One only has to dipstick around the blogosphere to pick up on the national tone against public servants. You know, your teachers, your cops, your fire fighters and first responders, your county and city employees, your state workers–all those people who are out making the wheels or progress grind along.
Why are these people suddenly the victims of public wrath? The slumping economy. Public employees are paid out of state and local public coffers. When times are tight, all of a sudden the government employees become dog biscuits. If people have to pay higher taxes to keep their public services alive and well, then the public employees who do the work get kicked about a bit.
Politico addresses this issue:
Spurred by state budget crunches and an angry public mood, Republican and some Democratic leaders are focusing with increasing intensity on public workers and the unions that represent them, casting them as overpaid obstacles to good government and demanding cuts in their often-generous benefits.
Unlike past battles over the high cost of labor, this time pitched battles over wages and pensions are being waged from Sacramento to Springfield to New York City and the conflict is marked by its bipartisan tone, with public employee unions emerging as an intransigent public enemy number one in cities and state capitals across the country.
They’re the whipping boys for a new generation of governors who, thanks to a tanking economy and an assist from editorial boards, feel freer than ever to make political targets out of what was once a protected liberal class of teachers, cops, and other public servants.
Republicans around the nation have cheered New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, whose shouting match over budget cuts with an outraged teacher—“You don’t have to” teach, he told her without sympathy—became a YouTube sensation on the right last week.
And even Democrats, like the nominee for governor in New York, Andrew Cuomo, have echoed the attacks on unions.
Christie is merely the most florid voice for a calculated, national effort to fundamentally reshape the debate on the labor costs that account for the bulk of government spending at every level. And at the core of the shift is a perception among many political leaders that public anger at civil servants is boiling over.
“We have a new privileged class in America,” said Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels, who rescinded state workers’ collective bargaining power on his first day in office in 2006. “We used to think of government workers as underpaid public servants. Now they are better paid than the people who pay their salaries.”
“It’s a part of a very large question the nation’s got to face,” Daniels told POLITICO in an interview. “Who serves whom here? Is the public sector—as some of us have always thought—there to serve the rest of society? Or is it the other way around?”
What about those public employees in most of the southern states, including Virginia, where there is no collective bargaining? Most employees are not union workers. There is strong resentment of these workers. I not only don’t see it, it incenses me.
People, especially those living in suburban and urban areas, expect public services like schools, police, fire fighters, libraries, county and city services. They are busy and they don’t like standing in line. they want their children to receive top notch educations and they don’t want a rescue squad to take a half hour to get to their house. Services are a major reason to move to the suburbs.
People need to be mighty careful about what they complain about. Too much government? Put your own house fire out. Clean up your own oil slicks. Is it the pensions? Is it the 401k plans? Perhaps that is small compensation for those who served the public rather that going into the private sector.
On Facebook, Congressman Frank Wolf commended federal workers for donating to food banks across northern Virginia, which have seen a 30 percent increase in client visits over the past year. Four of the five comments in response were along the line of “the should, considering public sector jobs outpay private sector jobs by about 40%.”
There’s a lot of polarizing “us” and “them” going on. People are struggling and stressed and looking for someone else to blame instead of looking in the mirror.
Please take time to give to food banks and blood drives now – both need more help in the summer months.
The attitudes being dsplayed are just the thing needed to attract dedicated, smart public servants–NOT. Obviously Govenor Christie has forgotten that if it wasn’t for teachers, he wouldn’t be in the job he has. No teacher makes what they are worth. And folks forget that “bureaucrats” are who keep things going when the politicos are changing seats. It is a shame memories are so short. While I don’t have any numbers, the idea that public sector jobs pay more may be true since a lot of private sector jobs are now in the service sector and they don’t pay well. I suppose if one wanted to dig through the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Employment Cost Index you couldfind the answer. In the meantime, here is an interesting article– http://innovationandgrowth.wordpress.com/2010/05/03/public-sector-pay-outpaces-private-pay/ that seems to support the allegation that public sector salaries are higher.
There are a lot of inter-related issues here Moon and like you I fear a perfect storm is brewing that could have disasterous long-term impacts on the public service. The cause — the bottom line here is the lack of leadership, among politicians and among the public employee unions.
Why are these people suddenly the victims of public wrath? Because they appear to be insulated from that economy and the normal way of doing things – good for the rest of us. Ok, just one example it is now reliably reported that federal employees, under a weighted average by posiiton, are 30 percent ahead of their corporate equivelents. It is only when senior private staff are included that the private sector catches up and exceeds vice the senior manangement of any agency. Forbes did an article that laid out the problem. The net present value of an $80,000 annual pension starting at age 55 requires a corpus of over $2 million – and that does not include health care. “That is a lot of multi-million dollar police officers.” That should be concern enough, but the unions and their congressional supporters on the hill are seeking to increase the government by over 50,000 employees per year over the next 5 years – and this is after Bush doubled the number of federal employees over that of the Clinton Administration, and they have prohibited public-private competition for commercial support services – to include lawn maintenance, vehicle and building repair – to protect existing federal employees. I don’t know what PWC is doing on this, but it seems reasonable to me to expect that any work that can be done by either sector be opened to that opportunity.
Economics aside – which I think just feed and reinforces the problem, the real issue is that public employees represent the growth of Government itself. For those who believe in bigger, more intrusive and more paternalistic government – those who believe in equality and charity through forced income re-distribution – it befuddles the mind. For those who believe in constitutional government as a necessary and controlled evil, it befuddles the mind.
Yeah right! Tell that to my husband and our checkbook. Then check out how much private contractors are making compared to federal employees.
I only meant to quote this: “the should, considering public sector jobs outpay private sector jobs by about 40%.”
That said, YES YES YES! Contribute what you can to food pantries. If you can’t give food, give time.
So is it jealousy?
Governments have to have employees. I also think that the federal government is very different from state and local. Not even sure why but it starts with benefits.
Still, I don’t begrudge federal workers what they have. They also put up with crap the rest of us don’t have to. They have restrictions the rest of us don’t have also. Everyone else in the world that I have ever heard of can get their spouse’s SS if that spouse is no longer alive. Federal workers cannot if they are receiving benefits under the old federal retirement plan. That sort of sucks.
@Moon-howler
In the case of those who work for DOD as Mr. Pinko does, he is very restricted on what he can do, say, etc. Plus, all his co-workers are being shipped out or moving around, so he has to do more than just his own job.
Who are these people who are so resentful? Are they unemployed? Are they unfamiliar with those working in the public sector?
Look at how much a new cop makes. In an area like this, it’s hard to live on that low pay.
I guess my take on private contractor vs government employee would be: pay me now or pay me later. Those private contractors often have to pay their own benefits and they get no retirement–not everyone but many. I mean the temporary workers doing the federal jobs.
Other folks…like those working for defense contractors, etc….different ball game. They make a very decent salary. However, why shouldn’t they.
I guess we should have started with, define private contractor. That can mean a lot of things.
I suspect that the need for employees is counter-cyclical for some government functions. The need for people to take and process unemployment, TANF, Medicaid, Foodstamp claims all increase when the economy is bad. I’d also guess that the need for police goes up as the economy worsens. Trash pickup, water and sewer systems all probably stay about the same.
As to whether public employees are over-compensated, there are differences in pay scales between state, local, and federal government. It’s been my experience that at the state level, wages are lower than private sector for rank and file, but about par for in-demand occupations like information technology, skilled trades, and management. What you don’t see, though is that more and more work is being done by temp or part-time workers who receive no benefits and whatever benefits their temp contract provides. These people tend to be pretty poorly paid.
the second “benefits” in the last sentance should be “wages”.
I love teachers; I want to see them paid well; i want to see them paid better than currently.
But that teacher was obnoxious and Gov. Christie was right to interject reality into that discussion – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aw0aBkt8CPA
“I”ve got a Masters degree so you need to pay me more” … no, not really.
For number 8 above, I don’t think that holds true anymore. Federal govt salaries exceed private salaries. When you include the benefit load (health insurance, vacation, etc.) you balloon the cost by over $50K per employee.
WRT the ‘public’ going after public employees I don’t see this any different than the ‘public’ going after those that make $250K+ (the HENRY’s). But, I doubt we’ll see any of the fiscal left that’ll give a HENRY a pass to do the same to a teacher.
It simply boils down to a government is constrained by how much revenue it can generate (by putting a gun to our heads) and how it spends it. What isn’t spent on a teacher is spent on a cop, or on a road, or on a library, etc. So, we need to prioritize what really is important and shift spending as appropriate. Want higher teacher salaries then we need to fire a few cops. Want more cops? Lay off a few librarians. Those choices seem unpopular? Maybe shave salary/benefits from govt workers after all there jobs are fairly insulated and they earn more than the ‘average John Q. Public’….
The difference between the HENRY’s and public servents is that a HENRY doesn’t appropriate his money from me the govt worker does.
So, as long as I pay that salary I have the right to vote to lower it or absolve it. That SHOULD be part of the risk for working for the government…in a perfect world.
Actually advanced degrees should be one means that people move up in pay scale. Otherwise, why go to the expense and time of getting advanced degrees.
Bubberella brings up an excellent point about part time workers. It is cheaper to hire 2 part times than 1 full time because of benefits. It might look like there are too many employees when there really aren’t.
Maybe we should start by shaving marin’s salary. Doesn’t sounds so good now, does it.
Rick, I don’t think the teacher was obnoxious in what she was saying. Her delivery system left something to be desired, I grant you, starting with that hidious accent. shudder. But her content …she was making a point.
A couple of months ago, someone here attempted to insult me by calling me the best friend of the public employee. I took it as a compliment. Most of the public employees I have known and I have know literally thousands, have worked hard and often put in overtime. For their level of education and degree of experience, they did not make what their comparables made in the private sector.
Being a public servant should not be seen as a risk.
In times of economic downturns, and I think there have been approximately five of them since 1980, on a local basis, two things happen. First, the applications for government jobs increase dramatically (Figures at PWCPD and PWDF&R and other agencies will support this) and government employees become targets of ire because in a way, they are insulated to some market fluctuations unlike private enterprise.
However, during high economic times, those same statitistics will show that applications to government positions drop. Why? Because the financial rewards do not come in such sizes and as quickly as in the private sector. It takes years to get to the top of a government payscale in PWC. Both PWCPD and PWDF&R, during economic boom times, had to compete with fast raises and higher starting salaries in the private sector and had difficulties filling their vacancies.
Just because publice service employees choose to be on the “slow and steady” course, while others chose the “fast and furious” reward path, they are not fodder for everyone when things go bust.
Society and politicians will always look at something somebody else has and complain. But when those people have more than someone else, I don’t see them giving anything away.
I won’t say much here other that to say that I think most of this discussion is academic. There will be radical cuts in the number of government workers and their compensation/benefits packages. It doesn’t matter whether you think it’s a good idea or not, it’s a simple matter that the present rate of government spending is unsustainable. (And by present, I don’t just mean the 2009/2010 level of spending. Even going back to the 2000/2001 level of spending is unsustainable.) It is already becoming a problem in states like California and in time other states will feel the pinch.
The model of 1/3 of the work force working in the public sector for 20-30 years and then retiring can no longer be carried by the the remaining tax payers. Nobody seriously thinks we can “grow our way out of it” anymore through productivity gains. You can postpone the cuts some through tax increases and raising the retirement age or means testing Social Security, etc, but there will be “austerity program” in the US in the future and government employment will have to be a part of the solution. The question is when it comes to an end and if it is sudden or gradual.
As I’ve always said, I’m not an advocate of cutting government spending for ideological reasons. I like cops and teachers and soldiers and park rangers, etc. I wish we could have more of them all and pay them more as well. But there is simply not enough money to go around and no realistic way to get the kind of money that we’ve already committed to. That means cuts. It’s unfortunate, but I’d rather make medium sized cuts now than drastic cuts 5-10 years from now.
But I’ll be happy to change my opinion if somebody can tell me where we can get another ten+ trillion dollars without cuts.
Lucky Duck, I totally agree. Thanks for pointing out how things work locally.
FA, I think in order to have a productive discussion on the benefits public employees get, we need to separate at least by state. Certainly no Virginia public employee has gotten what a public employee gets in California. I also am not even sure that is all of California. Perhaps it is just a section of California.
Perhaps a good place to start might be curbing some of the huge salaries and benefit packages that the CEO’s of cities, counties and school systems get. They are way disproportionate to what their underlings get. For example, Dr. Walts gets paid about 5 times what the average teacher makes. The benefit package would break the bank.
Asking public employees to work without retirement would be like a company trying to get buy with it. It won’t fly. Jurisdictions need a fair shot at attracting and retaining quality employees. How many people are going to apply to be a cop and get paid peanuts? Certainly not your skilled, professional law enforcement officer who puts his or her life on the line daily. This sounds like it is going to have to turn in to a lesson in there being no free lunch.
You’ll always have some people that take jobs that aren’t the most financially rewarding for other reasons — good benefits, short commute, good boss, experience to go elsewhere – whatever. It may be that PWC becomes a feeder community in that we hire teachers here and keep them for a few years and then they get hired off by Fairfax because we’re unwilling to match FCPS salaries. At that point we manage the churn – not unlike what McDonald’s does. That gets you away from having a burdonsome retirement program. 🙂
FA’s right about CA. Unsustainable. They’ve pushed way too many of the upper taxbands out of the state and cannot support there spending model.
Not every company offers a retirement program. Sure the large employers do because they use the retirement program as an incentive for executives as well as the wrench turners but the economic engine of this country – small business – for the most part does not.
To your 4th para about cop salaries. I’ll argue much the same as I did above with teacher salaries. The hiring qualifications for PWCPD are lower than that of FCPD. So, you could get a job with PWCPD…get some experience and then apply for a job with FCPD. If you get picked up you quit your job with PWCPD. Business deals with that all the time.
Everyone can’t be ‘the best’. Maybe we just settle for ‘good enough’ and pay a fair rate for that.
“Maybe we should start by shaving marin’s salary. Doesn’t sounds so good now, does it. ” I’m not a public employee so you have no direct say in my salary. However, if you become a customer of my company and are on good enough terms that you can tell my boss that you’ll take your business elsewhere.. Good on you. I work in the free market as an at-will employee. They can terminate me without cause anytime they wish. Wouldn’t be great if we could do the same with our public employees??
Actually, I would say that PWC cops have a higher standard than the Fairfax cops, from what I have been told. PWC has some of the highest standards in the state. Fairfax might pay more but I have not seen syphoning off of our good cops.
Many public employees can be terminated without cause. It depends on the type of job you do.
Many small businesses do have retirement programs–perhaps not as robust as a company like Xerox or HP, but some retirement programs. But just for argument sake, let’s say all retirement programs dried up. So who ends up ultimately paying? The American taxpayer will eventually pay for those who have no retirement and who become a burden in their old age.
It seems money ahead to have people plan and prepare for their retirement rather than having to step over old people with tin cups on every street corner.
marin, I detect some smugness that you aren’t a public servant. Is this when I say I hope you future kids get Ronald McDonald for a teacher? 🙄
Maybe you should have chosen Starbucks as an example. They have great benefits for their employees and their management. They even allow part time workers to get benefits.
Ok, using Starbucks as an example… And, I’ll bolster your arguement for a second – well not really! 😉
From Fool.com
Today’s subject: Despite its recent difficulties, Starbucks (Nasdaq: SBUX) still spends more money on employee health care than on coffee. Given corporations’ tendency to cut costs in tough times — sometimes at the expense of workers’ happiness and well-being — CEO Howard Schultz’s adherence to the principle that Starbucks baristas should have health-care benefits is cause for applause.
Why you should cheer: Last week, Fortune magazine revealed how Starbucks’ Schultz, in the midst of attempting to turn around his company, stood up to a shareholder’s suggestion to boost profits by cutting health-care benefits. According to the article, Schultz denied the request, and told the shareholder to sell the shares if he felt so strongly about it. (The unnamed shareholder reportedly did end up reducing his position.)
Many companies did slash various worker benefits amid the worst of the recession. This past April, The Wall Street Journal noted that those axed extras have been slow to return. As recently as October 2009, a Society for Human Resource Management survey of 371 companies revealed that 39% were somewhat or very likely to cut benefits in the following six months.
Think about that for a second. They sell coffee (and of course assorted other products) but they spend more on employee healthcare than they do on the product they sell… Of course this only continues to sustain itself when people are willing to spend $5 on a latte or a frosty yummy Frapacinno. What happened when consumers had to decide between gas and Starbucks? Starbucks had to layoff employees (no job = no healthcare) and close stores.
And thats the rub. What many people are arguing is that current govt spending is unsustainable. If we’re prepared to ask the top 1% to do there patriotic duty and pay more taxes… Why not ask our government workers to do there patriotic duty and take pay cuts and layoffs to help balance the budget?
Smugness? No, not really. I just see one set of rules for government workers to protect pay and benefits and one set for all the others (us peasants). It’s not smugness – its disgust.
Taxpayers should not have to shoulder the debt of those in old age. That’s a cost that should be borne by savings, family, and charity/churches – not the govt.
But they will shoulder the debt of those in old age because we are a civilized society. Coulda woulda shoulda. That’s just how it goes. That’s the kind of society we are. So it seems like a more cost effective plan to help people save towards their retirement.
The obvious answer to why government employees shouldn’t pick up the tab rather than the rich people? Rich people have more money. Everyone should contribute something.
I don’t know where you are getting your figures about Starbucks from. That company spends millions around the world improving the areas that it goes in to. For example, check out their ethos water commitment.
I honestly don’t see why you think you are going by a different set of rules than say a cop in Prince William County. Why does their pay arrangement disgust you? Are you suggesting that we all ought to hire our own protection?
Do we want fewer cops? NO. Do we want to pay them enough so we attract the best and most highly skilled? Yes,. Same with f & R. People don’t work for free.
Marin, you have a very archaic view of society in my opinion. You also seem to be concerned only for yourself rather than including society in any of it.
Marinm, sorry, I have to disagree with you about the hiring standards for PWC being lower than Fairfax. That is an insult to the men and women of Prince William County. In fact, until five years ago, they were actually higher standards compared to Fairfax. Prince William County Police required 5 points higher on their police exam and a different standard in regards to personal behavior than Fairfax County. However, PWC decided they were disqualifying too many good candidates and then LOWERED their standards to match those of Fairfax, Arlington and Loudoun as well as Montgomery Counties and Alexandria city to capture those candidates. I would like to know your facts that Prince William County Police standards were lower than Fairfax County’s…what are they based upon? Where did you get them? Can I please see them?
Tell me Marinm, what is the passing score for a Prince William County Police Officer on the initial written test?
Your first para actually sounds like you agree with me. That people should be responsible for themselves, that they should save and that as a society our family structures should be there to help each other out. I know when my parents get old they’re coming into my basement. That’s just how we roll.
Second para is amusing because the average govt worker makes more than the average annual income holder in almost any place in our nation. So, by your logic they SHOULD be contributing more…even if that includes job loss. After all, they are RICH compared to the average income worker..
As I stated in #23 the information I cut/pasted was from the Fool.com. WRT ethos you still ignore that without people paying $5/drink they wouldn’t be in the position to do what they want to do. When the market turns against them they trim jobs and locations like any other company. Like govt they’re stuck on the idea that benefits for everyone is sustainable long term.
When was the last time that we heard of layoffs with PWCPD? Any of us in the private sector can be terminated at the drop of a hat. Try and get a cop fired. They have much more job security than many in the private sector. I’m not outright suggesting that you hire your own protection as that’s upto you to perform that risk and cost benefit assessment. As I’ve shown before a police officer or any agent of the government owes you no duty to protect you.
Do I want fewer cops? Sure. It’s not a service I actively use so the cost/benefit is skewed against me. So I get little tangible benefit but I pay out.
Thank you for the compliment. I see selfishness as a virtue not as something to be rediculed.
I do not know the initial passing score for FCPS or PWCPS. I can’t find any links to provide for the information about qualifications so I cede to you on that point. I could’ve been operating on the standards of Alexandria City police and mixed it up with FCPS — either way, I’m wrong. Thank you for correcting me.
I am sorry if that came across as a challenge, it was not. I was trying to point out that there are public safety workers here, both fire and police, that exceed the standards of other jurisdictions and take pride in those facts. But I know for a fact the difference in standards. In fact, more officers have left Northern Va. departments to come to PWC than have gone the other way.
When was the last time a layoff took place in PWC? PWCD has lost vacant positions, true, no “active” officers were told to go home, but positions were lost and the Middle School resource officers were pulled out of schools and reassigned. So any calls at those schools now have to be answered by patrol officers, thus pulling them from calls for service.
Most in this County do not want fewer officers. When anyone calls, they want police there immediately. Because its like insurance, you don’t think about it until you need it. Get there a few minutes late and the citizen wants to know where you’ve been.
Yes, the police DO have a duty to protect you. If they do not, its called malfeasance of duty, leaving both them and the County open to civil charges. While there is no law requiring an officer to be killed protecting you, an officer is trained to protect the public and many, many in PWC have been injured and two killed doing so. When was the last time a co worker of yours died in the line of duty?
While you may be secure in your safety and I am happy for that, most citizens address wrongdoings or problems by calling the police. Somebody has to come when a citizen calls. I do not mind paying for police response when I need assistance nor Fire and Rescue when I need help.
Totally agree here with Lucky Duck. I knew I was on firm ground citing the higher standards for PWC police officers. I know of a person or 2 who didn’t make the grade for PWC but who went to other locations. The higher personal standards are hard to top. n
Marin, you have to face it that you are unique. Most people don’t feel as you do. Most people want others to assume personal responsibility like saving for their golden years. As a country, we have grown accustomed to retirements, pensions and social security.
Quite frankly those people who have worked hard, saved a little or perhaps stayed in a job because of the pension rather than skipping aound will demand that those things be in place for them. It’s one thing to have the rug pulled out from you at 30. At 50, its a good way to get sued.
That is one reason it is dead wrong to start using well managed pension funds like the VRS like an ATm….like the state of Virginia has now done. It compromises Virginia law that mandates a balanced budget and it also compromises the fund that many Virginians are relying on.
Do I want fewer cops? Sure. It’s not a service I actively use so the cost/benefit is skewed against me. So I get little tangible benefit but I pay out. – maybe you are using them, and you just do not know it. The Law (as in Johnny Law) is what keeps piece, and makes people stop at red lights and keeps you safe at night. A reduction in presence will increase the crime rate.
I also have not made use of our Fire Department, but I do not want to reduce what we already have, just in case I need them.
LD, no reason to be sorry at all. If I make an error. Call me on it and I’ll own up to it. 🙂
I was using dated information and ‘what I’ve been told’ and that’s usually a path to lose a debate point. My understanding was that Alexandria PD (or Arlington!) required college degrees to be accepted into there program. But, I also have one relative that joined the FC Sheriffs Department because he wanted to be a PWCPD officer in the future (he is now).
Last time a co-worker of mine died in the line of duty? None. My clients on the other hand (civilian and federal) do take that Oath and know that they may be called on.
I’m glad you understand the difference between doing ones duty and then being required to give your life for someone else. A lot of people believe police are required to do so – they are not. It’s a sacrifice that civilian law enforcement and citizens do everyday when they interject themselves into a dangerous situation to help another person. I do tire of being told that ‘police will always be there when something bad happens’. It’s unrealistic. Police are regular people that go home to there own familes at the end of the day. While we may wish that they’re Superman; they are not.
TD, to your last para I agree with you. I think people have lost a certain level of self responsibility and ‘do it yourself’ mentality. Instead of a dispute escalating to a point where the law is required to assist people used to be able to simply discuss what happened and come to a resolution. Now it’s call a cop because a dog is barking.
MH, I might be the only person on this board that voices displeasure at fire/police and teachers being held as sacred cows but I doubt I’m the only one. The idea that those job codes are untouchable in terms of budget in our county is a lack of leadership at our county level. In counties and cities all across this country you hear about those very same jobs being terminated, reduced or left unfilled. Raise the idea here and your seen as a leper. So, while I agree I’m unique on these boards as having that opinion I really doubt I’m the only person in PWC that feels that those budgets shouldn’t be untouchable.
My 401K stipulates that the company can get rid of it at any time. They also don’t ever need to provide a match. Not sure how I could sue them if they decided to get rid of it.
I agree with you that the VRS shouldn’t be used as an ATM. It also should not exist to begin with.
Pat, the law is a piece of a paper. A threat that if you do one thing that you may get punished. Stopping at a red light is almost a good idea not just because of the law but because a solid object might be in that intersection and fault for having ignored the light would be assigned to you.
Does having a patrol officer doing speed traps protect me? Not really. People will continue to speed and those that don’t will simply hit there breaks and cause traffic congrestion on that segment of road.
I appreciate what your saying that police/fire act as ‘insurance’ in case I need them. You’ll see that I didn’t say eliminate all of them. The idea that police/fire/education is somehow untouchable is of course something I disagree with.
Moon-Howler is correct in that there is significant variance among the states as to just how bad their liabilities are, but only one state has a fully funded public employee pension system. (Alaska, due to revenue from oil drilling.) Every other state has an underfunded public pension.
Take the teacher from New Jersey. Every year the state auditors issue a report stating how much is needed to fund the new pension obligations created for that year. In 2009, New Jersey funded 6% of it’s new pension obligations. Let me repeat that again. For every dollar in new pension liabilities created in 2009, New Jersey allocated six cents to cover it. It’s not much better at the Federal level either.
To take the other example mentioned in the Politico article, Andrew Cuomo’s criticism of police pensions in New York. One case in particular that made a lot of news was a 46 year old cop who retired on disability with a knee injury. He is receiving a pension of over $100,000 per year. That’s ridiculous. A 46 year old with a bad knee can still hold a desk job and many people get angry when the hear about situations like this.
The simple fact is that our current level of public sector spending is unsustainable. Even if you were to impose a 100% tax on the richest 1%, you would still not have enough money to fund the obligations we’ve already committed to.
Whether we like it or not, the future of the public sector in America is going to be a lot closer to marinm’s Libertarian vision than what it is today. Regardless of their merits, we can’t afford “Middle School Resource officers” or any of thousands of less important public sector functions. At least not when each of them costs two million or more for an effective career of 20 years.
Both the number of public sector workers and their pay and benefits will be lower in the future as surely as night follows day. The laws of economics can be as immutable to people’s wishes as the laws of physics. (Again, I’m not saying if this is desirable or not, just that it’s going to happen.)
For all the bitching and for all the actually irresponsible comments about competence noted above, I think we are pretty lucky to live in PWC. From my experience and compared to some of our surrounding areas, by comparison things work pretty darn well here.
The problem with public services – just to get it back on topic here – is that there are really no limits. Can you have enough police protection, low enough crime, enough fire protection and what is an acceptable response time given our rural and high traffic areas. Can we ever afford all the teachers we would want. No. Agreed?
It takes guts and political leadership to make those budget trade-offs so that other culteral and commuity services and their administrative and logistical support is also available and competently managed. The first problem highlighted here is the “whinner class” that takes out personal attacks on public employees – who can and often do say -“Up yours” and go to the private sector- right about the time that they are most effective. The second problem lies in the self interest of those who want more for themselves at the expense of others — and I view that class of citizen as growing. If I figure I can get the government to do something for me that I could/should pay for myself — I must be ahead. It ain’t free, but if I can make others pay for it too – its free-er. Unfortunately, public employees do that too, but they do it in terms of service requirements and the ability to hire better folks through earlier retirement and pension rules. Most taxpayers want public wages/benefits to be comparable & competitive with a reasonable level of service. Once there is a sense that that reasonable test is breeched the attacks on public agencies begin. The reasonable test has been breeched on immigrration too. What really riles me is that big government has limits and telling me that just more and more taxes are needed is simply irresponsible.
VRS has fallen into the underfunded because some localities haven’t paid their fair share like they should have, as I understand the situation. Until very recently, VRS was one of the pension models held up for example nationwide.
Marin, I am going to have to be honest with you. I find the comments you make about VRS very offensive. I don’t think you have the right to suggest that it cease to exist.
For many years those in the system paid for their half. It was only when jurisdictions wanted to cheap out on raises that it became popular for the employer to pick up the tab for the entire thing. So it was bought and paid for in that way.
It appears that you don’t care what happens to Virginia’s public servants and it appears you have very little respect for them or place any value on that which they give to the state.
I hope you never need any of the services provided by local, state, or federal government.
Oh, I have been meaning to ask, were you home-schooled?
tp, I think you bring up some good points. I also will have to say that I feel the attitude you describe is more visible at the federal level, or at least that has been my experience. My experience with PWC govt and City of Manassas Govt has, for the most part, been positive. Yes, there are a few rotten eggs but that happens everywhere.
I think what has happened is that some of the localities where it would be permissible to retire at 46 with a bum knee and collect 100k a year have toxified our thinking. That doesn’t happen in this state and never had. I think our folks can stand proud that they aren’t hurting but they aren’t greedy either. I think we pass the ‘reasonable’ test, in most cases.
So when public servants take a hit in national rhetoric, everyone has to come home and kick a cop and beat up on their fire fighters, librarians and teachers.
MH, I have every right to seek to cease VRS or any other taxpayer funded program that is not to my liking as it’s funded through taxes. The minute I’m made exempt I lose my right to complain.
I graduated from Hylton HS.
The system is unsustainable. Whatever dislike you may have in me or others that share my view doesn’t change that we are paying out more than we take in. We need to change course to avoid going down the path of Greece. It’s just that simple.
Excuse typos, I’m on my iPhone.
vrs is not unsustainable. Not even close…or rather it is very sustainable if jurisdictions pay won time and if the state stops using it as an ATM. Those newcomers might have to pay part of their own share for a while. But it is very sustainable.
Of course you have the right to think and say what you want. However I find that particular topic extremely offensive…just so you know.
You forgot social workers! 🙂
yes, I did forget social workers. Some social workers are state and some county or city, arent they?
Can you please explain how VRS is sustainable? Mr. Schultze’s quote is priceless.
MH, I find the topic of the govt putting a gun to my head and stealing my money as extremely offensive.
Below is from Pilot Online (Hamton Roads news).
What is VRS?
The Virginia Retirement System is the state agency that manages retirement benefits plans for state employees, teachers and most local government employees. All South Hampton Roads school divisions and cities participate – with the exception of Norfolk city workers, who have their own retirement system. VRS places the money in a trust that is overseen by a board of trustees with help from an investment advisory committee.
How is retirement pay calculated?
Take the average of the employee’s three highest years of salary, multiply it by the employee’s total years of service, and then multiply by a benefit multiplier. For example, a teacher retiring with 30 years of service and an average salary of $50,000 would receive $25,500 a year in retirement pay ($50,000 x 30 x 0.017 multiplier = $25,500 ).
How does Virginia’s pension system differ from that of most other states?
Virginia is one of a handful of states where most government employees don’t contribute money toward their retirement benefits.
____
Timeline: How the practice evolved
General Assembly decisions to expand retirement benefits for employees:
1983
In lieu of a pay raise, the state begins to pay the 5 percent contribution on behalf of employees. Many local governments opt to pick up the contribution for their employees in the ensuing years. The recent JLARC study said Virginia is one of only a handful of states that do not require employees to contribute to their retirement benefits. “It seemed like a good idea at the time because it was tax-efficient,” VRS Director Robert P. Schultze told the House Appropriations Committee in November. “Now, 25 years later, it doesn’t seem like such a good idea.”
1987
The minimum age requirement for full retirement benefits is reduced from 60 to 55 for state employees and teachers that also have at least 30 years of service.
1990
The minimum age and service requirements for full retirement benefits are reduced from age 55 and 30 years of service to age 50 and 25 years of service for State Police. Localities have the option to provide the same benefit for their law enforcement officers.
1991
Virginia offers its employees an early retirement program, which is considered flawed for its lack of structure and overly broad applicability. It also increases VRS unfunded liability.
1994
Retirement benefits are increased by 3 percent. This increase is a result of a Supreme Court case regarding the equitable taxation of benefits. The increase applies only to those receiving a retirement benefit at the time the legislation was passed.
1995
Virginia offers another early retirement incentive. Because of the program, the unfunded liability under the retirement program for state employees and State Police increased by about $125 million, Senate staffers say. The program results in a $14 million increase in unfunded liability each year.
1999
With the investment portfolio rising in good market years, the assembly makes a series of decisions that add cost to the retirement system. A single benefit multiplier of 1.7 is established as a result of a Supreme Court case. The minimum age requirement for full retirement benefits is reduced from 55 to 50 for state employees and teachers that have at least 30 years of service. A separate tier of retiree benefits is created for corrections officers and select state law enforcement officers.
2001
The benefit multiplier increases for the tier that includes corrections officers and other select state law enforcement officers.
2007
State Sen. Kenneth Stolle sponsors a bill that increases the benefit multiplier for State Police officers and sheriffs. The bill requires localities to provide enhanced benefits to deputies and allows localities to offer the same benefit increases to their law enforcement officers. The bill has had a significant budget effect on big localities that elected to give law enforcement officers the higher multiplier, including Chesapeake and Virginia Beach.
2009
The VRS investment portfolio decreases by about 21 percent, from $55.1 billion to about $42.9 billion. Officials report that the portfolio has rebounded to $47.5 billion as of November.
You might want to check and see which naughty jurisdictions have not paid their fair share.
The system is sustainable. It might need tweaking but it is a good program. It has been operational sin ce 1942. Before then, it went back to 1908 as some sort of retired teachers’ fund.
I still find it amazing that you are so willing to try to take away from others.
If you feel your teachers and county cops are getting your money, perhaps you could just look at it as your way of saying thank you. You got an education from ‘the system.’
Did you spend the entire time in PWC? What schools?
If jurisdictions can not pay a ‘fair share’ then the system by definition is unsustainable.
Ok, lemme rap my head around this one. You think it’s amazing that I’m trying to ‘take something from others’ when THEY take my tax money, don’t contribute anything on there own, and expect me to carry them when they retire… This pension is paid for by you and I and every other taxpayer. It’s tax money going into the system to fund those retirement pensions…. I’m not trying to ‘take away’ anything that I am not already paying for by it being taken from me.
I got an education from the system because if I didn’t they’d put my parents in jail. It’s not charity but forced obedience. How about our public employees say thank you for having a job in an economy with 10% unemployment by giving something back to the taxpayers…….
Beachtree Elem K-6 (Falls Church)
Glasgow Intermediate 7th (Fairfax)
Woodbridge MS for 8th
Osborn Park for 9th
Hylton 10-12th
I’m curious, why are the schools I went to important?
Oh, I will point out (proudly) that I graduated with a 1.1 GPA. 🙂
You graduated, that’s the important part. I thought you had said before and I couldn’t remember the context. I knew you said Hylton yesterday.
Yea, I think you are trying to take something away that has been in effect for well over a half century. Think of it is pay for public servants. Think of it as fewer people who will be on welfare. If my house never catches fire, I don’t feel I have wasted my money. Those types of public expenses aren’t subject to line item veto. If I don’t use the library, it is still to my benefit to live in a community where literacy and reading are valued.
I guess a 401k is out of the question also?
At any rate, Marin, I do not believe that an institution whose origins survived the depression, is unsustainable. I also am not sure that Hampton paper has backed up its suppositions either.
The system might need some tweaking during hard recession times. So be it. It also might need to have employees contribute some of the funds that go in in that persons name. The state might have to change how it assesses jurisdictions for the money owed.
VRS is very sustainable, providing this administration stops allowing the VRS to be used as an ATM.
As to your schools, you went to 2 of Prince William’s finest schools.
I forgot to include this link:
http://www.varetire.org/about/history.asp
VRS is sustainable – because it is sustained by voters and their taxes — and that is the risk. Fire and police are public monopolies where voters need to negotiate the level of acceptable services /costs, but remember how much of our local budget is committed to education. Education need not be a public monopoly – even if publically supported / funded. Here, I think you must agree that Marinm has a point. It is – should be consumer oriented not taxpayer oriented.
There are those that will argue that private pensions can fail and that because they can fail, unions/workers are constrined in their demands for wages and pensions (or deferred compensation as some call it). That is a wrong. When a private pension or a state or local pension fails – it goes to the federal taxpayer – er, borrower.
Marinm, some of those increases in the article you posted may have saved the taxpayers some bucks. Some jurisdictions may have opted for offering early retirement ( and, therefore, a smaller payout) in order to pare down their staff.
As for offering State Police or other law enforcement/fire fighters earlier retirements, well, they work more overtime and under more hazardous conditions. Their overtime plus regular hours in a 25 year period may well equal what a 40 hour/week employee puts in over a 30 year period.
My advice to anyone complaining about local or state taxes is to use your public library or public parks. If you’re an avid reader, you can recoup much of your tax dollar by borrowing rather than buying your books.
And the pension fund hasn’t failed. It won’t fail because the state of Virginia has been committed to providing for its employees aka public servants for over a century. You know, the Virginia that had Virginia values.
Employees might have to make more of their own contributions for a while, but they will survive. Its a good plan and it survived the financial crash far better than most 401k’s did, which speaks somewhat to its sustainability.
Any time you throw the word ‘union’ into the mix it just shows ignorance. Unions do not have bargaining power in Virginia or most places in the south. Unions have nothing to do with VRS beyond suggestion. If you keep trying to blame unions, I am just going to start laughing.
Our opinions obviously differ on this but the stark reality is not that I’m right or wrong but how much money really exists.
I don’t believe the current model can exist without the government hitting us over the head with a tax stick.
The math just doesn’t add up. Politics aside the money just isn’t there. Otherwise, why would there be so much resentment against govt workers?
You are right, we aren’t ever going to agree on this one.
How come the math has added up for a century? The VRS has always been self sustaining.
I think there might be resentment because people read something that happened in California and think they can apply whatever that is to here.
You can go look at the books on VRS. I am not sure where but it should be public information.