Someone owes the PBA an apology - http://madison.patch.com/articles/teachers-contract-provides-19-average-salary-increase. Incredibly, the Great One was actually there (see first photo and quote in the story). In his ongoing crusade to bash the police, he must have forgotten the event.

Read the 4th graf of the article you reference. You've got your years mixed up. The "net zero" wage freeze was the same year the PBA refused to do likewise.

My "years" are spot on:

Looks like PBA got 1.5% in 2010, MEA 1.523%.

In 2011, PBA received 2.0%, MEA 2.25% plus $80,000 (no idea how much that would goose the % increase).

Finally, in 2012, PBA gets 2.0%, MEA 1.95%.

If the articles' data is accurate, the teachers received a higher % increase over three years than the PBA did!

Regarding your last response, a little Patch research shows that the teachers agreed to a freeze for the 2010/11 school year, not "last year" (2009?) as the 4th graf incorrectly notes - http://madison.patch.com/articles/teachers-union-agrees-to-wage-freeze.

As confirmation of the timing, check this story, which was filed shortly after the one about the teachers, about the FMBA accepting a freeze - http://madison.patch.com/articles/fire-union-agrees-to-two-year-wage-freeze. They were the real heroes, accepting a TWO year freeze.

According to the previous article, what the teachers agreed to was a virtual freeze, "That was based on the 1.5 percent increase being offset by the 1.5 percent contribution each employee is currently making toward the cost of health coverage. The combination equaled a net take home increase of zero." Thus, the PBA 1.5% increase matches the MEA's 1.523%.

Not taking a "freeze" appears to have gained the police nothing compared to their education counterparts.

Some of what you say is correct, but you miss the two key points: a given % increase of the average police salary equates to far more actual $ than the same given % of the average teacher's salary, AND teachers and firemen voluntarily agreed to a net wage freeze while the police and DPW didn't. Bottom line is you either have a Council that brings these municipal payrolls down to earth, or you suck it up and don't complain about paying higher taxes. No more comments in response to phantoms.

Still unable to admit defeat. Too bad. 100% of what I wrote is true, and your whole premise, that the police did better than the teachers and firefighters because they held out, is 100% false. Of course someone who makes more $$ will get more $$ when increases are percentages of base pay, that holds true for a teacher making $100K as it does for a policeman or firefighter. Duh!

As for "bring(ing) these municipal payrolls down to earth," the only way that happens is with fewer employees. No union is going to agree to cut pay its pay (it's even amazing that the borough got them to cut their HC benefit), nor will any arbitrator give the borough that relief.

If you want to know how this got out of hand, refer to page 39 and check out the previous two contract awards - 4.25%, 4.25%, 4.0%, 3.9%, 4.0%, 4.0% & 4.0%, all at a time when inflation was extremely low. Then consider which candidate for council was in the majority party approving all those outsized increases. So why would anyone vote for Ms.Baillie AGAIN??

No one is arguing merit here. The question is how much is enough? Where do you draw the line? Would you be all right with, say, a doubling of their salary? (Their pay scale is already vastly higher than that of their counterparts in NYC.) Hey, as far as I'm concerned, you can pay them as much as you want as long as a) people stop griping about the salaries of teachers, who make significantly less, and b) all the griping about taxes comes to an abrupt halt. Oh, and remember, the DPW will be looking for the same retroactive increases now, as they refused to accept a wage freeze as well.

You're right, Frankie, in most cases it is silly to compare "small town salaries to a city of 8 million" because the two shouldn't be equivalent when the latter carries so much more risk with it. Also, I suggest you focus on patrolman salaries, where the gap is largest. And you can't legitimately exclude "overtime" in your calculations; for many others, such as teachers, there IS NO overtime pay, regardless of the hours they put in. Finally, on the surface, 2% a year IS a "fair deal" UNDER NORMAL CIRCUMSTANCES; the mistake that was made here is that teachers and firemen should have made their voluntary concessions in recessionary times contingent on ALL municipal employees making the same concessions. This type of double standard only breeds resentment, which isn't healthy.

The gap is not large Steve. After 5.5 years a NYC patrolman makes 91k before OT, last I checked MPD was about the same. I left out "overtime" because it can vary greatly between each officer. Neither are paid as well as they should be.

Lol, Steve there are plenty of NYC patrolman who make 125k with O/T. 125k doesn't go very far in NYC. Making 125k, will not enable someone to by a house in a decent area of Bklyn, Bx, Man, or Queens. Which is why many NYC cops live in Staten or LI.

Many small towns in NY make more than the NYPD. Small towns in LI make a base of 130k plus Overtime. Big city cops probably should make far more than small city town cops, but paying 32,000 officers a base of 130k is a stretch.

Steve are you even a taxpayer in Madison? Last time I checked you are renting.

http://www.nyc.gov/portal/site/nycgov/menuitem.c0935b9a57bb4ef3daf2f1c701c789a0/index.jsp?pageID=mayor_press_release&catID=1194&doc_name=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nyc.gov%2Fhtml%2Fom%2Fhtml%2F2007b%2Fpr236-07.html&cc=unused1978&rc=1194&ndi=1

Because the Borough refused to give increases due to the recession.

Steve, one more question. If your employer basically told you that you were going to take a pay cut what you be happy? Would you accept that without exploring options or would you just roll over?

http://www.madisonpublicschools.org/51454103114833/site/default.asp

http://www.nytimes.com/schoolbook/2011/11/15/class-sizes-grew-again-new-city-figures-show/

Same bogus argument that's made every time someone points out how over compensated many/most/all public sector employees are. Since we are paying their salaries and benefits we are allowed to weigh-in on the total costs, and the ridiculous increases we get hit with after every contract is settled.

@didyoujustsaythat..... Have you ever considered that most of these cops, fire fighters and Dpw employees live in town as well and are paying the taxes too ... So again if you think it's over compensated go to town hall grab an application

Irrelevant, and still the same bad argument you've made before. All taxpayers have the right to demand that their money is being well spent, WITHOUT having to "grab an application."

You can't be serious. Statistically, NYC cops have weapons drawn on them, get assaulted, and killed in the line of duty INFINITELY more times than suburban cops. Policing can be a dangerous business wherever you are, but comparing NYC to Madison is a joke.

I agree with some of what you're saying and I think the MPD should be paid better. To say MPDs risk is nearly as high as NYC is moronic. Look in the paper and see how many people get shot and how many cops get hurt every day. If NYC cops worked alone they would be killed more often Look at the list of NYC cops that die on duty, its a long one. Most NYC cops have handled more in one month than a MPD officer will see in a career. When was the last shooting in Madison? Last homicide? These are daily events in NYC, and thankfully are not here.

I respect the MPD and will always say they should be compensated well, but lets stick to reality.

Interesting concept - Only public sector employees get to comment on public sector salaries and benefits. May be the dumbest comment posted on the Patch this year. Then again, I guess it is how someone who is collecting a taxpayer based paycheck "thinks!"

It's easy to grasp your point, unfortunately, it's just dumb.

Everyone has a right to demand that the money they pay for a product or service is fair. In the private sector, because of competition, it is. In the public sector, however, unless a service is outsourced, there is no competition to keep the cost of the service "honest," and union demands have no basis in reality, especially in difficult economic times.

Your point about picking up a broom, or shutting up, demonstrates the typical attitude of public sector employees - No one should question the value they deliver, or their demands for outsized wages and benefits. Those days are OVER.

As for " the 'little' amount of work they do," must be a Freudian slip on your part, I never questioned that effort, just the compensation.