Why Public Employees Cost Too Much
The Des Moines Register writes:
Republican Terry Branstad recently said he wants to cut the cost of state government by 15 percent, if elected. We look forward to Branstad providing a detailed plan for how he'd do that. The state work force is already smaller than it has been in years. Providing health and human services is especially important in difficult economic times. Where can spending be reduced on the biggest ticket items, such as education?
But Branstad was specific about one place the state can save some dollars: salary and health benefits for public workers. The former governor said he wants to look at reworking the system that awards pay increases to employees based on longevity. He also said public employees should contribute to their health insurance premiums.
He's right.
State employees provide crucial services to the public. They are the people who rescue children from abusive homes, patrol highways, operate state parks, run prisons and connect Iowans who have been laid off with unemployment checks.
But their job benefits are too generous, considering taxpayers are footing the bill. Public workers typically have it better than those in the private sector - from sick leave to job security to retirement pensions to automatic pay increases most years.
Ask people working in the private sector if they get a "merit" raise - regardless of job performance - and they'll likely laugh. Ask them how much they're paying for their health insurance and they'll wince, then quote you a hefty amount.
Yet the vast majority of state workers pay no monthly premium for health insurance. Zero. And that "free" insurance plan is robust and comprehensive. The average public worker also pays less than private-sector workers for doctor visits, prescription drug co-pays, deductibles and other out-of-pocket costs.
Even some of the public workers themselves can't believe their good fortune on health insurance. Many know they should be contributing something to the cost. They know publicity about "free" insurance feeds public resentment toward state employees, especially when the economy is so tough.
"The idea of public employees paying nothing for health insurance while other people are paying a lot, that doesn't seem right," Branstad said. "It's certainly not right from the perspective of the taxpayers."
Workers should pay something - and state officials should call for them to do so when meeting with union leaders at the negotiating table.
Union officials argue the better benefits are a trade-off for public workers accepting lower pay. Perhaps a lawyer working for the state could make more in private practice. But, in many cases, the public jobs pay more than private-sector equivalents. Branstad is right that automatic pay increases should be scrutinized.
No one goes to work for the state thinking they'll get rich. But they do know they'll have good job security, a pension, generous sick time and free health insurance.
That counts for a lot.
It also costs taxpayers too much.
Click here to read more.
