4 ms·

Paying these people a high salary seems fine to me. Good on them for collective bargaining to not have to commute half their lives. Paying them an equally high

Paying these people a high salary seems fine to me. Good on them for collective bargaining to not have to commute half their lives. Paying them an equally high pension just makes me feel sad. Here I am running the rat race to save enough to retire, but I'm not making much more than they are, and including retirement, making much less (the retiring fire chief will make more than $300k/year for the rest of her life?!?). Maybe I should have gone into public service.

jMyles 6y ago
> a high salary seems fine to me...collective bargaining... Is that what you see in this story? To me, it just seems like overtime abuse.
- thelean12 6y ago
  If a tech worker has half their compensation in bonuses and equity, is that bonus and equity abuse? It could just be a different compensation structure to get fair pay. That being said, I don't want to claim to know what a "fair" compensation is here. $80k, $100k, $150k, doesn't matter. If $150k is too high, then fix the compensation structure. Don't blame it on "overtime abuse" or some other reason that blames the workers for getting as much as they can from their job.
  - bootcampwhere 6y ago
    Just for example. I work for the US government as a contractor. I get overtime if I work after 5pm or weekends. Working Sunday, 5-9pm, my rate is 3x normal. Plus, I make my own hours. So naturally, my work day is 3-9pm m-f and 5-9 sat/sun. I'm abusing the system and everyone where I am does the same if they can. I tell everyone, the us government is broken. It literally doesn't work and hasn't for a long time. We're just running on fumes at this point and it's a matter of time before the shit hits the fan with hyper-inflatiom.
  - jMyles 6y ago
    > blames the workers for getting as much as they can from their job. Is that what you think I'm doing? Is there any evidence that "the workers" are getting as much as they can? It seems that a small percentage of workers, mostly in positions of power over other workers, are gaming the system in a way that does not benefit the public they're supposed to serve.
- 6gvONxR4sf7o 6y ago
  I'm bitter enough about the abuse of salaried positions and "crunch time" and 50-60 hours/week as normal that when I see other jobs get paid overtime, I have a hard time summoning resentment.
  - jMyles 6y ago
    This seems like goalpost movement. A moment ago you were celebrating high salaries and collective bargaining when presented with evidence that a small number of public employees (apparently, based on the graphic, largely "peace officers") are using a system which pays them far, far more than they agreed. I think we're all mostly fine with the former, but the latter is a very different situation.
    - 6gvONxR4sf7o 6y ago
      > far, far more than they agreed. I'm not moving any goalposts. I see that they negotiated a total package that's high. It includes tons of overtime, which I don't resent like some in the thread seem to.
hackeraccount 6y ago
That's the logic of collective bargaining. The best move is to get benefits that go to everyone equally instead of putting everyone in the position to potentially earn more. So increase the size of pensions and health care benefits. Also politically when the two sides are non-antagonistic the biggest reward possible is the one that's put in the form of an unalterable agreement to be paid by a future party.

jMyles 6y ago

> a high salary seems fine to me...collective bargaining... Is that what you see in this story? To me, it just seems like overtime abuse.

thelean12 6y ago
If a tech worker has half their compensation in bonuses and equity, is that bonus and equity abuse? It could just be a different compensation structure to get fair pay. That being said, I don't want to claim to know what a "fair" compensation is here. $80k, $100k, $150k, doesn't matter. If $150k is too high, then fix the compensation structure. Don't blame it on "overtime abuse" or some other reason that blames the workers for getting as much as they can from their job.
- bootcampwhere 6y ago
  Just for example. I work for the US government as a contractor. I get overtime if I work after 5pm or weekends. Working Sunday, 5-9pm, my rate is 3x normal. Plus, I make my own hours. So naturally, my work day is 3-9pm m-f and 5-9 sat/sun. I'm abusing the system and everyone where I am does the same if they can. I tell everyone, the us government is broken. It literally doesn't work and hasn't for a long time. We're just running on fumes at this point and it's a matter of time before the shit hits the fan with hyper-inflatiom.
- jMyles 6y ago
  > blames the workers for getting as much as they can from their job. Is that what you think I'm doing? Is there any evidence that "the workers" are getting as much as they can? It seems that a small percentage of workers, mostly in positions of power over other workers, are gaming the system in a way that does not benefit the public they're supposed to serve.
6gvONxR4sf7o 6y ago
I'm bitter enough about the abuse of salaried positions and "crunch time" and 50-60 hours/week as normal that when I see other jobs get paid overtime, I have a hard time summoning resentment.
- jMyles 6y ago
  This seems like goalpost movement. A moment ago you were celebrating high salaries and collective bargaining when presented with evidence that a small number of public employees (apparently, based on the graphic, largely "peace officers") are using a system which pays them far, far more than they agreed. I think we're all mostly fine with the former, but the latter is a very different situation.
  - 6gvONxR4sf7o 6y ago
    > far, far more than they agreed. I'm not moving any goalposts. I see that they negotiated a total package that's high. It includes tons of overtime, which I don't resent like some in the thread seem to.

hackeraccount 6y ago

That's the logic of collective bargaining. The best move is to get benefits that go to everyone equally instead of putting everyone in the position to potentially earn more. So increase the size of pensions and health care benefits. Also politically when the two sides are non-antagonistic the biggest reward possible is the one that's put in the form of an unalterable agreement to be paid by a future party.