3 ms·

> Government usually pays well-below-market salaries That may be true for base salaries, but if you take into account overtime and pension/health benefits that

> Government usually pays well-below-market salaries That may be true for base salaries, but if you take into account overtime and pension/health benefits that is not the case. If what you say is true, gov't emplpyees would quit en masse; however that's not happening. I know from personal experience people that get government jobs and act like they won the lottery. > Public sector unions have almost nothing to do with that, though, since the labor is almost entirely contracted-out (so, private sector unions, to the extent unionized), and anyway the main cost drivers aren't labor costs but MTAs horrible contracting process and NY State contracting rules. In NYC at least, public projects like subway construction use by law or by convention only union labor. That's a huge cost driver. You are right that that's private unions when it comes to construction, however when one considers the enormous operating costs of the MTA (the other side of the same coin) that's all public unions driving costs up and resisting any modernization that would make the system more efficient. You are also right that contractor oversight sucks and that's also a cost driver; both are valid issues.

dragonwriter 6y ago
> > Government usually pays well-below-market salaries > That may be true for base salaries, That's specifically what the phrase you quoted refers to. > but if you take into account overtime and pension/health benefits that is not the case. It's still below market, though not as much. As I said in the next phrase in the same sentence from the one you quoted. > If what you say is true, gov't emplpyees would quit en masse No, if what I said was true, government would (as I said, again, in the same sentence you pulled the quote from) disproportionately end up employing those with noncompensation reasons to choose the particular work, and those of below average competence. Which it does. Government employees would only quit en masse if the below-market pay was a sudden transition from at-market pay.
Kluny 6y ago
Something you may not have considered - in countries where public servants are paid poorly, the result is widespread government corruption. In Nicaragua, for example, the police are so badly underfunded that if you want their help, you may be asked to pay for the gasoline to run their cars. If you can't pay, you don't get help. This type of behaviour is massively wasteful and a drain on the wealth of a country. It's wise to avoid it.

dragonwriter 6y ago

> > Government usually pays well-below-market salaries > That may be true for base salaries, That's specifically what the phrase you quoted refers to. > but if you take into account overtime and pension/health benefits that is not the case. It's still below market, though not as much. As I said in the next phrase in the same sentence from the one you quoted. > If what you say is true, gov't emplpyees would quit en masse No, if what I said was true, government would (as I said, again, in the same sentence you pulled the quote from) disproportionately end up employing those with noncompensation reasons to choose the particular work, and those of below average competence. Which it does. Government employees would only quit en masse if the below-market pay was a sudden transition from at-market pay.

Kluny 6y ago

Something you may not have considered - in countries where public servants are paid poorly, the result is widespread government corruption. In Nicaragua, for example, the police are so badly underfunded that if you want their help, you may be asked to pay for the gasoline to run their cars. If you can't pay, you don't get help. This type of behaviour is massively wasteful and a drain on the wealth of a country. It's wise to avoid it.