Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: GOP fights among itself over state’s new non-citizen police law
Next Post: Former Madigan chief of staff Tim Mapes’ perjury trial begins
Posted in:
* From a recent Wall St. Journal editorial…
The best argument against collective bargaining for government workers is that no one represents taxpayers. Union chiefs and the politicians they support sit on both sides of the bargaining table. That was demonstrated again last week when Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker signed a whopping new contract with the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (Afscme).
The contract covers the next four years and gives 35,000 public workers 19.28% raises, outpacing the growth in private wages. That’s more than the Teamsters are getting for tenured drivers in their rich new deal from United Parcel Service, and that’s merely the increase in Afscme base pay. Many workers will get more pay increases based on job tenure. The contract also includes a $1,200 “stipend” to every worker merely for ratifying the contract. Mr. Pritzker included these bonuses in his last contract negotiation in 2019, supposedly to compensate workers for the financial “hardship” of being a state worker under previous Governor Bruce Rauner. (Remember when a Governor tried to represent taxpayers?) The unions liked the sweetener, so now it has become an expected fillip.
The governor’s office says the increases are actually 17.95 percent over four years. They also pointed to this AP story…
Public employers across the U.S. have faced similar struggles to fill jobs, leading to one of the largest surges in state government pay raises in 15 years. Many cities, counties and school districts also are hiking wages to try to retain and attract workers amid aggressive competition from private sector employers. […]
In Georgia, state employee turnover hit a high of 25% in 2022. Thousands of workers left the Department of Corrections, pushing its vacancy rate to around 50%. The state began a series of pay raises. This year, all state employees and teachers got at least a $2,000 raise, with corrections officers getting $4,000 and state troopers $6,000. […]
Missouri gave state workers a 7.5% pay raise in 2022. This spring, Gov. Mike Parson signed an emergency spending bill with an additional 8.7% raise, plus an extra $2 an hour for people working evening and night shifts at prisons, mental health facilities and other institutions. The vacancy rate for entry level corrections officers now is declining, and the average number of applications for all state positions is up 18% since the start of last year. […]
Since 2022, the [Brevard County transit system in Floriday] has twice raised bus driver wages to a current rate of $17.47 an hour. The school board recently countered with a $5 increase to a minimum $20 an hour for the upcoming school year. The goal is to hire enough drivers to regularly get kids to class on time, said school system communications director Russell Bruhn.
* Nevada…
Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo signed another important budget bill on Thursday, bringing 12% raises to state employees starting in July. […]
The bill goes beyond Lombardo’s proposed 8% raise with another 4% raise next year. Democratic lawmakers built on that plan by increasing it to 12% in the 2023-2024 fiscal year — a 50% increase over Lombardo’s proposal. Democrats changed the structure of the governor’s proposed bonuses and added more permanent pay increases. […]
The state has been struggling to fill positions, with a job vacancy rate around 20%. This budget contains quarterly bonuses for employees of $250 to help retain staff on top of the 12% raise. Longevity pay is also part of the compensation plan after it was removed in lean budget years after the Great Recession.
* Oregon…
The state’s largest public employee union has reached a tentative agreement on a new labor contract with the state of Oregon that would include a 13% to 22% pay increase over the next two years. […]
Workers are set to receive a 6.5% cost-of-living raise in December, followed by another 6.55% cost of living increase in early 2025. As part of the contract, the state will also hand out one-time payouts of $1,500 to state employees in September. […]
The average worker will see about 19% with steps and COLAs
* And UPS…
International Brotherhood of Teamsters President Sean O’Brien said in a statement that UPS “put $30 billion of new money on the table as a direct result of these negotiations,” and called the tentative agreement “the best contract in the history of UPS.” […]
They also notched a big win through the creation of 7,500 full-time jobs. The negotiating committee said part-timers would get a 48 percent wage increase on average over the five years of the contract.
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Aug 7, 23 @ 9:35 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: GOP fights among itself over state’s new non-citizen police law
Next Post: Former Madigan chief of staff Tim Mapes’ perjury trial begins
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
If you add the yearly colas together you get 17.95%. If you compound them into each other you get 19.28%.
Comment by DHS Drone Monday, Aug 7, 23 @ 9:41 am
The right has never been shy about their desire to see government fail. They want regulators gone, they want any force that might act in the public interest to be as weak and useless as possible. They want under staffed government agencies with underpaid workers. Grover Norquist has made a whole career out of shouting from the rooftops that he wants to drown the government in a tub.
Every article about a right wing individual or outlet should open with a giant disclaimer reminding us that they are rooting against the federal and state government.
Comment by Homebody Monday, Aug 7, 23 @ 9:42 am
People who work for a living getting anything more than crumbs is always a world-ending catastrophe for the WSJ editorial page.
It’s alright though, we’ll keep donating federal tax money to all those well run, corruption-less red states who are such experts in bootstrap pulling.
Comment by Larry Bowa Jr. Monday, Aug 7, 23 @ 9:42 am
I’m not sure why anyone ever quotes the WSJ editorial page. Their position is always, always, always anti-worker.
Comment by Friendly Bob Adams Monday, Aug 7, 23 @ 9:46 am
Voters are taxpayers. It’s impossible to have one Governor “represent taxpayers” and the next one not. The Governor who “represented taxpayers” got voted out by those same taxpayers, so yes, the current governor still represents taxpayers.
Comment by Sterling Monday, Aug 7, 23 @ 9:48 am
“The best argument against collective bargaining for government workers is that no one represents taxpayers”
Bunk. Taxpayers in Illinois and elsewhere, including many government employees, agree that public workers should have unions and be paid decently. That type of divide and conquer talking point, taxpayers vs. public employee unions, is so 2010. Silly WSJ, the GOP base is into culture wars now. Maybe should have called public unions “woke.” /s
Comment by Grandson of Man Monday, Aug 7, 23 @ 9:50 am
===under previous Governor Bruce Rauner. (Remember when a Governor tried to represent taxpayers?)===
Vetoing entire annual budgets and sending the state’s debt into the stratosphere is representing taxpayers? Okee dokee pokee.
Negotiating in good faith with AFSCME would have constituted representing taxpayers. Instead, Rauner walked away from the bargaining table and sent AFSCME to the bring of a statewide walkout. The only people Rauner represented were the Koch brothers.
Comment by Nick Name Monday, Aug 7, 23 @ 9:54 am
JB ran twice on pro labor platforms. The taxpayers chose him over candidates that had anti labor platforms. IL taxpayers chose JB therefore IL taxpayers had a seat at the bargaining table. When WSJ means taxpayers they mean just rich people.
Comment by DHS Drone Monday, Aug 7, 23 @ 9:56 am
Any and all discussions?
State workers, unionized or not state workers, are taxpayers too.
If your foolish argument or discussion towards things is surrounded by the idea of “taxpayers”, it’s a clear signal that the person is not a “serious person” to this specific discussion.
It’s a simpleton’s fallacy
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Aug 7, 23 @ 9:56 am
The WSJ has many fine reporters but the editorial pages are notorious as fact free zones.
Comment by Socially DIstant watcher Monday, Aug 7, 23 @ 10:05 am
The Koch Bros represent taxpayers? I almost spit out my coffee laughing so hard.
Comment by Jerry Monday, Aug 7, 23 @ 10:07 am
=== Vetoing entire annual budgets and sending the state’s debt into the stratosphere is representing taxpayers? Okee dokee pokee.===
Ball game.
An entire General Assembly sat without the state having a budget, the governor vetoed every attempt for the government to function.
It’s a real head scratcher the flowers and kudos to Raunerites leaving the GA and the heaping of praise on them, as they, like Rauner purposely hurt Illinois, and then *RAN* on that hurting in Rauner’s midterm as a reason to send them back to the GA.
Why is that important?
When you read this WSJ piece, it’s not about the actual functions necessary to govern, including paying state workers, it is about taxes that the WSJ thinks are misused, and “misused” taxes on union workers are to blame for the ills of Illinois.
Deciding to decimate social services, and cheering on that destruction, or being a member of the GA helping that destruction, why was it done?
“To end collective bargaining. To end prevailing wages. To allow Dems to raise taxes”
Rauner wanted to end unions as we know them… but was willing to raise taxes as his “give”?
Now you have the WSJ concerned trolling to exorbitant raises? Nah. It’s that the hurting of unions isn’t happening, “think of the taxpayers”… as Rauner was fine with raising taxes… as long as unions were gutted.
Simpletons want it to be about “hurting taxpayers”, the grifters have a one note song.
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Aug 7, 23 @ 10:11 am
I’m pretty sure the whole point of voting is so that we can elect the people who will represent taxpayers. Aren’t those people on one side of the bargaining table?
Comment by Distant Viewer Monday, Aug 7, 23 @ 10:17 am
“…no one represents taxpayers.”
Pretty sure that’s the Governor and legislators job. If they aren’t doing it, there is a remedy every few years.
Comment by Bruce( no not him) Monday, Aug 7, 23 @ 10:20 am
=== no one represents taxpayers ===
The WSJ throws out populist drivel to disguise their far right agenda. Who would choose these alleged representatives? The WSJ or the state’s largest conservative paper?
The WSJ fails to understand that the taxpayers already choose their representatives. It’s called elections for state officials. The WSJ just doesn’t like the current results.
Comment by Norseman Monday, Aug 7, 23 @ 10:23 am
Trying to spin anything even remotely positive out of Bruce Rauner’s tenure is laughable.
Comment by High Socks Monday, Aug 7, 23 @ 10:31 am
==The Illinois Governor hands out huge raises at taxpayer expense==
Did they make sure to fold the slam letter small enough to fit into JB’s high school locker? /S
Comment by Jocko Monday, Aug 7, 23 @ 10:48 am
Remember the WSJ once headlined an editorial Governor Junk to i.d. Rauner.
The Journal would prefer there were no public employee unions at any level. They ignore the reality that government is competing with the private sector for folks to fill the workforce. Generally those on government payrolls are paid more than government.
Comment by Annonin' Monday, Aug 7, 23 @ 10:58 am
Re: WSJ
=== The contract covers the next four years and gives 35,000 public workers 19.28% raises, outpacing the growth in private wages. ===
Dear WSJ Editors. Perhaps, these two laws of capitalism apply:
Higher wages have been demonstrated to attract better qualified applicants to the labor pool.
Higher wages have been demonstrated to produce greater worker commitment to their jobs and employers.
Higher wages have been shown to produce greater worker productivity.
Comment by H-W Monday, Aug 7, 23 @ 11:10 am
Apparently WSJ wants to go back to the heady days before Garcia v. San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority (1985), when National League of Cities v. Usery (1976) said the 10th Amendment prohibited the Federal Government from forcing State & Local governments to comply with the Fair Labor Standards Act.
Comment by Anyone Remember Monday, Aug 7, 23 @ 11:18 am
===Higher wages have been demonstrated===
People warned about this when Tier 2 was being debated. Government could attract workers with lower wages because of the pensions. Not so much any longer.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Aug 7, 23 @ 11:18 am
There *is* a point to public sector unions being complicated.
FDR wasn’t for them for the same reason. Police Unions have gained a lot of notoriety for inserting clauses which protect bad cops. A lot of California cities back in the recession got hammered financially because their police and fire unions got into a “competition” re benefits and no one wanted to run for reelection being called anti-cop or being protested by the fire department.
But if retention rates and vacancies are anything to go these pay raises seem very much called for.
Comment by Nick Monday, Aug 7, 23 @ 11:19 am
Unlike most states, The State of Illinois has failed spectacularly actually paying for the state workers contracts for decades.
What are the implications for the unfunded pensions given the pay raise.
Comment by Lucky Pierre Monday, Aug 7, 23 @ 11:21 am
=== has failed spectacularly actually===
Example?
Which contract in particular?
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Aug 7, 23 @ 11:32 am
Maybe if the gub’mint built free stadiums for every professional sports team that wants one, paid for by taxpayers, that’ll fund the pensions for sure!
Comment by Jerry Monday, Aug 7, 23 @ 11:55 am
= The contract also includes a $1,200 “stipend” to every worker merely for ratifying the contract.=
Not the right message to send to the taxpayer.
As for the overall contract, when one considers the cost of living it is not all that ‘generous’. It will be interesting to see how wages in the private sector turn out over the next four years but if they don’ come close to matching this it spells real trouble for people to pay their bills.
Comment by unafraid Monday, Aug 7, 23 @ 12:14 pm
=== to the taxpayer===
You mean the state worker taxpayer?
Anyone who ever got a bonus or “one time bump” can’t relate?
Simpleton thinking is the thought that it’s gonna anger taxpayers, since running as an anti-union candidate here in Illinois is not embraced.
Even Rauner pretended he wasn’t anti-union
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Aug 7, 23 @ 12:25 pm
Since when did pesky facts get in the way of a WSJ editorial opinion?
Comment by jackmac Monday, Aug 7, 23 @ 12:41 pm
I believe at a recent point in time Illinois had the fewest number of state employees per capita in the US. Hopefully this raise will aid us in attracting more applicants and in retaining current staff.
Comment by Stormsw7706 Monday, Aug 7, 23 @ 12:43 pm
Last year the unfunded liability in the 5 pension funds for state employees increased by 9.8 billion
The administration needs to be transparent about the effects of this pay raise on the unfunded liability
https://www.wgem.com/2022/12/09/illinois-pension-debt-grows-1397-billion/?outputType=amp
Comment by Lucky Pierre Monday, Aug 7, 23 @ 1:02 pm
(Sigh)
=== The administration needs to be transparent about the effects of this pay raise on the unfunded liability===
From your own cite;
=== Although that’s an important measure of the systems’ long-term financial health, it does not reflect their current ability to pay out benefits that are owed. All five of the pension funds continue to pay out benefits to eligible retirees on a timely basis.===
If they can’t pay benefits, lots of people will notice.
Anything else?
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Aug 7, 23 @ 1:18 pm
I have to believe with the kind of comments @LP makes that he has some sort of ties to the Illinois Policy Institute. I mean now he’s jumping on the “hate the state employee” bandwagon.
Comment by Demoralized Monday, Aug 7, 23 @ 1:19 pm
=== some sort of ties===
Maybe too to the “Ryan” family, with concerned trolling of both all things NU and Bears
I do enjoy the continued selective use of citing things where reading them is not part of the schtick
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Aug 7, 23 @ 1:22 pm
Guessing commenters’ identities in comments is generally frowned upon. Move along.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Aug 7, 23 @ 1:25 pm
My apologies.
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Aug 7, 23 @ 1:30 pm
Where did I ever say I hated state employees?
Many are concerned about the increase in the unfunded liability
Shrugging off these concerns as insignificant is exactly why these deficits have grown so large MK
There is zero urgency to address this, in fact the legislature voted to sweeten Chicago firefighter pensions that are only 21% funded just last year
Comment by Lucky Pierre Monday, Aug 7, 23 @ 1:47 pm
Speaking of reading things being part of the schtick
I never claimed they couldn’t pay out present benefits
By definition the unfunded liability is in the future which you don’t seem at all concerned about
Comment by Lucky Pierre Monday, Aug 7, 23 @ 1:51 pm
==There is zero urgency to address this,==
What are you talking about? It was addressed a decade ago when they passed Tier 2 so stop attempting to argue that nothing has been done. But people like you are not going to be satisfied unless and until they reduce pensions for Tier 1 employees.
Comment by Demoralized Monday, Aug 7, 23 @ 1:57 pm
The best argument against collective bargaining for government workers, which also would fail, is…jealousy.
Comment by Politix Monday, Aug 7, 23 @ 2:53 pm
The State is not competitive salary-wise for a lot of jobs. That is just a fact. They haven’t been competitive for a number of years. So if you want good employees working for the State, paying competitive wages is a must. And as for the pensions down the road….Tier 2 took care of a lot of that. Tier 2 is not a good system. In fact, tier 2 and lower State pay is a determent to finding good employees. The pension liability will be funded. It will take time. But it will get done.
Comment by Appears Monday, Aug 7, 23 @ 3:12 pm
It’s entertaining to read the torrent of angry comments from Dem state workers.
Comment by Chitruth Monday, Aug 7, 23 @ 3:17 pm
Even Republican state workers want to be paid fairly. Also only angry comments i’ve seen have been from your side.
Comment by DHS Drone Monday, Aug 7, 23 @ 3:24 pm
It has been said for years that when the Baby Boomers left the job market, that there would be more jobs than workers. With covid, a lot of Baby Boomers left the job market and haven’t returned. There are a lot of job openings. Police, fire, DCFS, DOC, IDVA, as well as a lot of job openings at Apple, General Electric, Exxon, Microsoft, Amazon, etc. The question is: do you want a competent work force in the State? Potential police and firefighters can make more money elsewhere (with fewer headaches and an 8-4:30 schedule). DCFS competes for employees with major employers. Nurses and physicians working for IDVA can make more in the private sector.
Comment by Appears Monday, Aug 7, 23 @ 3:32 pm