Should San Jose City service levels be cut, and fees for services raised, so that city employees can enjoy more pay?
The Mercury News recently reported that automatic “step increases” will cost the city $10 million in FY 09-10 (almost $8 million to be paid from the city’s general fund). “It’s going to come from layoffs or reducing services…” Councilman Oliverio said…“Or, we can recognize the severity of the situation, bargaining units come together…and come up with a way to save jobs and save the city money.” (Mercury News 3/22).
People in the private sector are beginning to question why public sector employees are immune from having to endure the sort of sacrifices that they have been forced to assume. A high-level manager at a major Silicon Valley firm told me that he and his peer managers have not received a salary increase in the past two years, and that their corporation has imposed monthly furloughs in an effort to keep layoffs at a minimum.
Tere Barbella, a teacher at Andrew Hill High School, recently opined on the troubles facing the East Side School District. “Until the Teacher’s Association makes concessions on benefits, we will continue to face the loss of jobs every year.” And, “I hope that my colleagues will take a second look at paying a share of medical coverage for the sake of fewer pink slips.” (Mercury News 3/22/09)
San Jose City service levels have already sunk too low. Something’s got to give. Maybe this time, it should be the “public servants.”
It is so nice to know that Mr. Campbell is one of these people who think everyday is a holiday if you are a public employee.
What a champion for the working man! Or, should we say, advocate for his fellow trust fund beneficiaries.
It amazes me and others how Peter Campbell can use every excuse to put forward his view that public employees, labor unions, and other parts of the groups that he just does not like, should bend and kneel to his Republican buddies. Month and after month,post after post, we read the Reed party line from Campbell that there must be concessions from the public sector. Yes, Peter, all public employees are lazy adult children who have had it too good under Ron Gonzales who printed counterfit invoices in his office and San Jose was robbed blind.
Next?
The fact is that many public employees donate a lot of their free time to a lot of community causes, many of which I have never heard Campbell talk about.
Of course, Reed never wastes any money, and he should continue to grant contracts to people who are not even employees of the city, right, Pete?
By not addressing the employee compensation issue this year and instead relying on layoffs the city next year will probably inevitably again have to layoff more workers should the economy not improve. Continued layoffs would be a disservice to our residents and neighborhoods as we rely heavily on employees to ensure our streets are paved, our libraries and community centers are staffed and our ever burdening questions are answered.
Unlike most large Fortune 500 companies, for the most part the City of San Jose is a service based entity that relies on people. As a resident I continue to feel frustrated at having to continue to make sacrifices through increased fees and service reductions while employee compensation issues aren’t addressed.
I hope our cities leaders will recognize the future misfortunes of not addressing compensation issues now and work with unions to find a compromise. A good first step would be to freeze step increases, but this would only a first step of many more needed.
Make It Happen Paul!
“Should San Jose City service levels be cut, and fees for services raised, so that city employees can enjoy more pay?”
NO!
#1, the working men & women of which you speak are losing jobs and houses as we speak. At a time when people are most in need of open libraries to do job searches and create resumes, we are suggesting closing them to avoid making difficult decisions regarding city employee compensation.
City, state and county services needed desperately by these working-class people are being cut so that government employees can continue to enjoy the benefits that they “deserve.” I suggest that you compare the turnover ratio of city employees (excluding retirement) to that of “normal” businesses to determine if compensation is a problem.
No, every day is not a holiday when you are a public employee. Hopefully, the vast majority of them are hardworking individuals who take pride in the work they do for the people. But that doesn’t exempt them from the same issues facing “the people.”
BTW, I got an email from Monster.com yesterday. Subject: “Recession-Proof Careers in Public Service.” An excerpt: “local and state governments are using billions of dollars to create new, recession-proof public service jobs right now.”
It’s not just trust fund beneficiaries who are starting to realize the gravy train that is a public sector job.
Off topic, but #2 Flem- Your statement/fact that “many public employees donate a lot of their free time to a lot of community causes” is interesting.
If you want to reference “facts” like those, it may behoove you to research how those donation rates stack up against non-public employees. You also might want to read about the differences in donation rates among political affiliations, geographical regions, income categories and religious affiliation.
The “facts” are out there, but something tells me you might not want to know them.
#1 and #2: Are you serious?
And for the record, the “high-level” manager that I referenced is a life long Democrat.
San Jose is a poorly maintained city. No one should get raises until that turns around.
20-30 years ago, folks became public employees due to the job security (you couldn’t be fired unless you killed your manager on site AND got blood on the cheesy metal furniture). You made less than private sector employees, but you had guaranteed job security, no matter how poorly you performed, and decent benefits.
Now you still have job security no matter how poorly you perform, but you also make wages equal to or better than private sector types, and you have a lifetime benefit package that is the envy of everyone.
Mayors and councils are afraid to stand up to the unions. Work rules are laxer than those in France, which has the laziest, strike-prone workforce on the planet. If a private gardener, for example, worked as slowly and inefficiently as parks and wreck gardeners, they’d be fired in 2 weeks. Yet, nothing happens.
Chuckie and the council eliminate 18 positions, and transfer everyone else to unfilled positions on the city payroll, and they wonder why they can’t close the $60 million deficit???!!!
There are layers upon layers of deputy this and assistant that at $125k+/year on SJ payroll alone…and what do they really DO? Multiply that by all the cities in California alone and you can see whay we have such a huge budget shortfall.
Our roads in SJ SUCK, yet we have 16 or more folks employed in the Office of Cultural Affairs. HUH???
A few of us here on SJI have a few minutes to grouse about it, but no-one has time to attack the problem. Bureaucratic inertia combined with union strangleholds win the day every time. They can wait out the most dedicated objecters.
I have ended many a post here saying “It’s time for another Boston Tea Party”. There are tea parties planned, some have occurred already. JOIN IN.
I’d say vote out all incumbents, but the only people who run for office are those wishing to suck off the public tit. So that gets us nowhere, either.
We’re bloody doomed, people. The politicians and the bureaucrats win every time.
Obama promised change while campaigning, and no more earmarks AFTER he took the oath of office; yet a bill with 9000, yup NINE THOUSAND, earmarks was not vetoed. His every speech reminds us that he inherited the fiscal proble, A true statement. But he’s doing nothing about it. His Treasury Secretary cheated on taxes and can’t even use TurboTax properly. He testifies daily in Congress looking like a deer in the headlights.
And the Democrats’ solution is MORE TAXES, to pay for the bloated, inefficient system we have now. Where’s the f*cking change, Mr. president? Obama’s budget projects the highest deficits EVER for the next TEN years. He’s proudly stating repeatedly that his crowning achievement is going to be cutting a huge deficit in half in four years. First, it will not happen. Second, cutting a record deficit in half is not an achievement, it’s a sellout.
So, everyone, bend over and grab your ankles.
Now, I will be having no smacks against Peter.
Though I am not allowed in his neighborhood, he has handed me a silver dollar for a pint once in a while if I dance a jig for him.
“Corruption
One definition of the word “corruption” is, “a departure from what is pure and correct.” That definition, unfortunately, fits San Jose perfectly. Corruption is not just about politicians helping their friends and putting themselves before the people. It’s also about citizens not fulfilling their civic duties. Too often in the modern age, people look to their government as if it were a hotel concierge, designed and expected to meet their every want and need. That’s not what we’re about. At least it shouldn’t be.” ….Pete Campbell
And now, you look to your goverment to cut the wages of those very same people that provide the “need” for your “want”. Let’s not forget that those same city employees are in the same boat as everyone else. Living paycheck to paycheck and on the verge of losing their houses as well. Cut their check and you’ll send more people to the soup kitchen.
“San Jose City service levels have already sunk too low. Something’s got to give. Maybe this time, it should be the “public servants.” I guess you don’t mind having the service levels go even further into the toilet……
Are YOU serious???
The story of your friend, besides being a single data point, is misleading for several reasons. To start with, his income is probably at least 10 times that of the typical city worker, so it is a lot easier for him to coast along on his already inflated income. Also, most high-level managers make more money from their executive bonus plans than their salaries, which if they were smart enough to save, would see them through lean times pretty well.
The job security traditionally associated with public sector jobs is also traditionally associated with incomes much lower than a comparable job would command in the private sector. Except of course with the constantly growing upper management end, where the argument is that valuable paper-pushing skills can only be obtained by paying salaries comparable to industry.
And in #7 Pete proposes that ordinary city employees should be punished because their bosses are incompetent.
WalMart helps their employees make up for their low-paying jobs by helping them apply for food stamps, so why shouldn’t city workers be treated the same way?
Peter Campbell does not think public employees do any work, nor does he appreciate their value. He is one of these smarmy, country clubbers who gets this subsidy or that, and then talks about belt tightening.
Campbell=Phony
Gee, JMC, these buns you have at the stand on North First are not fresh at all.
JMC goes from attacking minorities to making a hit on unions.
LBJ, JFK, and MLK sure ruined your world, JMC. The plantation never was the same for you until you had to pay them.
#13- Hot Dog Stand,
“When we lose our individual independence in the corporateness of a mass movement, we find a new freedom – freedom to hate, bully, lie, torture, murder and betray without shame and remorse.”
Quote by Eric Hoffer (American Writer, 1902-1983)
I’m tired of seeing you coming on here and personally attacking JMO because you are claiming he is a racist simply because he has views that differ from your own. I don’t know why Eric is allowing you and others to post personal attacks on him, or Pete, but I’m asking you to stop it. Either contribute to the discussion, or have enough respect for the rest of us interested in intellectual conversation to follow the commentary rules. Thank you.
Hot dog boy #13 still can’t read my name and get my initials right. Back to kindergarten to learn the alphabet, boy. And he still doesn’t have the balls to use his real name. Mustard on the brain, dude?
Pete Campbell
“San Jose is a poorly managed city.”
For the last two years, San Jose has been led by Chuck Reed, who Campbell characterizes as a great leader.
When does Reed get the responsibility for the management of the city?
“All San Jose City Employees are overpaid, expect too much, and must be held accoutable for the poor shape of San Jose.”
Peter Campbell.
Let’s make Petey, City Manager!
Let’s employ Peter as a city street sweeper!
Those can do are working right now, and those can’t are wriing columns.
10: Isn’t it a little bit over the top to suggest that skipping raises will “send more people to the soup kitchen?”
And, re: 12’s rant…I have never asked for or received a public subsidy.
Great scholarship everyone!
It looks like SJI is plagued with a number of pre-adolescent posters. Thank God they can’t vote until they turn eighteen.
There’s a big difference between private sector workers earning big bucks and public sector workers earning big bucks. The private company has to compete for business. As consumers we have the choice NOT to patronize a company if we think they’re providing a less than adequate product or lousy service for too much money. I’ll not tolerate being ripped off by any company.
The City of San Jose on the other hand, has a monopoly, they have a gun to our heads, and they ARE ripping us off. They take our money and in return provide very poor service.
Those who indignantly defend this travesty must fall into one of the following categories;
– adolescent utopian
– on the dole
– have a “public service” job
– leech off a family member who has a public service “job”
– get a fat pension from the government
– an elitist too wealthy to even notice the tax burden.
Unfortunately, the percentage of the voting population who falls into one or more of those categories has exceeded critical mass so they can vote themselves greater and greater payoffs extorted from those who don’t.
Our streets are third world, but SJ has on its payroll a bicycle and pedestrian co-ordinator. I wonder what he makes, and how much support staff he has.
We NEED roads, we do NOT NEED a bicycle and pedestrian coordinator.
So, the folks at the top in CSJ have done the right thing and foregone raises in order to help balance the budget. Now it’s time for the union folks, who make up the largest portion of SJ salaries/benefits, to do the same.
FAT CHANCE! Geez, I hope I’m wrong.