Sweeney and Oliver are confronting their own coalition, telling the unions they can't have their way because its simply unreasonable. It's the equivalent of Washington Republicans telling their team that tax hikes must be part of the answer to the debt problem. It's grown-up politics. It's leadership.
Oh, so now the benefits are "unreasonable." Except you're comparing public workers - who are underpaid anyway - getting health care and modest pensions to tax breaks for the very wealthiest at a time when they are paying historically low rates and taking more of the money for themselves than ever before.
There is simply no equivalence between a teacher making $60K a year getting decent health insurance and a hedge fund manager being asked to give up a tax rate that's lower than that teacher's.
More Moran:
This is Jersey, and they have been kings for a long time, even when Republicans were in power. A decade ago, they got a 9 percent pension boost just for asking. They rigged the rules on collective bargaining so they couldn't lose, sending the average police salary to nearly $100,000. It became almost impossible to fire them, so no one even tried.
I can't speak for the cops, but 40% of teachers do not earn tenure in their first three years. So let's put that "impossible to fire" nonsense to bed once and for all.
Let's instead talk about salaries. Your own paper reports that the median salary for police in NJ is $90, 672; that "nearly $100,000" assertion is more than a little generous.
Further, that includes superior officers - essentially, managers. Patrol officers - again, in your own report - make a median $80,120. That's before taking out 10% for mandatory pensions and health insurance. And keep in mind that New Jersey has one of the highest costs-of-living in the nation.
Tom, are you really prepared to say that NJ cops are overpaid making $80K? If so, you have an obligation to tell us what you think they should earn. $70K? $60K? $40K?
Teachers refused to take a pay freeze, despite the recession. Cops wouldn't yield on benefits, forcing mass layoffs in violent cities like Camden and Newark. Firefighters fought to keep giant payouts for unused sick time, even as union members in the private sector were taking a pounding.
On the teachers: plenty took a pay freeze. Plenty took a pay CUT: when the 1.5% contribution to health care kicked in, those teachers working without a contract around the state made LESS money than they did before.
And the NJEA never said locals shouldn't take freezes; they said it should be negotiated, not legislated. That is the entire point of this week's protest.
Further, the contracts that have been settled over the past year average raises of 2% - right in at the national average for all workers. In fact, the contracts settled since the spring have settled at 1.6%. And this is after over 20 years of teacher wages not keeping pace with average wages in NJ.
So let's not talk about the recession passing teachers by, Tom.
As to all of those charges about cops and firefighters and teachers and their greedy benefits: no one ever said they wouldn't yield on benefits. The cops in Camden agreed to a wage freeze - exactly what you call for here from the teachers.
But, no, Mayor Dana Redd - who is increasingly revealing herself to be a Christie crony - wanted a 20% cut in pay. Do you support that, Tom? A 20% pay cut for cops in the second most dangerous city in America? If so, come out and say it like that, instead of pussyfooting around.
The sad fact is that this legislation does nothing to deal with the core issue: runaway health insurance costs. Moran would better serve his readers by informing them about that than beating up public workers for daring to stand up for their middle class compensation.
UPDATE: Moran might also tell his readers that this bill will save towns a meager $5 million next year. That won't help property taxes very much, will it Tom?
(An aside: one of my biggest pet peeves about the press these days is how so few reporters seem to understand how to analyze data and statistics. Take, for example, the article I reference above from the S-L about police salaries. In an attempt to show NJ police are paid more than the national average, the writer, Chris Megerian, states:
But data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics show police here are paid better in comparison with other professions than they are elsewhere in the country.
The average rank-and-file cop nationwide makes 27 percent more than the average resident. In New Jersey, the average rank-and-file cop makes 55.3 percent more.
First of all, that's a real roundabout way to calculate regional wage disparities. Second: comparison to the average wage doesn't take into account the variability of wages in a state.
In other words: [and this is purely hypothetical] even if the above statistic is true, it is possible that the average cop in New Jersey and the average cop around the US are both paid at the 70th percentile: 70% of the population makes less, and 30% make more. The two statistics would not be incompatible.
New Jersey has many rich folks and lots of poverty; there is very high variability in our wages. So this statistic is really not very helpful in having us figure out whether NJ cops are really overpaid.) |
.gif)
