Cops’ massive salaries are robbing taxpayers blind | Hacker News Reader

Cops’ massive salaries are robbing taxpayers blind

nypost.com

20 pointsrbcgerard15 comments

It's hard for me to get bent out of shape about salaries for public employees. Most of them do shit work, at shit pay, for many years -- and if a few of them accrue enough overtime and holiday pay to make very good money in their last few years of employment, and therefore secure a good pension, then I'm not about to argue it should be taken away from them. Lord knows that if you broke down the budget of NYC (~ $85 billion annually) what these guys are making probably barely puts a dent in it.

In general, I hate this crabs-in-a-bucket mentality to how we fund (or don't) public services and the social safety net. Every teacher, police officer, paramedic, and sanitation worker -- the people who keep society functional and healthy -- should be getting this kind of money! And if you look at it jealously because your private-sector job (perhaps as a NY Post hack?) would never get you nearly that much, then maybe you, too, should unionize and agitate for better pay. I mean, you should probably do that anyway, regardless of what teachers and cops get paid, but that's for another thread.

If it costs the government more money to pay these salaries, with increased taxes to go along with that, then I'm fine with that. These services are available to anyone and everyone, for everyone's benefit. This (from my experience, especially but not only American) need to moan and complain about every dollar of tax paid, or (if you're rich enough) pay accountants and lawyers enormous sums so you don't have to pay any taxes at all -- is, frankly, unethical and contributes to the ongoing breakdown of American civil society that I have been watching for my entire life.

The base salary mentioned here, 151k a year, doesn't bother me at all. I'm a little alarmed that enough overtime is available to make $156k more (do we have a bleary, edgy, sleep deprived guy with a badge and gun going into tense situations?). It doesn't bug me that cashing in unused vacation time can push this number up, as a one time deal.

What does bug me is the line: "The salary cops make in their final year is often used to calculate pension size.

Pension spiking is something the taxpayers should be angry about. The truly serious problem isn't that the guy made $442k one year (though this does raise some questions), but that this number will be used to calculate his pension for the rest of his life. I'd need to know what percentage of this $442 he'll be paid for the rest of his life, but if it's a high percentage, that is fleecing the taxpayer, even if he's been a great employee.

There's a pretty big difference between "moan and complain about every dollar of tax paid" and objecting to pension spiking. You can feel that public employees should have good pay and good retirement while disagreeing that this kind of pension spiking is reasonable.

Don't you think, though, that there are probably hundreds of people who would be eagerly lining up to do that job for half the price?

It's not clear how many of those are as qualified as the guys discussed in the article but, if there are any, isn't it the job of your town to get you the best deal it can when hiring a police force?

This could lead to an opposite problem - where I am from(Poland) police bribery is still an issue despite years of fighting against it, and I have no doubts one of the main reasons for it is the low pay of policemen. Someone with 10 years of experience in the force takes home about $800/month. So if they are offered $200 to forgive a fine, that's like a week-worth of money for doing less work.

What would you guess is the median monthly income there, counting people of all professions?

Median net worth (not net income, and not average) in Poland in 2016 was $9,484 USD.

So, assuming a cop is at the 50th percentile of society, a $200 bribe would be 2% of his life savings.

No, I don't think it's anyone's job to simply "get the best deal", at least not from an ideal-social standpoint. I think employers (whether government or not) should adequately compensate their employees. And I think employees get a much fairer shake in negotiating that compensation when they have the backing of a union.

What is "adequate" I can't say, but without knowing more I'm not prepared to simply swallow the line that $400k is somehow totally outrageous. A lot of less useful people make a lot more money for a lot less work and personal risk.

Anyway, $400k was only the last year of salary this guy made. The article is suspiciously quiet about what his compensation was over the course of his whole career.

So, do they use that officer's unpaid vacation time that he cashed in during his last year when calculating his pension?

The article seems to imply that, but does not say it directly.

>including one officer who pulled down $442,000, a new report shows.

Is that considered a lot for a senior wage for a skilled worker in the US? Sounds pretty tight, even with dramatically lower taxes than most European countries.

That would be considered a fabulous sum of money in any city here.

You are getting into the realm of surgeon/athlete money when you are talking 442k.

There are some cops who only make maybe 40-70k.

I've heard lofty cops in rich towns are making 100-200k.

It's not exactly a tough job.

>>It's not exactly a tough job.

I agree with everything you said, but this. It betrays a profound lack of understanding of what police actually do.

I'll admit that I have a bias here, and I know that many cops in specific areas have truly dangerous jobs.

HOWEVER.

The above is not true for many, many jurisdictions. These cops are armed, well paid, and operating in very very normal and safe neighborhoods.

In many dangerous neighborhoods, police don't even go in.

Regardless, the question is also about price. Police are valuable, but at what price? Ask the property tax payers in that neighborhood what they feel is the right salary. People will move if they don't like it.

Just look at South Side Chicago and Detroit.

First responders are often not showing up to calls within an hour. Gunshot victims are being turned away from hospitals.

I think you need to go check USD vs whatever currency your country uses.

That is more than what 10 average people make per year. If someone making four hundred and forty two thousand dollars per year self-described their salary as "tight" they would become an instant laughing stock. You could seriously make a viral video out of that.

No cop is going to work in new york for 40k a year unless you want a huge spike in bribery. I don't know where you could even live in the city on that much. 400k is a tad excessive, but complaining when public employees make a decent salary (100k in a high cost place like NY) is sad

Yeah but there's a big difference between 442k and 100k. The extra cost of living is additive, not multiplicative.

I didn't even say 442k was unfair for the position- I don't know. But "tight" is basically objectively false.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com