Entries Tagged 'Employment' ↓

Working Poor w/2nd jobs are now called ‘Hustlers’

Gotta love the media, now people who ‘dare’ get a second job are ‘Hustlers’;

A recent survey from Bankrate shows that more than 44 million Americans now have what’s known as a side hustle.

The definition of ‘Hustler’;

an aggressively enterprising person; a go-getter OR a prostitute
So now people who need a second job to make ends meet are just considered ‘aggressive’ and ‘prostitutes’.
But here’s the reality folks, the South Dakota Department of Labor’s latest statistics from 2014 Census data show South Dakota had the highest percentage of people who work more than one job.
Why do you think that is? Let me sum this up for the SF Development Foundation, The SD Department of Labor, Mark Mickelson and Governor Daugaard – South Dakota’s full-time employment doesn’t pay SH*T! Get it?

Should South Dakota State Law change to help with wage increases

Wage collusion has been going on in Sioux Falls and the State for quite awhile. Would a change in State Law or even city ordinance that requires all employers (big and small) to show either the hourly wage or salary in an employment ad that is posted within the state or city help matters? Would it hurt?

Neel Kashkari, President Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis at Rotary

Neel spoke today at Rotary Club of Sioux Falls Downtown. He asked the audience to challenge him with tough questions.

He felt that if you are struggling finding workers or complaining about it, it is NOT that the workers don’t exist, but the wages are not high enough to attract them.

“If you’re not raising wages, you’re just whining.” (about finding enough workers)

I have consistently stood by the argument that when you pay your workers more, they spend more, which boosts the local economy, which in turn boosts the bottom line of your company. The middle class is more likely to spend more than they will invest or save if they make more, while the rich tend to put that money away where it doesn’t circulate as much.

Hey Stupid, it’s still about the wages

You can give away all the free tickets to a free outdoor concert or unlimited mimosas on center court of the EC, doesn’t matter, if young people want to move back to Sioux Falls to continue their career that decision depends on something else very important;

“There’s other things that hold people back from moving back. Like pay and benefits,” she said.

She expects her husband will take a pay cut when they return.

“He’ll most likely get paid less than in Alaska,” she said.

We can talk all we want about the cost-of-living differential, but it’s still important to note the perception here is that financially they feel they will be less-well-off.

WAGES! WAGES! WAGES! So often we like to talk about low unemployment or affordable housing, but let’s face it, over 40% of the full-time jobs in Sioux Falls don’t pay a living wage. Though we have two of the largest industrial hospital complexes in the region, our pay for healthcare workers is still some of the lowest in the nation, so yes, her husband would have to take a pay cut, a big one.

While there is lots of things to do in SF, some of them free, like recreation in our parks, it still costs money for entertainment. I’m sorry, but the 700 lb. gorilla in the room is still the lack of good living wage jobs in Sioux Falls, not entertainment and recreation.

2017 City Salaries; Human Resources

The best way to describe the city of Sioux Falls Human Resources Department would be ‘Management Heavy’ of the 15 employees there is 7 managers, over 50%. There is even duplicity in some of the managers. For instance there is two Human Resource Managers who both make $97,073.60 a year, their boss, the Director of Human Resources makes $145,392.

Management salaries equal $662,207 with hourly employees equaling $404,183.

Salaries for the entire department is $1,066,390 with an average salary of $71,092.66 a year.

If I had any advice for the next mayor, I would take a cutting knife to the HR department, and I would start at the top down.

Here is the full doc: 2017-Wages

2017 City Salaries; Facilities Management

When you start looking at the salaries in this department, you would think they haven’t been adjusted for inflation since 1988. While the city spends millions each year (of our money) on economic development, job growth and affordable housing projects, for some reason they don’t even notice the wage disparity issue in this department.

Out of the 24 custodians that work for the city, 14 of them don’t even make a living wage. The recent Thrive report estimated that a living wage is around $17-20 per hour in Sioux Falls.

The department also has two managers, they make $59,966 & $68,577 per year.

The total salary expenditure for the department (26 employees) is $949,910

If you just count the 24 custodian’s wages it is $821,367 which comes to an average of $16.45 per hour, under a living wage in Sioux Falls.

Should any of this surprise us? I guess people who clean toilets or mop floors are always looked down on as low skill jobs, but over half of these people are actually maintenance employees that require mechanical skills also. Doesn’t someone who works hard 40 hours a week deserve at least a living wage?

I know that the mayor has bragged in the past that they have saved the city even more money in custodial services by contracting a lot of it out. I can tell you that independent cleaning contractors probably pay even less at around $10-12 an hour.

This is where Huether’s corporate culture kicks in. He pays most of his directors well over 6 figures a year, and while their jobs may be more important than cleaning toilets, they still seem to find time to leave before 5 PM to drink beers, or patrol neighborhoods for unsecured wireless so they can download kiddie porn.

Would it really break us if we paid every full-time custodian/maintenance worker with the city AT LEAST $17 an hour? I don’t think so. It seems kind of hypocritical of the current city administration to be throwing millions at local foundations for job growth when we can’t even pay someone a living wage to scrub a toilet.

These are the kind of things that happen when you run a city with a ‘business acumen’. Management lives high on the hog while the minions starve.

Here is the full doc: 2017-Wages


Low wage employer wonders why only druggies apply to work for them

Gee, Dana can’t figure out why only drug users want to work for him?

Maybe it as something to do with the wages that are offered?

When you sell yourself as a low-wage state, you bring in low-end employees.

2017 City Salaries; Economic Development

While there is only 6 employees in the Economic Development office, salaries add up to over $500K. Even the lowest paid employee of the department, the administrative assistant, makes over $49K a year. The department seems management heavy.

What surprises me about the department is how slim it is on office staff. I think the department has become very ‘tight’ or should I say ‘tight-lipped’ since Huether has become mayor. I guess the fewer people in the department, the less likely there are leaks.

Here is the full doc: 2017-Wages

2017 City Salaries; Health Department Dentists & Other officials

Today we will look at the Health Department.

Did you know that some of the highest paid city employees are dentists?

The city health department employees 4 dentists with combined salaries of $620K. Seems odd, doesn’t it? When we think of snow plow operators or police officers, we think of direct service to the public, or at least most of it? But you wouldn’t likely use a city employed dentist unless you had to go to community health because financial restraints. In defense though, as I understand it, the community health department does try to receive some kind of payment. Sometimes through Medicare or Medicade. I would be curious how many patients are served by our city dentists each year?

It also seems the Health Department has many high paying jobs in the department besides dentists.

The Director receives $157K and the Chief Medical Officer about $205K a year. Oddly, even with these positions, the Director has 2 managers that receive the same wage of $88K a year. There are also 13 other mid-management that receives approximately between $80-$100K a year. The clinic even has its OWN finance director (even though the city has a well staffed finance division already) that makes $97K a year.

What is odd about these wages, that are probably not out of line of with a community our size is that many of the minions don’t even receive a living wage. Approximately 15 workers receive under $17 per hour (defined by Thrive as a living wage in Sioux Falls). With the remaining staff making a decent middle income of about $47K. The Sioux Health department has some of the highest wages (in management) of any department in the city) yet Sioux Falls continues to rank average or below average on National health rankings, especially when it comes to obesity and lack of exercise.

Here is the full doc: 2017-Wages

Should city employees be required to live within jurisdiction it works for?

I’m finding some interesting arguments on the topic. This one from Washington State that says chartered cities like Sioux Falls could implement the rule, especially for APPOINTED positions (Like City Attorney, Finance director, etc);

Most cities probably do not have residency requirements for their employees, even if they can. Is it a good idea to require residency? Residency helps build a bond between employees and the community they serve. The public may expect city employees face the same restrictions, taxes, policies that they do, and that’s only possible if employees live within the same community where they work. On the other hand, requiring residency limits the size of the pool from which good employees come – probably the strongest argument against requiring residency. The smaller the city, of course, the more that becomes an issue. Ultimately, it is a policy decision, one that needs to be carefully considered.

Finally, note that, if the affected employees of a proposed residency or response time requirement are members of a union, this would be a matter that would need to be bargained.

I also find this argument from Minnesota about elected officials being required to live within the jurisdiction, then why not the employees?

Elected officials must maintain a city residency. Under the Minnesota Constitution, a candidate must live in the city for at least 30 days before a city election in order to serve as a mayor or councilmember. If a mayor or councilmember fails to maintain a city residency, state statute provides that a vacancy in office is created.

There are a ton of reasons for and against, I guess my argument would be ‘customer service’. Wouldn’t a city employee who lives in that community have more pride in the job they do? This would be an interesting debate to take up with the Charter Revision Commission and a possible ordinance change.