-
Farewell to the Spectator
December 16, 2011 | 8 comments
-
Tentative Praise for Ryan’s New Bipartisan Medicare Plan
December 15, 2011 | 3 comments
-
The Day Ahead: Thursday, December 15
December 15, 2011 | 0 comments
-
Examiner for Romney, National Review Against Gingrich
December 14, 2011 | 39 comments
-
Paul Ryan to Introduce New Medicare Plan with Democrat Ron Wyden
December 14, 2011 | 4 comments
The Spectacle Blog
The debate over whether public employees are overpaid relative to their private-sector counterparts breaks down, as usual, along partisan lines. Jonathan Cohn of the New Republic does his best to defend public workers’ seemingly inflated wages. AEI’s Andrew Biggs responds briefly, delving into some of the reasons to believe that an apples-to-apples comparison shows that we’re paying too much to public-sector union workers. Biggs, along with Jason Richwine, has a much more comprehensive review of the situation in the upcoming October issue of the Spectator.
While I think Biggs has taken into account all the major considerations in making the call about whether or not public employees are making too much, Steven Landsburg has found a way to cut through the fog in this blog post:
How can we ever be sure we’ve counted everything important? We can’t…. So let’s do something sensible instead. Let’s look at quit rates. Quit rates in the public sector are about one third what they are elsewhere. In other words, government employees sure do seem to like holding on to their jobs. More than just about anyone else, in fact. Doesn’t that tell us everything we need to know about who’s overcompensated?
View all comments (48) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by Joseph Lawler
http://spectator.org/blog/2010/08/11/how-to-tell-if-your-public-emp
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Jeff| 8.11.10 @ 4:55PM
bingo ...
also notice that public sector jobs have grown over the last two years at all levels of government ...
they won't quit, they can't get fired and apparently they are immune from the recession ...
JohnD| 8.11.10 @ 6:10PM
Jeff, all those things are true, and add to that that unlike the private sector, the government's work week never exceeds 40 hours, but see below.
Occam's Tool| 8.12.10 @ 5:33PM
I work as a physician in a government hospital in a Northern State Rural Hospital. I bill for 40 hours/week, but work on site at least 50 hrs. I'm also on call 128 additional hours beyond the 40.
I make good money, but I also have a sense of duty and commitment to the Native Americans in the area to work in a rural area where the winter weather hits minus 30 plus. I have also worked in private practice, as well, and maintain a small one right now.
Give me a break.
The Conservatives have done nothing to prevent government takeover of medicine, and couldn't pass tort reform when they held both houses of Congress and the Presidency.
Occam's Tool| 8.12.10 @ 5:41PM
128 hours of call every two weeks, that is. Actually, it usually averages 144 hr every two weeks of on-call.
David| 8.12.10 @ 11:24AM
It is a BS generalization to say that all public employees are overcompensated. I work a public sector job in higher education. I haven't had any kind of raise or COL adjustment in 3 years. I can only afford health care insurance for myself and not my wife. There has been a hiring freeze in place for the last 2 years. WTF are you talking about??
Eric Cartman| 8.12.10 @ 12:59PM
How can you tell? Easy: Are they breathing?
JohnD| 8.11.10 @ 6:07PM
While I generally agree with the sentiment that government has gotten too big, and agree that government is the problem, not the solution, as a federal employee I have to take a little bit of exception to this.
First of all, the truth is, lumping private sector burger flippers, unskilled laborers, cashiers and retail clerks in with government economists, lawyers, PhD statisticians, etc., skews the comparison. The truth is that if you look at salaries and benefits on a level of comparable skills, government employees make a lot less than their private sector counterparts.
For example, I am an attorney by trade, with a background in economics and statistics. My brother is also an attorney, and while I make a decent salary by most standards (which is enough to barely get by in the DC area) he makes at least 5 times my salary, and travels by private jet.
Furthermore, living in the DC area, which is very expensive, means you need a larger salary than someone living in a less expensive area. An attorney making my salary in Arkansas or Idaho can live like a king, where in DC I can barely pay the bills.
The last industry conference I attended in New York, my private sector collegaues, all Wall Street investment analysts, had arrived by corporate jet. Uncle Sam wouldn't even let me take the Acela, making me take coach on the slow train to save money, and I had to pay $18 a night out of pocket to stay in the hotel where the conference was held, because it cost that much more than government travel allows for NYC.
I am not complaining, because I chose government service so I would work 40 hour weeks and get to be a father to my son. I also like the job security and all (like not having to worry about competition), but in doing so I gave up any chance of getting rich, and while I eat every night, and keep a roof over my head, that's about it.
Bottom line - someone with my education and background in the private sector makes a hell of a lot more than I make working for the government (if they still have a job, that is).
Troy| 8.11.10 @ 6:34PM
John,
In fact even controlling for all of the variables you mentioned--education, location, etc.--federal workers are still overpaid. See here:
http://online.wsj.com/article/.....13374.html
JohnD| 8.11.10 @ 6:45PM
The Bureau of Economic Analysis, which is the soruce everyone cites to say public employees are overpaid, acknowledges that the skill mix is different, and accounts for the seemingly higher public sector pay:
http://www.nteu.org/documents/BEA_ Factors.pdf
Steven E. Landsburg | 8.11.10 @ 6:34PM
JohnD: You've managed to miss the entire point, which is that we can list specific ways in which you're less (or more) compensated than your brother till we're blue in the face, but we'll never know that we've accounted for everything relevant. So we need to abandon this fruitless approach to the question and find a better one.
Ran | 8.11.10 @ 9:01PM
"First of all, the truth is, lumping private sector burger flippers, unskilled laborers, cashiers and retail clerks in with government economists, lawyers, PhD statisticians, etc., skews the comparison."
Gharbazh! The Gov't doesn't hire statisticians and PhD's to dole-out passports or to answer phones or to bust into [the wrong] people's homes to make drug arrests. Let's talk some more about skewed data, shall we?
Bottom line - someone with my education and background in the private sector makes a hell of a lot [less] than [you] make working for the government - especially when one factors in vacations, "benefits", retirement, 'corporate' and job security.
P.S., You're welcome.
JohnD| 8.12.10 @ 7:29AM
I got news for you; passport clerks are contractors, not federal employees. This is true with most people in the government who work at the point of delivery of services. Call Social Security for information about your benefits, and the person on the other end of the line will be a contractor.
All I know is this: here in suburban DC, all my realtor, electrician, plumber, supermarket manager, mortgage broker neighbors have 2 $75K SUVs parked in their driveways. I drive an 12 year old car with 130K miles on it, and can't afford a new one any time soon.
Where is all this money we are supposed to be earning?
JohnD| 8.12.10 @ 7:29AM
Oh, and Ran; Thank you.
Ernie| 8.12.10 @ 7:27PM
Well, then why don't you go work for the government and make "a hell of a lot" more money?
TG| 8.12.10 @ 9:10AM
I sort of agree with JohnD concerning "professional" employment. I'm also a guvmint worker (attorney for state agency). I would contend that any "professional" type employee (i.e., doctors, lawyers, nurses, economists, engineers) of the government tends to make less overall than their private counterparts (including benefits) while relatively unskilled labor that gets government work through civil service will on average do better than a private worker. I have no real data to back that up. Just making argument based on personal observation.
Now , as a dutiful public servant - back to work. As Buck Owens once sang: Don't want folks thinkin that I'd steal!
JohnD| 8.12.10 @ 9:20AM
This is what I am saying. There are no golden parachutes, no 5 figure bonuses, no partnership draws, no company cars, no private jet charters, no commission checks, no stock options, and no company NFL luxury box suites for government employees.
2112| 8.12.10 @ 11:33AM
JohnD, You portray a "Hollywood" version of the private sector in your description above. The number of private sector employees who receive these types of benefits are infinitesimal. The two most common in your list, stock and commissions, can worthless or irregular at best.
owyheewine| 8.12.10 @ 10:04AM
Time for a 3 year 25% across the board decrease in pay, frozen health insurance payments and conversion of pensions to a defined contribution system.
JohnD| 8.12.10 @ 10:09AM
Federal employees do have a defined contribution pension system. I have a 401K type retirement account, which all federal employees have since the 1980s. There are still feds who were here before the mid-80s who have the old defined benefit pension system, but most of us do not.
Sheila| 8.12.10 @ 10:11AM
JohnD, get over yourself. As you noted, you chose to work for the government, both for job security and regular work hours. To compare your remuneration with the outrageously overpaid attorneys that NY is crawling with is apples and oranges - and your point about cost of living (higher in DC) applies even more so for NY (obscenely ridiculous cost of living). Part of the reason you "work" for the government is atmosphere (holier-than-thou; myth of public "service") and part may be collegiality. I was raised in (and escaped from) that environment, and the entire liberal Jewish population of Maryland works for the government. They aren't the plumbers, electricians, and other laborers providing legitimate goods and services that you claim make more than you - and if they do, what of it? Perhaps they are providing a service more valued than your vaunted legalese. My family couldn't conceive that my spouse's employer (privately held small business in a Republican state) didn't provide generous health benefits and all the other federal largesse they take for granted. You might want to realize that despite Dear Leader's valiant efforts, most people do not work for the government, most jobs are not created by the government, and most people have no idea just how insular and status-conscious DC really is. It reminded me of my college years - everyone in the Metro looking at everyone else's badge, seeing who's more important in the DC scheme of things. So quit your whining - whether you work for the Dept. of Labor, or Education, or HHS, you are a functionary who pushes paper and does so by choice - and those who actually produce things that grow this economy pay your salary.
JohnD| 8.12.10 @ 10:33AM
Sheila:
Yes I chose this, and I said that, but my whole point is we are not paid more than the private sector. It is just not true and I have the pay stubs to prove it.
Laine| 8.24.10 @ 1:56AM
Maybe the reason you have to work for the government and are low on the pay scale is that you think anecdotal evidence of your pay check trumps a generalized trend that is based on average income over thousands of jobs. Do you not understand that for every person like you there could be two who are overpaid relative to the private sector and that's what brings the government average up?
Ernie| 8.12.10 @ 7:11PM
Sheila, you are very mean. I don't like you one bit.
Jim S| 8.12.10 @ 10:50AM
Any time you go into a Fed/State gubmint office and face an affirmative action clerk it hurts to remember that he/she/it is making multiples of your income whether they can understand you in English or not. What a bad deal for us all!
Thomas| 8.12.10 @ 11:49AM
It is always interesting to note that when the economy is good and construction workers are making $75,000.00 a year and secretaries pull down $30,000 - $40,000 a year that no one complains about the government maintenance worker who makes half what the construction worker makes and the teacher who makes about the same as the secretary, while requiring far greater educational requirements for the job. Yet, they all jump on the band wagon to scream that the public sector worker's wages are too high when the economy slumps.
Now, if public sector employment is such a plum, where were all of these private sector workers when police and fire departments were begging for applicants? Where were the long lines for secretarial and public works jobs? There weren't any, when the economy was good. Why was that?
There is always a trade-off in employment. Traditionally, private sector workers can make significantly more than a public sector worker when a similar job skills description, when the economy is good. The trade-off in the private sector is that there is less security for the worker; businesses fail, the economy worsens, new technology eliminates jobs, etc. In the public sector, salaries and benefits are usually less than the private sector, in good times, but there is increased job security. That is reality, whether anyone likes it or not. The current whining about public sector salaries is just so much sour grapes spawned by jealousy. As one posted pointed out, people make their own choices about where they work. Some people, who had the opportunity to work in the public sector, chose to chase the better salaries in the private sector. While some, who could have competed very well in the private sector, chose the public sector for its increased long-term security. They didn't whine about how much their private sector counterparts were making during the boom times. It is simply not fair for those in the private sector to complain about the security of those in the public sector during the lean times. Public sector employees are retiring all the time. If private sector employees want to move to the public sector, quit whining, get in line and apply for the jobs available.
Rob C K| 8.12.10 @ 12:46PM
To all of you government job bloodsuckers:
I truly hope that cuts come. DEEP cuts, like 75% of public workforces, and massive pay cuts to those that remain. Then you can enjoy what those of us in the real world deal with daily. You haven't had a COL increase in 3 years? Most of us took pay cuts to keep our jobs. You live in your insulated union world, unable to comprehend what real people go through. You look down upon us and enjoy your bureaucratic power over us. Well, enjoy it while it lasts.
There is a revolt coming. The People will not stand for this much longer.
Occam's Tool| 8.12.10 @ 5:38PM
Hey, I could go back to private practice, and would if I lost this job. But I think I'm doing good work with the rural poor.
Wren| 8.12.10 @ 7:15PM
Does the revolt involve you, firearms, and a pile of dead illegals and poor black people? I can only imagine it does.
RegularJoe| 8.12.10 @ 4:10PM
Your entire argument ignores that this situation is a new one. Government pay has SKYROCKETED in the last 3 years. I don't have the number handy, but they've been well publicized -- in 1997 no one working for agency X makes more than Y dollars; in 1999, thousands upon thousands do.
By the way -- if you think the average teacher is still earning 30-40K per year -- well, you're nuts. The average is now well over 40K, and in some states the average is $70K or more. Add in an advanced degree, or coach badminton after school, and it can be quite a bit more. Also, while many teachers are very conscientious, the unions make that optional. They can coast, produce next to no results, and in many schools still get raises. Let a "secretary" -- most of us these days would say "Administrative Assistant" -- try that. By the way, admins average below $35K per year, with a full work-day and work-year, compared to teachers who get 3-4 times the vacation the rest of us slobs get, and are home before rush hour starts.
Nor does the average construction worker make $75,000 per year. Some do, if they've got a lot of experience and are REALLY good. But they're also usually self-employed or contractors, so they have higher taxes, no benefits, have to supply and maintain their own tools -- not exactly apples-to-apples with government maintenance workers.
Sean| 8.12.10 @ 4:12PM
There were about 30,000 people that tested to become a LA County Fireman in the mid 1990's. LA County Sheriff's also had a huge number of applicants. This is because those jobs were high paying with great benefits and retirement. Teaching is also a very nice job to have. Next time you hear a teacher complain about pay and working conditions stick them outside as a roofer and then see which one they prefer.
As for the need for education. I would rather get rid the reliance on degrees and credentials in public sector jobs. Go to a comprehensive test based system. You will find high school graduates that will test better and have more knowledge than a great deal of your teachers and PhD holders.
Laine| 8.24.10 @ 2:00AM
Teacher is a terrible example as any income has to be pro-rated for only 9 month's work a year of less that 8 hour days. In addition, those hours "worked" are not spent in front of the classroom as many imagine. So the marking teachers complain about can be accomplished during the school day breaks and if they take it home, that's a personal choice. They would have to spend two hours on it every weeknight before they even got up to the typical 8 hour day.
Rich Berger| 8.12.10 @ 12:39PM
Amen. The quit rates, and the number of applicants for each job are the real metrics. I made this point in response to a letter in my local newspaper complaining that teachers were underpaid. To my surprise, my wife found my letter on the bulletin board at my kids' elementary school. My wife and I then agreed that I should not write any such letters until my kids were out of school.
Laine| 8.24.10 @ 2:03AM
Teachers do keep a black list of parents who are not teachers' pets and the children of those parents do pay for it in subtle and not so subtle ways. Professionals wouldn't do that but there are few professionals left among the clock-watching union workers.
Sheila| 8.12.10 @ 3:51PM
Au contraire, Rich - send letters often; simply remove your children from public school and the sphere of influence of those whose thinking (re taxes, role of the government, and purpose of education) is diametrically opposed to yours before they terminally infect your children.
Patrick J. Rafferty| 8.12.10 @ 4:01PM
I would just ask JohnD when is the last time he's changed employers. The large majority of working Americans, except those brave entrepreneurs who work for themselves, have to change employers every 5-10 years to stay employed and in some cases to increase their income. The fact that you haven't (and sliding from DOL to HHS doesn't exactly count!) says you love your job and apparently you don't want anyone to know just how much you do! God help you if you had to compete for it.
David T.| 8.12.10 @ 5:22PM
The problem is we have too many civil servants. Let's take Angelo Codevilla's advice and defund the government monster we've created--then we won't have to debate the question. How's this for a goal: Eliminate all departments except State, Defense, Treasury, and the Attorney General's office?
MattSwartz| 8.12.10 @ 9:37PM
I second this fully!
People who gripe about the wage levels are playing politics and trying to stir up resentment. Public-sector wages should be high enough to attract the best people. There just shouldn't be very many of them.
The biggest problem the Obama administration has (and Bush had it too) is the revolving door of people coming in and regulating (or running the bailouts of) their old bosses.
It's a huge conflict of interest, and the only reason nobody cares is that Yalies tend to stick together.
josil| 8.12.10 @ 6:55PM
While it's true that the quit rate of public employees is much lower than that in private employment, you'd still have to compare similar jobs in similar locales to make a logical case. In general, lower level government employees are paid (and "benefited") substantially more than their private counterparts and higher level gov't workers are paid substantially less than their private peers (and still they don't quit!). When it comes to the federal workforce, every federal employee around the country knows that D.C. workers have always been paid more for the same work than their " flyover" counterparts...and this was especially the case before locality pay.
Craig| 8.13.10 @ 12:04AM
These debates have to focus on the statistics, not people's personal situations. Barak Obama and his aides make less than they would in the private sector of course, but rank and file government workers make more than their comparables. But the number that really is the killer is the benefits for non-productive labor. The hourly wage of the public sector is world greater then the private sector. If these were equalized or at least close we wouldn't have these issues.
BT| 8.13.10 @ 8:18AM
Get rid of the DEA, the EPA, trim down the payrolls in all of goverment by 20%, secure the border, read the bills, actually implement "pay as you go", tort reform, de-regulate much, get rid of defined benefits plans, repeal the HC bill, set taxes at a rate that businesses can live with (and know what to expect), quit loaning money to people who can't pay it back, get rid of tenure, quit asking me to pay for you... that's a start to lowering costs and forcing the government goliath to lose some weight.
silva| 10.14.10 @ 12:26AM
There used to be a test for entry to federal service (FSEE), but it was discontinued. The complaint was that it only tested for intelligence, and that it was unrelated to the work in civil service.