Is Seiler choosing sides?

Yanno gilhags, I posted a response to you on our forums, but this deserves one here. Why? Because you are still making blanket statements that twist reality.

Now, why do I say that do you ask? Well, for starters "No one gets a raise every year for 30 years!" or whatever you said above. Firstly, as jdunphy correctly points out, WE didn't get a raise every year for 30 years either. I count 5 years that were either outright gooseeggs, or had lump sum payments that were not added to base salary or pensionable - in other words, those lump sum payments are more like signing bonuses for signing a contract and don't add to an employees base salary, and are therefore, not part of the salary when future raises are calculated. Now, these 5 gooseeggs don't even consider the 3 more gooseeggs from this last contract.

Conversely, who are you comparing us to when you say "no one"? The nation as a whole? Well, just what figures are you using to make that comparison? The simple answer - you aren't. You're making a blanket, unsupported statement because you either are naive enough to believe the talking point yourself and are just perpetuating it, or you actually are wise enough to KNOW you could make a comparison with something that would show what "everyone" gets and realize that by making such a side by side comparison, it would essentially negate your argument. For example, you could compare our historical raises with something like the national average wage index published by the Social Security Administration, which reflects how much they show wages have grown nationally year over year. Or you could find studies by private firms that have figures showing what companies report to them their average annual wage increase given was and they then aggregate all that data - like what Towers Watson does. But you do neither of these things. Let me illustrate why:

Comparing the NAWI (which currently goes out to 2010) to the raises you show above PEF members received, in 11 of those years, the NAWI increased more than the raises PEF members received. Out of the remaining years, 5 more show years where PEF members had raises that were about the same as the national average. So out of 26 years of comparisons, 16 of them showed PEF members either falling behind or simply keeping pace. Yes, this means that the remaining 10 years reflect gains over what is seen on the NAWI. However, even with those years where there were gains, the average over that term is in favor of the NAWI - which increased by 3.71% when averaged out, as opposed to PEF, which reflects an average over the same time frame of 3.08%. In other words, your narrative, as usual, isn't based in reality. It's based on getting people angry at public sector workers by twisting the facts, omitting information, and making people envious of things that they THINK are going on instead of what's really going on.

I won't even bother with the Towers Watson comparison. We (PEF) get creamed, since the NAWI looks at "everyone" and Towers Watson only looks at large scale employers and omits burger flippers, janitors and such who are generally people who have no education, no skills, and because of that get shafted by their employers routinely, which the NAWI considers these people in their calculations.

On the health care argument, we went over that a bazillion times during the contract last year with you, and you are well aware that the Kaiser Family Foundation reflects that the average percentage of premiums paid by employees in this nation is 25% of the premiums. What does this mean? Most of us now pay MORE than the average. So by "everyone on the planet pays more than state workers do", you're apparently talking about a planet other than Earth, because once again, you made an unsupported blanket statement that doesn't hold water when looked at under the light of factual data.

If you have to "win" by doing such things like you're trying to do here gilhags, perhaps, just perhaps, you're on the wrong side of the argument in the first place - at least if your intention is to be an honest person. Because if there is one thing you are most certainly NOT attempting to do here, it's being honest.

"Darth- Only you, believes in any “chart”, “study” or “analysis” that shows any comparison between NYS unionized workers’salaries and a comparable field of employees from the private sector. It can’t be done with any specificity."

Firstly gilhags, you aren't making an position by position comparison. The comparison you are making is what the overall memberships raises have been in relation to a rhetorical "everyone else". The NAWI isn't a representation of a rhetorical "everyone else". It's a representation of the REAL everyone else, because it's a metric that shows the average wage nationwide. If that average wage increases year over year, how did that happen? Magic? Or does that mean people are getting raises?

Secondly gilhags, position by position comparisons are actually extremely easy, and are extremely specific. Why? Because you can utilize the GOT-IT tool on the Civil Service website to look up a specific job (say, a Nurse I), then go to the salary schedules on the GOER website and find the salary schedule for that titles paygrade (you obviously know where the salary schedules are since you've spammed them here what, 4 times now?), and then look up that same job on a job research site like Salary.com, Payscale.com, or Careerbuilder.com. Do you know why such comparisons are never done by people you would expect to do such comparisons like EJ McMahon? Because doing such a comparison actually proves what I originally said RIGHT.

So in both cases gilhags, you're dead wrong. But I wouldn't expect you to admit that.

"Labor stats are submitted, per law. They show number of employees and payroll. They do NOT show individual raises or by whom or for what purpose. For that very reason, your entire argument, as we all know, is ridiculous."

While I covered this above, let me reiterate: What is the NAWI if it's not a measure of the average income per worker in the US? If it's a measure of the average income of the average worker in the US, and that average increases year over year, how did that happen? The answer is simple gilhags - it is exactly what I described it to be, and when it reflects an increase year over year, that's a reflection that wages are increasing. And according to the NAWI, wages increased every year for the last 30 years save for ONE year. If you are saying you want to compare us to everyone, there's your comparison.

And that disregards that I also pointed out that Towers Watson - a human resources research company - also puts out a report that reflects wage increases reported to them from employers. Why does Towers Watson exist? Because for one reason, employers want to be able to obtain such information and are willing to pay for it, so that way they can ensure they are not giving their employees competitive wages. So this also goes right at the heart of your statement about "not showing individual raises", because thats EXACTLY what their report aggregates. I've pointed you in the direction of this firms information multiple times in the past, and as I noted above, PEF gets creamed by the raises they report.

So once again, you're dead wrong. You're being either obstinate or purposely dishonest. Take your pick.

"Furthermore, we are not talking about anything else other than PEF’s membership’s actions (vote) and WHY. The debate has raged, as you’re well aware, upon the essence of what is greed. You know it, I know it. You’re trying to say that PEF members aren’t greddy, they are in line with the norms. I disagree. I say that PEF’s members have enjoyed very generous salary increases for nearly thirty years. Much more than that of a private sector. Ask anyone from the private sector. "

And once again, you provide no basis for your argument other than a rhetorical "ask anyone from the private sector". Sorry gilhags, but an informed opinion doesn't involve rhetorical "gut feelings." It involves making a comparison between known dataset A and known dataset B. While you are complaining about our dataset, saying it's an indication of "greed", you provide no dataset to reflect how you come to such a conclusion. You instead just present an indefensible and impossible to argue rhetorical statement that has no basis in any known set of statistics. That isn't proving your point gilhags, no matter how much you'd like to think it does.

"Doing something wrong and then pointing to someboby else doing it too, is not justification for the initial wrong doing. That’s something younger and more liberal generational people is increasingly doing. Example, thought you’d never ask.

John Edwards. His supporters point to J. Ensign, D. Vitter or other conservative politicians caught up in sex scandals. Should we care about them all? Yes, because they represent us. Should we discount what Edwards did because Vitter did it too? No, that would be childish and that’s what we expect from our politicians, on both sides."

Where did this tangent come from? Unrelated and irrelevant to the discussion.

"Again, I never said “thirty striaght years”. for the umpteenth time. It’s insignificant but I feel as if I should correct your every falsehood."

Gilhags, I've honestly lost track of the number of times above that you inferred that we've received a raise "every single year". But let me repeat what I said in response:

Comparing the NAWI (which currently goes out to 2010) to the raises you show above PEF members received, in 11 of those years, the NAWI increased more than the raises PEF members received. Out of the remaining years, 5 more show years where PEF members had raises that were about the same as the national average. So out of 26 years of comparisons, 16 of them showed PEF members either falling behind or simply keeping pace.

Now, while you don't WANT to accept the NAWI as a yardstick to measure us against because it basically blows your entire line of argument straight out the water, it's reality. It's not the rhetorical "everyone", but the actual everyone. And you also ignore that there are already 5 years of zeros on the books already, and the 3 more of them from this contract make 8 years of goose eggs. Over a 30 year span, that isn't even "almost every year". That's a zero one out of every 4 years, give or take a decimal or two.

"Yes, I do know what I’m doing. I’m informing the public to PEF’s contracts. It’s pretty self-explanatory. So long as you’re out there spewing your “union above all” anti-tax payer rhetoric, I will be here, offering factual data, easily verifiable for anybody with a free second. Soon enough, people will see you for what you are. Keep it up, you are loosing momentum with every post."

What data have you provided other than spamming the contract figures 4 times now? How are you giving anyone any yardstick to see if your conclusions are accurate or meaningful in any way, shape, or form? All you're doing is posting the raise amounts from contracts and saying "See! I told you they were greedy!" Sorry gilhags. That isn't pushing an "I win" button. No one with a modicum of critical thinking skills is going to go "Look at this guy! He's right!" The only people that are going to buy into it are others like you who aren't going to ask any questions about what the yardstick is that you are using to come up with your assertions. And sadly, that is indicative of what's wrong with this nation today. Too many people just believe something because they hear it over and over again, and not because they've seen any actual, legitimate information that shows whether or not it's true or false. People in this nation used to be inquisitive. Today, they'd rather just go the low effort thinking route and just have someone give them an answer, regardless of whether or not it has any legitimate basis or not. And people like you are there, happily feeding them with the disinformation you interject into the echo chamber. What a patriot you are.