Slashdot Mirror
Scientist Union's Talks Stall Over Pay
HughPickens.com writes: The Sacramento Bee reports that the labor contract between California's state government and the 2,800 employees represented by the 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 ($5,715 in salary, plus $3,270 in benefit costs). 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."
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."
If you work for the state, where do you HAVE to live in the bay area? Shouldn't the state alleviate the issue by having offices for these people in other, less expensive, areas of the state? You could attract a lot of people at a lower salary using quality of life as an attraction if you locate somewhere outside the major cities... there's a lot of California and all of it is not as expensive as the bay area.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
While I'm sure they deserve to get paid what they're paid, consider that this money comes from taxpayers. Consider that we have homeless people and other poor people who aren't necessarily helped by higher taxes in this country. What I'm getting at here is... the money has to come from somewhere. I want to say there should be a cap for how much government employees can earn for employment that is consistent over time.
In 10 occupations, the state’s total compensation was at or above the market. In four occupations, the state’s total compensation was below the market.
So California needs to cut (or not change) the compensation of ten occupations and increase it for four. Seems reasonable.
There are people with real work problems.
Seriously, read what was written in that comment [emphasis added]:
Have one of these unionized scientists ever started crying just by looking at their lab coats?
Then there's this [emphasis added]:
That, my friends, is real suffering.
If you want to make more money, move to a private position. Nobody is forcing these people to work for the state. If you have a need to fulfill some sense of "civic duty" for your government, then consider that warm fuzzy feeling part of your compensation package. If the state's wages are no longer enough for you, leave. If the state wants to keep highly skilled technical positions, they will pay more to do it.
nearly 13 percent less than the midpoint for local-government chemists and almost 6 percent below the private sector
.
So, while this particular group is complaining that they are relatively underpaid, it seems,on average, government employees are overpaid.
Let them train some H1-B visa holders to replace themselves and help get the government average down to the private sector average.
This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
Try working in IT where you get outsourced to anoher country with someone making $8/hr
I'm sure the Amalgamated Union of Philosophers, Sages, Luminaries, and Other Professional Thinking Persons could help them get what they want.
Newsflash!
Scientists strike! They say "No working science until they're paid better!"
In other news!
*BOOM!*
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
Am I reading this right? That private sector chemists are paid less than government sector chemists?
Don't worry, the state will just lay them off and hire H1B visa holders. That's the solution to all problems. /sarc
and the real and the real question still is, and the real question still is, what do these people make in the and the real world? what do these people make in the private sector? The real world? Not the obscene world of the union/communist funded life style?