PUBLIC PAYROLL SOARS (wealth transfer gone from citizens to people in Govt)

LA Daily News ^ | 3./22/04 | Troy Anderson

[Joe Hadenuf]

(I instructed the Admin Moderator to remove the other thread).

______________________________________________________

Public payroll soars

Salaries move far ahead of inflation

From the city of Los Angeles to California state government, the cost of salaries and benefits for public employees has soared far faster than inflation in the last five years -- three times as fast in the case of the Los Angeles Unified School District, a Daily News analysis has found.

The study showed that spending for public employees' salaries and benefits at the state and local levels increased overall at more than twice the rate of inflation and grew faster than the per capita income of average Californians. The cost of pensions was excluded from the analysis because of the wide disparity between different levels of government.

The spending binge started at a time that tax revenues were soaring, at the peak of the 1990s dot-com boom. Now that the boom has gone bust and the economy remains weak, state and local officials are making deep cuts in public services and looking for ways to raise fees and taxes. The review covered the fiscal years from 1997-98 to 2002-03.

"At all levels of government, the rate of compensation has gone up much more rapidly than it has in the private sector and, most importantly, faster than the personal income of the people who pay for this," said Steven B. Frates, a senior fellow at the Rose Institute of State and Local Government at Claremont McKenna College.

"There has been a wealth transfer. It has gone from the citizens to the people in government".

"You often hear people in government cry that there are going to be cuts and we're hurting the poor and the little children. The fact of the matter is the citizens of the state, county and city are making life better, not necessarily for schoolchildren or people in need, but for government employees."

The review covered the state of California; the city of Los Angeles; Los Angeles County and three neighboring counties; the LAUSD; and the Metropolitan Transportation Authority. Overall salary and benefit expenditures increased between 18 percent at the MTA and 53 percent for San Bernardino County during the five-year period.

The portion for employee benefits alone jumped by 35 to 186 percent.

In comparison, the inflation rate in California rose 17 percent, and per capita income in the state increased 24 percent.

Pension costs varied widely and dropped at some public agencies like Los Angeles city government, which has its own pension fund that profited from the booming stock market, and skyrocketed by as much as 79 percent at other agencies. Many local governments now face huge pension bills largely because of expansion in pension benefits.

Workers' compensation costs rose between 29 and 141 percent, and overtime costs increased by 13 to 60 percent.

In the last five years, per capita income in California increased 24 percent, from $26,521 to $32,898. Nationally, employees in the private sector earn an average of $34,299 a year, plus $13,374 in benefits.

That compares to the $49,005 annual salaries local and state government employees enjoy, plus $21,528 in benefits, according to U.S. Department of Labor statistics.

The highest average salary and benefits package is in Los Angeles County, where compensation jumped from $59,126 to $79,057, although officials point out that many employees went without raises for several years in the mid-1990s.

Local and state government officials said they approved compensation increases for their employees to remain competitive with other government agencies and the private sector, and that some cost increases, such as health care and workers' compensation, were outside of their control.

Some union leaders questioned the figures.

"We represent over 50,000 county employees whose salaries increased 24 percent over 10 years, an average increase of 2.4 percent a year," said Bart Diener, assistant general manager of Service Employees International Union, Local 660, which represents Los Angeles County workers. "We believe this is appropriate and in line with the growth in the economy."

But H.D. Palmer, spokesman for the state Department of Finance under Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, said the 41 percent rise in state salary and benefits costs under former Gov. Gray Davis clearly exceeds similar increases in the private sector.

"Looking at that growth in the rearview mirror, it's clear that kind of growth is unsustainable over the long haul," Palmer said. "It's one of the reasons the governor has said he'd like to reopen a number of contracts with state employee unions."

With the state facing a massive shortfall even after voters approved a $15 billion bond issue mainly to refinance existing debt, state and local government agencies now face making steep cuts. Much of the problem was caused by a five-year state spending spree that raised expenditures 43 percent while revenue rose only 25 percent.

Los Angeles County faces making nearly $500 million in cuts, while the city of Los Angeles faces $250 million and the LAUSD $600 million.

County Supervisor Michael D. Antonovich said the biggest portion of the salary increases comes from often unnoticed 2.75 percent and 5.5 percent annual "step" increases, or merit raises, which local and state government workers get during their first five to 11 years of employment.

"And many times employees who reach the fifth step after five years will be reclassified for another five years," Antonovich said. "This is above any cost-of-living adjustments negotiated in labor contracts. That's why those numbers go up so much each year and services are cut.

"So what they need to have is a two-tiered system. Labor laws need to be modified. You could develop a new classification that would allow step increases based upon merit and performance with a smaller increase. So what you would have is something similar to the private sector where promotions are based on merit and performance, not just showing up and having your eyes open."

Jon Coupal, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, said the figures confirm that the only "growth industry" in California is government.

"It's clear that the size of government and the slice it takes from the private sector continues to expand," Coupal said. "And while private sector businesses have suffered, it appears that local and state government believe they are beyond economic pressures."

Coupal said local and state officials should renegotiate contracts with employees unions, consider salary and benefit cuts, work furloughs and layoffs to reduce spending.

But Robert Stern, president of the Center for Governmental Studies, said government employee unions are powerful in California and he's not aware of any agencies cutting salaries and benefits since the Great Depression.

"These are pretty stout increases in both salaries and benefits," said Jack Kyser, chief economist at the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corp. "But the attitude in Sacramento was, 'Look at all this money coming in,' and they spent us into a massive budget deficit."

And, with the state plagued by a structural deficit of up to $10 billion a year, Kyser added: "We are either going to have to increase taxes or make painful cuts in spending. We are not out of the woods yet."

Frates of the Rose Institute said elected leaders bear the blame.

"They gave the farm away," Frates said. "California politicians need to be candid and open about what they are actually spending taxpayer money on.

"They frequently use the shorthand of, 'It's for public safety, education and public health,' when in fact it's for lavish salary and benefit increases for public employees at the expense of the general citizens of California. There are many public safety employees who now make more in retirement than they did when they were working and they get to retire at age 50."

Schwarzenegger is trying to renegotiate contracts. Los Angeles city officials have talked about renegotiations as well and County Chief Administrative Officer David Janssen has proposed a 1 percent salary cut for county employees and furloughs to save about $20 million.

"The question is do we make these necessary adjustments, or do we fire people?" Antonovich asked. "I'd rather make reductions and keep people employed. I believe you will find from workers a willingness to move forward and take reductions to retain their jobs and continue providing services to the public.

"The union leaders have traditionally opposed these reductions and would rather lay off people than have any reductions in compensation. To me, that is cruel and unnecessary. They don't want to jeopardize the benefits they have already gotten." l=8s=8 Troy Anderson, (213) 974-8985 troy.anderson@dailynews.com AT A GLANCE Here are highlights of the changes over the last five years based on figures from state and local governments, comparing fiscal year 1997-98 to fiscal year 2002-03. State:

Spending for salaries and benefits, excluding pensions, was up 41 percent, from $13.3 billion to $18.7 billion.

The number of full-time employees increased 10.5 percent, from 192,377 to 212,563.

The salary for correctional officers increased 25.4 percent, from $65,450 to $82,066 a year. City of Los Angeles (Not counting the departments of water and power, airports and harbor):

Spending for salaries and benefits, excluding pensions, rose 26 percent, from $1.8 billion to $2.2 billion.

The average salary of civilian workers rose 23 percent, from $45,534 to $55,919, while the average for police officers grew 28 percent, from $60,397 to $77,537.

Overtime costs increased by 61 percent, and workers' compensation costs went up 81 percent. Los Angeles schools:

In the Los Angeles Unified School District, expenditures for salaries and benefits rose 51 percent, from $3.6 billion to $5.4 billion.

The average salary and benefits package of an LAUSD employee grew by 27 percent, from $51,424 to $65,526.

The number of full-time employees expanded 18 percent, from 69,140 to 81,691. Los Angeles County:

Expenditures for salaries and benefits rose 39 percent, from $5.0 billion to $6.9 billion.

The average county employee's salary increased 31 percent, from $37,664 to $49,343.

Workers' compensation costs soared 96 percent, from $143.1 million to $281.0 million. Ventura County:

Salaries and benefits rose 22 percent, from $271.5 million to $330.9 million.

Overtime shot up 55 percent, from $1.9 million to $2.9 million.

Workers' compensation costs skyrocketed 141 percent, from $4.5 million to $10.7 million. MTA:

Salaries and benefits increased 18 percent, from $499 million to $589 million.

The number of full-time employees was up by 17.9 percent, from 7,576 to 8,930.

[Joe Hadenuf]

I work for Homeland Security. And I happen to believe that's a rather important job at the moment.

If it's so important, why is our country being literally over run with people here illegally? You know, the million man conga-line of people entering illegally from God knows where?

We now have about 10 *million* in this country that are here illegally, we have not a clue who they are, what they are doing here, or what their agenda may be, as hundreds of thousands continue to pour in every month or so.

It's creating epic economic chaos, fraud, choking off our hospitals, jails, classrooms, etc. Not mention the titanic, real, terrorist security threat caused by these open bleeding borders.

So what is *your* government agency, Homeland Security, doing about this?

[Hostage]

Hi Sandy,

Greetings from a fellow denizen of liberal Seattle. I think Homeland Security is an important job. It ranks with the military in my view.

Bu the key thing is that the Department of Homeland Security is a non-unionized part of the federal government like the military. Am I correct?

In the mid 1980s I was offered a GM-15 position working to support the DOD. As you know that's a high position and the reason I was offered was because I had been in some DARPA programs where I had done some good things that caught the eyes of my superiors.

But when I was offered the GM position it was through a person that was retiring from that position. He knew me for years and we had interacted in many capacities in our travels around the country and around the world. However, some of my colleagues told me that although he had earned his laurels in the 1950's fledgling space program, he was leaving behind quite a mess and that I would have to deal with cleaning it up. We are talking about organization, mission, budget, duties, etc.

I found out why he was in a mess. His staff was totally unionized and deadwood. Let me put it this way: his secretary was one of the dimmest bulbs I have ever seen in government. He had tried to have her fired four times! Each time he had to go through an elaborate procedure of hearings, warnings, goal setting, evaluations and re-evaluations. Then after a third hearing and evaluation process he had to recommend her firing but was always told by the union office that she had requested a further review. He told me that he had spent so much time on just trying to get rid of her that after five years he gave up trying.

This pattern was repeated for several other persons in his office. At first I thought he may be a poor manager but then I saw the incompetencies of his staff. When I discussed this with friends in my own sphere, they said that was par for government support. I declined the offer.

Over the years I have come to the conclusion that government unions have nearly destroyed the effectiveness of our government.

I can tell you volumes of experiences regarding extremely competent government employees and agents that were from the old school of government, before all the unionization and civil rights restrictions.

But instead I will just point out that the democrats obstructed the creation of the DHS because they wanted it unionized. The Republicans to their credit knew that meant the DHS would have been destined to be another ineffective bureaucracy, serving very little purpose.

I am glad you're in the right part of government. I hope you never have to see the deadwood, banalities and demoralization of the unionized part. Those posters that show hatred for government are correct. Many parts of government are a drag on the productivity of the population. Many government agencies take alot in fees and taxes and give very very very little in return if anything.

To understand this, try building a normal home in a city someday where you have to deal with city building departments. You will pay exhorbitant fees to hear someone behind a counter tell you that it will take six months to review your plans. They will give you a list of impractical to-do's that you must comply with or no permit. You will pay thousands of dollars for the priviledge of having them treat you like you are the enemy and they represent all residents of the city against you.

As you live in your house that you own on the land that says you a property owner, they will treat you as if you are a tenant on their land because landowners will come and go but the City is forever and you will pay rent in the form of property tax.

Government in many many cases is unnecessary, intrusive, condescending, impractical, impossible to deal with, nonsensical, hamstrung by its own workplace and above all disrespectful of a person's time and hard earned cash.

Government often works well as a Soldier, as a Cop, as a Bailiff. Wherever authorized force is needed, government can excel. In most other things, government can be and often is a troublemaker.

[Joe Hadenuf]

Greetings from a fellow denizen of liberal Seattle. I think Homeland Security is an important job.

Greetings! I think she's went off in a huff. But feel free to take a crack at 241. I am a little confused why we are spending billions on HLS, yet we've left our doors and windows to our country wide open to the point where large tracts of our country have been literally over run by this epic lawlessness.

[Sloth]

well yes, all those government employees are having yummy lunches at the tax payers expense!

So, if those gov't employees go to church and drop $50 in the collection plate, I suppose you think that's government funding of religion. Wanna call the ACLU to whine for you?

[Joe Hadenuf]

So, if those gov't employees go to church and drop $50 in the collection plate, I suppose you think that's government funding of religion. Wanna call the ACLU to whine for you?

You're spin is making the planets rotation speed up. Please stop.

[Sloth]

If the taxpayers are paying for the public employee's lunch, then they are also contributing to his church. If you don't buy the latter, drop your foolish insistence on the former.

[Joe Hadenuf]

If the taxpayers are paying for the public employee's lunch, then they are also contributing to his church.

So if they go to a mosque and contribute it's OK with you? I don't want people taking my hard earned money to contribute to anything.

I already give money to charities of my choosing, not what some government employee chooses.

How about the money they contribute to the political socialist screw worms that want more government agencies and more government taxes? Nice huh?

So, maybe we should hire several million more government employees, so they can put a buck in the plate on Sunday?

What is you're point? Are we lucky to have 23,000,000 government employees?

So the more government employees we have, the better our economy?

What about the private sector that's footing the bill for all this?

[Not A Snowbird]

You make some excellent points. There is no doubt there is dead wood in the government, one of them works in my office and I'm sorely tempted to push her down an elevator shaft one of these days.

Is it hard to get rid of these people? You bet... because of the unions. It's unions, more than government itself, that is causing the bulk of the problems in my view. Can it be done? Yes, I see it happen but it takes effort.

We are heavily unionized, unfortunately, even in Homeland Security. The Department inherited four or five different unions when it was created, all of them competing with each other to be the one calling the shots. Different working rules, different overtime systems, different leave accrual and classification systems. It's been a nightmare trying to come to some accord.

All of our inspectors and border patrol are union, as are some of the people in the field office. My position is bargaining (union) although I flatly refuse to join. I am so behind President Bush for wanting more control and flexibility over assignments and working conditions, and I'm sick to death of the union whining.

Sorry, I'm in a bad mood. Just got back from mailing my federal taxes. Grr.

[Not A Snowbird]

I'm breaking my pledge not to respond to you, I'll give it just one more try.

If you expected Homeland Security to immediately fix all the problems of immigration overnight, you are delusional. I can tell you we intercept alot of people and things that shouldn't be here, it just doesn't get in the press. Most of what we have accomplished is under the radar and doesn't get in the press.

Do you think that 10 million people just entered in the past year since Homeland Security was created? Again, you are delusional. You blame us for the past umpteen years of neglect, but don't give us any credit for what we have been able to accomplish.

We have much more to do, and we need agencies like the California Coastal Commission to step up to the plate and let us physically secure that border. We also need policy set by the executive branch to support getting tough on the border.

You just want to rant and rave. I would like to know, since you have such a hatred for all things government and the employees thereof, how the hell you would keep any illegals out if you fired us all? Station citizens on the border with shotguns, firing at will? Sorry, I don't want to live in your world.

Out for good this time. I'm finished trying to talk to you.

[Joe Hadenuf]

You didn't answer the simple question Sandy, all you did was avoid the question.

Since you work for Home Land Security, I'll ask the question one more time.

What is *your* government agency, Homeland Security, doing about this epic invasion of millions that continue to pour into our country?

Since you work for Homeland Security, why can't you answer this?

[Hostage]

Wow, I had no idea that Homeland Security was unionized!

Thanks for filling me in.

How did it get unionized? I thought a good part of the battle in the 2002 elections was over the issue of how democrats obstructed the creation of Homeland Security by insisting it be under union control.

What am I missing here?

[Not A Snowbird]

How did it get unionized?

The individual agencies that were reorganized to make up Homeland Security are unionized. I can't speak for the other agencies that merged into it, but I know Customs, Immigration, and Agriculture have unions.

I think the union flap was primarily with TSA, since I believe they were created from scratch rather than reorganized from somewhere else. (Somebody correct me here, if I'm wrong.)