 
Lilpup
Member
Username: Lilpup
Post Number: 2731
Registered: 06-2004
| | Posted on Friday, September 07, 2007 - 2:44 pm: |    |
LY, WHO, in your opinion, is NOT overpaid (excluding yourself)? |
Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard
Post Number: 3858
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Friday, September 07, 2007 - 2:52 pm: | |
There were newspaper articles on teachers' pay being more hourly than engineers. It's no secret. And during the three years I taught, I experienced many teachers who nearly beat their kids out of the building at the end of the day.
It mattered little to those fleet of foot that their teacher contracts stipulated that the teachers were to remain available (30 minutes, typically) after school for (extremely rare) unscheduled parental visits.
Yeah! Tell me something about teachers. YAWN! |
Lilpup
Member
Username: Lilpup
Post Number: 2732
Registered: 06-2004
| | Posted on Friday, September 07, 2007 - 3:00 pm: | |
LY, WHO, in your opinion, is NOT overpaid (excluding yourself)? |
Bob
Member
Username: Bob
Post Number: 1553
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Friday, September 07, 2007 - 5:11 pm: | |
Everyone seems to be doing more work than our state government at finding a solution.
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pb cs.dll/article?AID=/20070907/U PDATE/709070436/1003 |
Novine
Member
Username: Novine
Post Number: 110
Registered: 07-2007
| | Posted on Friday, September 07, 2007 - 5:47 pm: | |
Isn't it interesting that the Right-to-Work types bash unions and claim that the star performers in the private sector can negotiate themselves better wages and benefits than if they're stuck in a union where it's claimed that the needs are geared towards the group, not the individual.
But here, and elsewhere, all you hear is how those in the public sector are overpaid, their benefits are too generous and how in comparison to the private sector, they're living the golden life.
So the question is this? Are the ones here complaining about those in the public sector the laggards and misfits of the private sector? Or if you're the star of the private sector, where are your great pay and benefits to show it? Or is that right-to-work anti-union thing not such a great deal after all? |
Ccbatson
Member
Username: Ccbatson
Post Number: 3349
Registered: 11-2006
| | Posted on Friday, September 07, 2007 - 8:52 pm: | |
I think that people naturally resent the pay and benefits of public servants for one simple reason...they are paying for it. |
Digitalvision
Member
Username: Digitalvision
Post Number: 348
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Friday, September 07, 2007 - 9:12 pm: | |
I don't think I've ever heard a truer statement, Ccbatson. |
Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard
Post Number: 3865
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Friday, September 07, 2007 - 9:24 pm: | |
It's not hard on DY to ascertain those types who are themselves or have family members on the feeding side of the public trough versus those who simply must provide their fodder--yet get little in return in the way of gratitude. |
Corktownmark
Member
Username: Corktownmark
Post Number: 334
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Friday, September 07, 2007 - 9:42 pm: | |
some great posts Novine. thanks for your contribution to the discourse and welcome!
Mark |
Novine
Member
Username: Novine
Post Number: 112
Registered: 07-2007
| | Posted on Friday, September 07, 2007 - 11:36 pm: | |
"I think that people naturally resent the pay and benefits of public servants for one simple reason...they are paying for it."
By that logic, I should rant and rave about the pay and benefits of those at Detroit Edison every time they jack up the electricity rates or I should yell at the kid working behind the counter at the gas station that he's overpaid and doesn't deserve the benefits he gets each time the price of gas goes up. After all, I'm paying for it.
It's a sad statement about where we are as a society when that when people get decent pay and benefits, we see that as a bad thing. Still waiting to hear why those in the private sector who are free of the horrible unions haven't negotiated themselves better pay and benefits. Isn't that one of the benefits of getting out from under the yoke of the oppressive unions? |
Perfectgentleman
Member
Username: Perfectgentleman
Post Number: 2408
Registered: 03-2006
| | Posted on Friday, September 07, 2007 - 11:51 pm: | |
I do get pissed when electricity rates are jacked up because I have no other choice but to pay it because there is no competition. As for the gas station, we need to buy that too but there is some competition.
As for government, well they have it the best. We MUST pay them under threat of prosecution for substandard services whether we want them or not. What a racket! |
Ccbatson
Member
Username: Ccbatson
Post Number: 3409
Registered: 11-2006
| | Posted on Saturday, September 08, 2007 - 1:42 am: | |
Novine, one distinction, in the private world, you choose to pay, and for what/who's salary. If the service is bad, or price to high, you go to a competitor that is better. This is recognized on both sides of the aisle. They want your business/money, and you want the best service at the lowest price. No such dynamic exists in the public realm...that is a huge problem. |
Bob
Member
Username: Bob
Post Number: 1554
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, September 08, 2007 - 9:51 am: | |
That works in the public sector too. You don't like what is going on in a community, you move, run for office to change it, or vote people out of office. If services stink, or conditions are not right, businesses will not locate here, there are no jobs, and people will relocate. There is a choice, it just is a much more drastic one, which is what is currently happening in this state. |
Ccbatson
Member
Username: Ccbatson
Post Number: 3430
Registered: 11-2006
| | Posted on Saturday, September 08, 2007 - 11:50 am: | |
Only for the elected officials. The public sector system does not have built in incentive for anyone below the level of the elected officials. |
Novine
Member
Username: Novine
Post Number: 114
Registered: 07-2007
| | Posted on Saturday, September 08, 2007 - 9:02 pm: | |
I'm still waiting to hear why those in the private sector who are not saddled with those horrible unions haven't negotiated themselves better pay and benefits? All I hear are complaints about how crappy your benefits are compared to unions in the public and private sector.Are you all just poor performers or what? |
Ccbatson
Member
Username: Ccbatson
Post Number: 3466
Registered: 11-2006
| | Posted on Saturday, September 08, 2007 - 9:52 pm: | |
It works differently...you don't simply "negotiate yourself" something in the private sector. You earn what you get with hard work and productivity. When done right, not only do you get better pay, you get promoted up the ladder. |
Mikeg
Member
Username: Mikeg
Post Number: 1152
Registered: 12-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, September 08, 2007 - 10:52 pm: | |
Compensation increases in the private sector are often awarded using a merit system - the supervisor is given a "pot" representing - let's say 3% - of his employee's monthly salary and then awards raises in proportion to individual workers performance. The preliminary merit plan is then reviewed with the supervisor's boss and the personnel dept. to insure that the plan is in sync with individual performance reviews and across other groups. Unlike a represented workforce, the better workers in these groups know that their salary increase will be greater than the worst performers. Those who are dissatisfied with their merit treatment have the option of moving on and they often do, landing another job with similar or sometimes even better pay.
Within a business sector, benefits tend to be very similar with respect to coverage and out-of-pocket costs. The long-term trend has been away from defined-benefit pensions to defined contribution plans and towards increased deductibles and co-pays for health care. Private sector companies have had to do this to control these costs which the govt. has decreed will now be measured on their balance sheet at the present value of their future liabilities.
Much of the public sector has been immune or exempted from these forces of change that have impacted benefit plans, yet the govt. is still facing the same "time bombs" that the private sector has already reacted to. It appears that our legislators are going to sweep this compounding problem under the rug again and opt for the quick fix of increased taxes without corresponding reforms. That is what the complaints are all about.
(Message edited by Mikeg on September 08, 2007) |
Ccbatson
Member
Username: Ccbatson
Post Number: 3482
Registered: 11-2006
| | Posted on Saturday, September 08, 2007 - 11:11 pm: | |
In the short run. The big payoff comes with time, loyalty, consistency, and an apparent disregard for personal gain in lieu of productivity for productivity sake. |
Novine
Member
Username: Novine
Post Number: 116
Registered: 07-2007
| | Posted on Sunday, September 09, 2007 - 12:49 am: | |
"You earn what you get with hard work and productivity."
It sounds like it's safe to assume that the ones here who complain about the overpaid government workers and the exorbitant benefits enjoyed by union types are the ones in the private sector who don't work hard and are not productive. Otherwise, they would be getting rewarded for their hard work and productivity, right? As far as benefits go, the trend of private sector companies towards making employees take on more of the costs of those benefits must demonstrate that most private sector employees aren't earning their keep. Otherwise, why would companies punish employees who we're told will be rewarded for their hard work? We know that the CEOs are rewarded with large salary and benefit packages. Surely the same would be true of the rank-and-file. After all, that's one of the benefits of not being a union employee. |
Perfectgentleman
Member
Username: Perfectgentleman
Post Number: 2427
Registered: 03-2006
| | Posted on Sunday, September 09, 2007 - 12:56 am: | |
The reason that benefits are being scaled back is that the costs have skyrocketed for these programs. We need market reforms in the health care system to correct this, not a government takeover.
Individuals should be in control of their own insurance and retirement plans anyway, with people moving from job to job more often employer provided programs are becoming impractical and an administrative nightmare. This will also induce much more competition which will lower rates.
There are retiree families from the big 3 that are running up 10's of thousands of dollars per year for prescriptions alone. No company will stay afloat given that some of these folks will be getting these benefits for over 20 years. I think I heard that Toyota has only 250 retirees in the US which gives them a huge advantage.
(Message edited by perfectgentleman on September 09, 2007) |
Lilpup
Member
Username: Lilpup
Post Number: 2742
Registered: 06-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, September 09, 2007 - 1:24 am: | |
"You earn what you get with hard work and productivity. When done right, not only do you get better pay, you get promoted up the ladder."
This is the biggest crock of bullshit in the business world. More workers end up as doormats than ever get promoted up the ladder and such promotion has little or nothing to do with loyalty, productivity, or quality of work. |
Novine
Member
Username: Novine
Post Number: 117
Registered: 07-2007
| | Posted on Sunday, September 09, 2007 - 2:10 am: | |
"The reason that benefits are being scaled back is that the costs have skyrocketed for these programs."
But surely this doesn't apply to the star employees, does it? In those companies free of the bad influence of unions, the top employees can negotiate themselves better benefit packages so that they're not stuck with co-pays and high deductibles and other out-of-pocket expenses. And don't those great benefit packages go along with the salaries that exceed what you'll find in union shops? It must be. That's what I've been told happens when you get the unions out of the picture and let employees fend for themselves. |
Perfectgentleman
Member
Username: Perfectgentleman
Post Number: 2429
Registered: 03-2006
| | Posted on Sunday, September 09, 2007 - 2:31 am: | |
I know this might sound silly, but I think people should have some out-of-pocket expense for health care. It gives them incentive to be prudent and makes them question the costs.
When there is a third party paying the bill (or at least the false impression of that) we go to the doctor for every little thing and don't scrutinize the bills we get at all because we think "let the insurance company worry about it." It is human nature. |
Ccbatson
Member
Username: Ccbatson
Post Number: 3486
Registered: 11-2006
| | Posted on Sunday, September 09, 2007 - 4:29 pm: | |
That is why people like Lilpup will stagnate in mediocrity...they don't get it.
PG...not silly at all. Way back before the new deal that was how health care worked. When the middle men (employer purchasing insurance/insurer/unions) are taken out of the equation, the seller needs to appeal to the buyer with the best product at the lowest price.....result? better health care and cheaper to boot. |
Novine
Member
Username: Novine
Post Number: 119
Registered: 07-2007
| | Posted on Monday, September 10, 2007 - 12:20 am: | |
"Way back before the new deal that was how health care worked."
Are you kidding me? Please share with us the percentage of the population that had health care insurance pre-New Deal. I can't wait to see how the golden years compared to today.
If we really want to get to the root of the problem, it all goes back to that socialist Henry Ford. If he hadn't started "overpaying" his workers with the $5 a day wage, we would never been in this mess where people expect to get paid anything more than enough to keep them alive and working. |
Lilpup
Member
Username: Lilpup
Post Number: 2751
Registered: 06-2004
| | Posted on Monday, September 10, 2007 - 12:53 am: | |
Batty, you gonna accept chickens and homegrown garden veggies for payment? Because that's the direction the majority of the workforce is headed.
Or are you just going to cater to the rich and everyone else be damned? |
Ccbatson
Member
Username: Ccbatson
Post Number: 3572
Registered: 11-2006
| | Posted on Monday, September 10, 2007 - 12:59 am: | |
A low percentage...costs were relatively much lower and out of pocket payments were the primary method of payment.
Relatively speaking (given inflation, etc) Physicians did better then than now, with much less red tape and hoops to jump through.
Lilpup, I will accept whatever reimbursement a free market would warrant. As I am confident that the services provided are very desirable/valuable, I am not concerned that I will go broke at all. |
Danny
Member
Username: Danny
Post Number: 6482
Registered: 02-2004
| | Posted on Monday, September 10, 2007 - 6:37 am: | |
YAY GRANHOLM!!!
The political war between the Republican legislature of Michigan and Granholm and the Michigan Democratic Liberation will be loomed after October 1st.
Let's show those Republican what we democrats are made of. |
Mcp001
Member
Username: Mcp001
Post Number: 2997
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 10, 2007 - 7:55 am: | |
And just what might that be, Danny?
In case you haven't been keeping score, the democrats (you know: thos people in charge of the Michigan House & Governor's Chair), haven't been too brave when it comes to jacking Michigan taxpayers.
I wonder why that is?
(Message edited by MCP-001 on September 10, 2007) |
Novine
Member
Username: Novine
Post Number: 123
Registered: 07-2007
| | Posted on Monday, September 10, 2007 - 9:45 am: | |
"Relatively speaking (given inflation, etc) Physicians did better then than now, with much less red tape and hoops to jump through."
Oh right, it's all those stupid regulations and red tape that are driving up the costs of health care. I'm sure if we compared levels of care, technology and other costs between the 1930s and today, they would be comparable. |
New threads cannot be started on this page. The threads above are previous posts made to this thread.