Thanks for nothing Pawlenty:
Thanks for nothing Pawlenty:
I am sure alot of people will dispute that figure
Typical skewing of information to the uninformed for his own political agenda......
1. Nothing in the link says anything about the fire service, including Federal FF.
2. Federal Gov't employees are vastly overpaid, over "benefited", and underworked. Compared to like positions in the "REAL" world. Just in pay/benefits over twice what a typical business would pay. Add in the slow pace and nonproductive system and it's worse. The $ payout by the Feds come from only TWO sources. The taxpayer's back pocket (yours and mine) and by borrowing from the Chicoms. And many states are as bad or worse.
Any specifics otherwise?
A bit short-sighted, don't you think?
As government employees, with taxpayer funded salaries, benefits and pensions, we are in the same crosshairs that the folks in the article are. Plenty of citizens consider Firefighters to be "vastly overpaid, over "benefited", and underworked. Compared to like positions in the "REAL" world." In many areas, firefighters are under attack, by politicians and others using the same tactics and language Mr. Pawlenty uses in the article. But, again,since he doesn't mention firefighters its OK?
Very brotherly of you.
May we remind Gov. Pawlenty that the truly overpaid in this country are the Corporate CEO's. Bonuses, company paid jets and other lucrative compensation.
Some of this corporate compensation was paid for by taxpayers, with the bailout money given to Wall Street firms.
It is quite a travesty when taxpayer money is used to bailout corporations (corporate welfare) and some of those CEO's are still awarded bonuses, when their company was essentially bankrupt.
There are many government employees that work in essential government services. Whether firefighters, LE, EMS, highway maintenence and others. To try to blame hardworking Americans, when the blame goes elsewhere (Wall Street, etc.), really shows how shortsighted Gov. Pawlenty is.
Not knowing the source of all the information Mr. Pawlenty used for his diatribe, I won't comment on it directly. I'm a former IAFF Member, and I have only one problem with the Union, and that is not relevant to this discussion. Fire and EMS Services, Law Enforcement, and many other functions of Government are absolutely necessary to the continued existence of our Nation. Having public employee unions is, in my opinion, necessary for the well being of those employees, and should be a normal course of Business.
Where I have a problem with this thing is that, again my opinion, there are wayyyy too many people out there getting paid for a unnecessary job. There are a lot of positions that simply aren't needed for the work that an Agency does, indeed, there are whole Cabinet Level Agencies that could have some of their functions farmed out to other agencies, and other functions simply terminated. Living practically in the Shadow of the Heart of our Government, I tend to see things a bit differently, because I hear and see more of the Day to Day stuff.........
Something that I find to be frequently (and conveniently) left out of this discussion by people like this guy is the relatively simple explanations for some of the perceived "public vs private" disparities.
There are very real differences between public employers and private employers and what they provide and the way they provide it. These differences are a large part of the reason that job security in the public sector appears to be better than the private sector.
1.) The ability to reduce costs is not the same. For example, in order to reduce costs and get back on their feet GM shut down some of their Brands, closed manufacturing facilities and layed off workers. With less overhead, less revenue is needed to achieve the same level of profitability. The impact on the general public is essentially that fewer GM cars are available for purchase, but a person can easily go to a Ford, Toyota, Dodge, etc. dealer to purchase a vehicle.
For a public employer like a local municipality, the prime way to achieve substantial savings is often to layoff employees. This pretty much equates to a reduction in that municipality's ability to provide the same level of services. The impact on the general public is oftentimes a measurable reduction in services provided - less cops on patrol, less firemen on duty, grass on public property gets cut less often, less DPW workers plowing streets, etc. In this situation, the general public can't just "drive across the street" to obtain these services elsewhere. Since a lot of these services are things the public wants and/or demands, most of the jobs often remain filled.
2.) Many private manufacturing corporations have shipped jobs overseas in order to reduce operating costs by employing low wage workers rather than paying a reasonable wage to American workers here. So jobs are lost and people end up unemployed.
For the public employer, the option to ship the jobs overseas just doesn't exist. Kind of hard to patrol Main Street from the other side of the world. So less people end up unemployed.
I wish I made that much... Hell I still have to pay for my health insurance, taxes, retirement. Maybe Mr. Pawlenty should spend a day or a week doing what I have to do. I don't belong to a union but sometimes wish I did so numbskulls like this would be put in their place.
Of course he never mentions anything about fire fighters which is the only good thing about the article.
If you think corporate CEOs are overpaid, fine. It's a private sector job and we have nothing to say about it. Their compensation is between them and their company. Doesn't matter who thinks it is excessive.
The other issue is corporate bailouts. If the companies in question were run so badly they were going bankrupt the govt has no business in proping them up. At this piont CEOs getting big bonuses DOES become our business. Getting a bonus for running the company down? Fine. Stupid, but fine. Not my money. Taxpayer funded bonus? Not ok by any strectch.
Bottom line is the govt should not have done this to begin with, and now it is handled badly.
When a company is going under you either make changes to become profitable again or you go under. Getting bailed out so you can continue to do all the things that got you into this mess flies in the face of logic.
If unions booted substandard members, they would be looked upon as an assurance of quality work. Too often, unions protect people who don't do their jobs, and there is a common attitude of entitlement amongst public workers. We need unions, but the unions need to do what's right, not simply what will benefit them.
So in a nutshell:
Government employees are evil, except for my job, that one is cool. :rolleyes:
That $123K is the highest civilian pay (for "GS" employees) not including "locality pay." The "rest of the US" locality pay makes that max $148K. Some areas may go as high as $160K. That's for a GS-15, Step 10, which is to say top management with a lot of years on the job. Not a wet-behind-the-ears dishwasher, a mechanic, or a warehouse clerk. WG rates (generally the "trades") top out just over $100K.
An article in USA Today (via Monster.com) indicates that the average pay for 8 of ten careers that exist both in the federal arena and private industry is around $67K on the government side (vs $60K on the private side, but that's another story).
While there are certainly people making the kind of money the story suggests, there are many more making a lot less. I don't have anything to back it up, but my gut feeling is that the average pay for a federal worker is closer to the $40K-$50K range. Probably lower.
For example, I've seen a person in a "last chance" status fail a drug test and then be fired for it. The Union was obligated to "fight" the action because 1) they have to do so and 2) because the employer acted improperly and you need to "protect" the rights of the "good employees" for the future.
This person got reinstated because the employer improperly ordered and administered the drug test and the results became inadmissible evidence. With no admissible evidence to justify termination, there was no choice but to reinstate him.
If you've got information backing your opinion, that's great. Unfortunately, it seems to be a rarity these days.
Obviously there is a problem and this employee should be terminated. However, the employer has to abide by the proper procedures to do so. In this particular case, I forget some of the detail, but basically they ordered the person to take the drug test in violation of the established drug testing policy. It's basically the same concept as the handling of evidence in a criminal trial. If the evidence was wrongfully obtained (i.e. no search warrant), then legally the evidence doesn't exist and the criminal could potentially avoid prosecution.
Another good example was the aftermath of that fatal fire in DeKalb County, GA. Errors were made and clearly disciplinary action of some sorts was warranted. The County basically overreacted to the public outcry regarding a perceived dereliction of duty and fired several people pretty much immediately.
In the end, exactly what I said would happen, happened. The union firefighters all got their jobs back directly because the County failed to follow the proper procedures to investigate the incident and take disciplinary action. Instead of being patient and doing it the right way, they basically just gave the public what they wanted - some "heads on a platter".
Unfortunately, when these thing happen, the typical reaction from the public seems to be to blame the "Union" for protecting the "bad employee" rather than recognizing that the employer (in some cases public officials that they elected) engaged in procedural errors and/or misconduct that directly caused their action to be reversed.
It's basically the same thing as blaming the Defense Attorney for a criminal's acquittal because of misconduct by the Police or DA.
In MN, what is it? 95% of all fire departments are volunteer or paid on call? $7.50 to maybe $10.50 per hour (when actively on a call), if they get paid at all, and maybe a small pension. All for risking your life to help others like him. And, last time I checked, I didn't get an employee discount on my taxes for being on the fire department.