OT: Public pay & benefits

[CA renter]

[quote=EconProf]Folks, we gotta stop relying on special interest propaganda for our voting decisions and political stands. Because we see a newspaper photo of a fire or police person doing something heroic does not mean they automatically have a dangerous profession and should be paid oodles of money and retire at age 55 at 90% of last paycheck.
To see who is in far more dangerous occupations, and is NOT paid accordingly, google Most Dangerous Occupations. There you’ll see the real heroes: fishermen, tree trimers, taxi drivers, ironworkers, roofers. Their pay is not comensurate, and their bodies are used up and more deserving of a pension at 55, unlike the relatively sedentary police and fire personnel.
Piggs are supposed to be a skeptical bunch that digs for data. C’mon, we can do better![/quote]

Do those workers have the same liability as firefighters and cops? Does their work mean the difference between life and death for their customers?

After all, if we want to look at overcompensation, I’m sure we can come up with a whole host of occupations with far more egregious examples of “undeserved” compensation than what firefighters and cops get.

[CA renter]

[quote=jficquette][quote=Aecetia]You get what you pay for. If you want to pay bargain basement wages, you will get marginally qualified employees. The less qualified, the more problems, and the more law suits for the municipalities who are for the most part self-insured.[/quote]

If we really wanted our money’s worth we would fire all them all and let private entities handle it.[/quote]

Privatization of critical operations:

There has been much debate ast to whether the use of private security
contractors by the U.S. government is cost-effective. According to the CBO, the
costs associated with using private security contractors in Iraq “did not differ greatly
form the costs of having a comparable military unit performing similar functions.
During peacetime, however, the military unit would remain in the force structure and
continue to accrue costs at a peacetime rate, whereas the private security contract
would not have to be renewed.”18 Agencies generally have not conducted
comprehensive cost-benefit analyses comparing the costs of using private security
companies with the costs of using in-house security resources.
Pay Scales for PSC Employees. Pay scales for these contractors
reportedly vary depending on their experience, their nationality, and the U.S.
government’s perceptions of danger involved. When the hiring of such contractors
first became controversial, the news media reported (in April 2004) a pay range of
$500 to $1,500 per day.19 Since the earlier days of the conflict, experts suggest that
the pay scale has decreased and is on average lower globally as the supply of those
desiring such work has risen.20 The highest amounts are paid to highly trained and
experienced former military personnel from the United States and British
Commonwealth, with lower amounts paid to personnel from developing countries
such as Chile and Nepal, and the lowest amounts going to locally hired Iraqis.

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL32419.pdf
——————–

Since police and fire protection are ongoing services, there will likely be no net savings if private contractors are used. Note how the training for these “highly trained and experienced former military personnel” was paid for by taxpayers, as these contractors usually hire former military personnel. I’ve heard that the pay for these “experts” is 3-5 times what their pay was for doing the **exact same job** in the regular services. Not sure where all these “savings” are supposed to come from when private companies expect to make a profit.

Also, who is going to be liable when somebody’s accidentally shot or when a person’s life is lost because of paramedic/firefighter negligence, or if a house/business burns down because the private fire department didn’t get there on time? Are the taxpayers going to be on the hook for this? I would certainly hope not! If private companies want to make the profits, they need to take all the losses as well. What happens when they go out of business? How do you protect against corruption or other problems when these private contractors don’t have to answer to the public?

BTW, would you rather a rent-a-cop/private ambulance respond to your 911 call, or a professional cop or firefighter/paramedic?

[CA renter]

[quote=jficquette][quote=Aecetia]You get what you pay for. If you want to pay bargain basement wages, you will get marginally qualified employees. The less qualified, the more problems, and the more law suits for the municipalities who are for the most part self-insured.[/quote]

If we really wanted our money’s worth we would fire all them all and let private entities handle it.[/quote]

Privatization of critical operations:

There has been much debate ast to whether the use of private security
contractors by the U.S. government is cost-effective. According to the CBO, the
costs associated with using private security contractors in Iraq “did not differ greatly
form the costs of having a comparable military unit performing similar functions.
During peacetime, however, the military unit would remain in the force structure and
continue to accrue costs at a peacetime rate, whereas the private security contract
would not have to be renewed.”18 Agencies generally have not conducted
comprehensive cost-benefit analyses comparing the costs of using private security
companies with the costs of using in-house security resources.
Pay Scales for PSC Employees. Pay scales for these contractors
reportedly vary depending on their experience, their nationality, and the U.S.
government’s perceptions of danger involved. When the hiring of such contractors
first became controversial, the news media reported (in April 2004) a pay range of
$500 to $1,500 per day.19 Since the earlier days of the conflict, experts suggest that
the pay scale has decreased and is on average lower globally as the supply of those
desiring such work has risen.20 The highest amounts are paid to highly trained and
experienced former military personnel from the United States and British
Commonwealth, with lower amounts paid to personnel from developing countries
such as Chile and Nepal, and the lowest amounts going to locally hired Iraqis.

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL32419.pdf
——————–

Since police and fire protection are ongoing services, there will likely be no net savings if private contractors are used. Note how the training for these “highly trained and experienced former military personnel” was paid for by taxpayers, as these contractors usually hire former military personnel. I’ve heard that the pay for these “experts” is 3-5 times what their pay was for doing the **exact same job** in the regular services. Not sure where all these “savings” are supposed to come from when private companies expect to make a profit.

Also, who is going to be liable when somebody’s accidentally shot or when a person’s life is lost because of paramedic/firefighter negligence, or if a house/business burns down because the private fire department didn’t get there on time? Are the taxpayers going to be on the hook for this? I would certainly hope not! If private companies want to make the profits, they need to take all the losses as well. What happens when they go out of business? How do you protect against corruption or other problems when these private contractors don’t have to answer to the public?

BTW, would you rather a rent-a-cop/private ambulance respond to your 911 call, or a professional cop or firefighter/paramedic?

[CA renter]

[quote=jficquette][quote=Aecetia]You get what you pay for. If you want to pay bargain basement wages, you will get marginally qualified employees. The less qualified, the more problems, and the more law suits for the municipalities who are for the most part self-insured.[/quote]

If we really wanted our money’s worth we would fire all them all and let private entities handle it.[/quote]

Privatization of critical operations:

There has been much debate ast to whether the use of private security
contractors by the U.S. government is cost-effective. According to the CBO, the
costs associated with using private security contractors in Iraq “did not differ greatly
form the costs of having a comparable military unit performing similar functions.
During peacetime, however, the military unit would remain in the force structure and
continue to accrue costs at a peacetime rate, whereas the private security contract
would not have to be renewed.”18 Agencies generally have not conducted
comprehensive cost-benefit analyses comparing the costs of using private security
companies with the costs of using in-house security resources.
Pay Scales for PSC Employees. Pay scales for these contractors
reportedly vary depending on their experience, their nationality, and the U.S.
government’s perceptions of danger involved. When the hiring of such contractors
first became controversial, the news media reported (in April 2004) a pay range of
$500 to $1,500 per day.19 Since the earlier days of the conflict, experts suggest that
the pay scale has decreased and is on average lower globally as the supply of those
desiring such work has risen.20 The highest amounts are paid to highly trained and
experienced former military personnel from the United States and British
Commonwealth, with lower amounts paid to personnel from developing countries
such as Chile and Nepal, and the lowest amounts going to locally hired Iraqis.

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL32419.pdf
——————–

Since police and fire protection are ongoing services, there will likely be no net savings if private contractors are used. Note how the training for these “highly trained and experienced former military personnel” was paid for by taxpayers, as these contractors usually hire former military personnel. I’ve heard that the pay for these “experts” is 3-5 times what their pay was for doing the **exact same job** in the regular services. Not sure where all these “savings” are supposed to come from when private companies expect to make a profit.

Also, who is going to be liable when somebody’s accidentally shot or when a person’s life is lost because of paramedic/firefighter negligence, or if a house/business burns down because the private fire department didn’t get there on time? Are the taxpayers going to be on the hook for this? I would certainly hope not! If private companies want to make the profits, they need to take all the losses as well. What happens when they go out of business? How do you protect against corruption or other problems when these private contractors don’t have to answer to the public?

BTW, would you rather a rent-a-cop/private ambulance respond to your 911 call, or a professional cop or firefighter/paramedic?

[CA renter]

[quote=jficquette][quote=Aecetia]You get what you pay for. If you want to pay bargain basement wages, you will get marginally qualified employees. The less qualified, the more problems, and the more law suits for the municipalities who are for the most part self-insured.[/quote]

If we really wanted our money’s worth we would fire all them all and let private entities handle it.[/quote]

Privatization of critical operations:

There has been much debate ast to whether the use of private security
contractors by the U.S. government is cost-effective. According to the CBO, the
costs associated with using private security contractors in Iraq “did not differ greatly
form the costs of having a comparable military unit performing similar functions.
During peacetime, however, the military unit would remain in the force structure and
continue to accrue costs at a peacetime rate, whereas the private security contract
would not have to be renewed.”18 Agencies generally have not conducted
comprehensive cost-benefit analyses comparing the costs of using private security
companies with the costs of using in-house security resources.
Pay Scales for PSC Employees. Pay scales for these contractors
reportedly vary depending on their experience, their nationality, and the U.S.
government’s perceptions of danger involved. When the hiring of such contractors
first became controversial, the news media reported (in April 2004) a pay range of
$500 to $1,500 per day.19 Since the earlier days of the conflict, experts suggest that
the pay scale has decreased and is on average lower globally as the supply of those
desiring such work has risen.20 The highest amounts are paid to highly trained and
experienced former military personnel from the United States and British
Commonwealth, with lower amounts paid to personnel from developing countries
such as Chile and Nepal, and the lowest amounts going to locally hired Iraqis.

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL32419.pdf
——————–

Since police and fire protection are ongoing services, there will likely be no net savings if private contractors are used. Note how the training for these “highly trained and experienced former military personnel” was paid for by taxpayers, as these contractors usually hire former military personnel. I’ve heard that the pay for these “experts” is 3-5 times what their pay was for doing the **exact same job** in the regular services. Not sure where all these “savings” are supposed to come from when private companies expect to make a profit.

Also, who is going to be liable when somebody’s accidentally shot or when a person’s life is lost because of paramedic/firefighter negligence, or if a house/business burns down because the private fire department didn’t get there on time? Are the taxpayers going to be on the hook for this? I would certainly hope not! If private companies want to make the profits, they need to take all the losses as well. What happens when they go out of business? How do you protect against corruption or other problems when these private contractors don’t have to answer to the public?

BTW, would you rather a rent-a-cop/private ambulance respond to your 911 call, or a professional cop or firefighter/paramedic?

[CA renter]

[quote=jficquette][quote=Aecetia]You get what you pay for. If you want to pay bargain basement wages, you will get marginally qualified employees. The less qualified, the more problems, and the more law suits for the municipalities who are for the most part self-insured.[/quote]

If we really wanted our money’s worth we would fire all them all and let private entities handle it.[/quote]

Privatization of critical operations:

There has been much debate ast to whether the use of private security
contractors by the U.S. government is cost-effective. According to the CBO, the
costs associated with using private security contractors in Iraq “did not differ greatly
form the costs of having a comparable military unit performing similar functions.
During peacetime, however, the military unit would remain in the force structure and
continue to accrue costs at a peacetime rate, whereas the private security contract
would not have to be renewed.”18 Agencies generally have not conducted
comprehensive cost-benefit analyses comparing the costs of using private security
companies with the costs of using in-house security resources.
Pay Scales for PSC Employees. Pay scales for these contractors
reportedly vary depending on their experience, their nationality, and the U.S.
government’s perceptions of danger involved. When the hiring of such contractors
first became controversial, the news media reported (in April 2004) a pay range of
$500 to $1,500 per day.19 Since the earlier days of the conflict, experts suggest that
the pay scale has decreased and is on average lower globally as the supply of those
desiring such work has risen.20 The highest amounts are paid to highly trained and
experienced former military personnel from the United States and British
Commonwealth, with lower amounts paid to personnel from developing countries
such as Chile and Nepal, and the lowest amounts going to locally hired Iraqis.

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL32419.pdf
——————–

Since police and fire protection are ongoing services, there will likely be no net savings if private contractors are used. Note how the training for these “highly trained and experienced former military personnel” was paid for by taxpayers, as these contractors usually hire former military personnel. I’ve heard that the pay for these “experts” is 3-5 times what their pay was for doing the **exact same job** in the regular services. Not sure where all these “savings” are supposed to come from when private companies expect to make a profit.

Also, who is going to be liable when somebody’s accidentally shot or when a person’s life is lost because of paramedic/firefighter negligence, or if a house/business burns down because the private fire department didn’t get there on time? Are the taxpayers going to be on the hook for this? I would certainly hope not! If private companies want to make the profits, they need to take all the losses as well. What happens when they go out of business? How do you protect against corruption or other problems when these private contractors don’t have to answer to the public?

BTW, would you rather a rent-a-cop/private ambulance respond to your 911 call, or a professional cop or firefighter/paramedic?

[Aecetia]

I think over time many police and fire departments will be merged into public safety agencies, streamlined and many aspects of their work will be outsourced to civilians for some of the reasons listed above by several of you. The remaining will be better trained and more para-military. There is a lot of waste in public safety and most of it is the pay of the many levels of administration similar to school districts and their multi-level bureaucracy. Most of us want boots on the ground and ultimately that is what the tax dollars should be paid for.

[Aecetia]

I think over time many police and fire departments will be merged into public safety agencies, streamlined and many aspects of their work will be outsourced to civilians for some of the reasons listed above by several of you. The remaining will be better trained and more para-military. There is a lot of waste in public safety and most of it is the pay of the many levels of administration similar to school districts and their multi-level bureaucracy. Most of us want boots on the ground and ultimately that is what the tax dollars should be paid for.

[Aecetia]

I think over time many police and fire departments will be merged into public safety agencies, streamlined and many aspects of their work will be outsourced to civilians for some of the reasons listed above by several of you. The remaining will be better trained and more para-military. There is a lot of waste in public safety and most of it is the pay of the many levels of administration similar to school districts and their multi-level bureaucracy. Most of us want boots on the ground and ultimately that is what the tax dollars should be paid for.

[Aecetia]

I think over time many police and fire departments will be merged into public safety agencies, streamlined and many aspects of their work will be outsourced to civilians for some of the reasons listed above by several of you. The remaining will be better trained and more para-military. There is a lot of waste in public safety and most of it is the pay of the many levels of administration similar to school districts and their multi-level bureaucracy. Most of us want boots on the ground and ultimately that is what the tax dollars should be paid for.

[Aecetia]

I think over time many police and fire departments will be merged into public safety agencies, streamlined and many aspects of their work will be outsourced to civilians for some of the reasons listed above by several of you. The remaining will be better trained and more para-military. There is a lot of waste in public safety and most of it is the pay of the many levels of administration similar to school districts and their multi-level bureaucracy. Most of us want boots on the ground and ultimately that is what the tax dollars should be paid for.

[jficquette]

[quote=CA renter][quote=jficquette][quote=Aecetia]professional cop or firefighter/paramedic?[/quote]

CA Renter,

It’s nonsense that you would not save money by getting rid of the overpaid unionized government employees in public safety.

Public cost per year counting retirement is about $250k-$300k depending on how long they live which in this day and time is pushing 100 years old. Private pay would be about $75k per year.

That report on Iraq was written by an overpaid unionized government worker and is as bias as all government reports are. Even if it wasn’t slanted don’t you realize that fighting a war in Iraq is different then public safety in America? It’s not even Apples and Apples.

[jficquette]

[quote=CA renter][quote=jficquette][quote=Aecetia]professional cop or firefighter/paramedic?[/quote]

CA Renter,

It’s nonsense that you would not save money by getting rid of the overpaid unionized government employees in public safety.

Public cost per year counting retirement is about $250k-$300k depending on how long they live which in this day and time is pushing 100 years old. Private pay would be about $75k per year.

That report on Iraq was written by an overpaid unionized government worker and is as bias as all government reports are. Even if it wasn’t slanted don’t you realize that fighting a war in Iraq is different then public safety in America? It’s not even Apples and Apples.

[jficquette]

[quote=CA renter][quote=jficquette][quote=Aecetia]professional cop or firefighter/paramedic?[/quote]

CA Renter,

It’s nonsense that you would not save money by getting rid of the overpaid unionized government employees in public safety.

Public cost per year counting retirement is about $250k-$300k depending on how long they live which in this day and time is pushing 100 years old. Private pay would be about $75k per year.

That report on Iraq was written by an overpaid unionized government worker and is as bias as all government reports are. Even if it wasn’t slanted don’t you realize that fighting a war in Iraq is different then public safety in America? It’s not even Apples and Apples.

[jficquette]

[quote=CA renter][quote=jficquette][quote=Aecetia]professional cop or firefighter/paramedic?[/quote]

CA Renter,

It’s nonsense that you would not save money by getting rid of the overpaid unionized government employees in public safety.

Public cost per year counting retirement is about $250k-$300k depending on how long they live which in this day and time is pushing 100 years old. Private pay would be about $75k per year.

That report on Iraq was written by an overpaid unionized government worker and is as bias as all government reports are. Even if it wasn’t slanted don’t you realize that fighting a war in Iraq is different then public safety in America? It’s not even Apples and Apples.

[Author]

Posts