patrick.net

kentm says

What is it with you guys and unions anyway? What is the problem with people organizing so they have a chance to balance back an organized manager class? It was unions that allowed the ‘middle class’ to exist, and now its the continuous union busting in the past few decades that directly relates to to the falling numbers who claim ‘middle class’ status. And anyway, teachers unions help individuals organize and balance back against evil “big government” intrusion against person income earning freedom. By that count I’d expect you’d be in support of teachers unions.

The problem is with PUBLIC EMPLOYEE unions, not private unions. Here's the difference:

In a private union (say, flight attendants, steel workers, etc), each side has something to lose and something to gain. Management is tasked with earning the most money for their shareholders. The workers are tasked with trying to earn the most money for themselves. This need for balance breeds compromise and I fully support.

When it comes to public employee unions, however, the "Management" (politicians) have no profit motive - it's not their money and no one holds them accountable if they over pay. The unions then pay tons of money to lobbyists and the politician's campaigns so the politicians give the unions more and more generous pay and benefits. If a politican tries to stand up to them the unions resort to scare tactics like this. The balance that is normally struck between management and worker is out of whack. Government pensions used to be given to compensate workers for paying below private sector salaries. But govt workers make as much as private workers and still get those pensions and benefits. Bus drivers in San Francisco make $65k/year. When you add in pension and benefits it at least doubles. BART cops make over $100k/year with lifetime medical and nearly 100% pension. If you assume they work for 30 years and then live another 30 years they're making WAY over $200k/year. These people are ridiculously overpaid.

Public employee unions steal money from the public employees to enrich themselves and lobby politicians. What are you talking about "evil “big government” intrusion against person income earning freedom"? Who pays public employee's salaries? Taxpayers. Public employees ARE the "evil “big government” intrusion against person income earning freedom" because they take more than their fair share from the people who actually. If we had fewer of them and/or paid them less we'd have lower taxes; which means a stronger middle class, not the other way around.

There wouldn't need to be any layoffs if public employees took a pay and benefit cut. In 2008 my company eliminated vacation and cut our pay 10%. Lots of companies have had layoffs. It's time for public employees to share the pain that we've been going through in the private sector.

Thanks for the reply, I'll look into this. But my first thought is: Why are teachers getting so fucked over then, if they're so powerful?

All this pension stuff was dandy a few years ago when investments were good. No one, not even the hallowed "Mish", talked about them then. Is it possible you're reacting to a short term drop in interest rates and a general all round as yet unaccounted-for-fuckery-overy by wall street which seemingly has depleted just about everything? You've seemingly internalized billion dollar profits and million dollar salaries & bonuses on Wall Street but you demonize bus drivers?

Every time I hear about how good public employees have it I think: Envy? Just because private industry is lowering our standards is it any reason why we should blame those who've been able to hold onto their dignity?

Anyway, whats happening with public unions in other countries? Discussions on this board always seem to happen as if there's no other place these systems are in play.

What was the profits of your company last year?

There's no question that illegal immigration has shot the public schools here in L.A. If you compare schools within a single district - say, the LAUSD - which operate under similar budgets, you'll see that those that have lots of illegals or their children (or children's children) can be counted on very reliably to be far below average for the district as a whole. It's a sort of sociological constant. There've been a couple of new schools built in L.A. over the past few years that have each cost hundreds of millions of $ (including one that cost a half billion+) and which are in areas that have sizable illegal populations. Just watch how they perform over the coming years. It's not rocket science.

@elliemae

Good comment. I wish people would realize how much of the budget is spent on the military. It amounts to as much or more than 190 other countries...put together. I am not a pacifist here, but when will there be balance?

agrifolia says

There’s no question that illegal immigration has shot the public schools here in L.A

Have you looked at how prop 13 has impacted the system? An intelligent distribution of wealth across the system and an adequate income equivalency for all schools would go tons toward providing basics, I'd expect.

The make-up of the student body should have no impact on the quality of education. And why should individual districts have to fend for themselves? Is it not one education system we supposedly have, not individual local isolated fiefdoms? What do we have in this system if not broad unification and greater benefits through pooling of resources?

elliemae says

rpanic, you made a racist statement so don’t get your panties in a wad because you were called on it.

Hmm.. no, he/she really didn't. Which part of his/her post was racist? Mention of anchor babies, a very real problem in CA? Guess what - you are the racist here if you draw the correlation between anchor babies and a specific race. Or do you question the effect that children with lower education standards have on school system?
And yes, it's typical leftist BS - pulling race card whenever social issues are brought into light.

But it wasn't ellie that mentioned race first in relation to education, bubba. And I suppose you folks are simply 'realists' for having mentioned 'anchor babies' in this context... that wasn't racist at all, no. But because she points it out you call her a racist? Ha. Ha ha.

rpanic01 says

With all the illegals and anchor babies education will never be as good as it once was

So prove its not a racist statement then, please school me on how the make-up of the student body and their supposed background affects the entire standards and structure of the education system?

I can see how it would tax teachers in individual classes, but in the entire education system? Come on.

kentm says

Every time I hear about how good public employees have it I think: Envy?

Allegedly there's going to be $6.7T of government spending going on in 2011. Where is all this money going???

That's around $60,000 PER HOUSEHOLD.

Troy says

6.7T of government spending going on in 2011

more facts please, whats the breakdown?

kentm says

The make-up of the student body should have no impact on the quality of education.

That's wishful thinking, I'm afraid. Quality of education is a function of many variables - chemistry of a classroom, peer pressure among students, attention span of a teacher, level of preparation of a teacher are some of them, and they all depend on the make-up of the student body.

Pooh, those are all incidentals to the support & structure of a well structured system.

kentm says

So prove its not a racist statement then, please school me on how the make-up of the student body and their supposed background affects the entire standards and structure of the education system?

That's not how it works. _You_ prove that it is a racist statement. Which race does the statement above belittle? Last I heard, anchor babies are not a race.

Whatever. Play stupid word games... Okay, I don't know WHAT you wrote could have prompted such an absurd statement on my part. Now please show me how the make-up of the student body and their supposed background affects the entire standards and structure of the education system.

kentm says

Pooh, those are all incidentals to the support & structure of a well structured system.

Well structured system is a meaningless concept until you realize that it's composed of elements. The ones you call "incidentals" (hint)
I've been through some very good and not so good schools. Oftentimes, class body was _the_only_ thing that made a difference.

A well structured system is different from a well structured classroom.

You're attempting to put the weight and then the blame on individual classes and teachers, which is exactly the battle teachers face in a system that is unable to support them. Its not the way it should be. You need to take a broader approach.

kentm says

Whatever. Play stupid word games… Okay, I don’t know WHAT you wrote could have prompted such an absurd statement on my part. Now please show me how the make-up of the student body and their supposed background affects the entire standards and structure of the education system.

So, you mean that anchor babies imply a race? It sounds like that was an example of racism - making an observation, building an argument on that observation, but not wanting to voice it because it works against your cause - and thus painting yourself into a corner.

I ask again. Why would mention of anchor babies make you call the other person a racist? Last I heard they are not a race.

As for make-up of a student body... Have you ever tried to teach in a class where most students don't give a damn? Have you ever been a student in such a class? How did that go?

kentm says

A well structured system is different from a well structured classroom.
You’re attempting to put the weight and then the blame on individual classes and teachers, which is exactly the battle teachers face in a system that is unable to support them. Its not the way it should be. You need to take a broader approach.

A properly structured system should support a properly structured classroom, not destroy it. Currently it destroys it. No amount of money taken from taxpayers and thrown into the system that doesn't work can fix this.

delete

kentm says

more facts please, whats the breakdown?

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/year2011_US.html

This is counting $700B of SS, so it's really more like $6T I guess.

$1.2T on healthcare
$1.1T on education
$900B on military
$700B on welfare
$1.4T on other
$375B on interest

Interesting article. I am looking at moving from the military to be a teacher. I have talked to and interviewed a few teachers and one thing always resonates. If the parents are unwilling to get involved with their childrens education it will never improve. One teacher I know said she sat in her classroom all evening for the parent/teacher night. She had roughly 140 different middle school kids in her 7 different classes. She told me maybe 20 parents showed up. I don't see the job satisfaction if you can't get your community or the parents involved with childrens education.

BTW: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/21/high-school-grads-fail-military-exam_n_799767.html

1 in 4 kids cannot get into the military because they are fat or stupid. I blame the parents, not the teachers or what they serve for school lunch.

zzyzzx says

Clasroom size is way too small. There should be a minumum of 35 kids in each classroom. Anything less is just to line the pockets of unions.

troll much ?

grywlfbg says

In a private union (say, flight attendants, steel workers, etc), each side has something to lose and something to gain. Management is tasked with earning the most money for their shareholders. The workers are tasked with trying to earn the most money for themselves. This need for balance breeds compromise and I fully support.

When it comes to public employee unions, however, the “Management” (politicians) have no profit motive - it’s not their money and no one holds them accountable if they over pay. The unions then pay tons of money to lobbyists and the politician’s campaigns so the politicians give the unions more and more generous pay and benefits. If a politican tries to stand up to them the unions resort to scare tactics like this. The balance that is normally struck between management and worker is out of whack. Government pensions used to be given to compensate workers for paying below private sector salaries. But govt workers make as much as private workers and still get those pensions and benefits. Bus drivers in San Francisco make $65k/year. When you add in pension and benefits it at least doubles. BART cops make over $100k/year with lifetime medical and nearly 100% pension. If you assume they work for 30 years and then live another 30 years they’re making WAY over $200k/year. These people are ridiculously overpaid.

Public employee unions steal money from the public employees to enrich themselves and lobby politicians. What are you talking about “evil “big government” intrusion against person income earning freedom”? Who pays public employee’s salaries? Taxpayers. Public employees ARE the “evil “big government” intrusion against person income earning freedom” because they take more than their fair share from the people who actually. If we had fewer of them and/or paid them less we’d have lower taxes; which means a stronger middle class, not the other way around.

There wouldn’t need to be any layoffs if public employees took a pay and benefit cut. In 2008 my company eliminated vacation and cut our pay 10%. Lots of companies have had layoffs. It’s time for public employees to share the pain that we’ve been going through in the private sector.

If you knew what average teacher pay is in this country, and if you knew how difficult a job it is (most quit in less than 5 years), you would then possibly be able to extricate your head from your ass. You are basically a poster child for many ignorant Americans who buy every BS lie they hear from Fox news, or right wing talk radio.

Truthplease says

BTW: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/21/high-school-grads-fail-military-exam_n_799767.html

1 in 4 kids cannot get into the military because they are fat or stupid. I blame the parents, not the teachers or what they serve for school lunch.

That would be 1 in 4 who want in to the military. As a high school teacher, I can tell you that a very small number of kids in the top half of the graduating class are applying to go in to the military. Rotc maybe, for a few. So that 1 in 4 number is very misleading. If for example all the applicants for military immediately out of HS are in the bottom third of their class, and 1 in 4 of those can't pass the test, then that means that about 8% can't (or don't) pass the test.

grywlfbg says

There wouldn’t need to be any layoffs if public employees took a pay and benefit cut. In 2008 my company eliminated vacation and cut our pay 10%. Lots of companies have had layoffs. It’s time for public employees to share the pain that we’ve been going through in the private sector.

Good to know you have been paying attention. We have had layoffs of teachers, clerical, and maintenance people, to the point that class sizes can't go any higher (without bigger classrooms). On top of that we have furlough days (a pay cut).

I think all the teacher-bashers should spend a few weeks in a classroom.

grywlfbg says

When you add in pension and benefits it at least doubles. BART cops make over $100k/year with lifetime medical and nearly 100% pension. If you assume they work for 30 years and then live another 30 years they’re making WAY over $200k/year. These people are ridiculously overpaid.

You have no idea what you are talking about. These people don't pay in to social security. Instead they pay in to a pension fund (it comes out of their pay just like fica does for most people) and the state adds to that. When you hear a figure like 100K tossed around for those Bart cops, I guarantee that includes ALL BENEFITS. After all, the people citing those numbers, like you are trying to talk about how these guys are paid too much, so they include EVERYTHING. At least they are honest, and if you read carefully they say avg salary and benefits of 90K (in 2005).

I'm not saying that some California government workers aren't overpaid, but let's get all the information, and let's be honest, with ourselves first, and then when making your case.

Quote:

Regardless, management says it can't afford to continue paying workers what it says is an average of more than $90,000 a year in wages and benefits, because the cost of benefits is rising rapidly and the system has a $24 million deficit in this year's budget.

That's 2005, so it could be slightly higher now.
Source: http://articles.sfgate.com/2005-07-03/bay-area/17383357_1_bart-workers-station-agents-amalgamated-transit-union

kentm says

Have you looked at how prop 13 has impacted the system?

You can exclude the effects of Prop 13 simply by comparing different schools *within* a single district, like I said. In the LAUSD, for example, schools that serve areas with lots of illegals have terrible scores and graduation rates. Those that have none or very few tend to be far better.

kentm says

Thanks for the reply, I’ll look into this. But my first thought is: Why are teachers getting so fucked over then, if they’re so powerful?
All this pension stuff was dandy a few years ago when investments were good. No one, not even the hallowed “Mish”, talked about them then. Is it possible you’re reacting to a short term drop in interest rates and a general all round as yet unaccounted-for-fuckery-overy by wall street which seemingly has depleted just about everything? You’ve seemingly internalized billion dollar profits and million dollar salaries & bonuses on Wall Street but you demonize bus drivers?
Every time I hear about how good public employees have it I think: Envy? Just because private industry is lowering our standards is it any reason why we should blame those who’ve been able to hold onto their dignity?
Anyway, whats happening with public unions in other countries? Discussions on this board always seem to happen as if there’s no other place these systems are in play.
What was the profits of your company last year?

Envy? Hell yeah I'm envious. These people are impossible to fire, get lifetime medical and pension benefits, have rigid work rules so don't work that hard.... It's a great gig. We should all work for the government. Oh, wait. You keep forgetting that public employees are PAID BY the work done by those who work for private industry. So if the private economy drops lead to a reduction in tax revenue then we must decrease the pay and benefits of public employees or decrease the numbers of public employees. The math is simple.

Other countries are having similar problems - witness riots by public employees in Greece, France, etc. as a result of government cutbacks.

During good times politicians give public employees ever more generous pay and benefits. The problem is that politicians have a very short time-frame (the next election) while the promises they're making play out of decades (pension benefits) so there are no consequences. It's then very hard to decrease those pay and benefits during bad times because public employee unions lobby politicians and use scare tactics on the public to try and preserve their wealth.

It's the teacher's UNION that is very powerful, not the teacher's themselves. The union leaders take dues from teachers who everyone claims have paychecks that are too small and give that money to politicians. But I think the problem is that education is often the largest part of a state budget so the numbers are big enough to matter. Also, teachers can't engage in the same scare tactics of police and fire. Whenever threatened with cuts the police take out ads saying everyone's children are going to be kidnapped and raped, drug dealers are going to set up shop on every street corner, etc. Even though it's a bunch of BS because they're so freaking selfish they would rather lay off junior officers instead of everyone taking a cut in pay. So it's easier for politicians to cut education because the effects take awhile to show up which as I wrote above are beyond a politician's attention span.

Pensions have been in trouble for years but everyone just assumed that the economy would keep growing and their investments would bail them out. And now, the pensions are in WAY worse shape than they're reporting because the current deficits are still based on 8% growth. Good luck finding that.

I have vented gallons of bile for the asshats on Wall Street - continuing to do so was only going to give me an ulcer. We should never have bailed them out - they contribute nothing to society and take way more than their fair share. Public employees at least provide some services for their pay.

Anyway, the bottom line is why should I have to pay a larger percentage of my reduced wages (ie increase taxes) so that public employees get raises?

Once again we have more teacher union bashing. Chris Christie must be SO proud.

Pay no attention to the $135,000 a year cops. Just keep bashing the $60,000 a year teachers.

grywlfbg says

It’s the teacher’s UNION that is very powerful

It has a little power, to represent us collectively. But all unions have been asking for in recent years is to minimize the cuts, and to cut the bureaucracy first, to try not to cut things on the front lines too much. But the amount spent by the state per student has not in recent years been as high as it should be, so you can't claim the union has all that much power.

What we are witnessing is a once in 80 years type depression, or deleveraging or what ever you want to call it. We should be careful not to fuck over the government workers and their unions too bad, just because the economy is going through a weak period. I mean we (public employees) are going to get fucked over, but you should be on our side that they don't take it too far. And maybe even trust us when we say they really can't cut much more than they already have.

marcus says

You have no idea what you are talking about. These people don’t pay in to social security. Instead they pay in to a pension fund (it comes out of their pay just like fica does for most people) and the state adds to that. When you hear a figure like 100K tossed around for those Bart cops, I guarantee that includes ALL BENEFITS. After all, the people citing those numbers, like you are trying to talk about how these guys are paid too much, so they include EVERYTHING. At least they are honest, and if you read carefully they say avg salary and benefits of 90K (in 2005).

What!? Social Security? I would gladly give up my Social Security benefits to have a govt pension. Besides, many employees JUST started paying into their pensions. BART workers paid ZERO into their pension as of 2009. On top of that BART paid into employee's 401(a) accounts. The BART cop I'm talking about is an acquaintance of mine. His pay is ~$108k. On top of that he gets almost 100% pension after 30 years and lifetime medical. If you assume he works for 30 years and lives for 30 years he's making way over $200k/year. A few months back there was a segment on Forum on KQED where an Oakland City Councilman was talking about Oakland beat cops being paid $180k/year. It's freaking ridiculous.

Look for yourself: http://www.contracostatimes.com/public-employee-salaries As far as I can tell those are salaries. Pension and retirement medical is on top of that.

This graph tells you everything you need to know (from this article: http://innovationandgrowth.wordpress.com/2010/05/03/public-sector-pay-outpaces-private-pay/):

My point is that public employee unions should never have been allowed to exist (thank you JFK) because they just make things worse. I'm not some right-wing nut job - I don't watch Fox news and the only talk radio I listen to is NPR and KPFA. Governments from City to Federal need to balance their budgets and as you can see from the graph above SOMEONE in the govt is taking more than their fair share and it's time for them to give it back.

marcus says

What we are witnessing is a once in 80 years type depression, or deleveraging or what ever you want to call it. We should be careful not to fuck over the government workers and their unions too bad, just because the economy is going through a weak period. I mean we (public employees) are going to get fucked over, but you should be on our side that they don’t take it too far. And maybe even trust us when we say they really can’t cut much more than they already have.

You're right that these are crazy times. Everyone is getting fucked over. Unemployment is high, wages are being cut, hours are being cut - it's tough all over. But you didn't answer my question, why should I have to pay a larger percentage of my reduced wages (ie increased taxes) so that public employees can keep their salaries and hours? What makes them more important than I?

As I mentioned in my last post, governments at all levels are broke and revenues are down. Where is the money going to come from?

On a related track I fully support the repeal of Prop 13 and wholeheartedly think that it is responsible for our lack of education funding. They need to repeal that sucker and then let's see where we are. I bet we could fund our schools then. We should also cut prison guard and police salaries dramatically and use that to help fund education. At the end of the day we ALL have to learn to live within our means.

grywlfbg says

I’m not some right-wing nut job

Okay, but I still say you don't quite understand how govt pensions work.

grywlfbg says

On top of that he gets almost 100% pension after 30 years and lifetime medical. If you assume he works for 30 years and lives for 30 years he’s making way over $200k/year.

Sorry, but this is nonsense. We pay in to a fund, IT COMES OUT OF OUR SALARIES. Yes the state pays in too, and yes it's better than SS. You've heard of compound interest right. Actually CALSTRS the teachers fund has averaged amazing annual returns. It a huge independent fund, independent of the government. The pension is not some total gravy on top of salary. By the way the graph is obviously of salaries plus benefits. Has Govt employee pay gone up too much, or private sector not kept up? It's the service economy and walmart type jobs. The average private sector job (AVERAGE - THINK ABOUT IT) is not what it used to be.

Another thing you don't understand is that being a public school teacher is already a really tough job. You have no idea. And without the security and decent, not great but almost good, pay and benefits we get, it would not be tolerable. If things go toward privatization it will truly be one more large step toward being a third world nation. If we don't have the sense to invest wisely in education, yes public education, then we are in big trouble.
grywlfbg says

On a related track I fully support the repeal of Prop 13 and wholeheartedly think that it is responsible for our lack of education funding.

I agree, and I wish.

I don't understand the spike up in both private and public pay in that graph in 2009. I'm assuming its average pay per person, and not total amount paid, because the latter would have spiked down more with all of the layoffs. Yep, I definitely can't make sense of that. Who were the public employees getting raises after 2008 ?

Someone would have to explain that to me for me to believe it. A big part of the stimulus was the fed giving States money so that they didn't have to cut essential services too much. You're going to tell me that in that environment anyone was asking for raises (unions or not) ? I really don't think so.

At the top it says: {IMPORTANT NOTE: I REVISED THE CHART TO CORRECT A PROBLEM WITH THE INFLATION ADJUSTMENT}

Dubious.

I dunno what that chart is really saying. Nobody around here in UC was getting any raises. Furloughs (pay cuts) and the same workload (if not more) was the UC pattern during this time period. I started as a contractor in 2005. After a year or so I got hired full-time at about the same pay. Then the last few years I took an 8% pay cut, and the guy next to me left, and I got some of his work added to mine. And right now I'm at about the same money I was making in 2005. And I got stuck with "oncall" sysadmin so while you jokers are roasting chestnuts I'll be sleeping next to a pager which might go off at 3AM then I gotta go in to work because God forbid a student be unable to re-watch their class podcast or register for class at 3AM on Christmas day. On the 26th I have to spend the entire day at work because some electrical overhaul is in progress too.

Maybe they defined "pay" as "money paid out". Example let 3 $100K permanent people go, and backfill with 7 $50K contractors somewhere else. Does it include when they hired a bunch of people to do the Census, or people to fix the potholes in the road, or an extra monkey-wrangler for $30K at the Primate Center that was an "increase"? Money was sent out for stimulus, what did people THINK it was supposed to be used for? Paperclips? Or to hire some out-of-work people and keep them off the street? At least from what I've seen in the UC over the last 3 years the pattern has been no raises, and many former permanent positions closed, and use whatever money you do scrounge to hire temps and contractors instead.

I can't speak to all the larger issues of course I only have my little view. But your list of "public salaries" the first pages of high salaries are majority medical. Yes we pay doctors a lot. Fire and police yes I agree that sector needs to take some lumps, however the pay disparity between top-ranking fire & police is way below the multiplier that exists in private sector. From what I've read SF fireman about $50K is the average.

Hey my pager just went off, enjoy your eggnog!

kentm says

agrifolia says
The make-up of the student body should have no impact on the quality of education. And why should individual districts have to fend for themselves?\

Unfortunately, education starts with the family - mom and dad - and can't be relegated to the government. If ma and pa don't care, what would make you think the kids would give a hoot about school ... especially parents who disparage the value of an education. I remember growing up in what one would call a disadvantaged background with gangs, drugs, violence, but the kids who made it out of that environment had parents who pushed their kids to do well in school. And many of them were immigrants (NOT illegal immigrants) who barely spoke english.

Maybe our education problems are just a reflection of our self-centered, narcissistic culture where parents are more concerned about their own well-being than their children's. Parents are supposed to teach those things schools won't or can't, such as morality, work ethics, and right and wrong. Lazy parents probably aren't going to produce diligent students. Unfortunately, student body has a HUGE impact on the quality of education, right or wrong.

Change the society and you'll change the education system. Otherwise, it's probably hopeless.

"When you hear a figure like 100K tossed around for those Bart cops, I guarantee that includes ALL BENEFITS."

I don't know abotu BART cops. But here in NJ, when cops make $100k, that is just in compensation. A quick check of the websites of most police agencies confirms this.

In California teachers make good money for 9 month work. It's fantastic in fact, because other 3 month they run around selling real estate (during summer).

It's the pension system that is ballooned, they get more from pensions than an equivalent in the private sector. What corporation out there offers 100% salary around the age of 55 for the life after retirement? They need to rethink the whole thing with pension contributions.

"What corporation out there offers 100% salary around the age of 55 for the life after retirement?"

What about all of the golden parachutes that many executives get? Didn't the former CEO of Exxon Mobil leave with $400 million?

HousingWatcher says

“What corporation out there offers 100% salary around the age of 55 for the life after retirement?”
What about all of the golden parachutes that many executives get? Didn’t the former CEO of Exxon Mobil leave with $400 million?

Most people are not CEO's. Comparing CEO's to a line worker isn't a legitimate comparison.

I think it would be best if they just pegged pension system to private sector. This way when things are going great, and income is high they will get more out of it, and when economy slows down pension system will not bankrupt the state.