[quote=sdrealtor][quote=CA renter][quote=ocrenter][quote=CA renter][quote=ocrenter][quote=sdrealtor]But if you perform below average you should fall behind. Its the private sectors way of showing you where the door is without getting sued.[/quote]
ultimately that’s the downfall of the public sector. the pay increases are all set in stone, regardless of performance.[/quote]
I’m pretty familiar with a number of public employers and their compensation numbers. Of the ones I’m familiar with, almost all have had their compensation frozen or seen net decreases in total compensation since about 2008. No net raises in the vast majority of cases. Their compensation has gone down in real terms, and in many cases, in nominal terms.[/quote]
But that’s looking at a short term deviation from the norm secondary to budgetary crisis at all levels of government. Overall, the government employees are significantly overpaid.
“Comparing private and public sector data
Compensation cost levels in state and local government should not be directly compared with levels in
private industry. Differences between these sectors stem from factors such as variation in work
activities and occupational structures. Manufacturing and sales, for example, make up a large part of
private industry work activities but are rare in state and local government. Professional and
administrative support occupations (including teachers) account for two-thirds of the state and local
government workforce, compared with one-half of private industry.”
——————
Here are some articles and studies regarding compensation in the public vs. private sectors:
One comment I have to make about the higher pay for the jobs with fewer degree requirements — many of which are public safety jobs — there are no similar jobs in the private sector with which to compare them.
Not only that, but they mention the much lower turnover rate in many public sectors jobs; this is very important to public employers. The (necessarily) bureaucratic hiring process and extensive initial, and ongoing, training required for these employees is VERY expensive. They cannot afford to have high turnover rates. IMHO, even if they were to go to defined contribution plans (as many suggest), I don’t think they’d end up saving very much (anything?) in the long run. One of the main reasons people are attracted to these jobs is the benefits packages. Take that away, and the turnover rates — and related costs — would be much, much higher.[/quote]
If there are no comparable jobs in the private sector then why do we have to pay them so much? Why would they leave? Where would they go? There are no comparable jobs in the private sector. You just murdered your case. The defense rests.[/quote]
“No comparable jobs,” means no jobs that have the same skill requirements and responsibility/liability levels in the private sector. It doesn’t mean they can’t make more in the private sector (many have made more prior to working in the public sector), but most public employees choose public service because of the benefits/security, not because of the pay. They make less during the “good times” and more during the “bad times,” and this is a calculated decision on their part. It’s also why public sector employees are pissed about being scapegoated for Wall Street’s fVck-ups and having the major PR war being waged against them right when the sacrifices made during the good times are supposed to work in their favor.
