Today's Blog: Time for the Guv to morph into Chris Christie My husband and I and a couple hundred friends watched in Green Bay as ...(more) Search Archives

Blogs

Time for the Guv to morph into Chris Christie (6/28/2011)

Time for Gov. Walker to talk more about the cake (3/4/2011)

Today, reality hits home (3/1/2011)

FoxPolitics News going on hiatus (1/28/2011)

Brown County Executive candidate forum Feb. 8 (1/28/2011)

Education done right (1/27/2011)

To Obama, the ‘We’ is Government (1/27/2011)

(more)

While working for the state my wage for my position was significantly lower than my counterparts in Ohio, Michigan, Minnesota, Illinois, Iowa and Indiana at the time. In addition, while working for the state it sometimes took 2-3 yrs to get our raises approved after a new contract was signed. So I guess before something like this is published the entire wage package should be taken into consideration.
Rick, the analysis here does not include service in the military. Regarding service as a state employee, I addressed the wage issue quite clearly, saying that low wages used to be the rationale for offering rich benefits to public employees. Today, public sector employee wages are very similar to private sector wages. JE

Rick Langan (Thu Sep 20 08:14:25 2007)

I think we can all agree that health care costs are out of control and need to be controlled. The pain is felt more in the public sectors because benefits haven't decreased there like they have in the private sectors. But even that point requires clarification since benefits haven't decreased for all private sector employees. Top execs of bigger corporations typically get much sweeter benefits than lower-level employees. But that's not the case in the public sector. While my salary as a relatively low-level administrative employee at UWM is a lot less than the chancellor's, my health care benefits are the same as his; heck, my health care benefits are the same as the governor's. That's an important distinction between the public and private sectors that's often ignored in these types of comparisons.

But I'd say the fundamental point is that total compensation has been increasing at virtually the same rate in the private sector (3.8%) as it has in the public sector (4%) in Wisconsin between 2001 and 2005. WISTAX notes this, and you can see the figures firsthand through the BLS here. And the BLS figures are probably even more precise because it allows direct comparisons between industries within the private sector; after all, simply comparing "the public sector" to "the private sector" isn't necessarily accurate.

As WISTAX points out, the private sector works off bottom lines. They use that to assert that those bottom lines hold back compensation more in the public sector. That's not always the case. Sometimes bottom lines can cause compensation to shoot up. Looking at the BLS data between 01-05, for instance, you see that the airline industry compensation largely stagnated (only a 2% increase over the entire timespan), for pretty obvious reasons, while the real estate industry saw compensation rise at a large rate (nearly 25% over the timespan), again, for pretty obvious reasons. The state and local government compensation is pretty steady over that time (roughly 18% over the timespan), which is largely the nature of public sector work (you're not going to get rich, but you're not going to lose your shirt).

And, if you look at the data prior to 2001, when the economy was still kicking in high gear between 98-2000, private sector compensation grew at 12.1% in WI while state/local compensation only grew at 9.7%. And if you take out the big recession years of 01-02, and just look at 03-05, private sector compensation again outpaces public sector compensation in WI (9.1% to 6.8%).

All in all, though, these macro comparisons are pretty rough. You get an openly conservative group like the MHPC to look at the numbers, and they're going to figure out a way to make them look the way they want (on that point, it’s important to note the MHPC figures include the federal government, which has seen a much larger jump in WI compensation – 32 percent – between 01-05 than state/local government). You get an openly liberal group like the Center for Economic and Policy Research to look at the numbers, and I’m sure they’d come up with a much different analysis.

In the end, looking at the raw data on WI from the BLS, and even reading the WISTAX release, doesn’t exactly create cause for alarm.
All interesting information Seth. Helpful. I disagree with your conclusion however. The information darn well needs to create concern. It can easily be argued that public sector benefit costs must be controlled. JE

Seth Zlotocha (Thu Sep 20 09:21:28 2007)

Jo:
This is not really new information although the percentages you stated are probably slightly different than last year. I think most of us who follow this know what the problem is but there has been little discussion on how to solve it.

Our state legislators and local officials need to work together to come up with solutions. The problem here, as I have stated numerous times before, is that our legislators and local officials don't really want to take this on because it is politically "messy" since a significant number of their constituents are employees of local or state government. Their current answer to the problem is either to ignore it or cut programs that are needed to satisfy the demands that are placed on them from increasing salary and benefit costs.

So what I would like to see from our legislators and local officials is more suggested solutions and some real effort in addressing the problem. However this will never happen unless you and I(the taxpayers) put specific pressure on them to react. Maybe we should be asking our legislators and local officials what they plan to do to address the problem and make this an issue of debate in the 2008 elections. That is the only way it is going to change. As someone once said "Either CHANGE the people or change the PEOPLE."

Mike Thomas (Thu Sep 20 09:36:45 2007)

Can't wait for tomorrow's follow up to this great article! Now, what to do about it?
Yeah.... JE

Phyllis (Thu Sep 20 15:52:03 2007)

Damn straight, Jo. Few wish to rock the cradle, or is it boat, or is it ship sinking slowly?

Richard (Thu Sep 20 16:57:19 2007)

Many, if not most, Wisconsinites know public employees are overcompensated. Now we have hard data from a credible organization to prove it. Of course the BIG question now is, will the private sector citizens of this state demand a rollback of public sector compensation???? Like most revalations of this kind it highly depends if the major media outlets run with this story.

There is no doubt that private sector citizens are being taken advantage of. In fact, it's worse than that. Their hard earned money is literally being stolen from them to provide Rolls Royce benefits. It reminds me of a recently retired lady in Brookfield. She and her husband were interviewed as they were packing to leave Wiscosnsin. She said "Wisconsin is welfare for public employees and we no longer want to write the welfare checks." That comment says it all. Public employee taxpayer extortion calls for a major taxpayer revolt.

Russ (Thu Sep 20 17:09:20 2007)

And then there is the Town of Grand Chute that doesn't reveal the fringe benefits of the town employees. I wonder why.
Shoot Ron, that reminds me of my commitment to you to get Grand Chute salaries posted. I'll get on it. JE

Ron Tank (Fri Sep 21 09:58:45 2007)

Post a Reply

Print this Article

Email Article to a Friend