Thread: Howard County Government Inflows in Trouble

The part time prosecutors are full time lawyers.... we dont "owe" them insurance. They can easily pay their own way, just sucking off the tax payers is easy. The part time people in gov are no diff than part time help in the real world, they dont "earn" insurance from work. Most are part time for a reason, and have full time jobs else where.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

You seem to suggest that we should cut off insurance for these people. The jobs you have listed are not high paying jobs, and these people could not afford to pay for the cost of health care, so, what is your solution?

I'm not 'suggesting' anything... I'm presenting the data as described in the budget.

Once again, I go back to our database and find this:



This compares what is spent, ratio-wise, between the County General Fund and all other funds.

Does it seem odd to you that nearly twice as much (percentage-wise) is spent in other areas outside the general fund? This would suggest that quite a lot of part-time employees are covered... which is a nice perk but becoming exceedingly rare these days.

Again, I'm not advocating anything... just presenting the data for consideration.

NIK

Originally Posted by Unregistered

The part time prosecutors are full time lawyers.... we dont "owe" them insurance. They can easily pay their own way, just sucking off the tax payers is easy. The part time people in gov are no diff than part time help in the real world, they dont "earn" insurance from work. Most are part time for a reason, and have full time jobs else where.

Amen! And the part time county council members, city council members and county commissioners, who also are sucking on the t** of full time taxpayer provided insurance, have full time jobs or have retired from them (many are over 65 also thus getting medicare). Cut it all out NOW!

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Good to see the Perspective this week pick up on our idea of part-time elected officials not getting full time benefits like health insurance. Now stick with it. Let us know how people vote on this and what they say. Turn them into headlines and cartoons. As you point out there is a huge conflict of interest because the very people voting are the ones who are part-time and getting these expensive full-time benefits. How Papacheck, Wyman, Miller, Karickhoff and others vote will tell us how bad the financial problems really are.

Actually, the Perspective started arguing against benefits for part-timers back in 2000. Ran lists of all the prosecutors and public defenders and what they were getting in benefits. The whole nine yards. They tried to make it a campaign issue in the commissioners and council races, but no one was interested in listening. What a difference a decade and a couple recessions make.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Actually, the Perspective started arguing against benefits for part-timers back in 2000. Ran lists of all the prosecutors and public defenders and what they were getting in benefits. The whole nine yards. They tried to make it a campaign issue in the commissioners and council races, but no one was interested in listening. What a difference a decade and a couple recessions make.

We will see if 10 years makes a difference. As of now, nothing about insurance for part timers has been cut from the budgets. In fact when Mckillip cut it out a few years ago, the city council added it back in. My guess is that it won't end up being cut again this year by the city or the county.

Insurance for part-timers is such a crock. In my 20 years in the workforce, I have never, ever worked somewhere that offered benefits to anyone who was only part-time. What makes these people so special??

My guess is now that Chrysler is paying more of their property taxes (per the Trib article today), cutting health insurance for part timers will not even see the light of day. No official will bring it up for a vote. Hopefully the KP will keep the pressure on and keep us informed on this one item.