[quote=jstoesz]your goals are not mutually exclusive…just because we screwed up on banking industry claw backs (which you will find few on this post who will disagree), does not mean that we do not have to deal with the public sector unions. And as Brian has framed the conundrum (I can not believe I am agreeing with brian), necessitates either tax increases or benefit cuts. Even though you refuse to admit it (I am sure you or your spouse is hoping for a generous government dole), cuts need to be made. Or you can tax the rest of us into destituteness…
Frankly I am tired, and I think others are as well, of you not owning up to your self interest in this matter. My self interest is clear. I do not want to be taxed one more red dollar…how about you CAR?
One more note. Just because I seek more contributions and and end to public unions, does not mean that I want abusive pay of public servants. I want them to be compensated in line with the demand for the job. And if hiring well qualified fireman or policeman is as hard as you say it is, than pay them well. But the numbers of those who want these jobs does not bear your desired salaries, as indispensable as you say they are…
Is that enough parenthetical statement…I think I set a record.[/quote]
You must have missed my post regarding suggestions for fixing our budget.
Again, I don’t have a problem with public servants taking cuts, but the first losses have to be borne by those who caused the liabilities in the first place.
BTW, we’ve been through this before on hiring police and firefighters during the bubble. There was a severe shortage of qualified recruits during the bubble. I heard that some police departments had to allow former gang members to sign up because they couldn’t find enough recruits without a criminal/gang history.
I know fire departments were sending representatives to colleges with Fire Academies to hand out applications and offer signing bonuses because they couldn’t find enough qualified recruits.
What people don’t seem to understand about public safety is that recruiting and training is VERY, VERY expensive. Fire and police departments cannot afford high turnover rates because of these expenses and because these jobs value **experience** over formal education or other qualifications. They cannot afford to have Johnny-come-lately types who will leave the moment something more lucrative (like flipping houses or peddling mortgages) comes up. This is whey they try to attract employees with long-term benefits which the more dependable, security-minded employees like. They WANT the employees with a lot of experience under their belts, because these are the most valuable employees. This is not the tech industry.
What was happening during the bubble was that other departments were poaching recruits after other departments had spent the time and money hiring and training them. There were too few recruits to go around, and I know this for a fact.
The stories you hear about “recruits lining up around the corner” are for **recruit** positions. These positions are only opened when departments cannot find enough candidates with the qualifications required for the job (education, experience, academy training, etc.). These recruit positions cost the departments a lot of money because they need to do ALL of the training (most fire departments hire people with at least 1-2 years of experience and paramedic certification, not “recruits”). Only large departments can afford to have these positions/training academies, BTW. Smaller departments do not have them, so no “lines around the block” for their open positions, especially when the economy is strong.
——————
As Los Angeles tries to add 1,000 officers in five years to the smallest big-city police department in the nation, it has found there haven’t been enough David Gameros to go around.
The LAPD and police departments around the country are engaged in an intense competition over an increasingly limited pool of suitable people interested in becoming cops.
In Los Angeles, the department is fortifying its recruitment efforts in its drive to beat out other departments and attract the elusive recruit. The department has increased its full-time recruitment team from two to 12. It is offering a $1,000 cash reward to any employee who brings in a successful recruit. And recruiters are hitting the college job-placement circuits.
