Consolidate Consolidate Consolidate
Imagine your boss calling you into their office and asking you simple questions like, "Do you have any suggestions on how we can save money?" You as the employee sit back for a moment and then answer, "I have a great idea, how about eliminating my job and my cousin's job. There are already other people in the same company that are doing the same thing, our jobs are redundant."
Of course, there are few employees willing to make the ultimate sacrifice and admit that there are better and cheaper ways to accomplish their respective job functions, especially if it means they will be out of a job. This scenario illustrates the largest hurdle that local government consolidation must overcome. The elected officials will have to fall on the sword and eliminate their positions or sacrifice friends and relatives jobs, and in some cases both.
On paper, consolidation is a no-brainer. When corporations are strapped for cash the first thing they look for is ways to increase efficiency, and oftentimes this means the elimination of jobs. A decent corporation will often offer opportunities for employees to train for new jobs. Most corporations do not consider the human toll, and if they did, it is conceivable that many of these corporations would go out of business.
The other alternative for corporations is to increase revenue to cover the cost of their employees. In the business world, this is a bit trickier than it is in government, because raising prices is not always a sound alternative, especially during hard economic times. Unfortunately, this seems to be the approach of most local governments, they raise our taxes to increase revenue. Unlike a product or service, we have to pay our taxes. In other words if cable TV rates go up we won't go to jail or lose our TV if we cancel our service, if we refuse to pay our taxes, we may lose our house and go to jail.
This taxing as opposed to efficiency mentality has become a disease in New York State. This is evidenced by recent proposals for taxing of everything from diet soda and gym memberships to music downloads and bowling games. This is because our archaic state laws put consolidation in the hands of the people who have the most to lose. Let's face it, many of these high paying government jobs were not filled because of qualifications, they were because of connections, family or otherwise.
This is not entirely different from the way the corporate world works. There are many businesses made up of family and friends. Who can blame a parent for getting their child a job in the company where they work? Even local government consolidation proponent Andrew Cuomo must acknowledge this, since his entrance into government is largely due to his father's political connections.
Unfortunately, in government, far too many jobs have few qualifications and high pay. Many of the potential jobs eliminated through consolidation are the type that does not translate well into the private sector. Simply put, these displaced employees will not be able to make the amount of money they are accustomed to making.
The bottom line is that consolidation is a paradoxically a simple and complex problem. On one hand, taxpayers simply cannot afford to keep paying hundreds of new types of taxes and fees, amounting to millions of dollars, to support redundant government jobs. On the other hand, can we expect local officials to make the tough decision that goes against their bests interests? I will simply say that if they had been looking out for our best interests all along, there would not have been a need to discuss consolidation.
Of course, there are few employees willing to make the ultimate sacrifice and admit that there are better and cheaper ways to accomplish their respective job functions, especially if it means they will be out of a job. This scenario illustrates the largest hurdle that local government consolidation must overcome. The elected officials will have to fall on the sword and eliminate their positions or sacrifice friends and relatives jobs, and in some cases both.
On paper, consolidation is a no-brainer. When corporations are strapped for cash the first thing they look for is ways to increase efficiency, and oftentimes this means the elimination of jobs. A decent corporation will often offer opportunities for employees to train for new jobs. Most corporations do not consider the human toll, and if they did, it is conceivable that many of these corporations would go out of business.
The other alternative for corporations is to increase revenue to cover the cost of their employees. In the business world, this is a bit trickier than it is in government, because raising prices is not always a sound alternative, especially during hard economic times. Unfortunately, this seems to be the approach of most local governments, they raise our taxes to increase revenue. Unlike a product or service, we have to pay our taxes. In other words if cable TV rates go up we won't go to jail or lose our TV if we cancel our service, if we refuse to pay our taxes, we may lose our house and go to jail.
This taxing as opposed to efficiency mentality has become a disease in New York State. This is evidenced by recent proposals for taxing of everything from diet soda and gym memberships to music downloads and bowling games. This is because our archaic state laws put consolidation in the hands of the people who have the most to lose. Let's face it, many of these high paying government jobs were not filled because of qualifications, they were because of connections, family or otherwise.
This is not entirely different from the way the corporate world works. There are many businesses made up of family and friends. Who can blame a parent for getting their child a job in the company where they work? Even local government consolidation proponent Andrew Cuomo must acknowledge this, since his entrance into government is largely due to his father's political connections.
Unfortunately, in government, far too many jobs have few qualifications and high pay. Many of the potential jobs eliminated through consolidation are the type that does not translate well into the private sector. Simply put, these displaced employees will not be able to make the amount of money they are accustomed to making.
The bottom line is that consolidation is a paradoxically a simple and complex problem. On one hand, taxpayers simply cannot afford to keep paying hundreds of new types of taxes and fees, amounting to millions of dollars, to support redundant government jobs. On the other hand, can we expect local officials to make the tough decision that goes against their bests interests? I will simply say that if they had been looking out for our best interests all along, there would not have been a need to discuss consolidation.
Comments