How We Treat Maryland State Employees
I found a spreadsheet with recent Maryland state employee cost of living adjustments as I was cleaning out my office.
Also, in FY 2004 through 2006, the state eliminated performance bonuses.
At the same time, the state workforce has been shrinking. From FY 2002 to the current FY 2006, approximately 1,000 positions have been eliminated from both the Department of Human Resources and the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene. About one out of every eight positions in those agencies have been eliminated.
The Departments of Labor Licensing and Regulation, Natural Resources, and Housing and Community Development have sustained even greater job losses.
It’s OUR state, and there is something that we need to own up to: we haven’t been attentive to the well-being of our workforce.
Did you know how small the cost of living adjustments for state employees have been the last four years? Is it fair to require our state workers to bear such a disproportionate share of the burden of solving our state’s budget woes?
For more information on recent state budget choices, click here.
FY 2003: No Employee Cost of Living AdjustmentsFor FY 2006, the state also transferred an estimated $68 million in prescription drug costs back to state employees. So state employees got a teeny pay raise this year, but ended up paying more for their health care.
FY 2004: No Employee Cost of Living Adjustments
FY 2005: $752 (average of 1.6% Cost of Living Adjustment)
FY 2006: 1.5% Cost of Living Adjustment
Also, in FY 2004 through 2006, the state eliminated performance bonuses.
At the same time, the state workforce has been shrinking. From FY 2002 to the current FY 2006, approximately 1,000 positions have been eliminated from both the Department of Human Resources and the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene. About one out of every eight positions in those agencies have been eliminated.
The Departments of Labor Licensing and Regulation, Natural Resources, and Housing and Community Development have sustained even greater job losses.
It’s OUR state, and there is something that we need to own up to: we haven’t been attentive to the well-being of our workforce.
Did you know how small the cost of living adjustments for state employees have been the last four years? Is it fair to require our state workers to bear such a disproportionate share of the burden of solving our state’s budget woes?
For more information on recent state budget choices, click here.
4 Comments:
One more thing:
Even before all of the job cuts, Maryland government was lean when compare to other states.
From our January 2003 report, Is Maryland Government Too Big? (pdf)
"The overall size of state and local government in Maryland--in terms of both the number of employees and the amount of government expenditures--is smaller than the vast majority of other states." p.2
"...Maryland ranks 41st among states in the number of state and local government employees per 10,000 residents (with 1 representing the state with the most employees per resident and 50 having the least employees per resident). This ranking suggests that Maryland government agencies are not unnecessarily large, at least in comparison to the size of government in other states."
I'll bet you didn't know that.
There are some nice looking charts in that report. Check it out.
By MarylandPolicyBlog, at 7:07 PM
Don't forget that the State match for employee supplemental retirement plans was dropped from $600 in FY 2002 to $500 in FY 2003 and eliminated since then.
By fnoppo, at 10:05 PM
You are correct. I also did not include that funding was eliminated for performance bonuses. There was a maximum bonus of $500 in FY 2004, I believe. But performance bonuses for outstanding employees were eliminated for FY 2005 and FY 2006.
By MarylandPolicyBlog, at 10:49 PM
Tuesday, January 17, 2006
It now seems that the Ehrlich adm. is trying to further "wrong" those "wronged". In the past state employees who where re-instated with full back pay, after a wrongful termination, meant the employee received everything as if they had never been terminated. Not so now! The present administration, via the att. gen. office has decided to challenge the wording of Sec 11-110(d) of the Personnel and Pension statue. Additionally I am sorry to report the upper court is supporting this attack. According to the CSA when a unjustified terminated employee is re-instated with full back pay that doesn't mean that they get everything as if they had never been terminated. No back leave, no credit towards retirement nor retirement contributions , Nothing that is included in § 8-104. of State personnel and Pension statue except award of US green backs. And those green backs are only based on the greenbacks the employee was receiving when they were terminated. No steps, COLA, nothing. If it took 5 years to litigate, the employee doesn't get 5 years worth of steps nor grades. Those 5 years are based on the the pay grade and step they where getting at the time of the termination.
It isn't bad enough that the unjustified terminated employee cannot recover lawyer expenses, nor is paid interest on the back award. No, now they want to screw them more. I'll keep you posted.
By tripled, at 8:23 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home