http://www.king5.com/news/City-of-Tacoma-plans-to-layoff-more-than-100-employees-134082048.html
Now I know there are a lot of people who support the unions here and constantly complain that they are underpaid compared to the private industry. If I am averaging this its $187,878 for pay and benefits. Seems a little excessive to me.
I think it is a poorly written article and hardly contains enough info to make any wage & bennie calculations. Total savings from employee layoffs include more than wages and benefits. Also, the total is 165 employees, which is a lot more than 'over 100'. This potentially includes 47 FTE's from the fire dept and 65 from the police dept, which tend to be fairly highly skilled and therefore well paid jobs. Plus, it doesn't mention ancillary cuts like closing fire stations, reducing leased office space, etc., as well as capital costs like vehicles, computers, etc., unless that's what it means by 'other cuts.'
The TNT has a slightly more informative article:
http://www.thenewstribune.com/2011/11/15/1907679/police-fire-departments-are-shielded.html
This is kinda like saying you saved $10,000 a year in home expenses when your kid left for college. Doesn't mean his allowance was $10large, it means your food bill dropped, your car insurance went way down, etc. Ok, overly simple example, but you get the picture ...
dobro
Member Profile
"The first $23 million of the shortfall will be addressed by the layoffs and other cuts before the end of this year."
Since you have no idea what "and other cuts" amount to, you don't know what you're talking about. Thus, your union-bashing conclusions could be considered to be misinformation.
Yeah, Boston. That figure of $187K per employee smells a little like parts of Tacoma. In other words . . . it stinks. I suspect there's either something wrong with your math or with the way the story was reported. Or both.
The story says that "unions were notified" of the layoffs but doesn't say how many of the eliminated positions were actually union jobs. Almost certainly, some of them would have been management positions. Some may have been consultant jobs, too. But the language King5 uses implies ALL the jobs cut were union jobs, when in fact, Beyonce had one of the best videos of all time.
Don't believe me? Just look at this:
My calculation was simply 31 million divided by 165 employees. Union bashing or not they are all union employees would be my guess which I bet is accurate. I agree with one thing, the article is poorly written.
It doesn't change the fact though if laying off 165 people can save that much money then there is an easy way to balance the budget and a lot of overpaid employees.
I don't make that much money and 100 other employees have a job because of the job I do. If I screw up then the company closes.
dobro
Member Profile
You still don't seem to be reading the "other cuts" portion of the article. You make "guesses" about what might be accurate and then draw conclusions from your non-existant data. It's easy to see that you think there are overpaid union employees who don't have the incentive that you do to not screw up.
So that makes your statement an uninformed opinion. Which you are entitled to have, but I'm pointing out that your attempt to have some sort of "facts" to back it up by citing an article that you misrepresent doesn't cut it.
Bostonman -- first, you shouldn't believe everything that shows up on your computer screen, esp when no source is cited and no links to addl info are provided. Second, if you are going to make that leap, you should be dividing $23 mil by 165. Third, you should not assume that the $23mil is all salary, esp. when 'other expenses' are specically mentioned. Fourth, you should explore the city of Tacoma's website for more detailed info. There are numerous briefing papers on their budget deliberations. Here, I'll make it easy for you:
http://www.cityoftacoma.org/Page.aspx?nid=992
Note that none of their numbers, esp in the most recent briefing document, match the info in the K5 'story'.
Fifth, I'm not sure about you, but I don't want to pay police officers and firefighters minimum wage. If one of them screws up, someone probably dies.
Sixth, this is TACOMA.
UPDATED: City of Tacoma Employee Salaries
This database shows base pay rate and total pay, for City of Tacoma, Tacoma Public Library and Tacoma Public Utilities employees for 2010. Data was provided by the City of Tacoma, responding to a public records request from The News Tribune. It is scheduled to be updated annually. Found on NewsTribune.com
http://www.thenewstribune.com/tacomacitypay/
by leaving it “All” in the search, you will bring up the salaries of Tacoma employees. At the far right of the table you will find a column for salaries and then one for total benefits as of 2010.
http://www.thenewstribune.com/soundinfo/seattlesalaries/
http://www.thenewstribune.com/soundinfo/kingsalaries/
Don’t forget when looking at some of the total salaries for the year, there may be some overtime or the loss of hours might be due to partial layoffs, injury or illness.
I would also suggest that everyone look at individual job descriptions. For the Police and Fire Departments, what it takes to even qualify.
http://www.cityoftacoma.org/Page.aspx?nid=992
http://www.seattle.gov/financedepartment/
http://www.kingcounty.gov/exec/PSB/Budget.aspx
Missed the entire point of my second post. I can concede the article written stinks, I can also concede that there are "other cuts" and its not all salaries. Its still alarming to me that they can save $31 million on 165 jobs.
I absolutly don't expect minimum wage for police men. That benig said I am armed most of the time myself in case something happens I don't need to wait for them.
I really think that you're falling prey to a ploy that all politicians seem to use. It is a scare tactic. Listen to them. Whenever they talk about cuts they begin with police, firefighters, teachers and nurses.
Bostonman...
did that $165 mill in savings account for the overtime they will be paying the remaining employees for doing the jobs of those laid off?
does it account for the loss in tax revenue for the city of Tacoma for the employees laid off?
does it account for the personal losses of city residents who depend on city services?
public safety workers aside... and i am not sure how you can brush them aside in Tacoma...
how long are you willing to wait for a building permit or for an inspector to sign off on your latest home improvements?
Those cuts are likely to cut residents pretty deeply.
Very one sided reporting...
and very opportunistic accounting.
AHexpat
Member Profile
Bostonman, I am a big supporter of unions, but an even bigger supporter of math and reading comprehension. The article you linked to states that the initial 165 jobs being cut will save $23 million, not the full $31 million. It states that the additional $8 million would be saved if they decide to cut a further 78 jobs, 34 being fire positions and 44 being police positions. If we divide $8 million by 78, the resulting savings works out to approximately $103,500 per employee let go.
According to the City of Tacoma website (http://www.cityoftacoma.org/Page.aspx?hid=5812#Self-insurance), the average cost of health insurance coverage was $10,300 per employee in 2007. According to Bloomberg (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-09-27/health-benefit-costs-rise-most-in-six-years-surpassing-15-000-per-family.html) health insurance costs rose approximately 9% from 2010 to 2011. They did note this was the highest increase in the last 5 years, so if we assume a more modest increase of 6% for the other years from 2007 to 2011, it is nearly $14,000 per year in 2011. That would mean that the average salary after deducting only the cost of health benefits (not looking at any other benefits) is approximately $90,000. Admittedly, these numbers are cobbled together from several sources using rough estimation on my part.
$90,000 is nothing to sneeze at. I make just over 50% of that amount, but the problems I face in my middle management job at a local credit union pale in comparison to what my friend who is a Seattle police officer has to deal with on a daily basis. I guess the thing that really bothers me about people who denigrate union jobs and their relatively higher wages is that they are often the people who benefit in some other way from some form employment that is similarly exclusive. Bostonman, you mentioned you are a CPA in a previous forum post. Can you tell me why CPAs shouldn't have their salary reduced to save someone else money, or anyone else with an advanced certification for that matter? I could argue that lawyers, doctors, CPAs, etc. make too much money, driving up the cost of consuming their respective services. True, passing the CPA exam is a laudable accomplishment, and one that my girlfriend is currently working towards. But, could the same not also be said for someone who passes the exams and interviews necessary to become a firefighter or police officer? Ultimately, it would be better for everyone to have better paying jobs with robust benefits, but somehow many of us have been convinced that union members are somehow less deserving. Must we always drag out the tired stereotype of the overpaid, lazy union employee?
AHexpat..
I believe that $90,000 per employee was real costs for wages.. not base salaries...
it includes the overtime made necessary by previous layoffs
Just to respond to this. It looks like King 5 added information to that report that wasn't there when I first linked it. In fact you can see in the header they updated it. So, yes I agree with you my numbers were high. Its probably somewhere in the $110 to $120k per person with benefits. Still a lot of money like you said.
Now back to the point I was trying to make here. This is one city, making one change and saving $31 million from the budget. When revenues aren't coming in why are there complaints that we can't fund expenses to cut. Here is one city cutting $31 million. Thats the point. I know its not ideal to cut police or firefighters but somethings gotta go.
Now, as far as me picking on union members my dad was a union member for 32 years. I wasn't picking on union members specifically but it just happens that city employees are generally union members. It could have just as well been 165 bank of america executives saving the company $31m.
redblack
Member Profile
cutting 165 bank of america executives would probably save them about 10 times that number. and they'd still be reaping profits.
hey! what do you call cutting 165 bank of america executives' jobs?
a good start! [rim shot]
thank you, thank you. i'll be here all week. be sure to try the prime rib.
Yea.. but B of A doesn't have taxing authority. Don't you wish all private employers could afford to pick up the kind of health insurance tab the local governments do? They sure can't. How about picking up 50% like many private sector employees do? AHexpat. Bostonman faces salary and benefits cuts everyday... he has to offer his services for sale. He is in a competitive, market driven, supply and demand market. when cops and firefighters have to do the same.let me know..open up a 12 week community college program for being a cop or a fireman.. then every graduate can put in a service bid against the existing cadre..low qualified bidder wins! That's the private job market.. get real .. let's not glamorize the "high levels" of achievement for either job. It's not brain surgery and has nowhere near the level of training. It's relatively pedestrian job. Delivery truck drivers have a higher injury and mortality rate than cops.
wow..we'd have cops by the dozens..and could pay them minimum wage...because it's not brain surgery, and anyone could do it. What a brilliant idea, Kootch !
I apologize for kootch to all of you who dedicate your lives to our personal safety...
there is no excuse for ignorance...
so all i can do is apologize
You must log in to post.
All contents copyright 2012, A Drink of Water and a Story Interactive. Here's how to contact us.
No photo reuse without permission.
Entries and comments feeds. ^Top^
westseattleblog
West Seattle Blog
West Seattle Blog