Author	Message
Guest	Posted: Tue, Nov 10 2009, 10:42 am EST    Post subject: Re: Christie considers declaring financial state of NJ emergency The salary maybe low by industry standards, but if you add up all the health benefits, pension, and other perks (fixed working hours; a day off per two weeks, etc.). It's a very good job!
publius	Posted: Tue, Nov 10 2009, 10:16 am EST    Post subject: Re: Christie considers declaring financial state of NJ emergency Seems to me that having a state gubmint job is the best way to stay outta the poor house!!!!!!!!!!
Guest	Posted: Tue, Nov 10 2009, 7:54 am EST    Post subject: Re: Christie considers declaring financial state of NJ emergency Guest wrote: Guest wrote: 3.5% - two years in a row?? Who is negotiating for/representing the side of the taxpayer? Obviously NOONE! Not to defend the public unions because I am opposed to them, but typically these annual increases during down periods like this are as a result of pre-negotiated multi-year contracts, not because the State made a new decision to grant that increase for this particular year during the economic crisis. And in the context of a few years ago a 3-5% raise would not have been an unusual commitment. If you step back and look at the pay of these public employees overall over the years it has not increased as fast as the national average pay, in fact it has not kept up. So focusing on just one year or two when their contract is to their advantage seems unfair. I agree. The public workers salaries are more of a "Slow and steady" salary which is safer. The private sector has higher wages but is riskier in these economic times.
Guest	Posted: Tue, Nov 10 2009, 7:45 am EST    Post subject: Re: Christie considers declaring financial state of NJ emergency Guest wrote: 3.5% - two years in a row?? Who is negotiating for/representing the side of the taxpayer? Obviously NOONE! Not to defend the public unions because I am opposed to them, but typically these annual increases during down periods like this are as a result of pre-negotiated multi-year contracts, not because the State made a new decision to grant that increase for this particular year during the economic crisis. And in the context of a few years ago a 3-5% raise would not have been an unusual commitment. If you step back and look at the pay of these public employees overall over the years it has not increased as fast as the national average pay, in fact it has not kept up. So focusing on just one year or two when their contract is to their advantage seems unfair.
Guest	Posted: Mon, Nov 9 2009, 11:08 pm EST    Post subject: Re: Christie considers declaring financial state of NJ emergency 3.5% - two years in a row?? Who is negotiating for/representing the side of the taxpayer? Obviously NOONE!
Guest	Posted: Mon, Nov 9 2009, 8:48 pm EST    Post subject: Christie considers declaring financial state of NJ emergency At least the new leader of our State has some sound financial budgeting skills, instead of just automatically agreeing to raises for state workers, he will be asking the workers for further pay freezes, not unlike many current residents are faced with. Some of my friends at HP had 15% pay cuts in order to stem the layoffs. Quote: With many state workers due to receive two raises in the next fiscal year and a no-layoff pledge in place through December 2010, Christie’s transition team expects to tackle the issue before he takes office Jan. 19, two of his advisers said today. Under the current agreement, CWA workers expect to receive two raises in the next budget year: one on July 1, 2010, and one in January 2011. Each wage increase would be 3.5 percent. If the state initiates layoffs before 2011, the January 2011 raises would kick in immediately, according to the deal. http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2009/11/nj_gov-elect_chris_christie_co.html