BobS
It is pretty widely agreed that government employees are better compensated than their private counterparts. Let’s remember that “compensation” includes not just pay, but fringe benefits, retirement benefits, job security & stability (sometimes including tenure), and even difficulty of the job itself.
One source of this imbalance is that private, profit-seeking companies engage in a natural and healthy competition with their unions, or individual hires, while the public employers (city councils, state legislatures, school boards, etc.) do not. The end result is that the public employee unions run roughshod over their counterparts. They are highly mobilized, vocal, and each employee has a lot at stake. The taxpayers each have very little at stake, are less organized, and are often duped by the media and the PR abilities of groups like the public safety unions.
Groups like the Taxpayers Association can try to speak up, but it is an uphill battle. So far they are losing.
For the past few weeks, I’ve been working on a fascinating “civics lesson” (in my “spare” time, lol) detailing the “real” reasons why the City of Vallejo had to file for BK. It’s enlightening, to say the least. Not finished yet (will post it when I am) but you need to ask yourselves just one question here. WHY did Vallejo’s personnel costs go up so much since the late nineties/early 2000’s?
Hint: the answer is not exactly what you may be thinking.
It’s a relatively small city (pop 116760 in 2000 to 117798 in 2010).
That’s approx 43% of the size of Chula Vista and it only grew by 1038 residents during the millenium boom (Chula grew by 250% during the same time frame). Vallejo has plenty of jobs and industry, bridge access and a bayfront presence (location, location, location). What more could a bay area city ask for??
Food for thought: Doesn’t EVERY CA City have the SAME problem (Props 13 and 58)??
