In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 668
Online now 1045 Record: 11761 (2/27/2012)
The Web's No. 1 forum for coverage and discussion of Terps sports
Visitor discussion of University of Maryland and college sports
A place for lively discussion for all other sports unrelated to Maryland athletics
Feedback for IMS and 247Sports
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
And again, what kind of leave are they seeing? How much have their insurance costs gone up?
Leave: probably more than the private sector
Insurance: employee contribution goes up every year with inflation. Somewhere around 5% I think.
And I'm sure their benefit costs aren't as higher as the average private sector worker.
Probably, the larger group you're a part of, the better rates you get for things like insurance.
Its hard to tell, but I think what he meant was the *personal* contribution to things like health insurance, and retirement are not as high as they are in the private sector.
Right, and what I'm saying is when you have a group as large as "MoCo Government Employees" or "MD State Employees", you can get better rates for your members, so since the total cost is less, personal cost is probably less too.
Obviously I don't know specifically what MoCo does with respect to paying for insurance, but it's absolutely correct that, generally speaking, private sector workers generally pay a far higher out of pocket percentage of their costs than public workers do. The cost difference in the group plans isn't that much different between public employees and private employees at large firms either. The aging of most government bodies is starting to raise the true cost of coverage for public plans as well.
the cost of the plan for a large group of government employees is probably higher than most large private sector group plans, it's just the government likely kicks in a greater %. A large group plan (over 100 employees) is largely under-written by the health insurer based on previous years' claims. I'd bet that a government worker is going to a doctor or less healthier then your average private sector employee. No real scientific data just a GOTERPSS hunch.
I've seen data on the government side. Your hunch is probably quite right.
Not to be glib, but what's your point? That there should be no raises ad infinitum, because their benefits are marginally better than someone in the private sector? If that's the case, be sure not to complain when all the competent folks leave.
Do you have a number in mind where their out-of-pocket insurance costs would satisfy you, so that after four years straight years of sacrificing 4% of their salary you wouldn't begrudge them getting caught up on their COLAs and step increases?
My issue is they are seeing a pretty big increase when most people have been lucky to hold on to their jobs, their rate of pay, or their benefit package.
Most private sector workers are not going to see a 6.5% raise in each of the next two years, their healthcare contributions are much higher, they don't have pension plan, nor do they recieve the astronomical amount of leave that government employees give.
Maybe if these raises were merit increase I'd feel a little differently.
Pay market wage. If the good employees are really valuable they can likely get other jobs paying more, so pay up those employees. Let the bad employees leave. It's just how any other business is run. There are plenty of unemployed folk willing to take these people's jobs if they don't like their raises
Are you just willfully ignoring the part where they went without raises--merit or otherwise--for 4 years, during which time they also agreed to sacrifice 2 weeks pay each year via furloughs?
Government workers are far from the only people who either didn't receive raises or took a pay cut in the last 4 years.
So you're OK with MoCo paying its attorneys basically double or triple what they make right now?
Obviously. But are you going to complain about private industry x if they begin giving out pay raises this year?
if they are going to work the same hour weeks that an attorney at a big law firm work, and am willing to be terminated at any time absolutely. I bet you can lay off 25-50% of the staff because of the increased productivity and better talent base too.
Attorneys are not the best example of the "average Moco employee".
Obviously an attorney has a wide swath of potential earnings depending what kind of law they choose to practice. So they knowingly will make less working for the county, than they potentially would doing civil litigation for a big firm. A better comparable would be say a middle management in moco government versus a similar position in the private sector.
The average private industry worker usually only gets a raise because they deserve it and the company has the money to pay for it.
The average government worker gets a raise because.
This post was edited by GunnerOne 84 14 months ago
What a silly question... as private industry is not funded by tax dollars! In (large cases) they have to answer to share holders, but in non publicly traded companies, the bottom line would ensure that IF such raises could be afforded, it is because of the success of the company, and they could bare the increases.
Edit- I see Gunner beat me by a few seconds, lol.
This post was edited by irishbmad 14 months ago
I was just reading an article in the Gazette about Moco teachers:
11,835 teachers this year
21 teachers recommended for nonrenewal or dismissal (fired)
266 since 2000, teachers not renewed or dismissed (fired)
My wife was a hard working MoCo teacher and I know for a fact there were some weak links that should have been nixed.
Is it that we can't hire enough people or do we just not care enough to be the best we can be?
I think part of the issue is as follows: public sector workers were told that everyone needed to share in the pain. I think we all get that and would agree, even though it definitely is not a positive (and individually, it sucks).
But (1) it 's not truly a share if it was only a delay in earnings, while private sector workers are actually losing jobs and median income decreases (2008-2011); (2) it's not a share if the jurisdiction emerges from the past several years essentially in a similar position as to previous years with respect to financial instability (certainly not at the same magnitude, but still in serious trouble); and (3) it's not really a share if employees are almost immune from the threat of being fired, whether due to budget constraints or performance.
The COL according to Obama is nil, so why do these government workers need any raise. BTW, the salary increase rolls up into the larger then life benefits packages for these people, so the expense is far more then pure increased salary costs.
This is not how you measure whether a group is to get an increase, particularly a percentage increase of this magnitude. Is the County Executive running for higher Office and needs labor peace and election foot soldiers?
A involuntary separation rate of 0.2% is what one can expect in a local Government environment. The Feds it is 0.01% involuntary separation rate or one for every ten thousand workers ...!
Businesses which need to stay competitive do forced ranking requiring 3-5% of the work force to be, on a comparative basis to their peers, deficient and put on notice. There are plenty of teachers who would thrive in a merit based environment, but the unions protect the lowest common denomintator, so the few dedicated remain, and more move to better rerwards for their competence. This is a contributing factor to the gradual decline in the performance of American students when measured against other industrialized cultures.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports