14, 2011 : 1:37 p.m.
"At $107,000 per year, the average total compensation of city employees is approximately twice the $57,000 national average. " The national average of other city employees? Of Wal-Mart employees? Please provide the source of these statistics.
Tony Livingston
Sun, Feb 13, 2011 : 11:26 p.m.
No one in the private sector gets the retirement package that public employees like those who work for the city of Ann Arbor get. Pensions starting at age 50 are extremely expensive and way out of line with what companies are paying.
snapshot
Thu, Feb 17, 2011 : 5:32 a.m.
The public unions are milking the system for everything it has, now it has nothing and their arguement isn't how much they have to offer but that they don't want the promise broken. Guess what? A lot of folks are dealing with broken promises.
Basic Bob
Sun, Feb 13, 2011 : 10:08 p.m.
I am comfortable with skilled workers belonging to unions, however all these public service "professionals" should do as their private sector counterparts do. Real professionals are paid by the results of their work, not simply by how long they have been doing it or how many degrees they hold. Police patrolmen and firefighters are skilled workers, they work for the boss. The bosses should not have their own union. Teachers should be allowed to keep their union only if they stop promoting themselves as professionals and confess that they also work for the boss. Principals are management and should not be allowed to belong to a union. Never, ever, should a lawyer or doctor be allowed to join a union and practice their profession.
Mush
Mon, Feb 14, 2011 : 1:34 p.m.
Basic Bob: Do you actually know of a lawyer, doctor, accountant, engineer or any other professional with a four year or more college degree that belongs to a state or local government union? Do you know of any state or local government manager that belongs to a union? If so, please tell us what unit of government and the type of job.
John B.
Sun, Feb 13, 2011 : 9:23 p.m.
This is just more Republikan talking points....
snapshot
Thu, Feb 17, 2011 : 5:29 a.m.
What does that mean? You don't believe in reasonable discourse? Did your union rep tell you to say that?
Austin
Sun, Feb 13, 2011 : 8:51 p.m.
In theory, many people work public service jobs for salaries lower than they could find in the private sector because they find some benefit in the purpose of their work. People accept lower pay for jobs they want or believe in. Athlete's take pay cuts to bring in talent because they want to win, not just get paid. The reward of public service offsets the difference in wages.
snapshot
Thu, Feb 17, 2011 : 5:10 a.m.
What? Athletes take pay cuts because they want to win? That doesn't even make sense, and neither does your arguement after it became legal for public unions and collective bargaining in the public sector.
braggslaw
Sun, Feb 13, 2011 : 9:27 p.m.
I do not believe that People work to make money When people start arguing the common good it is invariably tied to personal gain..... I do not believe them
FredMax
Sun, Feb 13, 2011 : 7:36 p.m.
We learned in econ 101 that question of free-market compensation basically boils down to "how little can I pay someone to get this work done". It seem like we should use this approach in the public sector also, rather than make subjective arguments over pay scale. If the entire public sector took a 10% salary cut today, does anyone really believe that those jobs would suddenly go unfilled? The real question is, how much can we cut and still get the job done.
FredMax
Sun, Feb 13, 2011 : 9:41 p.m.
Your questions obfusicate the issue again: public sector can't find capable employees => their salaries go up public sector has a large queue of capable applicants => their salaries stagnate or decrease
Edwin Gustafson
Sun, Feb 13, 2011 : 9:01 p.m.
Are there any statistics on migration between public- and private-sector jobs? Is the State losing people due to uncompetitive compensation?
braggslaw
Sun, Feb 13, 2011 : 4:07 p.m.
I can't wait for them to explain how a Phd in Elizabethan Poetry helps them operate the DMV. Or better yet, comparative primate psychology and the state park system. Real examples of people I know. The state jobs were safe harbors for people with degrees that were not marketable.
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Mon, Feb 14, 2011 : 10:28 p.m.
Ah yes. The unverifiable anecdotal story employed to justify a gross over-generalization. Logic = Fail. Good Night and Good Luck
dotdash
Sun, Feb 13, 2011 : 9:51 p.m.
I would love to have a PhD in Elizabethan Poetry operating the DMV. That person is intelligent, is capable of sustained effort to reach a longterm goal and has more interesting things to think about than how to make my life miserable by getting me to wait in more lines and fill out more forms. Bring on the PhDs!
average joe
Sun, Feb 13, 2011 : 5:49 p.m.
Your last sentence says it all.
stunhsif
Sun, Feb 13, 2011 : 4:02 p.m.
Well said Frank, and your article begs another question regarding all these "degreed" public sector employees. Why are they held up by unions and union members in the first place ? They want to be treated like professionals but they hide behind unions as if they were factory workers. I for one am sick and tired of them picking my pockets for more money when they alone are drinking the cream and we ( private sector workers) are drinking the scum.