NY Public Payroll Watch
  Home Daily Updates News Clips Links Contact Us  

Empire Center for New York State Policy
 
 
Taylor Made: The Cost and Consequences of New York's Public-Sector Labor Laws
by Terry O'Neil and E.J. McMahon

Defusing New York's Public Pension Bomb: A Fair Approach for Workers and Taxpayers
by E.J. McMahon

 
Early retirement for state workers: Money-saver, or costly sweetener?
May 2010

State Payroll Drops and Wages Rise; Workforce Still Above 2004 Level
March 2010

    ARCHIVE >>
 

To receive regular updates from NY Public Payroll Watch, type your email address in the box below and click "submit."

Email:
For Email Marketing you can trust
 
 

February 16, 2010

Recession. What recession?

New York state employees, unlike those in the private sector, have been largely untouched by the recession.

State workers elsewhere have faced layoffs, benefit cuts and unpaid furloughs to help close massive budget gaps, as I point out in an op-ed in the New York Post( here).

For example, Connecticut state workers, seeking to avoid layoffs, agreed to a one-year wage freeze, seven unpaid furlough days and higher employee health insurance contributions. New Jersey civilian workers agreed to 10 unpaid furlough days and deferral of a cost-of-living increase; state police and corrections employees opted for a one-year wage freeze.

In these neighboring states, public employee unions negotiated savings through the collective bargaining process. They concluded it was better for every union member to make a relatively small sacrifice than to throw thousands of young co-workers onto the unemployment line....

In contrast, New York public employees have rejected Governor Paterson's pleas for shared sacrifices. In 2009, they refused to give up a 3 percent pay raise or take a five-day payroll lag—even when threatened with 8,700 layoffs. Three months later, the unions got the better of the governor.

The Civil Service Employees Association and the Public Employees Federation agreed not to fight a modest change in the pension system (which would not affect current members). In exchange, Paterson agreed to a $20,000 buyout for up to 4,500 employees and a promise not to lay off members of the two unions until December 31, 2010.

That no-layoffs pledge will make it harder for Paterson to squeeze concessions from the unions this year to help close a $8.2 billion budget gap. Paterson want them to agree to a five-day payroll lag and delay or reduce a 4 percent raise scheduled for April 1, save $250 million in the coming year. But his plan merely pushes costs into the future.

That's also true of his plan to "amortize" sharply increased pension costs over a 10-year period--which will reduce a 52% annual increase in pension contributions to a still-whopping 33% increase.

The state's propensity to shift costs to future taxpayers is best illustrated by its promise of lifetime health insurance for retirees. Retiree health benefit costs, which grew nearly 11% annually over the past decade, are funded on a pay-as-you go basis. As a result, New York state's retiree health insurance promises amount to a $55 billion unfunded liability for the future.

Paterson's budget would put a miniscule dent in that liability by requiring retirees over 65 to pay a small portion of their Medicare Part B premiums, saving taxpayers $30 million in fiscal year 2011-12. But the state could save four times as much by requiring retirees to pay their entire premium, a common practice throughout the private sector.

Posted by Lise Bang-Jensen

« Previous | Main | Next »