4 ms·

This is just mean. Why don't you put your own name and salary up there for us to see, mariusz331? Whether your employer is the government or a private entity a

by flexie 13y ago

This is just mean. Why don't you put your own name and salary up there for us to see, mariusz331? Whether your employer is the government or a private entity and whether or not you participate in a strike you don't deserve to have your financial data exposed.

radicaldreamer 13y ago
They're public employees, their salaries have been public information for a long time. Mean or nice doesn't have anything to do with it.
dennis82 13y ago
We the People pay and employ public workers. Ergo, We the People are entitled to see their salaries, and in this particular case, how badly they're "ripping off" the Public in general.
nknighthb 13y ago
I support public employees, public employee unions, and the right of those employees/unions to strike. I also do not believe most of these salaries and other compensation are outrageous. But I also support complete transparency in government. Ultimately, we are their employer, and we have a right to know how much we're paying them. I know this will sometimes have negative consequences for the employees, but this is a balancing of interests, and in the end, I believe we're all better served by this. We would be better served still, however, if we knew exactly how these numbers came to be, because some of them are very strange. I'm guessing we could eventually figure most of it out with sufficient research, but ideally a subject matter expert would come forward and save us some time by explaining it.
- dantheman 13y ago
  Why would you support public sector unions? They face a very different dynamic than ones faced in the private sector. Here's a good write up: http://www.hoover.org/publications/policy-review/article/43266 http://www.hoover.org/publications/policy-review/article/432...
  - nknighthb 13y ago
    The parts of that article I don't believe are factually incorrect are parts I fundamentally disagree with. Trying to convince me public sector unions are bad by linking me to a conservative think tank rattling off a list of things public employees fight for/against is a bad idea. I fight for/against the exact same things. So the answer to your question is, I'm a bleeding heart pinko commie bastard, that's why. Have a glass of vodka, comrade.
    - tater 13y ago
      Thats the strategy, divide and conquer, make the private sector hate the public sector, make the nonunion workers hate the union workers, etc. As soon as they have enough haters to form a critical mass, the hated group gets shit on and they repeat the process with the next group.
    - dantheman 13y ago
      Just so you know, I wasn't trying to insult you or start a fight. I think there are two interesting sections that most people may not have thought of/considered: THE POWER OF PUBLIC SECTOR UNIONS & THE DISTORTION OF DEMOCRATIC POLITICS e.g. Correction officers’ unions are powerful forces in states like California and New York; they push for the construction of more prisons and for longer sentences for criminals (so that there are more people for correction officers to guard). Their activities in California are a case in point. In the last eight years they have spent $10 million on state politics — either in direct contributions to politicians or in spending on ballot initiatives relating to crime and punishment. They have mounted full-scale political campaigns. For instance, the California corrections union has attacked public officials, such as the Los Angeles district attorney, who supported an alternative to the union-favored “three-strikes law.” Indeed, Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy in February of this year noted that “the three-strikes law sponsor is the correctional officers’ union and that is sick!” In 1999 the union even successfully opposed a proposal to permit the California attorney general to prosecute brutality in prisons.
  - hallp 13y ago
    It's a little humorous that they are talking about unions disrupting the political system when corporations spend infinitely more money on lobbying government.
- tome 13y ago
  > Ultimately, we are their employer, and we have a right to know how much we're paying them. Although I support the general sentiment I don't think this is clear cut. Should shareholders have the right to know the salaries of the employees at the companies they invest in?
  - nknighthb 13y ago
    This sort of thing is actually one of the reasons the public stock markets bother me. I do, in fact, believe that someone who has an ownership interest in a corporation should be privy to such information (and much more). That said, it's up to the shareholders of a company whether they will force the company to release the information, and I can't blame them for choosing not to widely disseminate information that could be useful to competitors. I can blame them for being shareholders in companies with such fractured ownership, but I must blame myself, as well, for I also own stock in such companies. In this case, however, there is no direct competition, and the "shareholders" of the public sector have wisely decided that they shall have access to this information.
mariusz331 13y ago
well, it's available here too: http://www.mercurynews.com/salaries/bay-area?Entity=Bay%20Area%20Rapid%20Transit http://www.mercurynews.com/salaries/bay-area?Entity=Bay%20Ar... i just want someone to make some cool graphs with it
- cmina 13y ago
  Not exactly a cool graph but it shows the distribution of those salaries. http://i.imgur.com/ljZtghU.jpg http://i.imgur.com/ljZtghU.jpg Check the right tail, that's where "all the money are", literally speaking!

by flexie 13y ago

radicaldreamer 13y ago

They're public employees, their salaries have been public information for a long time. Mean or nice doesn't have anything to do with it.

dennis82 13y ago

We the People pay and employ public workers. Ergo, We the People are entitled to see their salaries, and in this particular case, how badly they're "ripping off" the Public in general.

nknighthb 13y ago

I support public employees, public employee unions, and the right of those employees/unions to strike. I also do not believe most of these salaries and other compensation are outrageous. But I also support complete transparency in government. Ultimately, we are their employer, and we have a right to know how much we're paying them. I know this will sometimes have negative consequences for the employees, but this is a balancing of interests, and in the end, I believe we're all better served by this. We would be better served still, however, if we knew exactly how these numbers came to be, because some of them are very strange. I'm guessing we could eventually figure most of it out with sufficient research, but ideally a subject matter expert would come forward and save us some time by explaining it.

dantheman 13y ago
Why would you support public sector unions? They face a very different dynamic than ones faced in the private sector. Here's a good write up: http://www.hoover.org/publications/policy-review/article/43266 http://www.hoover.org/publications/policy-review/article/432...
- nknighthb 13y ago
  The parts of that article I don't believe are factually incorrect are parts I fundamentally disagree with. Trying to convince me public sector unions are bad by linking me to a conservative think tank rattling off a list of things public employees fight for/against is a bad idea. I fight for/against the exact same things. So the answer to your question is, I'm a bleeding heart pinko commie bastard, that's why. Have a glass of vodka, comrade.
  - tater 13y ago
    Thats the strategy, divide and conquer, make the private sector hate the public sector, make the nonunion workers hate the union workers, etc. As soon as they have enough haters to form a critical mass, the hated group gets shit on and they repeat the process with the next group.
  - dantheman 13y ago
    Just so you know, I wasn't trying to insult you or start a fight. I think there are two interesting sections that most people may not have thought of/considered: THE POWER OF PUBLIC SECTOR UNIONS & THE DISTORTION OF DEMOCRATIC POLITICS e.g. Correction officers’ unions are powerful forces in states like California and New York; they push for the construction of more prisons and for longer sentences for criminals (so that there are more people for correction officers to guard). Their activities in California are a case in point. In the last eight years they have spent $10 million on state politics — either in direct contributions to politicians or in spending on ballot initiatives relating to crime and punishment. They have mounted full-scale political campaigns. For instance, the California corrections union has attacked public officials, such as the Los Angeles district attorney, who supported an alternative to the union-favored “three-strikes law.” Indeed, Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy in February of this year noted that “the three-strikes law sponsor is the correctional officers’ union and that is sick!” In 1999 the union even successfully opposed a proposal to permit the California attorney general to prosecute brutality in prisons.
- hallp 13y ago
  It's a little humorous that they are talking about unions disrupting the political system when corporations spend infinitely more money on lobbying government.
tome 13y ago
> Ultimately, we are their employer, and we have a right to know how much we're paying them. Although I support the general sentiment I don't think this is clear cut. Should shareholders have the right to know the salaries of the employees at the companies they invest in?
- nknighthb 13y ago
  This sort of thing is actually one of the reasons the public stock markets bother me. I do, in fact, believe that someone who has an ownership interest in a corporation should be privy to such information (and much more). That said, it's up to the shareholders of a company whether they will force the company to release the information, and I can't blame them for choosing not to widely disseminate information that could be useful to competitors. I can blame them for being shareholders in companies with such fractured ownership, but I must blame myself, as well, for I also own stock in such companies. In this case, however, there is no direct competition, and the "shareholders" of the public sector have wisely decided that they shall have access to this information.

mariusz331 13y ago

well, it's available here too: http://www.mercurynews.com/salaries/bay-area?Entity=Bay%20Area%20Rapid%20Transit http://www.mercurynews.com/salaries/bay-area?Entity=Bay%20Ar... i just want someone to make some cool graphs with it

cmina 13y ago
Not exactly a cool graph but it shows the distribution of those salaries. http://i.imgur.com/ljZtghU.jpg http://i.imgur.com/ljZtghU.jpg Check the right tail, that's where "all the money are", literally speaking!