Poll Question on School Drop-Out Age

In the State of the Union address Pres. Obama suggested states raise the school drop out age to 18. This week the Empire Page Poll Question of the Week asks you whether you agree with the President on this issue.

Pension Reform

Last week we asked people to grade Gov. Cuomo on his pension reform plan. That question drew the largest participation in any poll question ever offered on the Empire Page — nearly 5,000 people voted. The results? 84% gave the governor a failing grade of F; 5% an A, 3% a B and 8% a C.

We thank everyone who participated in that poll and urge them to vote this week as well.

From Occupy Wall Street to Occupy My Employer

If the “99%” can feel justified in taking property away from the “1%” on the grounds of fairness, then why can’t workers take a bigger share of a company’s revenue on the same basis? That’s the logic behind a campaign launched by CWA 1199 against Cablevision. Why do Cablevision’s employees need a union according to 1199? Because a former company COO earned more than twice as much as his employees.

Fairness as a determinant of a person’s pay level is also behind the drive to raise New York State’s minimum wage and behind living wage legislation on the agenda in New York City and elsewhere.

The fairness doctrine is predicated on the notion that one’s pay should be more a matter of want than one’s contribution to the enterprise in which one is employed.

Hence, performance as a basis for rewards of pay and status should be downgraded because that criteria undermines the opportunity for those who do not perform well to get their fair share.

Further the ability of the enterprise to pay — whether public or private — should not be considered when it comes to compensation of the work force. Such considerations undermine the ability of those who are unproducitve to gain their fair share.

Let’s be clear that fairness is a subjective value. In the past fairness was balanced against the need of the enterprise to be successful and survive (either make a profit or do the job with available resources). Today, there’s an underlying assumption that no company or government entity is paying its workers a fair wage. Rather, they are hoarding their resources and giving them to the 1%.

A company that pays its workers above the value of the contribution they add to the product or service will not long remain in business. The history of the American car industry is about that very issue. By giving in to union wage and benefit demands, GM, Ford and Chrysler had to charge so much for their cars that they opened the door to foreign manufacturers which were able to sell a superior product at a lower price even when the cost of shipping foreign made cars to the US was taken into account.

The history of the public sector over the past 40 years parallels that of the automobile industry. Elected officials gave in to union demands without consideration of the ability of taxpayers to foot the bill, often by ignoring the future pension obligations they were agreeing to. That lack of political courage has harmed both public sector employees and the general public, as it contributed to the belief that public sector employees are overpaid and underworked relative to private sector workers.

Let’s not waste our time debating whether fairness as a basis of compensation is socialistic or communistic. Labels are not important. What’s important is to recognize the long-term implications of undermining ambition and achievement.

Taken to its logical conclusion doing well in school and working hard in order to obtain a job that gives one decision-making authority and pays well should be discouraged. Why? Those values place the successful individual above the norm and undermine the ability of those who are below average to get their fair share.

Like pay, school grades should not be given out on the basis of performance but rather on the basis of want. Minority and handicapped students have a greater want of good grades since many come from low-income households and enter school with “unfair” disadvantages. Since they will not need to learn skills or work-world values in order to get a fair wage why require that they master subjects or compete with other students!

Grades, jobs and compensation should not be based on merit or performance but rather want — the measure of fairness.

Since the majority in any country skew to the average, the tendency of democractic societies is to elect officials who are in favor of policies that focus on results rather than contribution, on rewards rather than worth, on outcomes rather than effort.

The question we must ask ourselves is will that kind of society be able to compete against those that reward success based on enterprise, competition and equal opportunity and that provide a model for young people justifying effort and ambition? We only need to read the daily accounts of the problems facing Europe to gain a hint of the answer.

If that’s where this country is headed, is such an outcome the kind of fairness we owe future generations?

School Mergers Work

Need evidence that merging school districts can be done with benefit to the taxpayers and students? Read today’s story in the Auburn Citizen “Union Springs, Port Byron merger working“.

To stay on top of school mergers, local government sharing, local elections and all the local government news around NYS, subscribe to the Empire Page. The cost is less than a quarter a day.

Free trial subs are available at https://www.empirepage.com/subscribe.

Education Merger Cold Feet

School district officials — elected and appointed — who have cold feet about considering merging with neighboring districts might consider the discussion taking place in Maryland. The State Legislature is considering merging the University of Maryland with the University of Baltimore. The reasons are the same ones that should propel school districts mergers in New York state — the ability to offer students more choices, cost savings by eliminating inefficient use of capital equipment — from buses to copy machines, better use of personnel and the ability to devote resources to education which are now wasted on administration. The points of resistance are also the same — people who have a vested personal interest in their fiefdoms don’t want change. They try to rally others around the myth of their unique identity, claiming individuals will be lost in the larger institution. That could happen of course if the new administration isn’t conscious of the need to maintain open communications channels for all participants, but the time to recognize that consolidation is not just a good thing, but a necessary thing, is now.

State Budget & Funding Schools

In today’s Siena College Research Institute poll an interesting contradiction in voter thinking is revealed in hard numbers. On the one hand, voters do not want the state aid to education to be reduced; in fact they want it to be increased even if that means higher taxes. On the other hand, however, voters want the state budget to be cut and they want taxes to be lowered.

Of course we’re talking about voters in the aggregate, but that contradiction lives in the minds of many individual voters. Who ever said human beings — much less registered voters — are consistent?

The contradiction demonstrates that voters are sadly uninformed when it comes to education funding and the state budget. They view the problem from the perspective of their home community rather than from the state as a whole.

Voters are also loath publicly to oppose school spending. Yet, watch their behavior when they get a chance to vote on their local district budgets. If there is any hint of discretionary spending (on such items as libraries, art, music, etc.) and they’ll vote ‘no’.

The larger problem is complicated by the fact that governors don’t like to take on the problem of rich districts versus poor districts. There are districts across the state with large reserve funds not to mention solid tax bases, but try to reduce their next year’s state aid and they’ll run crying to their state legislators.

There is also the problem that we’ve had a laissez-faire approach to the organization of school districts. The fact is that there is unnecessary duplication of resources across the state as well as the failure to realize the benefits that centralization can bring.

Think of it this way: There are computers, fax machines, copy machines and other technology with underutilized capacity sitting in school district offices across the state. Tax payers have paid for their purchase and continue to pay for maintenance without getting the potential benefits that should accrue.

The same is true of people. Merge two districts and many of the people in the superintendent’s office from the superintendent down to the janitorial staff can become more productive without any increase in cost. Even teachers can be more productively employed. Were that not the case, then BOCES would not exist!

Here are two solutions:

1) Give districts a choice: demonstrate that you are lowering costs either on your own or as a result of sharing services with neigbhoring districts or have your state aid formula reduced.

2) Provide an incentive for small districts to merge. The State Education Department ought to be geared up to assist districts merge quickly and efficiently with lesson plans on how to reduce costs without any decline in service quality.

Other solutions, including reform of the Wicks’ Law that inflates construction costs, have been offered by a variety of organizations including the Empire Center, New Yorkers for Growth and Unshackle Upstate.

This is a great opportunity for voter education. Spread the word.

Merger Movement Mainstreams

When a topic shows up in the “Intelligence Report” section of Parade Magazine, that’s a sign that it’s something average citizens are paying attention to. Such we hope is the case for municipal merger movement which is not only on the agenda in some communities in NYS, but apparently also in places like Natchdez, Miss.

–

Speaking of merging government entities, Gov. Paterson missed a major opportunity to promote consolidation of school districts in his budget. While I support the progressive nature of his $1 billion state-aid cut — putting more of the burden on rich districts, there should have been a provision rewarding districts that either merge or start sharing services. Providing a financial incentive is the win-win way to get district administrators out of their parochial mind-sets. Of course, the public has to rally behind the cause as well, but when they recognize that holding up consolidation means higher school taxes most people will give up the notion that small school districts are better for their children.