By: Diane Benjamin
Last night the Bloomington City Council met as a Committee of the Whole. Around an hour was spent on a presentation by an ISU professor on how to do a salary and benefits survey.
See his written presentation here – beginning on PDF page 49: http://www.cityblm.org/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=11309
This presentation was prompted by Alderman Fruin bringing up my findings on the City’s gold-plated healthcare last July: https://blnnews.com/2016/07/28/jim-fruin-compare-benefits/
Being bureaucrats, Hales and Renner did what bureaucrats do. Call for studies, hear from people who have done studies, then study some more. Somehow the discussion morphed from healthcare benefits to TOTAL compensation studies. Instead of concentrating on one problem, the conversation expanded beyond the City’s ability to make changes. This mean nothing is going to change. Government employees will continue to receive benefits the people paying the bills never will.
Think they did it on purpose?
Alderman Fruin stated his position well – just hit play. I know readers would rather read a summary of his comments, but he said it better than anything I can write. Take a minute of two to listen!
I have always had the opinion that each employer provides the benefits that best meets the financial framework of the employer. That does not mean just because employer A,B,C,D,…. in the local area provides x benefits that another employer has to also. In addition benefits are not some right you are guaranteed similar to some required minimum wage. My employer this very day could say you have no benefits and I don’t believe there is a anything legally one could do.
Do I think many government employees have benefits that exceed the private sector, yes. Where should those benefits fall, I would say between the highest and lowest of the benefits being offered in the local area.
I believe what Alderman Furin was attempting to convey is that instead of doing extensive studies instead survey the local employers to bring benefits in alignment to what local employers are offering.
Very interesting that the lead off that packet with the city’s logo. They state, “Visually the symbol and the City’s identity represent a modern progressive style which is consistent with the City’s government.” Does that mean it represents the progression to more debt? Does it mean there is progression to more and more spending each year? Does it mean there is a progression to higher sales, motor fuel, and property taxes?
Totally like his ’80’s vibe. The feathered hair, the thick, almost horn-rimmed glasses . . . reminscent of my salad days.