If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Daily Kos)   You know the conventional wisdom that public sector employees are overpaid leeches? Yeah, about that   (dailykos.com) divider line 586
    More: Interesting, conventional wisdom, Economic Policy Institute, oligarchy, public sector, Daily Kos, nephew-in-law  
•       •       •

6238 clicks; posted to Politics » on 21 Feb 2011 at 4:48 PM (3 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



586 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | » | Last | Show all
 
2011-02-21 08:43:40 PM

Corvus: When I looked at government jobs they all paid about 30% worse with the same benefits.


Its true that salaries are lower in the public sector generally. Besides the job security, the sweet pension deals that many of these employees get more than make up the difference - very few private sector jobs provide those kinds of benefits anymore.


And THATS WHAT THIS IS ABOUT, farklibs. Outrageous promises made to unions.
 
2011-02-21 08:44:29 PM

drewkumo: They already conceded all the cuts, they just want to keep collective bargaining. He's out to bust then union.


AS I understand it, Walker proposed the contributions increase, and the union told him to go pound sand.
 
2011-02-21 08:44:37 PM

bhcompy: stoli n coke: puffy999: By the way, one other thing that skews the statistics in this article: very rarely does a public sector employee become a multi-millionaire.

So, yeah, way to fall into the same idiotic trap that people who say "$100,000 a year is a WEALTHY salary no matter where you live" fall into.

Outside of places like Manhattan, San Francisco, and L.A., 100K is very comfortable. Maybe not wealthy, but comfortable.

Well, it's above the median income for every county in the US. Wealthy? Hard to say. What is wealthy? If that's a two income household, you'd definitely on your way, at LEAST


If you have 2 people pulling in that much apiece, you are definitely on your way to wealthy.

Before mom retired, my folks pulled in about 100k combined. They were able to pay off the house in 10 years instead of 20 and could afford a new car every 5 years or so and put away a little bit into a retirement nest egg.

They weren't wealthy by any means, but they weren't suffering, either.
 
2011-02-21 08:44:55 PM
Skleenar

The company in question is called HBGary. Google 'em.
 
2011-02-21 08:47:25 PM

Fizpez: HowDareYouCallMeAHoser: Nice job KOS. The actual report (new PDF) showing that public employees make more:

Total compensation Difference
(public over private)
Private| Public| Dollars| Percent|
Less than high school $32,415| $36,935| $4,520| 14%
High school 47,469| 46,213| -1,256| -3
Some college 50,324| 46,707| -3,617| -7
Associate's 59,043| 56,561| -2,482| -4
Bachelor's 82,134| 61,668| -20,466| -25
Professional degree 225,644| 143,569| -82,075| -36
Master's 100,296| 74,056| -26,240| -26
Doctorate 128,306| 91,623| -36,683| -29
All $61,965| $63,151| $1,186| 2%

When you hand pick the education groups that do make more privately, you get this:


Really dishonest, KOS. And the actual report is pretty suspect by itself.

Do you realize that actually LOOKING at the numbers shows that private workers make more at every single education level except "less than high school education" only? In other words a person with a degree is underpaid in public work.


Yes, I saw that. It doesn't make this any more true though:
i887.photobucket.com
or the blog, or the blog's source, or subby's headline.
 
2011-02-21 08:47:41 PM

drewkumo: wheelofpain: He's not interested in hiring talented people right now, he's interested in balancing a budget busting a union.

They already conceded all the cuts, they just want to keep collective bargaining. He's out to bust then union.


I'm not in favor of busting the union, but this is about more than just cuts this year. It would give the state a hell of a lot more flexibility in the next several years, as well.
 
2011-02-21 08:52:09 PM

Scerpes: drewkumo: wheelofpain: He's not interested in hiring talented people right now, he's interested in balancing a budget busting a union.

They already conceded all the cuts, they just want to keep collective bargaining. He's out to bust then union.

I'm not in favor of busting the union, but this is about more than just cuts this year. It would give the state a hell of a lot more flexibility in the next several years, as well.


So, in fact, you are in favor of busting the union.

(Pinochet had a lot more "flexibility" in what he paid public workers too.)
 
2011-02-21 08:54:14 PM

birdboy2000: Skleenar

The company in question is called HBGary. Google 'em.


img255.imageshack.us
 
2011-02-21 08:56:41 PM

A Dark Evil Omen: Scerpes: drewkumo: wheelofpain: He's not interested in hiring talented people right now, he's interested in balancing a budget busting a union.

They already conceded all the cuts, they just want to keep collective bargaining. He's out to bust then union.

I'm not in favor of busting the union, but this is about more than just cuts this year. It would give the state a hell of a lot more flexibility in the next several years, as well.

So, in fact, you are in favor of busting the union.

(Pinochet had a lot more "flexibility" in what he paid public workers too.)


Not at all. I recognize the importance of collective bargaining...even for public employees.

However, the fact that the unions have offered concessions for a single year, while a nice opening gesture, are only a small piece of the pie.
 
2011-02-21 08:57:51 PM
Not overpaid, but they could cut a shiat ton of worthless jobs from the payroll. Of course, somebody is going to try to tell me the important jobs will be cut instead because they don't understand the difference between important and worthless. Or they'll go all defeatist and say that important things would be cut anyway if it were attempted.
 
2011-02-21 08:59:04 PM

Scerpes: A Dark Evil Omen: Scerpes: drewkumo: wheelofpain: He's not interested in hiring talented people right now, he's interested in balancing a budget busting a union.

They already conceded all the cuts, they just want to keep collective bargaining. He's out to bust then union.

I'm not in favor of busting the union, but this is about more than just cuts this year. It would give the state a hell of a lot more flexibility in the next several years, as well.

So, in fact, you are in favor of busting the union.

(Pinochet had a lot more "flexibility" in what he paid public workers too.)

Not at all. I recognize the importance of collective bargaining...even for public employees.

However, the fact that the unions have offered concessions for a single year, while a nice opening gesture, are only a small piece of the pie.


So the only rational response is to come down and ignore all other attempts at negotiation and instead try to implement the dismantling of the system that allows for said negotiations?

brilliant!
 
2011-02-21 09:00:20 PM

Penman: WhyteRaven74: How bad is it? Well in 1980 the average price of a new car was $7,574. In 2005 it was $22,700. That's in real dollars. Which makes for one hell of a rate of inflation. Those prices adjusted for inflation using constant 2006 dollars? In constant 2006 dollars a new car in 1908 cost $18,531 and in 2005 it cost $23,432. So even adjusting for inflation the price of a car went up by close to a third over 25 years.

True, but most of that is due to environmental regulations.


I'd argue it has far more to do with safety regulations then environmental regulations.

It isn't hard to keep emissions clean, perhaps if you want 400 horse power and a clean tail pipe, but for most people its not hard. But to keep a driver safe in a crash. That is hard.

this... and luxuries are what have been driving up the weight of vehicles since the 80s. And I mean 2 seat sports car or econobox is much heavier today then it was in the 80s.
 
2011-02-21 09:01:26 PM

playblu: Wikipedia:

The Economic Policy Institute is a "nonpartisan but progressive" non-profit American think tank...

EPI notes that it offers policy recommendations "with the goal of influencing policy makers to adopt policies that are good for working people."...

In 2009, EPI argued that a higher minimum wage rate would benefit low-income working families and help boost consumer spending and the economy...

In 2005, the Bush Administration and its allies in Congress mounted a campaign to privatize Social Security. EPI joined forces with other progressive groups and organized labor to oppose this effort...

During the 2009 debate on Health care reform in the United States some union interests attacked proposals to replace the employer tax exclusion with a tax deduction that would apply to all Americans (not just those who enjoy the good employer benefits provided to many union members) including the Healthy Americans Act bill sponsored by Senator Ron Wyden. The EPI supported the perspective of these union interests in a series of reports, which provoked criticism from independent progressives...

Biased source is biased.


As opposed to the guys leading the charge on this; Heritage, Reason, and Brietbart? I'd say EPI is a hell of allot less biased than they, and more than this, their numbers actually add up, so it doesn't really matter if they're biased or not. Newton was an alchemist and an apocalyptic fanatic; that doesn't make calculus any less useful.
 
2011-02-21 09:01:51 PM
I'd argue you were trolled pretty good there, ronin.
 
2011-02-21 09:02:40 PM

Scerpes: I'm not in favor of busting the union, but this is about more than just cuts this year. It would give the state a hell of a lot more flexibility in the next several years, as well.


Why is he going after collective bargaining then? The union is supposedly already prohibited from striking, so they would have no recourse to protest any wage changes.

HowDareYouCallMeAHoser: Yes, I saw that. It doesn't make this any more true though:


So your argument is basically that public employees get paid more if they don't graduate high school - and you are mad at teachers?

The comparison done in this is at least more accurate than an apples to oranges comparison of average compensation. Comparing two populations salaries without adjusting for their levels of education is step 1 in "lying with statistics".
 
2011-02-21 09:05:23 PM

ragekage: wheelofpain: ragekage:
Now UWCH is being told by the Governor they simply can't do that; not allowed. He'll damn well restrict the benefits of the unionized medical folks, as well at the State Prisons and mental hospitals, and they can deal with it or quit. So again, how are you supposed to hire talented folks with that attitude? I'm not talking about the teachers, I don't know anything about them or their situation personally, though I can see where they're coming from now. How do you reconcile that?

He's not interested in hiring talented people right now, he's interested in balancing a budget. A lot of other people have had salaries and benefits cut, you'll find that everywhere. Don't know why it's so different in the public sector. Benefits are part of total compensation, and that's all they look at. If both salary and benefits are below market rate, they'll get what they pay for. But there are plenty of highly skilled unemployed people who would like to have a job, period, even if it's for lower salary/benefits. Just economics right now. So maybe the talent won't be that low, being an employer's market right now.

That's good Hopkins can afford to pay for the best. Wisconsin can't. They have to make due with what they have.

Dunno if you've caught up, but there aren't any unemployed critical-care nurses (hardly nurses at all), for example, that don't want to work. There's a nursing shortage in this country. But you're right about one thing. I guess if the quality of care UWCH can provide suffers, so be it. Balancing the state's deficit is more important than that to Governor Walker, as you have astutely noted.


If he'd wanted to balance the budget, he wouldn't have started his term by slashing taxes. The governor created the budget crisis to justify going after the union; the people of Wisconsin be damned.
 
2011-02-21 09:05:32 PM
So let's finalize this:

Do elections have consequences?

Also, is shutting down the government good or not?
 
2011-02-21 09:06:31 PM

whidbey: I'd argue you were trolled pretty good there, ronin.


Story of my farking life.
 
2011-02-21 09:08:18 PM

drewkumo: Scerpes: I'm not in favor of busting the union, but this is about more than just cuts this year. It would give the state a hell of a lot more flexibility in the next several years, as well.

Why is he going after collective bargaining then? The union is supposedly already prohibited from striking, so they would have no recourse to protest any wage changes.


I don't know what the endgame is here...whether it's just to get more extreme concessions, or if he really is going to take collective bargaining. I suspect it's the latter, and it's bad news for public employee unions in other states.
 
2011-02-21 09:08:39 PM
www.epi.org

Why aren't the unionized WI public sector employees firebombing their union offices for doing such a shiatty job, then? They could go public without the union and make more.
 
2011-02-21 09:14:19 PM
Cabbyman

The democrats ran on health care reform.

The Republicans did *not* run on breaking the public employee unions. The unions agreed to the benefit cuts they asked for, but they aren't satisfied.

/Lie about your policies, then push through legislation against massive protests? Is that your idea of democracy?
 
2011-02-21 09:15:56 PM
>> You know the conventional wisdom that public sector employees are overpaid leeches?

You mean the republican conventional "wisdom".

It was republican conventional wisdom that wrecked the farkin economy and killed half a million people in Iraq for no reason
 
2011-02-21 09:16:05 PM
I'm a health inspector and I concur, my wages aren't very high.

Also I'm getting a kick
 
2011-02-21 09:16:13 PM

birdboy2000: Cabbyman

The democrats ran on health care reform.

The Republicans did *not* run on breaking the public employee unions. The unions agreed to the benefit cuts they asked for, but they aren't satisfied.

/Lie about your policies, then push through legislation against massive protests? Is that your idea of democracy?


That is the Republican idea of "representation".
 
2011-02-21 09:18:32 PM

drewkumo: Scerpes: I'm not in favor of busting the union, but this is about more than just cuts this year. It would give the state a hell of a lot more flexibility in the next several years, as well.

Why is he going after collective bargaining then? The union is supposedly already prohibited from striking, so they would have no recourse to protest any wage changes.

HowDareYouCallMeAHoser: Yes, I saw that. It doesn't make this any more true though:

So your argument is basically that public employees get paid more if they don't graduate high school - and you are mad at teachers?

The comparison done in this is at least more accurate than an apples to oranges comparison of average compensation. Comparing two populations salaries without adjusting for their levels of education is step 1 in "lying with statistics".


I just pointed out that subby, the KOS blogger, and the blogger's source are farking lying bastards. Not really arguing it, it just is.

And step two in "lying with statistics" is making apples to oranges comparison using education levels, rather apples to apples comparisons using actual jobs. A single multi-billionaire skews the numbers in any comparison otherwise, and the private sector has many of them.
 
2011-02-21 09:23:15 PM

HowDareYouCallMeAHoser: drewkumo: Scerpes: I'm not in favor of busting the union, but this is about more than just cuts this year. It would give the state a hell of a lot more flexibility in the next several years, as well.

Why is he going after collective bargaining then? The union is supposedly already prohibited from striking, so they would have no recourse to protest any wage changes.

HowDareYouCallMeAHoser: Yes, I saw that. It doesn't make this any more true though:

So your argument is basically that public employees get paid more if they don't graduate high school - and you are mad at teachers?

The comparison done in this is at least more accurate than an apples to oranges comparison of average compensation. Comparing two populations salaries without adjusting for their levels of education is step 1 in "lying with statistics".

I just pointed out that subby, the KOS blogger, and the blogger's source are farking lying bastards. Not really arguing it, it just is.

And step two in "lying with statistics" is making apples to oranges comparison using education levels, rather apples to apples comparisons using actual jobs. A single multi-billionaire skews the numbers in any comparison otherwise, and the private sector has many of them.



OK, here is a data point. CPA. A job that is probably pretty comparable public/private. From here ABC news


Private Sector CPA $71,216
Federal Govt. CPA $67,531
Local Govt. CPA $64,050
 
2011-02-21 09:23:50 PM
Scerpes

winterwhile: Scerpes
Not as much trouble as having the Democrats flee the state.

wait till you see what gets passed while they are gone.


get to work guys, the dems plan to be gone for some time.

I thought the whole point of the exercise was that the Republicans couldn't do anything without a quorum.


If it is a spending bill, yes, otherwise, just who is there.

So, with the dem's gone, they can pass a lot of good things.

Start with Obamacare........... delete it....
 
2011-02-21 09:30:19 PM
winterwhile:

I still think you're the Clear Channel of trolling. In other words you're bland, unoriginal, and not the least bit entertaining.
 
2011-02-21 09:38:17 PM
Who gets $74 000 with a Master's degree? Holy shiat, I need to move to Ohio!
 
2011-02-21 09:38:19 PM
So I took off "show ignored users" for a moment.

I knew winterwhile was dumb. I was not aware he was so dumb he thought "Obamacare" was a state law passed by the Wisconsin legislature.
 
2011-02-21 09:42:52 PM
Dumb enough to get you to talk about him.
 
2011-02-21 09:47:23 PM

Krymson Tyde: I'm a health inspector and I concur, my wages aren't very high.

Also I'm getting a kick


Specific job duties include but are not limited to:
- Assist QA Morning Technician with quality testing
- Maintain all ingredient documentation
- Analysis of incoming ingredients
- Knowledge of all food safety programs including HACCP, GMP's and Allergen Control
- Comfortable working in excel and word documents
- Able to multi-task in a rapid paced environment
- Good written and oral communication skills
- Detailed, organized, assertive, and dependable

Previous food processing experience a plus. Position would include both medical and dental benefits.
Must be open to working weekends.
Wage typically starts at $13 an hour but will depend on experience.KarmicDisaster: HowDareYouCallMeAHoser: drewkumo: Scerpes: I'm not in favor of busting the union, but this is about more than just cuts this year. It would give the state a hell of a lot more flexibility in the next several years, as well.

Why is he going after collective bargaining then? The union is supposedly already prohibited from striking, so they would have no recourse to protest any wage changes.

HowDareYouCallMeAHoser: Yes, I saw that. It doesn't make this any more true though:

So your argument is basically that public employees get paid more if they don't graduate high school - and you are mad at teachers?

The comparison done in this is at least more accurate than an apples to oranges comparison of average compensation. Comparing two populations salaries without adjusting for their levels of education is step 1 in "lying with statistics".

I just pointed out that subby, the KOS blogger, and the blogger's source are farking lying bastards. Not really arguing it, it just is.

And step two in "lying with statistics" is making apples to oranges comparison using education levels, rather apples to apples comparisons using actual jobs. A single multi-billionaire skews the numbers in any comparison otherwise, and the private sector has many of them.


OK, here is a data point. CPA. A job that is probably pretty comparable public/private. From here ABC news


Private Sector CPA $71,216
Federal Govt. CPA $67,531
Local Govt. CPA $64,050


OK, since teaching keeps coming up:
Teachers can boost their earnings in a number of ways. In some schools, teachers receive extra pay for coaching sports and working with students in extracurricular activities. Getting a master's degree or national certification often results in a raise in pay, as does acting as a mentor. Some teachers earn extra income during the summer by teaching summer school or performing other jobs in the school system. Although private school teachers generally earn less than public school teachers, they may be given other benefits, such as free or subsidized housing.
http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos318.htm
 
2011-02-21 09:48:29 PM
oh my.
 
2011-02-21 09:50:10 PM

KarmicDisaster: HowDareYouCallMeAHoser: drewkumo: Scerpes: I'm not in favor of busting the union, but this is about more than just cuts this year. It would give the state a hell of a lot more flexibility in the next several years, as well.

Why is he going after collective bargaining then? The union is supposedly already prohibited from striking, so they would have no recourse to protest any wage changes.

HowDareYouCallMeAHoser: Yes, I saw that. It doesn't make this any more true though:

So your argument is basically that public employees get paid more if they don't graduate high school - and you are mad at teachers?

The comparison done in this is at least more accurate than an apples to oranges comparison of average compensation. Comparing two populations salaries without adjusting for their levels of education is step 1 in "lying with statistics".

I just pointed out that subby, the KOS blogger, and the blogger's source are farking lying bastards. Not really arguing it, it just is.

And step two in "lying with statistics" is making apples to oranges comparison using education levels, rather apples to apples comparisons using actual jobs. A single multi-billionaire skews the numbers in any comparison otherwise, and the private sector has many of them.


OK, here is a data point. CPA. A job that is probably pretty comparable public/private. From here ABC news


Private Sector CPA $71,216
Federal Govt. CPA $67,531
Local Govt. CPA $64,050


Here's another:

Teachers can boost their earnings in a number of ways. In some schools, teachers receive extra pay for coaching sports and working with students in extracurricular activities. Getting a master's degree or national certification often results in a raise in pay, as does acting as a mentor. Some teachers earn extra income during the summer by teaching summer school or performing other jobs in the school system. Although private school teachers generally earn less than public school teachers, they may be given other benefits, such as free or subsidized housing.

http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos318.htm
 
2011-02-21 09:50:49 PM
What happened there I don't even

;)
 
2011-02-21 09:58:14 PM

LasersHurt: Even if paid less than the wages of a equivalent private sector worker? What mental gymnastics are necessary to decide that the worth of the employee is dependent on the sector of the employer?


I'll venture a guess. One sector is in the red, and one isn't. And I guess the word shouldn't be "worth", but "value" as determined by outcome.
 
2011-02-21 10:00:38 PM

printboy: These Union workers don't think they are over paid if you would just overlook that they are going to work drunk....

Chrysler UAW workers drinking, smoking weed on the job


Yes because a few bad apples in the bushel makes the whole orchards worth bad. Your an idiot.
 
2011-02-21 10:14:55 PM

A Dark Evil Omen: Skleenar: Hey, wasn't there a recent greenlight about some contractor selling software to right-wing organizations to help them create on-line personalities to create the appearance of consensus?

Just asking.

Yeah, as if. Whatever, little paranoidmitter.


Paranoia does not preclude that his statement is indeed true; as evidenced by the nearly non sequitur nature of your reply.

//of course, this is fark after all.
 
2011-02-21 10:16:32 PM

helix400: Skleenar: But please don't pretend that no thought was put into controlling healthcare costs in that legislation.

It wasn't. FactCheck.org looked into this, and found that as a result of the health care reform, many analysts are reporting it raised our health costs 1-3% (on account of forcing people and employers to offer expanded insurance), than what it otherwise would have been if the health care reform didn't pass. Our health care costs aren't going to go down on account of the law. They went up. (Although very slightly.)

And yes, I'll take Factcheck.org over Krugman.


The real problem is the greedy insurance companies were going to raise the rates anyway. Law or no law. There is not one sector of the economy that has risen faster than medical care or health insurance in the last decade. NOTHING. Well maybe military hardware but I digress. My insurance when I started at my current employer in 2000 was $150 a month fast forward to 2009 a policy for less coverage than I had in 2000 was now $533 per month. That's almost a 400% increase in 10 years with more copay and less overall coverage. The management of the medical and health insurance sector is full of greedy pigs who overall really don't care about people anymore just how much money they can extract from people.
 
2011-02-21 10:22:30 PM

mjsee: How many teachers do you know? I mean, personally? I do not know a SINGLE teacher who doesn't work more than 40+ hours/week.


I find it vaguely amusing (yet somewhat disturbing) that so many people think teachers work shorter days than other professions. I am a substitute (2nd career - looking for full time teaching work) and I usually get to work by 8:00 a.m. and leave by 4:00 but then I spend at least another 20 - 30 minutes communicating the events of the day to the classroom teacher. Add it up - I work about 8.5 hours a day.

This is a good day without any issues.

Often I stay later or come in earlier if I know the class is going to be a challenge; maybe finishing discipline paperwork if needed; training; or just meeting with other teachers in the building about students or other issues. None of this includes grading, or lesson planning, or parent conferences, or organizing a room, or meeting with administration, or any of the other dozen issues that need to be dealt with on a day-to-day basis.

Without those things, I'm still working at least 8 - 9 hours a day as a substitute. The school day itself may not be this long, but that doesn't mean teachers aren't working.

Incidentally, in my teaching job, I only make about 12-14K per year with no benefits. I am also working a PT job until I can get something permanent in education. I'm hardly an overpaid leech...

None of these comments are complaints about my chosen profession. I love what I do. Even once I land a FT teacher position I will have taken a 50% pay cut from my previous profession to do what I do. It's a lifestyle choice, and one I'm glad to have made.

I do however get a little tired of the armchair quarterbacking from people who think they know what this job is like. I'm all for helpful suggestions and constructive criticism, but the assumptions and outright disrespect from the ignorant wear a bit thin.

(You'll note I've deliberately left summers out of my discussion. Some teachers work second jobs, take classes, or teach summer school - and some don't. But the amount of time a FT teacher works a day during the school year isn't as variable as their choices during the summer.)

/Everybody was once a student, therefore they think they know what it means to be a teacher.
 
2011-02-21 10:33:52 PM
Pour salt on them.
 
2011-02-21 10:41:46 PM
The Democrat Truth Distortion Machine is fully operational for this Wisconsin endeavor, eh?

In case you're interested in, you know, the truth ...

USA TODAY: Federal workers earning double their private counterparts (new window)

Yes, They're Overpaid (new window)
 
2011-02-21 10:51:19 PM
I found this: Link

FTA:

WAGES

The latest data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (2009) show that government workers make about 5 percent more than private sector workers on average.

But, as can be seen in the following chart, the headline numbers hide some major disparities beyond the headlines.

Average Annual Wage
Federal Govt. Workers $67,756
State Police $61,000
Local Firefighters $60,572
State Govt. Workers $48,742
State Legislative Workers $48,129
Government (all types) $47,552
Private (total sector) $45,155
Local Govt. Workers $43,140
Local Schools $41,113

Average Annual Wage
Private Sector CPA $71,216
Federal Govt. CPA $67,531
Local Govt. CPA $64,050

SOURCE: BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS, 2009

Local teachers make 9 percent less than the average private sector worker. And federal employees are substantially better paid than the average state worker.

But working for the government doesn't automatically mean a bigger paycheck.

Take, for example, accountants. Government data shows that a certified public accountant who works in the private sector will have an annual salary of $71K. That same certification and education will lead to a $68K average salary for the federal government and $64K if you work for a local government.
 
2011-02-21 10:56:22 PM

teasea: A Dark Evil Omen: Skleenar: Hey, wasn't there a recent greenlight about some contractor selling software to right-wing organizations to help them create on-line personalities to create the appearance of consensus?

Just asking.

Yeah, as if. Whatever, little paranoidmitter.

Paranoia does not preclude that his statement is indeed true; as evidenced by the nearly non sequitur nature of your reply.

//of course, this is fark after all.


*facepalm*
 
2011-02-21 10:59:08 PM

FishingWithFredo: The Democrat Truth Distortion Machine is fully operational for this Wisconsin endeavor, eh?

In case you're interested in, you know, the truth ...

USA TODAY: Federal workers earning double their private counterparts (new window)

Yes, They're Overpaid (new window)


So in response to the question of whether or not WI state workers are overpaid, you give two links, one from the USA today and one from the Weekly Derp. Putting aside the idiocy of assuming that state workers in Wisconsin are overpaid because federal workers might be overpaid, they don't really even make a very convincing case that federal workers are overpaid.

Thanks for your one-two punch of failure.
 
2011-02-21 11:03:28 PM
farkers don't really know what it takes to be one till you have been one.
 
2011-02-21 11:14:15 PM

ne2d: Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: I was at the BMV Saturday. The employees were pleasant, quick, and extremely professional. I've never had a bad experience at the BMV.

That's been my experience every time too. I wonder if Indiana is particulary good at that.



They are. There have been times I'll just walk into a BMV in Indianapolis and can walk up to the counter.

In Denver I had to go to the BMV 3 times. The longest wait was 7 hours, the shortest was 4 hours. (It would help if they had more Spanish translators)
 
2011-02-21 11:14:21 PM
my father was a Republican's Republican, worshipped St Reagan, listened to Rush L in the 1980s, and was also a high school teacher and union member who went out on the picket line the year before he retired.

He didn't see it as a conflict, and I would have dared any one of you jackasses to tell that WWII vet, choirmaster of our church, father of seven children, that he wasn't a Real American because he honored a picket line.

I never agreed with his politics, but always respected him
 
2011-02-21 11:17:18 PM

HowDareYouCallMeAHoser: Nice job KOS. The actual report (new PDF) showing that public employees make more:


Funny, that report you linked to had an executive summary at the top stating:
However, the data indicates that state and local government employees in Wisconsin are not overpaid. Comparisons controlling for education, experience, organizational size, gender, race, ethnicity, citizenship, and disability reveal that employees of both state and local governments in Wisconsin earn less than comparable private sector employees. On an annual basis, full-time state and local government
employees in Wisconsin are undercompensated by 8.2% compared with otherwise similar private sector workers.


huh.
 
2011-02-21 11:24:08 PM

HowDareYouCallMeAHoser: Krymson Tyde: I'm a health inspector and I concur, my wages aren't very high.

Also I'm getting a kick

Specific job duties include but are not limited to:
- Assist QA Morning Technician with quality testing
- Maintain all ingredient documentation
- Analysis of incoming ingredients
- Knowledge of all food safety programs including HACCP, GMP's and Allergen Control
- Comfortable working in excel and word documents
- Able to multi-task in a rapid paced environment
- Good written and oral communication skills
- Detailed, organized, assertive, and dependable

Previous food processing experience a plus. Position would include both medical and dental benefits.
Must be open to working weekends.
Wage typically starts at $13 an hour but will depend on experience.KarmicDisaster: HowDareYouCallMeAHoser: drewkumo: Scerpes: I'm not in favor of busting the union, but this is about more than just cuts this year. It would give the state a hell of a lot more flexibility in the next several years, as well.

Why is he going after collective bargaining then? The union is supposedly already prohibited from striking, so they would have no recourse to protest any wage changes.

HowDareYouCallMeAHoser: Yes, I saw that. It doesn't make this any more true though:

So your argument is basically that public employees get paid more if they don't graduate high school - and you are mad at teachers?

The comparison done in this is at least more accurate than an apples to oranges comparison of average compensation. Comparing two populations salaries without adjusting for their levels of education is step 1 in "lying with statistics".

I just pointed out that subby, the KOS blogger, and the blogger's source are farking lying bastards. Not really arguing it, it just is.

And step two in "lying with statistics" is making apples to oranges comparison using education levels, rather apples to apples comparisons using actual jobs. A single multi-billionaire skews the numbers in any comparison otherwise, and the private sector has many of them.


OK, here is a data point. CPA. A job that is probably pretty comparable public/private. From here ABC news


Private Sector CPA $71,216
Federal Govt. CPA $67,531
Local Govt. CPA $64,050

OK, since teaching keeps coming up:
Teachers can boost their earnings in a number of ways. In some schools, teachers receive extra pay for coaching sports and working with students in extracurricular activities. Getting a master's degree or national certification often results in a raise in pay, as does acting as a mentor. Some teachers earn extra income during the summer by teaching summer school or performing other jobs in the school system. Although private school teachers generally earn less than public school teachers, they may be given other benefits, such as free or subsidized housing.
http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos318.htm


I wish my job duties were that simple. Plus I handle osms permitting and inspecting, tourist courts, rabies control, swimming pools, mosquito control, etc. as well as investigating complaints, building court cases and public education on all that stuff.
It's way more than inspecting restaurants.
 
Displayed 50 of 586 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report