The fight to bring a little private-sector discipline to America’s public sector has begun at last

"Does America really want to retain a chief executive who appears to have so little interest in making the public sector work more efficiently?"

This hits the nail on the head, but it should also point out that Obama is a Democrat - and the great contradiction in this is that it is the Democrats who are the ones who are supposed to trumpet the public sector.

"But Republicans have spoon-fed their allies in the firefighters and the police."
the only problem i see with walker is that he sold out to the police and fire unions and they are the most egregious abusers

"Elections have consequences" Obama said. However, it seems that he believes that they only have consequences when they benefit him or his party and supporters.

Obama complained about filibusters in the Senate, but he seems to support elected officials running out of their state to avoid a vote.

Very interesting turn of events.

" Does America really want to retain a chief executive who appears to have so little interest in making the public sector work more efficiently?"

Has the Economist finally recognized their mistake in backing Obama in 2008?

Once more we get an article from England - birthplace of child labor - attacking the already weakened unions in the U.S. based on the false assumption that public sector workers are overcompensated. I do not work in the public sector, but hope that the private sector unions can find some strength from the last bastion of workers rights left in this country, and feeding into lies and misleading statistics does not seem in keeping with the style of The Economist.
In the age of Wall Mart and vastly expanding gulfs between the ultra(obscene)rich and the production classes, yet another attack on workers' rights to organize and defend themselves against the predations of an increasingly lobbycentric government is abhorrent.
Of the several error-based assumptions this author parrots:
A. It is difficult to get rid of bad teachers.
False, teachers go through a probationary period in which they can easily and routinely do get fired, it is only after they have acheived tenure (i.e., proven themselves) that they are difficult to get rid of, this is to prevent school boards from dictating specific teachings (i.e, creationism, etc.), and threatening the jobs of teachers which don't comply.
B. Public sector employees get paid more for the same job as private sector employees (implied).
False, an apples to apples comparison shows that, in fact, public employees with the same level of education get paid less than their private sector counterparts. They take the jobs because they are more secure and offer more family-oriented benefits (resistance to capricious layoffs, health care, and reasonable pensions).
C. Pensions are paid for by the state for public employees (implied).
Only partially true. Sort of like saying that your employer pays for your 401k because they offer some matching funds. Public employees pay into their pension plans, and often the state then takes the money they have paid into it, and spends it on other things. Some matching funds may make their way in as well, but simple responsible management of the money paid in by public employees should suffice for a healthy pension system.

New city records show that former Police Chief Heather Fong - who retired in 2009 - received a grand total of $528,595 in her final year.

Now that she's gone, she's pulling down an annual pension of $229,500 for life.

Former Deputy Chief Charles Keohane, who exited in 2009, received $516,118 in his final year. There are 14 deputy police chiefs, one for airport, one for public transit, one for youth gang, one for drugs, etc…..

Another retiree, Commander Morris Tabak, clocked out with $425,558.
Of course, both Keohane and Tabak get six-figure annual pensions as well.

"We have no discretion on vacation payouts. They are mandatory under state law," said city human resources spokesperson Jennifer Johnson.

Three BART cops who left the transit agency's force in 2009 were among the highest-paid employees in California's so-called special districts, state records show.

At the top of the BART pile was former Commander Travis Gibson, who earned $355,000 in his final year.

Another final-year winner was Commander Maria White, whose total pay was $282,453. After White retired in May 2010, she returned as a contract employee until December.

BART police Sgt. Mark Macaulay - who is still working - pulled in $286,152 in 2009.

Down the street, Battalion Chief Michael Brown at the San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District cashed out with $289,349.

Bell (Los Angeles County), where the city manager was making $800,000 a year, and other officials weren't far behind.

-- Alameda County Administrator Susan Muranishi earns $454,062 a year, making her the state's highest-paid county administrator.

-- SamTrans and Caltrain head Michael Scanlon got a $407,642 pay package last year, including a no-interest home loan that is partially paid down by the district, a $24,000 annual housing allowance and $24,765 for unused time off.

-- BART General Manager Dorothy Dugger was paid $354,010.

-- And outgoing East Bay Municipal Utility District General Manager Dennis Diemer's last year on the job was worth $420,400.

One Police officer retired at age 55, received a ‘lump sum’ retirement of 2.1 million dollar, rehired back the very next day for a salary of $191,000….. …………………

When the newsman asked this officer, he said he was only 55 years old, still has 10 good years left, and he can find another Police officer’s job somewhere else………………………..

When the newsman asked the City Supervisor, he said, this is commonly done and nothing against the law………………………….…

Indeed, the previous Police Chief, retired and received ‘lump sum’ retirement paid, rehired as Homeland Security Chief of Oakland Airport the very next day……….

What a sad joke…..

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:

THERE ARE NUMEROUS FACTUAL ERRORS IN THIS WRITING.

PLEASE CONTACT ME AND I WILL BE HAPPY TO CORRECT.

Wisconsin Progressive:

Why don't you correct here, in public, where we can all see, and can all correct your corrections, if needed?

worker's pay should be equal. However, taking away the rights of unions to bargain is absurd. Also Obama is not just siding with the Unions on this issue. He is siding with the rights of all workers.

@Kacey

I understand that your figures are intended to point out how severely overcompensated many public sector workers are. But, I fail to understand how the salary figures of a few law enforcement officials from the Bay Area in California is relevant when talking about Madison and the bigger picture.
If you're upset with how much these individuals are getting paid you might look into bribery or croneysim.

I've never met a public school teacher that's made 500K in a year.
Or a snow plow driver.
Or a municipal maintenance worker.
Or a social services worker.

If, as a nation, we'd like to move forward and perhaps work together on this (gasp!), we might find that accepting the concessions of the public employees is a great place to start, and that maybe there is a way to reduce the corruption, bribery, and self-interest of some modern union machines while still maintaining the crucial right to collective bargaining.

The behavior of Governor Walker, the Democratic senators of Wisconsin, and indeed both parties since they have become involved has been unproductive and childish.

Let's send our lawmakers back to elementary school, so they can learn how to share, work together, and compromise.

"However, in his third battle—trying to end the right to collective bargaining in the public sector—Mr Walker is going too far."

Why is this "going to far"? Unionization of public sector employees is not that old, and in the federal government it only started about 40 years ago. You could abolish all public sector unions today, and all the civil service statutes would still be on the books providing ample protections for public workers. Public employees have their pay and benefits set by statute, and hiring and firing and layoffs are all also covered by civil service protection laws, so public employees without a union are still probably more protected than the average unionized private sector employee.

The premise that unions are somehow necessary to protect public sector employees is something that you need to re-examine, because the truth is that most public sector employees don't need unions at all.

The Republicans scheme to decapitate public employee unions to benefit the corporations and the Koch brothers are not working check out the latest polling. There are 45 states that are having financial problems that can be traced back to the deregulation of the energy and financial sectors by former US Senator Phil Gramm Republican of Texas.

The unions in Wisconsin have agreed to cut backs but the Governor refused to deal. Public opinion has turned against him. National Republicans thought for a quick second that they had an issue but that changed quickly and now they are running for the tall grass. This article does not have all the latest information and it could be deliberate. This magazine’s slant is contrary to Paul Kruger’s article that shines true light on this issue.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/21/opinion/21krugman.html?ref=general&src...

This is not the first time the Koch brothers has interfered into the internal affaires of a state. In California, Governor Arnold smacked them down as they tried to stop pollution controls from taking effect. See how the Gov. terminated the Koch brothers with great enthusiasm =
http://www.nowpublic.com/world/arnold-schwarzenegger-attacks-black-oil-h...

You might want to send this to your friends to see the great performance of the Terminator.

@LexHumana

I wholeheartedly agree with the argument that unions can be detrimental to public workers rather than beneficial. For instance, an argument can be made that unions help to promote bad practices among workers by trying to recruit and retain the maximum quantity of workers rather than recruiting the best quality workers. Union dues are paid per worker and the more union members you have, the stronger voting block the union leaders "control" for election purposes. Thus, it is in the benefit of unions to encourage the hiring and retention of workers rather than encouraging fewer high quality workers with better pay.

They are also responsible for the support of ridiculous tenure rules, such as the ones teachers unions continuously back. @nschomer tenure has nothing to do with "proving yourself" and everything to do with kissing the a**ses of those above you so they approve your tenure. This type of incredible job security is obsolete and only encourages complacency and laziness. By the way, I'm not sure why teachers should not have to adhere to specific teachings that schools dictate. I can pick an equally ridiculous example where a teacher decides not to teach history about Abraham Lincoln because he/she doesn't want to.

To Slug_Student:

You said and I quote:

“@Kacey
I understand that your figures are intended to point out how severely overcompensated many public sector workers are. But, I fail to understand how the salary figures of a few law enforcement officials from the Bay Area in California is relevant when talking about Madison and the bigger picture….."

-----------------------------------------------------

Let me show you a bigger picture:

Here is from local newspaper where I live.

FREMONT — City employee salaries have increased significantly more than revenue since 2006, contributing to Fremont's financial struggles.

More than half of the city's full-time employees were paid more than $100,000 last year, and 23 city workers' salaries topped $200,000....

On top of more than $100,000 base pay, the city employee makes more than $40,000 over time pay last year

An employee can retire with 20 years of service with 60% of pay, based on 3% per year retirement benefits

City Manager Fred Diaz said he didn't regret the previous labor contract and chalked up the city financial struggles primarily to "a cataclysmic downward economy" and state take-always. "If I decrease salaries ... I think I'd have recruitment problems," he said, adding that Fremont paid workers about the Bay Area median.

Can you believe, a firefighter can make $200,000 a year including overtime? How many fires in the city of Fremont? I have not seen one fire in the past few years.

I saw a fire truck stopped at a supermarket, and I saw 3 firefighters walk into a supermarket to do shopping.

NUMMI (New United Motor) owned by Toyota was the largest employer in Fremont, they just closed on April 1, 2010 and let go 4,700 employee.

There are 20,000 to 30,000 people lost their jobs, because these are the supplier of NUMMI. The city of Fremont is talking about earthquake retrofit and tax increases, instead of lay off these high paid employees - some of them are bureaucrats - do not do a thing...

What a sad joke!

The teacher’s union cares more about their pay, than teaching. My 3 sons all went thru public school and I saw several teachers’ union strikes. Where is education, how much money is enough? The public school has long summer break, winter break, spring break, holidays, teacher's training days....

The school starts 8:00 AM, only 6 sessions per day and 45 minutes per session, several physical education sessions, several silent hours, plus sick leaves buy the teachers, then, they go on strike for more money, where is education in America?

I hear on the news a teacher is getting more than $100,000 for retirement.

Many math teachers in public school can not do simple math? I went to school office many times; there are whole bunch empty desk, and few of old ladies in the office. When I asked for the specific person, that person went to break. They are allowed to have breaks; ‘GOD’ knows how long the break is.

It is really sad that teacher put their salary and benefits ahead of teaching student; teacher’s union only cares about the payees of union dues…..

Government union is different than private sector union; private company goes bankruptcy if they keep on losing money. Government just increases taxes….. As a owner of my own company, I do not have money to pay more taxes, my income is dramatically less than before and hurting in this recession…..

Find a real job in private sector or start your own business and see how hard it is; yes, some makes it, but, 97% went out of business in a few years…..

Here is the real the education system in America by teacher's union.... and the bigger picture of government unions…….

Sad, sad....

I think the Economist would be better off beating up on some Bankers ,whenever the urge gets to them, than having a go at a general low paid class.
I don't deny that some Public Sector Bosses salaries are bloated but they did not bring an economy to its knees.
It would have been nicer to see the papers view on Barclay's paying less than 2 % Corporation Tax but then of course that is private sector, free competition.

" But the fight is being led by Republicans. The main battleground is Wisconsin.."

Actually, the first battleground was Puerto Rico!

@Kacey1
I was waiting for this post. You've cut and pasted this exact same post now what, half a dozen times on this site alone?
Add something new to the debate, maybe.

Calcinandhobbs frankly doesn't know what he or she is talking about. As a retired teacher with over 30 years in public education, I never had to kiss anyone's anatomy nor did anyone I know. I was always evaluated on the basis of my classroom skills, subject matter mastery and contributions to the school/students. I taught at a number of different schools and and two colleges and this was true everywhere. Further, I certainly did not retire on the sort of pension quoted above for a few people in the California area.
Why does the Economist hold public sector practices as the gold standard? The public sector has become increasingly exploitative of workers while top execs become disgustingly rich. If the Economist thinks that is a formula for a stable society, your editors need to study a bit of history. If you like, I'll come out of retirement and run a class for you.

By the way, I hope this technique of running to a different state does not become commonplace among Democratic house members. This not only sets a bad example for others by insisting that the solution to problems is to run away from them, but also puts a bad face on the United States as a whole. Is this how we deal with our problems, by running away and crying about them? At the very least, those congressmembers who refuse to do their jobs while they run away should be docked pay for each day they are not present.

If Democrats would like to propose their own legislation and pass it, please be my guest and elect more Democrats next time. That is how a democracy is supposed to work after all. Just because you know you are going to lose doesn't mean you should refuse to play the game you're being paid to play.

My Granddaddy dug coal in a mine with a pick axe, 6 days a week, little to no safety equipment (he did have a canary), got paid by the ton, the company store made sure that the workers always owed so that they could have anyone who tried to leave (quit) arrested, cave-ins happened and people died, the owners didn't care because people like Grandaddy were replaceable. The owners were rich; I tried to find the author of the article, but am somehow missing it....my guess is that the author is descended from the owners of Grandaddy's mine or similar.