When did the private sector become subservient to the public worker state?

In response to Thomas Piels’ recent letter, “How about a level playing field,” it’s time to de-unionize Connecticut state government. At Gov. Dannel Malloy’s recent town hall meeting in Norwich to defend his budget, the first question was from Norwich resident John Ondusko, who said, “I am president of AFSCME Local 749, representing state employees of the judicial branch. And another thing: I voted for you … and I am absolutely stunned that you’re trying to get $2 billion out of state employees. I’m a math guy. I ran the numbers immediately using the 50,000 approximate state employees, working it out to $20,000 per state employee per year over the next two years … $2 billion in concessions from state employees … They’re not concessions. I call it a special tax on state employees.” Oh, really? Here’s the state of Connecticut’s math according to the findings of Connecticut’s Commission on Enhancing Agency Outcomes, which are stunning in their revelation as to why private sector taxpayers — not unions — deserve a level playing field. Using Connecticut Department of Labor wage data for 383 occupational titles, the commission determined that the average state salary was $65,746, about 10 percent higher than the average private sector salary of $59,313.However, after accounting for all monetary compensation, the total compensation package for the average state employee was $105,498 versus $74,174 for the private sector employee counterpart. I quote the commission’s report: “The dollar value difference of the benefit packages in the two sectors then is about $24,891 — or about 167 percent higher for state employees.” That makes Mr. Ondusko’s “union math” calculation of the “special tax on state employees” a bargain.Today, too many citizens see our state government as a union monopoly, controlled for more than 30 years by a Democratic Legislature with no fiscal discipline or restraint when it comes to extracting capital from the private sector for distribution to the unionized public sector. Worse, unions force members to pay dues, which union leadership uses to elect (buy?) politicians. Even more unethical — if not outright corrupt — is that these same politicians ultimately sit at the “negotiation” table with the same unions that funded their election. Even a Democrat wearing rose-colored glasses should see there’s something ethically wrong here. What we have seen in the Wisconsin union demonstrations — complete with death threats to Republican legislators — is that like President Obama’s beloved alma mater, ACORN, unions have no ethics or morality when it comes to corruption (voter fraud, etc.) and immoral abuse of “taxpayer-government funded” empowerment. It’s time state and federal government was de-unionized and brought in line with the private sector. In many businesses, unionized Connecticut government directly competes with private sector companies, often at significantly higher cost. Wherever possible, when government is involved in private-sector services or business, it should be put out to contract bidding against the private sector. If the public sector can’t compete, the state should get out; even if it means public sector layoffs. Let state union workers compete for jobs in the private sector — that’s a level playing field. Look at the teacher’s union. Twenty-five years of increases in educational spending have not delivered corresponding improvement in student achievement. The Lakeville Journal (March 10, 2011) reported proposed total Salisbury Central and Region One education is $7,727,391 out of a total town budget of $12,776,374. Why does education consume 60 percent of Salisbury’s town budget?According to Lakeville Journal columnist Chris Powell, “Control of school costs is actually prohibited by the law requiring binding arbitration for public employee union contracts and the law forbidding school systems from ever reducing their budgets over the previous year’s, even if all their students withdraw. Such laws are maintained for the benefit of school employees, not students or taxpayers.” The Salisbury Affordable Housing Report (page 17) — every Salisbury resident should read it — reveals “Enrollments at Salisbury Central School declined 27 percent from 2000 to 2010 and are projected to fall a further 14 percent by 2020, for a total 20-year decline of 37 percent.” In the face of these demographics, one of the obvious common-sense solutions to Salisbury expenditures would be appropriately reducing school budgets. The savings could provide additional support to our volunteer Lakeville Hose Company and the Salisbury Volunteer Ambulance Service, or the 52 Salisbury families (4.9 percent of the Salisbury population) currently living below the poverty line. Chris P. Janelli lives in Salisbury and is the chairman of the Salisbury Republican Town Committee.