By Susan J. Demas
Are state employees walking around with a target on their backs?
The three most powerful men in state government – Gov. Rick Snyder, House Speaker Jase Bolger (R-Marshall) and Senate Majority Leader Randy Richardville (R-Monroe) – are all on record that cuts to state worker pay and benefits are in the offing. Snyder said the task is “one of the toughest” he’s facing as the new governor.
With a fiscal 2012 budget deficit of about $1.8 billion looming, leaders say they have no choice. With Republicans controlling both the Legislature and the governor’s office, the compensation issues are shaping up as perhaps the biggest battleground of 2011.
“I’ve been clear: There’s going to be pain,” Richardville said during Michigan Public Television’s “Off the Record” this month. “There are going to be difficult decisions. And for all of us to come through in the long run, all of us are going to have to sacrifice in the short run.”
There are no raises included for fiscal 2012, according to the nonpartisan House Fiscal Agency (HFA). A 5 percent state employee pay cut would save the General Fund $75 million, the HFA reports. Having state workers pay 20 percent of their health care premiums (most now contribute 10 percent) is worth another $40 million to $50 million.
“You could lay off every employee in the state and you wouldn’t get to $1.8 billion,” HFA Director Mitch Bean noted.
Bolger appears impatient with the contract negotiation process, asserting on “Off the Record” that the Legislature could take action to reduce public employee compensation.
Under the state Constitution, that’s the purview of the Civil Service Commission (CSC).
The Office of the State Employer negotiates with unions through the collective bargaining process, and the CSC approves contracts. Contracts with five of the six state employee unions are expected to be hammered out this year for fiscal 2013, 2014 and 2015.
But the Legislature does have options, such as refusing to appropriate money to departments. And the GOP-led chambers could push for Right to Work laws or go after the collective bargaining process itself, something the free-market Mackinac Center for Public Policy has been pushing for years. That would, in essence, gut the power of public employee unions.
“I think Snyder and the Legislature will take it up,” said Mackinac Center Senior legislative analyst Jack McHugh. “I think they have to act for ($1.8) billion reasons and another $1 billion if Snyder takes up (Michigan Business Tax) MBT reform.”
However, Eric Lupher, director of local affairs for the nonpartisan Citizens Research Council, said he doubts attempts to quash collective bargaining will gain traction.
“If you’re trying to get away with eliminating unions in Michigan, good luck with that,” he said.
Still, the idea persists that government workers are better paid and have much better benefits than their public sector counterparts, although there is research that disputes those claims. The idea of “shared sacrifice” is all the rage and there’s little doubt that public employees will take a hit.
All of this makes Ray Holman, spokesman for UAW Local 6000, the largest union representing state employees, protest that politicians are trying to balance the budget on the backs of state employees.
“We expect that we’re going to have to make sacrifices,” Holman said. “But we’re often doing the work of two and three and four other people. Some of the public doesn’t understand that we’ve already made concessions.”
State employee concessions between 2001 and 2008 have saved the state more than $3.7 billion, according to a report by Michigan State University Economics Professor Charles Ballard compiled in 2009 for employee unions. Of that, there’s $3.3 billion in wages, $143 million in pension expenditures and $300 million in health expenditures.
Meanwhile, lawmakers and governors in at least a dozen states, including New York, Arizona, California and Ohio, also are examining ways to curb costs for government workers.
“Michigan is not alone; it isn’t the only one with a big problem,” Ballard notes.
Craig Ruff, senior policy fellow with Lansing-based Public Sector Consultants, expects state leaders to move quickly this year. “The Legislature realizes they have to act pretty fast,” he said. “You don’t want to test out any dramatic change in teacher pay and public employee benefits in an election year.”
Bargaining Table
Snyder and the new Legislature are starting their terms during an auspicious time, as state union contracts are up. Contracts with five labor groups — the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), the Michigan Corrections Organization (MCO), the Michigan State Employees Association (MSEA), the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and the UAW – are handled on a three-year basis.
No timetable has been set for talks, said new State Employer Jan Winters. But they typically kick off in the summer. Agreements are in place through the end of the year for non-economic items – work rules, overtime, etc. — and until Sept. 30, 2012, for economic items, like salaries and benefits.
The sixth union, the Michigan State Police Troopers Association, last year ratified a contract with the State Employer through December 2011. There also are 13,700 non-unionized employees who are covered under Civil Service rules.
The Civil Service Commission (CSC) oversees the collective bargaining process between unions and the Office of State Employer. The CSC has the constitutional authority to approve wage and benefits for state employees, but has to submit recommendations to the governor for his executive budget.
The CSC was established in 1937 to “remedy a politically oriented spoils system,” according to a 2002 white paper by the Citizens Research Council. Essentially, the goal was to create a functioning bureaucracy that wouldn’t change at the whim of a new governor. The CSC is independent of the executive, legislative and judicial branches.
The commission consists of four members appointed by the governor to eight-year staggered terms. That means Snyder won’t be able to start fresh with a new board.
In order to open up current contracts, all parties need to agree to do so, Winters said. Changes would be sent to the CSC for approval. It is not at all clear that unions will be willing to re-open the contracts, which would leave the focus on the next contract.
McHugh said he’s skeptical that unions will agree to necessary concessions, and he expects the Legislature will have to step in.
When asked whether there were any concessions the UAW would be comfortable with, Holman said that state employees just want the opportunity to sit down at the bargaining table with the new governor “rather than having concessions force-fed down our throats.” He said he’s encouraged by Snyder’s statements that he wants to talk to labor groups.
State Payroll
It might surprise people that the state’s annual payroll is only about 10 percent of a $44 billion budget.
That’s because a big part of the budget isn’t state programs. The state functions as a pass-through for programs like Medicaid, distributing money to hospitals and doctors. Money also is given to local governments via revenue sharing and road payments and to school districts through per-pupil grants.
Including salary and benefits, payroll totaled $4.78 billion in fiscal 2009, the HFA reports. Roughly half of that comes from General Fund dollars. That means that about 25 percent of the $8 billion general fund is payroll. The state’s other pot of discretionary spending, the $12 billion School Aid Fund, is largely a clearinghouse for funds sent to more than 550 school districts and to charter schools.
Breaking down the $4.78 billion, about $3 billion is in salaries, $260 million is for worker’s compensation and unemployment insurance, $655 million is for health insurance and $829 million is for retirement.
The state workforce has shrunk dramatically – falling by about 10,000 workers over the last 11 years.
The number of state employees is 50,615 for fiscal 2010, the last year for which the HFA has data. About 4,700 workers retired last year, in part because of the 2010 retirement incentive, and it’s not clear how many will be replaced.
The state workforce peaked at 68,105 in fiscal 1979, was down to 60,066 in fiscal 1999 and was at 51,699 employees as of fiscal 2009, according to the Michigan Civil Service 30th Annual Workforce Report.
Paid Too Much?
Are state employees paid too much? Given the state of the current debate, it’s surprisingly difficult to find public officials and policy analysts willing to say that.
“No, I don’t think state employees are paid too much in general,” Richardville said in a November interview. “I haven’t had the opportunity to go in and look specifically at every person, obviously. But I think there are some people who are paid more than what they produce and some people who are paid less than what they produce. … I think they need to be analyzed individually, not in a lump sum like that.”
Not even public union critics like McHugh and Michigan Chamber of Commerce CEO Rich Studley have taken a swing at employee pay. Both are former state employees.
“I sense that the salaries aren’t out of whack,” McHugh said. “It’s the benefits that are.”
Regardless, Ballard, the MSU economist, said there’s still a “great deal of fairly virulent sentiment” against state employees. Part of the problem, he said, is that many people don’t value the work they do, even though many are dedicated and “feel a sense of mission.”
“If you believe these people just made paper airplanes and threw them around the office for eight hours a day, getting rid of them is a benefit to society,” he said. “… Clearly, if you pay them nothing, you could save a lot of money. I don’t think you can just slash pay for people without any consequence.”
Jeff Guilfoyle, president of the nonpartisan Citizens Research Council of Michigan, agrees that public employees are often spoken of as “waste, fraud and abuse in the budget.”
The UAW’s Holman said that state workers are just an easy target.
“It’s an easy solution instead of cutting popular programs, raising revenue or cutting tax loopholes,” Holman said. “This is low-hanging fruit.”
So what’s the reality about public employee pay? Some studies have shown that public employees have higher salaries than those in the private sector, but they don’t control for education and other factors. According to a 2008 HFA report, 54.8 percent of state employees in Michigan hold college degrees, which is double the rate for the state (26.9 percent). Guilfoyle notes that lawyers in the Attorney General’s office and doctors in the Department of Community Health make less than they would in the private sector.
Pay in the private sector for highly skilled workers like engineers, attorneys and physicians has gone up significantly in recent years, Ballard notes.
Pay Cut Proposals
Neither Snyder nor legislative leaders have floated concrete numbers for employee pay cuts.
The Mackinac Center and Michigan Chamber have avoided specifics, as well. Both McHugh and Studley agree that there are too many categories of state employees to talk about an across-the-board cut.
Some analysts expect salaries will be trimmed by 5 percent to 10 percent. A 10 percent cut would mean about $150 million more for the General Fund. However, the HFA stresses that the final numbers will depend on how many retirees are replaced in state government.
“Employee salary and benefit levels are certainly a legitimate policy question,” said Bean, the HFA director. “But if you think this is going to solve the (deficit), that’s the thing that concerns me. The public tends to think this is going to solve things. But it’s less than 10 percent of the problem.”
Snyder has said he will give part of his $159,300 salary back, although he has yet to specify how much. A 10-percent pay cut for lawmakers and other state elected officials already went into effect this year.
Benefit Reductions
Government worker benefits are where most critics aim their fire. With many private sector employees facing spiraling health care costs for the last decades or losing employer coverage altogether, public sector benefits have been blasted as grossly unfair.
“It is a principle worth fighting for,” Studley said. “(State) employees should be compensated fairly, but it needs to be affordable, sustainable and in line with other employees and taxpayers in the private sector.”
The Mackinac Center did a study showing that the average federal employee kicks in 27 percent of his health care premium. McHugh said that’s a reasonable standard for state employees.
The model used by the HFA projects that raising state employees’ share of health care premium costs from 10 percent to 20 percent would save between $80 million and $100 million annually – half of that General Fund. Going to 27 percent would yield additional savings.
However, there already have been changes. New employees hired after April 1, 2010, have to contribute 20 percent of their health care premiums, said Steve Reck, political director with SEIU 517M.
Holman and Guilfoyle aren’t sure if the health care pooling plan proposed by new State Treasurer Andy Dillon will be revived. The plan he introduced as House speaker in 2009 was controversial and vocally opposed by unions. Bolger is against it, but Richardville is keeping an open mind to all reforms.
Guilfoyle agrees that public employee benefits are generally superior to those in the private sector, particularly in terms of health care and retirement. There also are fringe benefits, with more time off and less risk of layoff, he said.
Other ways to cut compensation costs include instituting furlough days, as the state did in 2009. There also can be layoffs, like when the Department of State Police axed 100 troopers that year, although staffing levels were later restored. There’s been talk from the Snyder administration about eliminating state police road patrols and turning that duty over to county sheriffs, which could result in eliminating 1,000 state trooper jobs.
Other Legislative Remedies
So what else can the Legislature do to clamp down on state employee pay and benefits?
The Legislature cannot vote to decrease workers’ pay. However, lawmakers can reject pay increases approved by the Civil Service Commission within 60 days of receipt – but it requires a two-thirds majority in both Houses. The GOP-led Senate fell short last year in its attempt to nix an agreed-upon 3-percent pay hike for state employees. It would have inevitably failed in the Democratic-controlled House, regardless. But no pay increases are scheduled for the remaining part of the contract, the HFA reports.
There is another way reduce payroll costs. Either Snyder’s budget office or the Legislature could propose a negative budget supplemental, which strips money away from departments. It’s up to the departments to decide how to cut the money; if salaries can’t be cut, they consider alternatives, such as layoffs or leaving positions vacant.
Snyder could only issue an executive order cutting state spending if the consensus revenue estimating conference this week finds a shortfall for fiscal 2011. However, Bean confirms that the budget is still in the black.
Collective Bargaining
The white whale in Michigan politics for some Republicans has been the power of the unions. While it’s declined in the private sector, organized labor is still going strong in the public realm.
One way to drive a stake through unions is to kill collective bargaining. That’s something McHugh is hopeful will happen with Republicans in control of the governorship and both houses of the Legislature.
The Mackinac Center would like to see changes at the state and local levels. The Legislature could limit or end local collective bargaining, for instance, by opening up the Public Employee Relations Act (PERA) of 1965, which enables unions to negotiate contracts with school districts and local governments. McHugh said he expects Snyder and the Legislature to push through reforms.
“If you change PERA, you could essentially say, ‘Go jump in the lake. We’re not collectively bargaining,’” McHugh said.
Lupher is skeptical, noting PERA gives “significant power” to the unions, who can employ a variety of methods to halt reforms from happening. They have the right, for instances, to force negotiations before changes would go into effect.
On the state level, McHugh wants the Civil Service Commission to put an end to the collective bargaining process. This was established in 1980 for most classified state employees, according to the Citizens Research Council.
Winters said the commission would theoretically be able to change or eliminate collective bargaining for state employee unions, except for the state troopers, as they’re a separate class. But she notes that the CSC’s authority is established in the Constitution and it is independent of all three branches. That means the Legislature can’t compel the CSC to abandon collective bargaining.
McHugh argues that it’s “excessive” for state employees to have protection both under Civil Service and through collective bargaining. Studley also questions the necessity. He said that the current system makes it difficult to reward exceptional employees and discipline poor ones, as the cost of the disciplinary process through collective bargaining, the CSC and the courts is often prohibitive.
“People decide it’s not worth it,” Studley said. “You just stick the person in a room and work around him.”
Although McHugh said it may be a “bridge too far,” he said he’d like to see a ban on public employee unions. That’s something that new GOP Ohio Gov. John Kasich is weighing for 14,000 child and home care workers.
“The public employee unions use their clout to elect politicians who grant benefits that are, in our view, excessive,” McHugh said. “It’s a vicious cycle.”
There’s some question of the effectiveness of pushing such a policy. Policy Matters Ohio, a liberal think tank, notes that states that bar government employee bargaining like Arizona, North Carolina and Nevada have budget deficits exceeding 30 percent of general funds. States that permit collective bargaining such as Montana, Massachusetts, New Mexico and South Dakota, have budget deficits less than 10 percent.
Ballard argues the primary goal for some in the Legislature isn’t to save money. It’s to break unions.
“A large fraction of this is anti-union ideology among some folks for whom unions are an enemy,” he said. “Ideology is a very strong part of this.”
Bean said it’s “above my pay grade” to know if the administration or Legislature will look at reforming the collective bargaining process. Holman said that the UAW takes the issue seriously, especially in the current political environment.
Right to Work
Looming in the background is the issue of Right to Work, which would allow workers to get union benefits without joining a bargaining unit. That would impact all labor groups in Michigan, but especially the public employee unions that represent the majority of organized employees in the state.
Talk of making Michigan a Right to Work state has been at a slow burn for years, with the Tea Party-affiliated group Americans for Prosperity toying with a ballot proposal in 2008. While the Mackinac Center supports the idea, business groups including the Michigan Chamber and Business Leaders for Michigan have not made it a legislative priority.
Studley said it’s a “legitimate policy question” and he’s encouraged that the discussion can finally be had in Michigan, given its rich history of union activity. But he cautioned groups, especially at the national level, about jumping in without realizing a ballot measure will cost up to $30 million.
“The one thing that’s worse than not being a Right to Work state is trying to become a Right to Work state and failing,” he said. “If someone had a magic wand to make Michigan Right to Work, we’d still be a cold, northern state with bad roads. Some schools do an extraordinary job; others do a mediocre job. We’d still be a state where the Great Lakes are at risk.”
Twenty-two other states have Right to Work laws. “Every state that has Right to Work has the same economic problems as Michigan,” Reck said.
Neither Snyder nor Richardville support Right to Work, but there’s been speculation that legislation could emerge from the House.
“Twenty percent of the workers in Michigan approximately are unionized, and the idea of going in and changing one of the fundamental privileges for years seems to me to be more disruptive with little positive results,” Richardville said after being elected majority leader.
Guilfoyle said he hasn’t seen anything yet that indicates Right to Work has legs. Holman and Reck are watching the debate closely.
“Certainly, we’re concerned with a Republican (legislative) majority,” Reck said. “We’ll deal with it if it gets traction.”
Susan J. Demas is a 2006 Knight Foundation Fellow in nonprofits journalism and a political analyst for Michigan Information & Research Service.
14 Comments
“…Right to Work, which would allow workers to get union benefits without joining a bargaining unit.” …that’s a particularly prejudiced view of the issue, don’t you think? An analogy would be “…Illegal immigration, which would allow people to get government benefits without being legally in the country.”
If the union had to compete for its membership (one worker at a time), it would be more responsive to their collective views, and less beholden to the union leadership and their comfort.
Stew on that.
I appreciate Susan’s article that presents a healthy balance of a variety of perspectives on state employee pay/benefits, unions, right to work, etc. I’d like to see an article in connection on pay comparison for the Michigan Legislature and Administration (and/or for those having to make the hard decisions) after in 2001 the Senate voted a week after the chamber, by not acting, let a new pay raise take effect for 2001 and 2002 which gave a 35.8 percent increase for state lawmakers, lifting them to $77,400 a year 13.7 percent for governor 19.6 percent for lieutenant governor and 13.6 percent for Supreme Court justices and another 2.9 percent increase in 2002. I’m curious how their pay and benefits compare to other states?
Despite all the rhetoric, there is not that much savings in slashing public employee compensation. We have fewer people working for the state than in the past, and anyone visiting a state office realizes that. Gov. Snyder talked about value based budgeting. That is one way to get at this. If certain programs or departments are not pulling their weight or are not benefiting the state, eliminate them. Those employees go then too. Greater contributions to health care and pension reform should also occur. That is better than accross the board wage cuts. But this should be about doing what is best for the state, not just about busting the unions. Most of the benefits we enjoy (40 hr work week, overtime pay) and the protections we have in the workplace are because of unions. We should not forget that.
Not in favor of cuts in employee pay until the legislature rills back their pay increases. They have to set the tone.
Sincerely,
Jacqueline Thiel
Elk rapids, MI
It’s interesting to see when Bishop and the others allowed themselves to get raises, health care benefits, pensions, etc. and then decry this for others in the state. I loved it when I saw that they continued to take their pay raise every year and stating that they had no control over it as it was legislatively induced. When they were finally backed in to the corner they took a pay cut (for the people replacing them in the future rather than themselves). I am always amazed with the Republican Party decrying the size of government but feeding at the trough themselves. Even after their term is up they tend to want to stick around to continue getting a taxpayer paycheck. Take Mike Bishop who is eagerly awaiting a job in the Snyder administration. Jason Allen just got named the head of Veterans Affairs. Many of these guys are hanging around the government trough. All of these lawmakers that are voting to repeal health care for millions of other citizens in America should not be taking it for themselves.
This is information I sent to Detroit News in response to a Daniel Howes Column.
As Daniel Patrick Moynihan once said, “Each of us is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.”
Your implication that public employees are overpaid relative to the private sector has no basis in fact.
I have looked at three different studies and all conclude that adjusted for education public employees are paid less than private sector employees.
In 2008 the House Fiscal Agency released a study ( using 2007 data), available on their web site, that concluded that ” Michigan state employees who do not hold
a college degree tend to be compensated somewhat better than private sector employees. However, “Michigan state employees with college degrees tend to earn
appreciably less than their counterparts in the private sector, and the difference in earnings between Michigan state employees and private sector employeees grows
significantly as the level of educational attainment rises.”
The study notes that 55% of state employees hold a bachelors degree or higher compared with 27% of private sector workers. Why go to college if it does not result in higher pay?
According to the study a state employee with a bachelors degree earns $51,646 annually compared with $71,378 for a private sector worker and a state employee with a masters degree earns $60,926
compared with $97,937 for a private sector worker.
A recent national study (April 2010) entitled, “Out of Balance? Comparing Public and Private Sector Compensation over 20 Years”, which was conducted by the center for State and Local Governemet Excellence
and the national Institute of retirement security reached the following conclusions
Wages and salaries of state and local employees are lower than those for private sector employees with comparable
earnings determinants, such as education and work experience. State workers typically earn 11 less and local workers 12 percent less.
Even after accounting for the value of retirement, healthcare, and other benefits, state and local employees earn less than private sector counterparts.
On average, total compensation is 6.8 percent lower for state employees and 7.4 percent lower for local employees than for comparable private sector employees.
This is national data but the study also covered Michigan and the results are similar.
Charlie Ballard at MSU has conducted comparison studies and reached similar conclusions. I would suggest you talk to him.
You should have also noted that Michigan is only one of two states with a DC plan. it has been in exitence since 1997 and more than half of all state employeees are covered by that plan.
Also the multiplier for the DB plan is 1.5, the lowest of any state.
As for health care, all new state employees with be paying 20% of cost and receiving less generous benefits.
Michigan state employment is down about 17% since 2001 and non-corrections employment is down 40% since 1980.
Also Michigan ranks 48th in the number of state and local empolyees per 10,000 population, 13.5% below the national average.
Why do not print these facts?
The one area that I agree needs to be reformed is local government pensions. They are generally much more generous that the state and school employee pension plans.
You should also be aware that the state constitution protects current pensions but new employees can be put into new plans as was recently done for new school employyes and employees can be required to contribute more for thir pensions.
I am sorry but when you publish unsubsantiated assertions and do not include any of the above facts you are bashing public employees.
The best way to make sure that government is ineficient and ineffective is to make public service unattractive to the most talented workers.
The honest way to present this is to say that public employees are not overpaid but the budget problem is so serious everyone must sacrifice to bring the budget back into balance.
Put all these issues together and collectively their impact on the budget is negligible if not purely speculative.
Blaming the patient, the employee, for high health care costs and demanding they contribute more to the cost of their premiums and/or co pays is not a savings. It is a shift of the “cost” created by bloated insurance carriers and wasteful and dysfunctional pharma and medical service providers from the public’s books to individual employees “books” or just another way to cut pay.
Instead of punitive measures to destroy unions and collective bargaining why don’t legislatures work together to find ways to make the process work for everyone. Negative attitudes and punitive actions get you negativity and punishment – a really destructive outcome for citizens.
We are in real trouble here.
The state employees/unions are missing the big picture here.
The issue here is not what they are worth, but rather what Lansing actually has to pay them with at the end of the day.
Unless they have been living in a cave for the past decade (and based upon their comments of late, I cannot rule this out), it’s difficult to miss the fact that we are in a depression. We will not be recovering from it anytime soon.
As a result of this, the money that is available to pay their salaries just isn’t there.
Now, there are two ways this can play out. One, the unions can pound on their chests and scream to the heavens that they have made enough sacrifices already. This will only result in their pay and benefits being unilaterally slashed and/or their jobs eliminated.
Or two, they can remove their rose-colored glasses and take a hard long long look at Lansing’s current fiscal climate and accept reality that they will have to adapt just like the private sector workers in Michigan already have done.
When you have people like Gov Brown of California and Gov Cuomo of New York telling their respective employees the same thing, if that doesn’t tell you that the old ways are finished, I don’t know what will.
It’s that simple.
The sacrificing will not be shared by Snyders new staff. They will be lining their pockets, which is how it usually goes when the GOP gets into power:
Michigan’s new budget director John Nixon will be paid $250,000 a year, the highest of those named so far to Gov. Rick Snyder’s new cabinet, according to salary information released by the governor’s office today.
Salaries for Rick Snyder’s senior staff
Administrator Title Salary
Dennis Muchmore Chief of Staff 171,000
Jeff Barnes Deputy Chief of Staff and Public Safety Group Executive 145,000
Dick Posthumus Senior Advisor 170,000
Geralyn Lasher Communications Director 140,000
Bill Rustem Director of Strategy 140,000
Allison Scott Executive Office Manager 120,000
Terri Reid Director of External Relations 140,000
Mike Gadola Legal Counsel 140,000
Bill McBride Director, DC Office 140,000
Marsha Quebbeman Director of Administration 100,000
I’m a highly-educated employee who has worked for the legislature for several years in a non-partisan capacity. I was willing to work for very low pay because I enjoy the work and believe in public service. I would have gladly made service to this institution my career. But my pay has been essentially frozen at an extremely low level since I began, our health insurance was cut back last year, and all signs are that compensation is going to get worse, not better. I am moving on.
People say our benefits are too high, but given that the pay is so low, I would never have accepted the job in the first place, if the health insurance hadn’t been pretty good. I have no pension, only a 401k. If the health insurance gets significantly cut back, and pay continues to be frozen or is cut, who will do these jobs? Certainly not the most talented employees, who have other options.
I loved the work, and was considered to be very good at it, but not my hard work and dedication have not been rewarded fairly. I will not be the only talented employee who leaves state government.
There are MANY Michigan Residents who are also dedicated hard workers in the private sector who can also make the claim that they have not been rewarded “fairly” either.
Life isn’t “fair”.
True enough. Life isn’t fair and many employees are not adequately compensated. I couldn’t agree more.
But my point is, that if compensation becomes ridiculously inadequate, and an employee has other options, she or he leaves. And that is what I’m doing. And state government will suffer if many do this.
The ability of the state to recruit and retain top-notch talent will suffer the more cuts and talk of cuts there is. It’s already happening.
I’ve been a State Employee for 16 years. In my Department I have seen personnel cut from 40 down to 7. Its been a great job and I have no complaints to make, although its been getting tougher year by year. It is a public job, and anyone who qualifies for it could have applied. Many, many have. I worked hard to qualify, and made it. If in truth I could pay more for my benefits, have my pay cut 5%, and believe it would cure the ills of this State I’d do it in a heartbeat. It seems very clear that won’t happen regardless of how much skin comes off state employees backs. We are going to get hit again, no sense in not accepting it. Revenue sharing is going to get hit too, and the consequences to all our counties and cities will become evident. The poor are going to get hit, and even though there is no shortage of abuse and a learned sense of entitlement out there, there will be good people who will suffer. Kids will go hungry. Corrections is going to get hit, and an already growing public order crime increase will get worse with the early release of inmates. Okay, so we are ALL going to have to suck it up, here. This is not going to be a time for whining. This is going to be a time to take stock, get off your ass if its been planted, and do SOMETHING positive.
I would advise keeping a close eye on Lansing though. There is no decrease in the number of lobbyists from corporations making profits here, who are in the Capitol every single day one of the houses is in session. Kudo’s to those that have the best interests of Michigan citizens on their agenda. I hope no one is foolish enough to believe they all do.
Well, shared sacrifice includes raising taxes too. That’s what most MIDDLE CLASS state employees are ticked off about. They are being asked to take it in the rear end (when it won’t put much of a dent in the budget deficit) while the state’ s wealthy business owners get yet another tax cut.
I see that Governor Snyder’s trial balloon about taxing retiree income is going over like its made of lead. The Legislature is clearly not serious about dealing with our problems. They, instead, are focused on busting public employee unions, because this has been their holy grail for decades. It’s not good public policy. It’s a naked political power grab.
While GM employees are getting a $4000 bonus, state workers are going to get shafted. Good thing GM cares about its employees.