Are Wisconsin public employees overcompensated?

I voted no reflexively but should have voted yes. Oh well.

Regarding the source of the OP... I'm sorry but I just cannot take that information as being either unbiased or even legitimate. The EPI is run by these founders according to the EPI's "About". After doing a little research of these founders, I find they all have one major thing in common - they all once were or still are Socialists. They were all or are still part of the Democratic Socialists of America. They're heavily pro-union, pro-social justice, progressive or outright Socialists who want a socialist economy or society in the United States. So why would I be compelled to take their views on the Wisconsin Unions seriously when just looking at who they are, what they've said and done would I think their views are anything but PRO union?

Founders EPI:

Jeff Faux
Author of "The Global Class War" highly recommended by the DemocraticUnderground.com
"The Global Class War" by Jeff Faux - Democratic Underground

In 2010, Jeff Faux was listed as serving on the advisory board of the Democratic Socialists of America dominated National Jobs For All Coalition.[9]

On September 28th and 29th 2010 Greater Detroit Democratic Socialists of America held a forum “Jobs and the Economic Crisis” featuring Jeff Faux, past president of the Economic Policy Institute[10]

Jeff Faux - KeyWiki


Barry Bluestone
Professor of political economy at the University of Massachusetts, author of Negotiating the Future: A Labor Perspective on American Business.
A future for public unions? (Boston Globe, July 18, 2009)

n 1968, Barry Bluestone was a founding member of the Union for Radical Political Economics, an alternative professional organization for left political economists and an intellectual home for academics, policy-makers, and activists.[5]

In 2001, Boston Democratic Socialists of America held monthly talks on different aspects of the global economy bring in 40 to 60 people. Presentations included economist Barry Bluestone on “Wall Street vs. Main Street;” a discussion of genetic engineering and corporate agriculture; and a meeting on “Global Warming: the Heat Is On.”
Barry Bluestone - KeyWiki



Robert Kuttner - The American Prospect, Newsweek
Re: The American Prospect "About": At the dawn of a new progressive era and a time of economic transformation for the United States and the world, The American Prospect will strengthen the capacity of activists, engaged citizens, and public officials to pursue new policies and new possibilities for social justice. ....The Prospect was founded in 1990 by Robert Kuttner, Robert Reich, and Paul Starr as an authoritative magazine of liberal ideas.
About the Economic Policy Institute

Ray Marshall
A very pro union former Labor Secretary under Jimmy Carter.
Democratic Socialists of America member and writer of Talking Union.
https://talkingunion.wordpress.com/tag/ray-marshall/
Ray Marshall Issues Report on SEIU Trusteeship of UHW « Talking Union

Back to Shared Prosperity
Note the book has Jeff Faux's article in it as well, page 211

Immigration for Shared Prosperity


Robert Reich
In 2009 Robert Reich was listed as the Co-Founder and a member of the Board of Directors of The American Prospect.[6]

In 2009 Robert Reich was listed as a member of the Advisory Board[4] of Wellstone Action, a Minnesota based organization based on the political legacy[5] of that state’s late ‘progressive” Senator Paul Wellstone.

• Wellstone Action and Wellstone Action Fund combine to form a national center for training and leadership development for the progressive movement. Founded in January 2003, Wellstone Action's mission is to honor the legacy of Paul Wellstone and Sheila Wellstone by continuing their work through training, educating, mobilizing and organizing a vast network of progressive individuals and organizations.

In 1996 Robert Reich, Brandeis University, Former Secretary of Labor was one of the original 130 founders of Campaign for America's Future.[2]

Campaign for America's Future was founded in July 1996 as "the strategy center for the progressive movement."[1]


Lester Thurow
In 1987, author and economist Lester Thurow, was a member of Democratic Socialists of America. [1]

Thurow is a longtime advocate of a political and economic system of the Japanese and European type, in which governmental involvement in the direction of the economy is far more extensive than is presently the case in the United States – a model that has come to be known as "Third Way" philosophy.
Lester Thurow - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Such a litany is akin to a post including John Bolton, William Kristol, George W Bush, and Dick Cheney started an institute espousing the need for more international involvement of the U.S. military to push Democracy.

phattonez said:

I mean that comparatively, public employees have had it pretty good. That they still have their jobs is a wonderful thing compared to the high unemployment rate for everyone else.

And I don't know if this applies for Wisconsin, but teachers are generally paid much, much more than private school counterparts (at least per pupil spending, which I assume would be kind of proportional to teacher pay).
They Spend WHAT? The Real Cost of Public Schools | Adam B. Schaeffer | Cato Institute: Policy Analysis

Click to expand...

Per pupil spending does not necessarily translate into higher teacher's pay. There are overheads and administrative costs that need to be taken account of.

This study shows pay by education and sector (figure 5), Federal employees are paid more than other sectors in all education group except for post-graduates, but private employees are better paid than state employees from "some college" onward. So, if Wisconsin is close to the average, its employee are not overpaid compared to the private sector.

jamesrage said:

I don't know.So I picked other.

Click to expand...

I chose other too. I figured we were mostly talking about teachers. There are some really good teachers who are probably undercompensated. Some are probably getting the pay they deserve and the rest overcompensated. Things need to change for the sake of the kids and the state's budgets.
Lousy teachers should get fired, but that's hard to do with the way things are.

I voted other.

Some are overpaid, some are probably underpaid. One main area where I think this delta is the highest is with education. That's why we need a privatized schooling system. The superstars will gravitate towards the best paying schools and those schools can charge what they need to charge to stay in business. Added bonus - parents will have more options available as far as what type of education they purchase. If they want Bible in school, they can choose that. If they don't want sex ed, that's up to the consumer also.

I don't think they are grossly overcompensated. I think they have a sweet deal with regards to healthcare contributions and pension, and the govenors demands aren't unreasonable at all.

My main issue is with pensions. They certainly aren't reflected in the private sector and are ripe for abuse with spiking and early retirement. I don't mind paying good salaries to attract competent employees, but pensions are expensive and provide little benefit.

Barbbtx said:

I chose other too. I figured we were mostly talking about teachers. There are some really good teachers who are probably undercompensated. Some are probably getting the pay they deserve and the rest overcompensated. Things need to change for the sake of the kids and the state's budgets.
Lousy teachers should get fired, but that's hard to do with the way things are.

Click to expand...

Good to see that some "tell the truth", whatever that is.
If you ask a Liberal, he say one thing; the identical query to a conservative - he will shout out another.
So we are noplace....he said....she said...
The vast majority say YES !!!...This may include 50 spammers.
I do not trust them.
Solution....
EVERYONE, the President on down, all Governors, all congressmen, EVERYONE !....take a 10% cut....Set an example...
Yes, I know, this is not the American way, but, with better people, we can innovate.

earthworm said:

Good to see that some "tell the truth", whatever that is.
If you ask a Liberal, he say one thing; the identical query to a conservative - he will shout out another.
So we are noplace....he said....she said...
The vast majority say YES !!!...This may include 50 spammers.
I do not trust them.
Solution....
EVERYONE, the President on down, all Governors, all congressmen, EVERYONE !....take a 10% cut....Set an example...
Yes, I know, this is not the American way, but, with better people, we can innovate.

Click to expand...

Generally speaking, I would take a 10% cut if it could be guaranteed that the government would not just increase spending by 10% on something else. I would pay more in taxes if the government truly eliminated wasteful spending. Until they control their spending, taxing more and/or cutting salaries will be useless.

dadrone said:

Generally speaking, I would take a 10% cut if it could be guaranteed that the government would not just increase spending by 10% on something else. I would pay more in taxes if the government truly eliminated wasteful spending. Until they control their spending, taxing more and/or cutting salaries will be useless.

Click to expand...

If all government employees took a 10% pay cut, the government would be saving 10% of their salaries. So would taxpayers. No high-falutin' math required.

MaggieD said:

If all government employees took a 10% pay cut, the government would be saving 10% of their salaries. So would taxpayers. No high-falutin' math required.

Click to expand...

Unless they spend the same amount on something else. Anytime one thing gets cut, politicians will try to get that money for something else.

dadrone said:

Unless they spend the same amount on something else. Anytime one thing gets cut, politicians will try to get that money for something else.

Click to expand...

I appreciate your frustration, but with that mindset, there'd be absolutely no reason to cut any spending. Good reason for fiscal paralysis.

These state funded employees are WAY over paid. I would say by 40% - 50%. Most property taxes are over $6k in that area.

Actually, they are under paid.

I worked in the public sector for a long time. When adjusting wage scales, one does not compare with the private sector. One compares with comparable public sector jobs. In other words, what do the same positions earn in a state with comparable population and comparable service. Wisconsin has less than 6,000,000 people. When you get a valid comparison between Wisconsin public employees and the employees of Minnesota, Missouri, and Maryland, then we'll talk. Anyone trying to compare public wage averages with private wage averages is simply setting up a statistical scam.

Their nearly free pension and health care benefits are worth thousands upon thousands every year.

Bottom line, if a state cannot afford their wages, then they earn too damned much. They either take a cut or wave goodbye to thousands of their fellow employees. Which, btw, is exactly what happens in the private sector.

pbrauer said:

Actually, they are under paid.

Click to expand...

So you're quoting the Socialists at the EPI and their obviously pro-union and biased study? Why am I not surprised... :lamo

Ockham said:

So you're quoting the Socialists at the EPI and their obviously pro-union and biased study? Why am I not surprised... :lamo

Click to expand...

Do you have anything to the contrary, because what the study finds seems common sense to me. If you have a college education you will make more money in the more competitive private sector. If you have less education you will make more in the public sector. That is common sense to me.

Ockham said:

So you're quoting the Socialists at the EPI and their obviously pro-union and biased study? Why am I not surprised... :lamo

Click to expand...

From what I can tell, this same finding has been more or less found to be true accross multiple studies.

pbrauer said:

Actually, they are under paid.

Click to expand...

As though a degree obviously makes you deserving of higher pay? A PhD in science is way more valuable than a PhD in Political Science or whatever other liberal arts are available for that. A degree in and of itself means nothing. It is the skills acquired along with the degree that are valuable.

megaprogman said:

http://credo.stanford.edu/reports/MULTIPLE_CHOICE_CREDO.pdf



According to this study, on average they are worse.

However, I agree that the more expensive private schools yield better results, but that won't have much of an affect on the general population. Teachers in the more expensive schools are usually paid better too.

Click to expand...

The differences that I have seen wear off by the time students enter high school. So is the many times more that we pay per student in public school worth it? Seems to me that it is not. Besides, I take these cohort studies with a grain of salt because there is no such thing as perfectly matched individuals. Not to say that the results are completely false, but they are only so valuable.

nonpareil said:

This study shows pay by education and sector (figure 5), Federal employees are paid more than other sectors in all education group except for post-graduates, but private employees are better paid than state employees from "some college" onward. So, if Wisconsin is close to the average, its employee are not overpaid compared to the private sector.

Click to expand...

You're only looking at degrees in general and not what kind of degrees. I would expect that the private sector workers have degrees that are typically more valuable than in the public sector (math and science versus liberal arts respectively).

Are the provided graphs also including non-wage benefits? That is a pretty big part of compensation that needs to be included.

phattonez said:

The differences that I have seen wear off by the time students enter high school. So is the many times more that we pay per student in public school worth it? Seems to me that it is not. Besides, I take these cohort studies with a grain of salt because there is no such thing as perfectly matched individuals. Not to say that the results are completely false, but they are only so valuable.

Click to expand...

If the differences wear off with time, then we should not have any concern about school performance at all. Also, if we have no real method of comparison, than there is no point in any discussion about school effectiveness either.

If thats the case, than we should all have cheap and crappy schools, since good schooling won't do us any good. Private or public.

Of course that is absurd (of course schools are important!) so yes, measuring effectiveness is important and results do matter, as we see in life and as you have confirmed in earlier posts implicit in your belief that private schools do better. If they do better, then that difference should be able to be measured. My personal view is that standardized tests don't reveal much though.

pbrauer said:

Actually, they are under paid.

Click to expand...

Showing the annual income is misleading. Teachers don't work nearly as many days as the private sector. July and August they get completely off and a school year is generally around 180 days.

phattonez said:

You're only looking at degrees in general and not what kind of degrees. I would expect that the private sector workers have degrees that are typically more valuable than in the public sector (math and science versus liberal arts respectively).

Click to expand...

Compare what a state or county or city engineer makes to what a private sector engineer makes. It is really not even close. Not to mention working in the private sector, as far as engineering goes at least, you get all the perks that you would NEVER get working for the government. A Christmas party at an extremely fancy restaurant, beer on Fridays, accepting gifts from clients, etc.

megaprogman said:

If the differences wear off with time, then we should not have any concern about school performance at all.

Click to expand...

We should, because public schools cost so much money and allow for no school choice.

Also, if we have no real method of comparison, than there is no point in any discussion about school effectiveness either.

Click to expand...

We can get rough comparisons, but that's as good as it gets.

Of course that is absurd (of course schools are important!) so yes, measuring effectiveness is important and results do matter, as we see in life and as you have confirmed in earlier posts implicit in your belief that private schools do better. If they do better, then that difference should be able to be measured. My personal view is that standardized tests don't reveal much though.

Click to expand...

Not all things that exist can be measured.