State of the City: $3.1 Billion Deficit
In his State of the City speech last night Mayor Bloomberg warned that this is likely to be a difficult year and announced belt-tightening measures in response to the Independent Budget Office’s projection that the city will see a $3.1 billion deficit in 2009. Bloomberg is ordering all city agency heads to cut their budgets…
In his State of the City speech last night Mayor Bloomberg warned that this is likely to be a difficult year and announced belt-tightening measures in response to the Independent Budget Office’s projection that the city will see a $3.1 billion deficit in 2009. Bloomberg is ordering all city agency heads to cut their budgets by 2.5 percent this year and 5 percent next year. Despite the predictions of economic woe, the mayor said the city would continue to offer the $400 property tax rebate and will roll out a few new services, including one that allows online access to 311. Bloomberg also noted that 2008 is the 130th anniversary of the death of Boss Tweed and said it was time to finally put to rest his style of politics.
Mayor Hails City’s Immigrants and Innovation [NY Times]
Mike Takes Baby Steps in City Plan [NY Post]
Photo from nyc.gov.
I didn’t make the earlier assertions, 11:06–just came upon the thread and had to laugh at you.
11:20 – You just made the anti union argument for us.
Why do you think HR policies are not based on performance – because the Unions would never allow it. “How dare someone work harder than me and be more efficient – Ive been in this job twice as long so regardless of my skills or productiity, my seniority entitles me to make more than you” – This is the mantra of the Union Ranks.
I wonder why the bulk of Union dues go to political compaigns – Doesnt that anger any of you Union stalwarts out there.
How much of the dues they collect from you goes to fund campaign parties, union leadership patronage and other “Closed Book” operations?
Do you really think this is what Unions shoul dbe doing?
“city employees make a ridiculous amount of money totally inconsistent with their skills.”
Do you know how much a starting professional (civil engineer, architect or attorney for example) makes working for the City? Mid $40s….and then they’re required to live in the 5 boroughs (not cheap)….while paying back student loans. Compare that with the private sector where $40k is a mere bonus for some people and not a yearly salary.
That aside, the problem with the City stems from crappy administration. I spent 2 years at a City agency and left because HR and administration did not reward productivity. The emphasis was more on having warm bodies in seats than having people actually perform. So as long as you showed up on time, nobody gave a damn if you actually did anything. If you were a “firecracker” as I was, and tried to do things that would increase efficiency/make the agency look good, all you get is a “thanks”. No promotions or bonuses because “it’s not in the budget, and you don’t have enough ‘time in your current salary level’ to justify an increase.” So that’s what happens…you become a drone and do nothing because nobody will recognize your efforts anyway, or you just leave.
If government administration would consider HR policies that actually make sense (realistic promotion/compensation packages) I think employees and the public would have a totally different opinion of public sector service. I know plenty of people who would have been fired if they were in private, but they just get marginalized and keep collecting checks in public sector. In the meantime, people who actually do work keep getting more work piled on for the same amount of pay. It makes no sense. If you want reform at the City service level, appeal to Mikey B. to implement administration that makes sense…or else you can expect more B.S. if/when he gets to the White House.
I support the concept of Unionization in private industry, however I work with a number of Unions and quite frankly with the ones I deal with, it is clear that Union cares little about its members and alot about the Union.
In the municipal arena I believe Unionization should be illegal. Unionized Municipal workers end up with “2 bites at the apple” and as a result they wield too much power in their negotiations. 1. They have the power of collective bargaining and 2. they have the power to VOTE.
I recognize that many municipal workers are prohibited from striking in NY due to the Taylor laws but even still, the ability to significantly influence who “management” will be (and then collectively bargain with that same “management”) results in municipal workers having too much power and results in bloated overpayed bureaucracies.
It’s amazing that a bunch of people who can’t seem to make it on $250K a year in the private sector, are going to turn around and begrudge a lower level city employee making $50K and a good benefits package, their salary.
Granted, their is waste, mismanagement and patronage galore in our city system. Show me anywhere in the world where there is not. That doesn’t make it right, but to blame our city’s fiscal problems totally on unions is ridiculous.
“city employees make a ridiculous amount of money totally inconsistent with their skills.” – Polemicist
The same could be said of most people on Wall Street, as well as other parts of the private sector.
Yes, great retort 10:58 – Now I see the merits of your asertions.
NOTHING to do with it? Shove your head a little further up your ass, 10:40.
Gross….you are…well…gross.