SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The Sacramento Bee reports that the labor contract between California state government and the 2,800 employees represented by California Association of Professional Scientists expired this week, spotlighting yet again the long-running feud over whether the tiny union's members should earn as much as their peers in federal and local governments and private industry. "It's a challenge to keep people motivated," says Rita Hypnarowski. "We talk about retaining the best and the brightest, but I can see that's not going to happen." A recent survey by the Brown administration found that the total compensation for half of state-employed chemists is less than $8,985 per month. That's 33 percent less than the median total compensation for federal chemists, nearly 13 percent less than the midpoint for local-government chemists and almost 6 percent below the private sector.
Members of the union perform a wide variety of tasks, everything from fighting food-borne illnesses to mopping up the Refugio State Beach oil spill. For example Cassandra McQuaid left a job last year at the Department of Public Health's state-of-the-art Richmond laboratories where she tracked foodborne illnesses. It's the kind of vital, behind-the-scenes work that goes unnoticed until an E. coli outbreak makes headlines and local health officials need a crack team of scientists to unravel how it happened. "It really came down to money," says McQuaid. "I just couldn't live in the Bay Area on a state salary."
Original Submission
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 02 2015, @03:00PM
What an outrage. Even the lifetime pension benefits they'll be collecting at the taxpayers' expense can't make up for that.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Thexalon on Thursday July 02 2015, @03:16PM
Yes, actually, that is an outrage: We want the government scientists to be good at what they do (otherwise, they'll waste time and resources the same way sub-par people in any endeavor do). If their salaries are noticeably low in comparison to the private sector, and they seem to be, then the smart ones are going to leave, giving the government the sub-par people only.
If your argument is rooted in "We'd be better off if the government didn't have scientists on their payroll", then enjoy grilling your E Coli-laced burger on that nice oil-drenched beach right off of the arid wasteland that used to be a nice park.
"Think of how stupid the average person is. Then realize half of 'em are stupider than that." - George Carlin
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 02 2015, @05:09PM
As I read it, Anon's argument is that government scientists get many benefits that private sector scientists don't get, thus more than making up for a 6% pay differential.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday July 02 2015, @08:43PM
(Score: 2) by ikanreed on Thursday July 02 2015, @03:18PM
Yeah, as far as public sector workers in California go, they aren't the most screwed.
When you work for the government, you do one of two things: either: sacrifice some of your potential income to do the kinda public works that help people, or B: you're a military contractor.
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Thursday July 02 2015, @03:39PM
B) Sacrifice someone elses life? ;)
C) Work in the private sector and sacrifice stress and mundane environment..
(Score: 3, Interesting) by JeanCroix on Thursday July 02 2015, @03:50PM
(Score: 2) by tibman on Thursday July 02 2015, @05:59PM
Six figures in the midwest is probably living in the top 10% too. That's quite a difference.
SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 02 2015, @06:33PM
We are at $170K/year in Florida, which puts us at more than 3x the median household income (49K). I received an offer for ~100K in LA, CA, which amounts to a 17% pay cut (I make 90K).
Six figures is still ballin' in some places, but not Southern California.
(Score: 0, Troll) by Ethanol-fueled on Thursday July 02 2015, @08:35PM
Cant tell if troll.
Which suburb are you talking about, rancho santa fe? Beachfront la jolla or del mar? You can live comfortably in pretty much every other suburb with six figs.
My rule of thumb is that if its mostly Jews and Catholics, well duh, of course you have to be loaded to be comfortable there. And if you're willing to live in ramona/fallbrook you can live like a king and on a decent plot of land.
(Score: 2) by JeanCroix on Friday July 03 2015, @01:43AM
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 02 2015, @03:59PM
University research scientists and post docs need a big bump too.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by TheRaven on Thursday July 02 2015, @04:53PM
sudo mod me up
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 02 2015, @04:33PM
From the link, 73% of the state chemists have a Bachelor's degree. From the Bureau of Labor Statistics, nationally, only about 50% of the chemists have Bachelor's degrees. They are then trying to compare a median made up of a larger Bachelor pool to another. Plus, at least for the Federal workforce, science positions are skewed heavily toward research positions (Ph.D.-level).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 02 2015, @08:53PM
That is part of the problem. If you want good people you need to compensate them well. They don't, so they get less educated people. In other words, you have cause and effect reversed.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 02 2015, @09:26PM
I don't think it is that simple. It depends upon their roles. Chemists who work for the state will be more involved in "ordinary" chemistry; things like sample preparation and analysis, working with Public Works on water safety issues and additives, etc. Research chemists will be involved more with doing exploratory research. It isn't simply a matter that if you pay the state chemists more money that they'll suddenly get Ph.D.s and be doing exploratory research. Paying your diner line cook more money doesn't mean that you can start serving gourmet dinners. It depends upon the roles and responsibilities of the jobs they are in. That isn't to say the line cook can't cook gourmet dinners, but since you're not offering gourmet dinners in your diner, you aren't going to pay for someone with that level of expertise or responsibility.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 02 2015, @05:38PM
Being handcuffed into a union is stupid. Ditch the union and negotiate your own benefits. If the entity they work for only uses union people, run away and look elsewhere.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Bromine001 on Thursday July 02 2015, @06:50PM
Because historically non-union workers get paid better and get more vacation?
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday July 02 2015, @08:47PM
Because historically non-union workers get paid better and get more vacation?
That's been true in the US since union workers often ended up unemployed. Keep in mind that any current unions are survivors of a great culling of labor unions.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 02 2015, @08:56PM
Since this union still exists, it must be one of the good ones that did not get culled, just as every union that still exists are the good ones in your reasoning.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday July 02 2015, @09:32PM
just as every union that still exists are the good ones in your reasoning
My reasoning has not cast any labor unions as good or bad (though I do have further opinion on this, of course). I merely pointed out the great flaw in the reasoning that labor unions result in better pay and more vacation time. They often do, if your labor union happens to survive.
(Score: 2) by dyingtolive on Thursday July 02 2015, @07:53PM
Yeah, that's the only thing that got California tech jobs down to 40 hours/week with accessible vacation time.
Don't blame me, I voted for moose wang!
(Score: 3, Interesting) by mendax on Thursday July 02 2015, @08:36PM
Public employees cannot negotiate their own salaries and benefits on an individual basis because of civil service rules in place to protect them from political interference. All employees doing the same job are, more or less, paid the same.
There was a case several years ago I heard about where the medical and psychiatric employees of the state prison system and Department of Mental Health, many of whom work within the prison system, sued the state of California to get their pay and benefits raised to roughly the same as those who do the same jobs in the private sector. They won and all of a sudden all of them got about a 33% increase in pay.
After all this happened, there is what my dentist, an old coot with a broad Texas accent who continues to work because he loves being a dentist, told me while I was in the chair. He was considering applying for a job at Folsom State Prison, close to where he lives, to work as a prison dentist because the pay was $300k/year. He was astounded at the amount. However, he didn't want to work pulling teeth all day which, at the time, is all state prison dentists were allowed to do at the time.
It's really quite a simple choice: Life, Death, or Los Angeles.
(Score: 0, Troll) by khallow on Thursday July 02 2015, @09:00PM
Public employees cannot negotiate their own salaries and benefits on an individual basis because of civil service rules in place to protect them from political interference.
That's quite the load of bull there since a) it doesn't really do that (it's just not that hard to find or create a good paying position for a crony), and b) is just another thing giving public employee labor unions protected status and in turn enabling their own political interference.
(Score: 2) by mendax on Thursday July 02 2015, @10:28PM
I was referring to civil service rules, not the influence the unions have on what they are paid. But what I said about the government employee compensation is in fact accurate.
It's really quite a simple choice: Life, Death, or Los Angeles.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday July 03 2015, @12:47AM
I was referring to civil service rules [...] But what I said about the government employee compensation is in fact accurate.
And you were also referring to the rationalization for those rules, particularly the manufactured need for collective bargaining. That is what I responded to.
(Score: 2) by mendax on Friday July 03 2015, @06:08AM
I believe I said nothing about a "manufactured need for collective bargaining". However, government employees ought to be paid a salary comparable to that paid in the private sector. This is not only to be fair to the government employees, this is to be fair to the electorate. If you want to have awful government employees, pay them less than the private sector so the government can only get the bottom of the barrel.
It's really quite a simple choice: Life, Death, or Los Angeles.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday July 04 2015, @12:41AM
However, government employees ought to be paid a salary comparable to that paid in the private sector.
What makes you think it's not already true? For example, this labor union represents people who for the most part are lab and field technicians. You don't even need a college degree to do that successfully. And that's not a particularly high paying job in the private sector.
(Score: 2) by mendax on Saturday July 04 2015, @01:25AM
California, for example, is a state that pays its programmers terrible wages. It starts at $4711 a month and ends at $7465 a month. That, my friend, is terrible and is not competitive. Incidentally, they expect you to have some experience to earn all of $4711 a month.
It's really quite a simple choice: Life, Death, or Los Angeles.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday July 04 2015, @10:40PM
California, for example, is a state that pays its programmers terrible wages. It starts at $4711 a month and ends at $7465 a month. That, my friend, is terrible and is not competitive.
Depends what they do. If all you're doing is web monkey stuff, it sounds about right for California. We also need to remember that there are typically some very plush benefits packages and perks associated with that sort of offer, particularly pensions and considerable job security.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 02 2015, @10:34PM
negotiate your own benefits.
You mean, "kiss your boss's ass"? Good luck with that. You are obviously a person of exceptional qualifications, with many areas of expertise!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 03 2015, @02:48PM
I believe he's instead the boss. Or perhaps I should say the slave driver...