OT: Public pay & benefits

[davelj]

[quote=jpinpb]Just curious, how many of you would be willing to take a 20% cut in your pay? And how many of you risk your lives in your job?[/quote]

Personally, I’d take a 20% cut in pay if I had to. Thankfully I don’t have to. But if I had to, I’d take it. Pretty simple.

As to risking one’s life while working, let’s go to the tape… In the last decade, here are the stats: There are an average of about 750,000 police officers employed in the U.S. at any given time and an average of 160 police officers annually have died while on duty. That’s about 2 out of every 10,000 on an annualized basis.

There are almost 800,000 fire fighters in the U.S. Average annual fatalities in the line of duty have averaged about 115 over the last decade (albeit, excluding 9/11). That’s about 1.5 out of every 10,000 on an annualized basis. (Interestingly, 86% of the fire departments in the U.S. are either all or partially manned by volunteers. 70% are all-volunteer departments and 73% of all fire fighters are volunteers.)

Given that the average person driving the average amount has a 1 in 100 chance of dying in a car accident in their lifetimes, I would bet that traveling salespeople – who obviously travel a lot more than the average person – have a similar (or perhaps even higher) incidence of work-related fatality relative to firefighters and police officers.

[faterikcartman]

I’m sick of the bull and the sacred cow treatment. Here’s the most dangerous (from Bureau of Labour Statistics):

1. Fishers and related fishing workers. Drowning.
2. Logging workers. Being struck by falling object.
3. Aircraft pilots and flight engineers. Crashes.
4. Structural iron and steel workers. Falls.
5. Taxi drivers. Homicide.
6. Construction laborers. Vehicular accidents and falls.
7. Farmers and ranchers. Vehicular accidents.
8. Roofers. Falls.
9. Electrical power-line installers and repairers. Electrocution.
10. Driver/sales workers and truck drivers. Highway collisions.
11. Refuse and recyclable material collectors. Vehicular accidents, falls, being struck by objects, and exposure to harmful substances or environments.
12. Police and sheriff’s patrol officers. Homicide and highway collisions.

That’s right, farmers risk their lives bringing you breakfast, lunch, and dinner, more than police and fire fighters.

The bottom line is whether or not you can replace someone with an equally competent person. Yes or no. Public employers need to start investigating the answer to that question. I’m tired of paying too much and giving those that “serve” the public a better deal than the public themselves.

And just another word to the wise: every time your presented with a question to vote for a tax increase to pay for so-called essential services like police and fire you’re being hoodwinked. They couch the question like that so they don’t have to cut spending for other things which you wouldn’t vote for if you were presented the choice.

Police, fire, teachers, and [fill in the blank] are treated with kid gloves as they are considered reliable voting blocks by politicians.

Full disclosure: My brother in law is chief of a fire department (though I will not disclose the municipality).

[faterikcartman]

I’m sick of the bull and the sacred cow treatment. Here’s the most dangerous (from Bureau of Labour Statistics):

1. Fishers and related fishing workers. Drowning.
2. Logging workers. Being struck by falling object.
3. Aircraft pilots and flight engineers. Crashes.
4. Structural iron and steel workers. Falls.
5. Taxi drivers. Homicide.
6. Construction laborers. Vehicular accidents and falls.
7. Farmers and ranchers. Vehicular accidents.
8. Roofers. Falls.
9. Electrical power-line installers and repairers. Electrocution.
10. Driver/sales workers and truck drivers. Highway collisions.
11. Refuse and recyclable material collectors. Vehicular accidents, falls, being struck by objects, and exposure to harmful substances or environments.
12. Police and sheriff’s patrol officers. Homicide and highway collisions.

That’s right, farmers risk their lives bringing you breakfast, lunch, and dinner, more than police and fire fighters.

The bottom line is whether or not you can replace someone with an equally competent person. Yes or no. Public employers need to start investigating the answer to that question. I’m tired of paying too much and giving those that “serve” the public a better deal than the public themselves.

And just another word to the wise: every time your presented with a question to vote for a tax increase to pay for so-called essential services like police and fire you’re being hoodwinked. They couch the question like that so they don’t have to cut spending for other things which you wouldn’t vote for if you were presented the choice.

Police, fire, teachers, and [fill in the blank] are treated with kid gloves as they are considered reliable voting blocks by politicians.

Full disclosure: My brother in law is chief of a fire department (though I will not disclose the municipality).

[faterikcartman]

I’m sick of the bull and the sacred cow treatment. Here’s the most dangerous (from Bureau of Labour Statistics):

1. Fishers and related fishing workers. Drowning.
2. Logging workers. Being struck by falling object.
3. Aircraft pilots and flight engineers. Crashes.
4. Structural iron and steel workers. Falls.
5. Taxi drivers. Homicide.
6. Construction laborers. Vehicular accidents and falls.
7. Farmers and ranchers. Vehicular accidents.
8. Roofers. Falls.
9. Electrical power-line installers and repairers. Electrocution.
10. Driver/sales workers and truck drivers. Highway collisions.
11. Refuse and recyclable material collectors. Vehicular accidents, falls, being struck by objects, and exposure to harmful substances or environments.
12. Police and sheriff’s patrol officers. Homicide and highway collisions.

That’s right, farmers risk their lives bringing you breakfast, lunch, and dinner, more than police and fire fighters.

The bottom line is whether or not you can replace someone with an equally competent person. Yes or no. Public employers need to start investigating the answer to that question. I’m tired of paying too much and giving those that “serve” the public a better deal than the public themselves.

And just another word to the wise: every time your presented with a question to vote for a tax increase to pay for so-called essential services like police and fire you’re being hoodwinked. They couch the question like that so they don’t have to cut spending for other things which you wouldn’t vote for if you were presented the choice.

Police, fire, teachers, and [fill in the blank] are treated with kid gloves as they are considered reliable voting blocks by politicians.

Full disclosure: My brother in law is chief of a fire department (though I will not disclose the municipality).

[faterikcartman]

I’m sick of the bull and the sacred cow treatment. Here’s the most dangerous (from Bureau of Labour Statistics):

1. Fishers and related fishing workers. Drowning.
2. Logging workers. Being struck by falling object.
3. Aircraft pilots and flight engineers. Crashes.
4. Structural iron and steel workers. Falls.
5. Taxi drivers. Homicide.
6. Construction laborers. Vehicular accidents and falls.
7. Farmers and ranchers. Vehicular accidents.
8. Roofers. Falls.
9. Electrical power-line installers and repairers. Electrocution.
10. Driver/sales workers and truck drivers. Highway collisions.
11. Refuse and recyclable material collectors. Vehicular accidents, falls, being struck by objects, and exposure to harmful substances or environments.
12. Police and sheriff’s patrol officers. Homicide and highway collisions.

That’s right, farmers risk their lives bringing you breakfast, lunch, and dinner, more than police and fire fighters.

The bottom line is whether or not you can replace someone with an equally competent person. Yes or no. Public employers need to start investigating the answer to that question. I’m tired of paying too much and giving those that “serve” the public a better deal than the public themselves.

And just another word to the wise: every time your presented with a question to vote for a tax increase to pay for so-called essential services like police and fire you’re being hoodwinked. They couch the question like that so they don’t have to cut spending for other things which you wouldn’t vote for if you were presented the choice.

Police, fire, teachers, and [fill in the blank] are treated with kid gloves as they are considered reliable voting blocks by politicians.

Full disclosure: My brother in law is chief of a fire department (though I will not disclose the municipality).

[faterikcartman]

I’m sick of the bull and the sacred cow treatment. Here’s the most dangerous (from Bureau of Labour Statistics):

1. Fishers and related fishing workers. Drowning.
2. Logging workers. Being struck by falling object.
3. Aircraft pilots and flight engineers. Crashes.
4. Structural iron and steel workers. Falls.
5. Taxi drivers. Homicide.
6. Construction laborers. Vehicular accidents and falls.
7. Farmers and ranchers. Vehicular accidents.
8. Roofers. Falls.
9. Electrical power-line installers and repairers. Electrocution.
10. Driver/sales workers and truck drivers. Highway collisions.
11. Refuse and recyclable material collectors. Vehicular accidents, falls, being struck by objects, and exposure to harmful substances or environments.
12. Police and sheriff’s patrol officers. Homicide and highway collisions.

That’s right, farmers risk their lives bringing you breakfast, lunch, and dinner, more than police and fire fighters.

The bottom line is whether or not you can replace someone with an equally competent person. Yes or no. Public employers need to start investigating the answer to that question. I’m tired of paying too much and giving those that “serve” the public a better deal than the public themselves.

And just another word to the wise: every time your presented with a question to vote for a tax increase to pay for so-called essential services like police and fire you’re being hoodwinked. They couch the question like that so they don’t have to cut spending for other things which you wouldn’t vote for if you were presented the choice.

Police, fire, teachers, and [fill in the blank] are treated with kid gloves as they are considered reliable voting blocks by politicians.

Full disclosure: My brother in law is chief of a fire department (though I will not disclose the municipality).

[sdrealtor]

Thank you. I dont want privatization of public services nor do I beleive the private sector would do a better job, I just want more transparency and fiscal responsibility there. Its fascinating to me how some people want such a high level of fiscal responsibility and transparency until it hits home. They resort to the same tactics they attack by comparing it to other problems. I hate to state the obvious but:

WRONG + WRONG still does not = RIGHT

[sdrealtor]

Thank you. I dont want privatization of public services nor do I beleive the private sector would do a better job, I just want more transparency and fiscal responsibility there. Its fascinating to me how some people want such a high level of fiscal responsibility and transparency until it hits home. They resort to the same tactics they attack by comparing it to other problems. I hate to state the obvious but:

WRONG + WRONG still does not = RIGHT

[sdrealtor]

Thank you. I dont want privatization of public services nor do I beleive the private sector would do a better job, I just want more transparency and fiscal responsibility there. Its fascinating to me how some people want such a high level of fiscal responsibility and transparency until it hits home. They resort to the same tactics they attack by comparing it to other problems. I hate to state the obvious but:

WRONG + WRONG still does not = RIGHT

[sdrealtor]

Thank you. I dont want privatization of public services nor do I beleive the private sector would do a better job, I just want more transparency and fiscal responsibility there. Its fascinating to me how some people want such a high level of fiscal responsibility and transparency until it hits home. They resort to the same tactics they attack by comparing it to other problems. I hate to state the obvious but:

WRONG + WRONG still does not = RIGHT

[sdrealtor]

Thank you. I dont want privatization of public services nor do I beleive the private sector would do a better job, I just want more transparency and fiscal responsibility there. Its fascinating to me how some people want such a high level of fiscal responsibility and transparency until it hits home. They resort to the same tactics they attack by comparing it to other problems. I hate to state the obvious but:

WRONG + WRONG still does not = RIGHT

[Ricechex]

[quote=faterikcartman]And just another word to the wise: every time your presented with a question to vote for a tax increase to pay for so-called essential services like police and fire you’re being hoodwinked. They couch the question like that so they don’t have to cut spending for other things which you wouldn’t vote for if you were presented the choice.

/quote]

Now, this is quite true. Take a look at Prop J. There is some propaganda. Extra taxes to “retain” math and science teachers. Did you know the entire district bought EVERY 3rd, 6th, and 9th grader a netbook? This from a district that is so short of funds? I would much rather RETAIN the teachers/smaller classroom size, than spend oodles of money on netbooks. The students can bring home the netbooks with them too. I wonder who the district contracted with for that one? Which private company made LOTS of money on those netbooks? I don’t remember voting on that one do you?

No need to blame the teachers either, they had nothing to do with it. When we blame the public servants, (firefighters, police, teachers, etc) it is essentially blaming the grunts that actually DO the job. It is the corruption at the top that is really the problem.

[Ricechex]

[quote=faterikcartman]And just another word to the wise: every time your presented with a question to vote for a tax increase to pay for so-called essential services like police and fire you’re being hoodwinked. They couch the question like that so they don’t have to cut spending for other things which you wouldn’t vote for if you were presented the choice.

/quote]

Now, this is quite true. Take a look at Prop J. There is some propaganda. Extra taxes to “retain” math and science teachers. Did you know the entire district bought EVERY 3rd, 6th, and 9th grader a netbook? This from a district that is so short of funds? I would much rather RETAIN the teachers/smaller classroom size, than spend oodles of money on netbooks. The students can bring home the netbooks with them too. I wonder who the district contracted with for that one? Which private company made LOTS of money on those netbooks? I don’t remember voting on that one do you?

No need to blame the teachers either, they had nothing to do with it. When we blame the public servants, (firefighters, police, teachers, etc) it is essentially blaming the grunts that actually DO the job. It is the corruption at the top that is really the problem.

[Ricechex]

[quote=faterikcartman]And just another word to the wise: every time your presented with a question to vote for a tax increase to pay for so-called essential services like police and fire you’re being hoodwinked. They couch the question like that so they don’t have to cut spending for other things which you wouldn’t vote for if you were presented the choice.

/quote]

Now, this is quite true. Take a look at Prop J. There is some propaganda. Extra taxes to “retain” math and science teachers. Did you know the entire district bought EVERY 3rd, 6th, and 9th grader a netbook? This from a district that is so short of funds? I would much rather RETAIN the teachers/smaller classroom size, than spend oodles of money on netbooks. The students can bring home the netbooks with them too. I wonder who the district contracted with for that one? Which private company made LOTS of money on those netbooks? I don’t remember voting on that one do you?

No need to blame the teachers either, they had nothing to do with it. When we blame the public servants, (firefighters, police, teachers, etc) it is essentially blaming the grunts that actually DO the job. It is the corruption at the top that is really the problem.

[Ricechex]

[quote=faterikcartman]And just another word to the wise: every time your presented with a question to vote for a tax increase to pay for so-called essential services like police and fire you’re being hoodwinked. They couch the question like that so they don’t have to cut spending for other things which you wouldn’t vote for if you were presented the choice.

/quote]

Now, this is quite true. Take a look at Prop J. There is some propaganda. Extra taxes to “retain” math and science teachers. Did you know the entire district bought EVERY 3rd, 6th, and 9th grader a netbook? This from a district that is so short of funds? I would much rather RETAIN the teachers/smaller classroom size, than spend oodles of money on netbooks. The students can bring home the netbooks with them too. I wonder who the district contracted with for that one? Which private company made LOTS of money on those netbooks? I don’t remember voting on that one do you?

No need to blame the teachers either, they had nothing to do with it. When we blame the public servants, (firefighters, police, teachers, etc) it is essentially blaming the grunts that actually DO the job. It is the corruption at the top that is really the problem.

[Author]

Posts