According to this Farmington Independent article, city employees are receiving their first raise since 2009 but healthcare payouts will be reduced as well.
From the article:
Last Wednesday, two of the city’s three bargaining units – the AFSCME Clerical, Technical and Professional Unit and the AFSCME Maintenance Unit – voted to accept a 1 percent pay increase but took a decrease in the amount the city contributes to health insurance.
The city will reduce its insurance contribution by more than $200 for some single-coverage policies and by more than $170 for some plans that cover the employee plus family.
[...]
In addition, the city’s department directors will receive a .5 percent raise in 2012. This, too, is the first pay increase since 2009.
Even with these raises which amount to $400 on a salary of $40,000 a year, will be largely offset by the increase on single-coverage policies (50%) as well as family plans. So while the staff are receiving raises, the raises really don’t provide much additional income.
With so many people in the private sector being laid off and/or continuing the same three+ year pay freezes while seeing higher healthcare costs, do you think it’s appropriate for the public sector to receive raises? Do you think you’ll see a raise in 2012? Do you think you should have to pay higher taxes at least in part due to this raise? Whatever you have to say about this one go ahead and comment on as I’d love to hear your thoughts.
Dakota Complaints Map
Dakota Inmate Dashboard
Loading ...
December 29th, 2011 at 8:02 am
I get a retroactive raise for 2011-2012. Not giving people raises doesn’t help the economy, in the private sector it only helps the big-wigs make more money. In the public sector, meh, I don’t know, but frankly, I’m over the whining about public vs. private sector raises. Maybe I’d feel differently if I didn’t work in the public sector, but honestly, I doubt I’d pay that much attention.
December 29th, 2011 at 8:32 am
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
December 29th, 2011 at 8:54 am
1% seems less than a cost of living adjustment, so in real terms a 1% raise is likely a decrease in pay. Not to mention you recognize that these employees may see a reduction in cash flow even in nominal terms due to benefit reductions.
I work in the private sector, and for the most part I’ve seen a lot of hiring. And my income has gone up by 50% nominally since 2009. I feel very blessed, as I know a few people a generation or two older who may be in lefty’s #2 column by no act of their own but merely due to their age.
Anyways, this seems like a bad deal for the Farmington employees, so not really worthy of consternation.
December 29th, 2011 at 9:01 am
lefty,
Two rounds of layoffs in a year and I’m not confident we won’t see more come 2012. And yeah, I spent the day with two guys yesterday who both said they haven’t seen a raise in 3 years and don’t expect to see one again in 2012 either.
I hear all the time how the economy is turning around but I have yet to see it. I’m certainly not suffering directly but I watch as many others are–even if they aren’t lazy and/or still have a job.
December 29th, 2011 at 9:03 am
I agree with lefty, though I worry that will make me unpopular by association :-)
I’d add as maybe a subcategory of 3 Overly Picky. Granted, I personally know very few unemployed people, but of them it seems the issue is an unwillingness to take anything less than a dream job.
I assume I’ll get a raise this year, and hopefully it will be better than the deal above.
December 29th, 2011 at 9:12 am
The raise is a meh imo. Dont care one way or another. Not sure I agree with Lefty, as I actually think things are somewhat worse than advertised, but hopefully he is right and I am wrong.
As a point of reference to evaluate the Farmington raises, Social Security Disability (and maybe SSR?) gave a 3.6% cost of living increase this year.
December 29th, 2011 at 9:26 am
Bill,
I don’t know your industry very well, but it sounds like your company is doing some downsizing for reasons related to slow business or perhaps the business is slow because of poor management/marketing, etc.
In my experience, when companies go through a layoff phase, they lose two types of employees, their best ones who can go anywhere to get a new job and don’t want to work for a company where there job is seemingly at risk. The other group they lose are the worst employees because the company is too pussy to let them go for purely performance reasons.
The second group are the ones lamenting how difficult the job market is because they have less marketable skills for the jobs they hope to attain.
Personally, I have interviewed and hired hundreds (probably over 1000) of people in my career, I have also had to let go a few hundred people in my career for many different reasons. I have stayed very close to the job market consistently and I can tell you that the market is brisk right now for good workers. Anyone who says otherwise is just wrong.
December 29th, 2011 at 9:38 am
lefty,
I’m going to go out on a limb and suggest that your statement about not knowing my industry well applies to many other industries as well.
December 29th, 2011 at 9:42 am
I’m one of those guys who gets a 3.6% increase in my SS paycheck for 2012. Thanks, everyone! And the Medicare cost DECREASED, so an even bigger check! You guys are the best!
As for the Farmington negotiations… I would have voted NO! But that’s just my opinion – I often err, just ask Bill, lefty, MSPD, my current wife, and many others.
December 29th, 2011 at 10:12 am
Bill,
My statement about your particular industry is relevant to the point that I have never worked in it. I would offer to you that my skill set is such that I am qualified to work at your company right now if the right job was open.
What I think is relevant to this are my connections to the local labor market and the general consensus among hiring managers that there are not enough good prospects out there to fill the jobs they are hiring for. This is not conjecture.
December 29th, 2011 at 10:29 am
lefty, just like people are too picky with finding jobs, people are way too picky with hiring too. Hard to find a job in a new industry when those who are hiring want very specific skillsets and over-inflated requirements.
No, you don’t need a minimum of a masters degree for a $45,000/year job. Stop asking for it and definitely stop requiring it.
December 29th, 2011 at 10:32 am
I agree 100% with you there. Didn’t think that would happen in this conversation.
This has a lot to do with the fact that employers also think the labor pool is much bigger than it really is. They keep looking to find that diamond (not in the rough) when they are passing on completely competent individuals that could start tomorrow.
December 29th, 2011 at 10:37 am
lefty, I think what you are saying is true for positions that you don’t need an education for or they want you to have a degree of any sort. In positions that require more specialized workers (such as various types of engineers, programmers) they are still hurting because many businesses/governments (local-federal) still aren’t doing upgrades or improvements that are needed for recovery.
December 29th, 2011 at 11:29 am
Could not agree more with Bill’s comment in number 11.
I would even go a step further and say that once a person passes age 30, a college degree, never mind the masters, becomes mostly meaningless when compared to work history. What difference does a persons education, in the distant past (which is why I picked 30, purely arbitrary), make regarding the ability to do a given job. Obviously there are some exceptions, but for the most part, none of the major jobs I have performed since leaving college has made any use at all of my college education.
December 29th, 2011 at 11:35 am
Chad,
That is an excellent point. I was once in a job interview for a job I was eventually hired for when the hiring manager said something like, “Everything looks good (my 14 years of experience), but we do require a degree.” Turned out my resume formatted oddly and my education had spilled to the second page and out of his view. None of interview even remotely discussed anything that had to do with my then 15 years old education until then and nothing after.
I kicked that job’s ass by the way.
December 29th, 2011 at 11:53 am
A 1% “raise” largely offset by a benefit reduction is hardly something to raise hackles about.
December 29th, 2011 at 11:57 am
Agreed, Chad. On the other side of that though, when the education is more recent than the experience, I think work history can be greatly discounted. I found it difficult during my last job search to not be perceived as just out of school with no experience after finishing my advanced degree, even though I had worked full time for many years while pursing said degree. Of course, it doesn’t help that my field of study is political science, because let’s face it, that’s not useful for much.
December 29th, 2011 at 12:14 pm
Yeah, I would agree. I just cringe when I hear talk that hiring managers are not finding qualified applicants.
They are not looking very hard, or they are not paying very much.
December 29th, 2011 at 12:34 pm
Congrats to CC on comment #100!
December 29th, 2011 at 12:38 pm
Better watch out, Chad. I’m coming for you. Just 1546 to go. ;-)
Hey, does this mean I can finally be promoted from ‘Chrony in Training’ to ‘Associate Chrony’?
December 29th, 2011 at 1:01 pm
Sorry CC…Bill told me if you can’t spell “Crony”, you are ineligible for status.
December 29th, 2011 at 2:02 pm
Congrats CC. Don’t mind MSPD, he is just making comments to try to catch my post count.
December 29th, 2011 at 3:57 pm
Thanks, Chad! I look forward to reading your future comments.
December 29th, 2011 at 8:09 pm
Lefty, you certainly can put your foot in your mouth…..reference comment #2. Observing the “thumbs voting”, your less than intelligent opinions……… just keep “on a” coming ………… just love it!! And I’ve NOT voted!!……………… yet. Bill, you should unleash the European voting. I think you are getting “world wide” responses.
December 30th, 2011 at 7:07 am
Perhaps things would move along better if employers were more willing to invest in people and train them rather than waiting for Mr. or Ms. perfect to come along to fill thier spot. Instead, many people, especially people who have been doing the same job for 10 years or more, are almost required to return to college or tech school to upgrade thier skill set so they can even begin to look for work beyond fast food and entry level retail.
December 30th, 2011 at 8:45 am
Will,
Regarding comment #2. Those are not opinions. I suspect the so far 12 thumbs downs are from the lazy and the unemployable readers here.
lefty
December 30th, 2011 at 8:51 am
lefty, 4 of the 12 came from business IPs.
December 30th, 2011 at 8:53 am
Thanks for the research. So 4 of those people have lazy children that can’t find jobs and won’t move out of the house, probably.
December 30th, 2011 at 9:35 am
This makes for an entertaining read on new years eve eve.
December 30th, 2011 at 9:58 am
Could be Lefty, but then again, maybe they just think you are being kind of an asshat…
December 30th, 2011 at 10:18 am
sui generis,
Me? An asshat? That could not be!
lefty