This is an archive of a past election.|
See http://www.smartvoter.org/ny/state/ for current information.
|State of New York||November 2, 2010 Election|
Cap Bureaucrat Pay and Pensions
By Warren RedlichCandidate for Governor; State of New York
This information is provided by the candidate
Guess how much the head of the New York Public Library makes. I ask people this and they shoot off guesses they think are high. $150K? Nope. A quarter-million? Still low. Okay, okay, $500 thousand. Not there yet.
He made $688K in 2008. That's down from when he made $800K in 2005. You're probably thinking I'm making this up. Nope. Read about it in the New York Times. Do your own research on payrolls at SeeThroughNY.net.
The SUNY Albany President was reported to be making $280,000 a year, plus a $261K pension, and a $100K consulting job with his old state job, for a total of $641K.
They're not alone. 110,000 bureaucrats in New York State make over $100,000 a year. Their high-flying pensions are becoming a huge problem.
Career politicians are proposing across the board pay freezes, soda taxes, cutting teachers, and closing parks. We can save more money for both the state and for local governments by bringing these high-flying salaries and pensions back down to earth.
Warren supports a cap on bureaucrat pay at $100,000 per year, and a pension cap of $75,000.
Critics of this idea say that these jobs are too important and that you won't be able to find quality people at $100K. They're not living in the real world. There are plenty of highly qualified people in NY who make less than $100K. Public service is supposed to be about public service, not about getting rich.
The head of the Albany Parking Authority makes $130K. To run parking lots? We can find someone to do that for $100K, and in fact, for much less.
Q: Would the pay caps affect those who now make more than $100K?
A: In the long run, yes. But in the short run, some employees are immune to having their pay cut.
Judges, for example, are protected by the state Constitution. A judge's pay cannot be reduced during his or her term. There's a good reason for this + it protects judicial independence. Personally I don't think that argument applies when the same pay cap would be applied across the board to all state employees, but I'm not likely to win that argument in Court. Nevertheless, the pay caps would kick in when a judge's term expires. If that judge runs for and wins reelection, or if another person takes the seat, the pay would be capped at that point.
Union contracts would also be protected. They are typically two or three years long. Once a union contract expires, the pay cap rule would prohibit pay over $100K in future contracts.
Q: Would the $100K cap apply to all public employees?
A: No. For certain professions the cap might have to be higher. A good example is physicians. A $100K cap would clearly be too low for them. We haven't determined a final number for a physician cap, but it would most likely be around $200-250K.
Higher caps might be appropriate for some other areas, which would be considered on a case-by-case basis.
Q: What about lawyers?
A: The cap for lawyers would be $100K. There are plenty of lawyers who would jump at the chance to get a public sector job paying that much.
Q: Could overtime push pay over $100K?
A: No. The cap covers total pay, not just salary. There have been so many abuses of overtime pay that the cap has to apply here. There are a lot of people in the world who work long hours for less than $100K in pay.
Q: Would there be any safety valves?
A: Yes. Going along with the idea of a Say on Pay for Voters, the pay for any job, or group of jobs, could have the cap increased if the voters approve. For example, if a Town Board wanted to pay its police chief more than $100K, it could do so by putting the proposal on the ballot for the next town election.
Q: Would the caps include a COLA (cost-of-living adjustment)?
A: No. In the real world, most of us do not get a COLA for our jobs. In our view, the caps should only be raised if the voters approve it in a referendum.
Q: Would the pension cap apply to someone whose pension is already higher than $75K?
A: Yes and No. We can't take away what someone has already earned. Anyone receiving a pension already would be unaffected. For someone who is currently working, and has earned a pension greater than $75K, we can't reduce it. But they would be capped at the amount they've earned at the date the cap becomes effective. Anyone who has yet to earn $75K in their pension would be capped at $75K.
Q: Would the caps be higher in New York City?
A: We occasionally hear people say things like: "But you can't live on $100K in New York City." This is nonsense. The average income in Manhattan is far below $100,000.
Please keep in mind that this proposal would likely face some compromises in the legislative process.
Position Paper 3
|| Feedback to Candidate
|| This Contest
November 2010 Home (Ballot Lookup) || About Smart Voter
ny/state Created from information supplied by the candidate: October 14, 2010 08:17
Smart Voter <http://www.smartvoter.org/>
Copyright © League of Women Voters of California Education Fund.
The League of Women Voters neither supports nor opposes candidates for public office or political parties.
|| Feedback to Candidate
|| This Contest