Advertisement

Kansas legislature

Kansas Legislature

House panel rejects state employee pay raise

April 20, 2012

Advertisement

— The Republican-controlled House committee has rejected the idea of restoring a pay-raise program for some Kansas public employees.

The Topeka Capital-Journal reports the committee on Thursday voted down a motion to set aside $8.5 million to resume a plan to raise salaries of the state's lowest-paid government workers.

The motion was defeated by a 9-11 vote.

House Appropriations Committee Chairman Marc Rhoades, a Newton Republican, said state employees should consider moving to the private sector if they think that state pay is too low.

Others raised concerns that the state was losing qualified employees, especially nurses at state hospitals, who leave for the private sector.

Comments

observant 1 year, 12 months ago

They can't afford raises for state employees, would cut into Koch tax breaks.

0

JayhawkFan1985 1 year, 12 months ago

I would like to know if he has declined participation in KPERS since he is a part time citizen legislator. He clearly is a legislator because he is dedicated to public service like the state employees he ridicules.

0

FalseHopeNoChange 1 year, 12 months ago

Say whaaat?

"Your EBT Card Has Been Denied": 700,000 Are About To Lose Their Extended Jobless Claims Benefits

While virtually everyone has opined on the topic of the massive fiscal "cliff" set to take place on January 1, 2013, which could crush US GDP unless American politicians manage to find a way to end their acrimonious ways, most forget that a far more tangible cliff is set to take place much sooner, specifically over the next several months, as those currently collecting handouts from the government in the form of extended unemployment benefits (i.e., those who have been out of a job for a year) are about to get as angry as Germants pre-funding TARGET3, once the free money stops. Goldman explains why: "First, more than 150,000 workers per month exhaust their allowed benefits. Second, recently legislated thresholds will reduce benefit eligibility in many states with below-average unemployment rates beginning in June. Third, apart from legislative changes, labor market improvement in some states has taken the state-level unemployment rate below eligibility thresholds, with many states looking at likely expiration of one or more tiers of benefits around mid-year." In other words, unlike the bulk of other transfer payment programs (read government subsides) which could be extended with the flick of a switch at the end of the year following the now traditional 1+ month congressional theatrical impasse, extended claims can not. The net result: by June some 700,000 people who are currently collecting benefits will lose everything.

(d'une source)

0

Cait McKnelly 1 year, 12 months ago

Interesting that this is reminiscent of Brownback's statement that if women want insurance to cover their birth control to "go work somewhere else".

0

Jayhawk1958 1 year, 12 months ago

...said state employees should consider moving to the private sector if they think that state pay is too low.

Oh yeah. Where are those jobs in the private sector you speak of, and what makes you think the private sector pays any better?

0

question4u 1 year, 12 months ago

What an embarrassment to be Marc Rhoades! Does he think that a comment like that speaks well of his intellect, let alone his ethics? Has Kansas really sunk this low?

0

progressive_thinker 1 year, 12 months ago

Here is a good article in today's JW. demonstrating some of the problems associated with paying state employees below market wages. http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2012/apr...

0

Cait McKnelly 1 year, 12 months ago

(In response to the headline.) Why of course they did!

0

tomatogrower 1 year, 12 months ago

Yet, CEO's of companies who run their companies into the ground deserve their huge bonuses? Pity the poor 1%. They are irreplaceable. Prison guards, clerks, state troopers, etc. are all a dime a dozen. They should have gotten an MBA, if they wanted a living wage, right? Wake up, people. It's so obvious that conservatives could care less about working people, and most of you are working people. Yet, in Kansas you vote against your own interests?

0

Cant_have_it_both_ways 1 year, 12 months ago

Many trend toward public service because they can't hack it in the private sector.

0

Blueangeleyes1 1 year, 12 months ago

Another slap in the face. Thanks.

0

1 year, 12 months ago

@Fossick.

Read this from the Capitol Journal, especially the first paragraph. I think it will answer your comments. I find it interesting that the LJW carried only a few lines while the CJ carried a more complete article. Perhaps it was selective editing of the AP article?

"Rep. Lana Gordon, R-Topeka, proposed the House budget committee support the fourth year's installment of a program designed to address salaries of state workers found to be far beneath peers in the public and private sectors. The House committee rejected the measure 9-11.

"This is something that was passed through the Legislature, and I think we should stick with it,” Gordon said.

Opposition surfaced from Republicans who expressed sentiment that state workers unhappy with their compensation ought to consider finding a job elsewhere." (http://cjonline.com/news/2012-04-19/house-panel-declines-state-employee-pay-bump)

0

deec 1 year, 12 months ago

So in other words, "you get what you pay for" only applies to bosses. Worker drones should be happy with whatever crumbs the bosses decide to throw their way. You want smaller government with the lowest-possible paid employees? Then be prepared for longer lines and processing times, lots of mistakes, and the sort of surly or disengaged customer service one receives at the megastores.

0

1 year, 12 months ago

This goes right along with The Guv telling women to "go get a job someplace else," (http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2012/feb...)

You do notice though that The Guv isn't saying a lot of these things as much anymore. He's letting his minions say them.

0

mom_of_three 1 year, 12 months ago

so basically marc rhoades is saying if you think government pay is low, guess what, the private sector is even lower. quit yer whining.

why shouldn't a government employee, especially among the state's lowest paid workers, expect a raise now and then?

0

progressive_thinker 1 year, 12 months ago

"House Appropriations Committee Chairman Marc Rhoades, a Newton Republican, said state employees should consider moving to the private sector if they think that state pay is too low."

Marc Rhoades obviously has no clue as to what the cost of employee turnover is. Considering having to cover necessary work during the turnover period with overtime, as well as the cost of training a new employee, there is a clear cost benefit associated with retention.

0

Shane Garrett 1 year, 12 months ago

Amen, they used to stand for exactly that: quality, and competent workers. Now they view the lowest paid amongst the state as something less. Republican legislators are telling them to leave for the private sector during an economic depression. What a crock. I guess only the rich and powerful can have a sense of civic duty.

0

akuna 1 year, 12 months ago

Republicans are such (o) these days. I long for a time when Republicans understand the value of quality, competent workers in all sectors of our economy.

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.