public sector compensation

The Strib has written a few stories now about public sector compensation and the efforts by the GOP majority in St. Paul to reduce or cap any increases.  One of the arguments leveled against these efforts is that the dollars involved in any such initiative are a drop in the bucket when compared to the state's budget deficit. 

This counter argument makes no sense to me and illustrates well the disconnect which those in the public sector unfortunately  have when in comes to compensation and benefits.

Public employees should be fairly paid for the important work which they do.  But, their compensation and benefits needs to reflect the realities of the private sector.

Two years ago, as the current recession was causing record lay-offs and salary freezes (or reductions) across Minnesota, I suggested to our then city manager that we needed to reflect that reality in the budget we were working on. I'll never forget his response--"why should our employees suffer because of what's going on in the private sector; the demand for our services hasn't changed..."  Slightly paraphrased given the passage of time, but that was the gist.

Ultimately, city headcount was reduced by 6 (out of 270 or so) and wages were frozen for one year.  Neither is immaterial, but both are quite modest when compared to the private sector.

I tend to agree, too, that the public pension should be a thing of the past.  In the private sector if you're lucky enough to save $800,000 in a 401k you can expect about $40,000 a year in retirement income, assuming safe investments.  Of course, most Americans don't save that much in a 401k. But, that same yearly income is far easier to come by for public employees. Should it be? Especially given today's long life expectancies, I think that's simply too generous.