South Carolina’s government sector is not only disproportionately larger than government sectors other states, but it pays its employees salaries that are higher than other workers, too.
Prior to its most recent expansion, government in South Carolina represented 40.5% of the state’s economy (with state government representing a 17.8% chunk). Of course, that was back in 2005 when the state budget was “just” $16.8 billion.
It’s over $20 billion today.
By contrast, government in neighboring North Carolina and Georgia represented 32% and 30% of those states’ economies, respectively.
Now, data from a new study released by the S.C. Manufacturers’ Alliance shows that state employees get paid higher salaries, too.
According to the study, the average local government employee in South Carolina makes $38,948 a year. State employees do even better – hauling in an average salary of $40,092 a year, while federal employee in the Palmetto State rake in a whopping $59,124 a year, on average.
Obviously, these salaries don’t include the expensive taxpayer-funded benefit packages that are offered to these employees.
By contrast, the average salary in South Carolina (for those workers lucky enough to be employed) is $35,620.
Surely the government hasn’t been able to continue paying these higher salaries to such a large number of bureaucrats during the ongoing economic recession, though, right?
Wrong.
In fact, they’ve actually added positions.
According to the latest data from the S.C. Employment Security Commission, the government sector in South Carolina has gained 1,100 jobs over the previous twelve months. By contrast, the state’s economy as a whole has lost 60,500 jobs over that same time period.
Clearly, despite all the whining we hear about “budget cuts,” the current recession isn’t hurting government in South Carolina.
By Andy Arnold December 11, 2009 at 11:53 am
Although this website is not above occasional drivel, this post really reaches for a lower standard. Would you prefer that families with a public sector breadwinner be hurting more? Of course, bureaucrats are citizens, many have families, and all pay taxes on the income they earn. Would you prefer that the 1,100 who were lucky enough to find public sector employment be unemployed? Would you prefer they collect unemployment benefits or merely starve?
How much of the 40.5% is represented by military? (It almost certainly is.) What would the SC economy be without this 40.5% or even the 23% represented by federal expenditures?
What is your point? Certainly some bureaucracies are unnecessary or even harmful. However, these types of stats and your “analysis” is worthless in the discussion at any real issues.
By Commonman December 11, 2009 at 12:23 pm
If you want to see some disproportionately larger salaries, just look at the Capitol Complex, specifically the Budget and Control Board, House, and Senate. That is where the disproportionately higher salaries and raises have always been, but more so today. Go you fiscally conservative Republicans. $100,000 salary is far too common many on top of drawing their TERI employment. Why don’t you look at these, FITS?
By countryboy December 11, 2009 at 12:48 pm
Andy, I think the point is, there are way too many government employees in SC and they are paid more than comparable government employees in other states. And I think most taxpayers (not employeed by a government) would AGREE 100% with this article. I do.
By Nathan Earle December 11, 2009 at 1:01 pm
Andy, your post completely misses the point. I’m pretty sure we can all agree that everyone who wants to work should have the opportunity to earn a fair living. But the “public” sector cannot grow except at the expense of individuals and businesses who are trying to make it out in the market — the real market where things of real value are produced.
Carrying your logic to its conclusion, what if everyone had a “public” sector job? Who would feed the beast then? While most people are willing to pay taxes to support the defense of their lives and property, I for one am not interested in paying some dude in Columbia $100k a year to sit on his trousers and invent ways to (1) justify his job (2) pad his pocket (3) reward his buddies (4) carry water for the folks who hired or appointed him and (5) be generous with other people’s money.
South Carolina government doesn’t just need a diet, it needs surgery.
By Commonman December 11, 2009 at 1:29 pm
Congratulations, Nathan Earle. You hit the bull’s eye. Right on point, my man.
By swampfox December 11, 2009 at 1:39 pm
Get a proofreader or slow down. Thers word missing here and in the Dawson story.
Surely the government hasn’t been able to continue paying these higher salaries to such a large ????? of bureaucrats during the ongoing economic recession, though, right?
By swampfox December 11, 2009 at 1:40 pm
I know, I know I need a proofreader too.
By Commonman December 11, 2009 at 2:13 pm
I would imagine that increases have been given since the beginning of the current tanking of the economy. There is no accountability and transparency in agencies that know how to hide their expenditures. Higher education and public education are two of the biggest culprits. Part of the reason here is that there is a culture that treats critical analysis of both as a taboo. Until we demand true accountability instead of sound bites, it will continue to get worse.
By UpState Native December 11, 2009 at 3:04 pm
I quess I am one of those bureaucrats that work for the state but my job is one not to be put off in the private sector or do you want the Mall Cop watching out for your family with these sex offenders on GPS. Yes some will say lock them away and never let them out but then you have to hire hundreds of more guards to run the much larger prison system 24/7 which is doing furloughs at present for their guards and cutting back to 2 meals a day for inmates as is so locking them away still costs lots more money and inmates don’t pay taxes but I degress.
My salary has gone down this year by 4.2%, furlough days, and I don’t make the “average” even with 20 years sevice, no new hires here in the office since January 2008 but we have lost 9 in that same time frame so Fits before you blow off and put us all in some Evil tail spin get your head right and stop the shotgun effect and point out where these new worthless jobs are. If I remember right Will would have been a vry high paid State Employee one time when he worked for the Lov Gov so who is calling the kettle black?
By the way Cops in SC along with DNR, Probation Parole, Troopers, SLED and all the rest inculding County Deputies are paid less than Ga and NC most less any place north from Virginia upwards.
Could some of those 1,100 jobs been with Job Service and Unemployment Comm. Bet DSS could have used a few hires when the lines got longer there as well.
By Andy Arnold December 11, 2009 at 3:33 pm
I will just say there are points to be made about government employment, but these stats as presented are really useless. They don’t support the point being made.
First, one of you state that the point is that too many gov’t employees and they are paid more than comparable employees in other states. Where is there any comparison of compensation with public employees from other states?
So, SC added .3% (less than 1%) in state and local public employment over the last 12 months. NC added 2.4% during same period. What does that mean? During same time period, Professional and Business Services employment increased 2.0% (6 times the rate of increase of gov’t). However, if you take the numbers that were originally reported in Oct. 2008, government has lost 10 time as many jobs as FITS is reporting were added. http://www.sces.org/lmi/news/December_2008.pdf Of course, numbers are revised, and these are preliminary numbers.
And, we don’t know what type of positions were added. So, there is an assumption that the 1,100 jobs earned the average salary, but of course, it is just as likely they were low paying jobs as high paying jobs. And I am willing to bet that state and local employees make more in NC and Ga than in SC.
And I am just as willing to bet that average pay for private sector is lower in SC than in our neighboring states. And perhaps that is the real meaning: Not that state employees are being paid too much but hard working private sector employees are not being paid enough.
By James the Foot Soldier December 11, 2009 at 5:26 pm
FITS and company – didn’t y’all get the memo: When using the term “budget cuts” in association with any government entity it MUST be preceded by the adjective “draconian”.
Sheessh….get with the program already.
Remember that as we approach the ACTUAL mid-year draconian budget cut hand-wringing circus.
By BIN News December 11, 2009 at 5:55 pm
sic(k) willie is just trying to fluff up his declining hit count by finding more ways to scream that the sky is falling. The way sic(k) willie’s little porn site is dropping in popularity, he needs to apply for a state job.
By CNSYD December 11, 2009 at 9:59 pm
FITS averages are part of the lie hierarchy. You know the one that says the biggest lie is statistics. Lets take you, me and Bill Gates total our net worth and divide by 3. On the average we are now multiple millionaries. Are athletic coaches and administrators included in your averages? If yes, they should not be since, as I understand it, their salaries come from revenues and not state tax funds. Hell even probationers have to pay their PO. How about the two medical schools we have (and really shouldn’t have)? I bet all these doctors draw high salaries and then get to use state facilities to see private patients.
By Ron December 11, 2009 at 10:25 pm
By Dennis Cauchon, USA TODAY
The number of federal workers earning six-figure salaries has exploded during the recession, according to a USA TODAY analysis of federal salary data.
Federal employees making salaries of $100,000 or more jumped from 14% to 19% of civil servants during the recession’s first 18 months — and that’s before overtime pay and bonuses are counted.
Federal workers are enjoying an extraordinary boom time — in pay and hiring — during a recession that has cost 7.3 million jobs in the private sector.
PRIVATE INDUSTRY: Some companies restore raises, benefits
JOBS FORECAST: Track job growth across USA
PROS AND CONS: President Obama crafts strategies to create jobs
The highest-paid federal employees are doing best of all on salary increases. Defense Department civilian employees earning $150,000 or more increased from 1,868 in December 2007 to 10,100 in June 2009, the most recent figure available.
When the recession started, the Transportation Department had only one person earning a salary of $170,000 or more. Eighteen months later, 1,690 employees had salaries above $170,000.
By Marvin December 11, 2009 at 10:28 pm
Right on, Nathan and James! Upstate – I think we’d all agree that funding public safety is a key role of government. That’s why they cut your pay in the Statehouse. They always threaten to fire cops and teachers, because those are the main jobs we want to pay for. Do you think legislators have the guts to say “we’ve hit tough times, but we’re still going to pay our high-priced, useless staff and a bunch of government lobbyists?” Of course not, but that’s exactly what they do, and it’s at your expense.
Here’s the larger point: there isn’t supposed to be an entire “public sector.” We don’t fund government so we can give people jobs. We fund it largely to protect our rights and keep us safe, and also to provide some common services, such as education. That’s it. There is no reason at all to pay overpriced legislative staffers, PR consultants, lobbyists, lawyers, “economic development” professionals, advertising firms, “communications directors” who spend all day pumping up politicians, tourism directors….etc. You get the point.
All of those jobs should be eliminated before a police officer or teacher is furloughed. And Upstate, you ought to be madder than anyone about the fact that a bunch of lobbyists and consultants are still working when you took a hit. You can blame the legislative leaders for that. It is 100% on them.
By Mike at the beach December 12, 2009 at 12:18 am
Good God, he’s back…
By Calhoun Fawls December 12, 2009 at 5:45 am
Who knows if the stats from the ESC are correct. If it is like anything else they handle, it is probably off. Just try proving someone never worked for you when the ESC gets your name mixed up with another business. It is a nightmare.
By theo December 12, 2009 at 8:14 am
DNR-now that’s a department that could use a serious liposuction…
By Sam December 12, 2009 at 10:52 am
Will, your wrong, sorry. The reason why state employess on average earn more than the average SC worker is because of the required education level of many state jobs. I’m sure you don’t believe that someone who has a high school diploma or a ged should be making as much as someone who goes to work for the state with a college degree or advanced credential, or do you? Would you rather have a well paid, intelegent and able public workforce or a semi-trained, uneducated, not so competent boob handling the state’s business? Live in the trenches for a few years, the view is much different from this side of the desk, versus your former desk at the Gov’s office.
Later.
By baker December 12, 2009 at 2:34 pm
Several thoughts:
**This report IS coming from Will Folks, a former government employee (who may, by the way, have been paid higher than the gov-employee average….though I do not know). I assume that Will’s resume includes mention of his work on the taxpayers’ dime.
**It’s strange logic to assert that if general unemployment rises, we should cut government employment by proportionally. Then overall unemployment would only go up! Not only that, but do demands placed on government lessen when the economy is bad? Of course not. As Upstate Native pointed out, there are still real needs in areas such as law enforcement. Of course, we need more private sector jobs — that doesn’t really say much, however, about public sector employment.
**Just a point of curiosity: are all government employees “bureaucrats”? Obviously, Will and others like to use that term (or “edu”crat) because it they sense it has a negative connotation. But does it really apply to all government workers….including police, teachers, sanitation workers, etc.?
**Finally, these “whopping” salaries Will points to…..they don’t seem that “whopping” to me. Forty-grand a year? High thirties? Stuff like that? Folks on those salaries certainly aren’t getting rich in their government positions. And, as someone else noted, these salaries are probably based, in large part, on the fact that so many government jobs do at least require a college degree and maybe additional education. So, of course, they’re going to pay more than so many low-wage jobs in SC.
By Soft Sigh From Hell December 12, 2009 at 3:16 pm
If you want to see abuse and a real scam, look at all the higher-ups in various agencies who got the advantages of the TERI program (originally designed for classroom teacher retention but gone awry in the bureaucracies) and who then “retired” but never went away and still draw large salaries. I don’t pretend to know the details, but from the pained howls of smart friends consigned to state cubes there seems to be something badly wrong here. The story goes that the high-ups basically claim that they are too important to have to leave and they get dispensation from each other and stay on and on. Friends at DHEC for instance claim that not a few of these hangers-on could do their highest service to the state by leaving. Instead they cling tenaciously. Lessers, that is regular folks, must leave of course.
Take a look at TERI.
By Stumpy December 12, 2009 at 9:56 pm
Soft Sigh From Hell, how right you are. DSS is having a furlough and is laying people off. However, none of them are the upper level management staff that makes the big bucks. Also, many of them are TERI and post TERI. DSS is a cabinet agency, over which the Luv Guv has appointing authority. He professes to be against the TERI program but still has a large precentage of them working in the higher paying jobs in the agency. One of the arguments is that there is no one with the experience, but how does anyone get experience if they continue to hang on to the higher positions? These are the people that inflate the average pay.
By Soft Sigh From Hell December 13, 2009 at 10:08 am
Thanks, Stumpy, by your comments I now remember more of the problem as told to me.
The post-TERI hangers-on claim that there is no one trained or experienced to take over their jobs and that they are thus still essential. This is after they themselves (the hangers-on) had FIVE YEARS of TERI time to train several underlings so that persons were available to take over. Unbelievably, these high paid bureaucrats are being further rewarded for their own failure and negligence. The whole TERI debacle, from legislation to clinging bureaucrats today, would make a great newspaper expose/documentary or university thesis in political science or public administration.
By Lynn Simmons December 13, 2009 at 10:59 am
I think the state agencies would be opening themselves to another lawsuit if they got rid of the TERI employees.. There is not one bit of difference if you really think about it..between a retired state employee working than say a retired military worker in a state job. There are alot of those as well. They would have to literally change the law to prohibit retired workers from being rehired..also would have to stop other retired persons from other areas such as military. Doubt they will do that.
By Marvin December 14, 2009 at 12:47 am
Baker, of course not all government workers are bureaucrats. But all the overpaid ones are, and there are many, many of them at all levels. Again, there are many jobs that are neccessary to provide services. But there are not nearly as many of those services that are critical as there are agencies and employees we don’t need and can’t afford. Sorry, but it’s a fact.
Government is not a private company, at which consumers have a choice to spend their money or not. Government has very little money that is not taken forcibly through taxation, and that money is always taken from an individual who would have spent it elsewhere. We are funding government at an alarming level, and politicians have literally behaved like college kids with their first credit card. We have agencies that shouldn’t even exist spending money they can’t account for on programs that make no sense.
Now, of course we should pay for law enforcement. But right now we are furloughing police officers. And teachers. Are we furloughing legislative staffers? Have we cut the consulting fees for PR firms? Have we laid off any government lobbyists? Are we cutting out the “economic development” incentives to private companies? How many communications directors were laid off?
You get the point. And the TERI program is a whole other layer of theft on the part of government workers. And Baker, trust me – I am much more aware than most what government workers do, and know that many do work very hard and care about their jobs. They know better than anyone else how much money gets wasted and how many lazy overpaid lawyers and PR people get automatic raises while others are doing the work of three people.
We have too many government employees and too many government agencies doing too many things that shouldn’t be done in the public sector at all. And those who really do provide core services and do it efficiently would be much better off — and so would the taxpayers — if we would cut out what we don’t need.
By Alec December 14, 2009 at 12:55 am
Sam, you asked if we would rather have “..a well paid, intelegent (sic) and able public workforce or a semi-trained, uneducated, not so competent boob handling the state’s business?” Well, heck yeah! But I don’t think that’s gonna happen anytime soon. Not as long as Harrell, Leatherman and McConnell run this state. I’m afraid it’s not-so-competent man-boobs for South Carolina.
By Commonman December 15, 2009 at 6:11 pm
Just take a look at the higher paid employees who are on TERI. They are using and abusing the system. The Budget and Control Board is one of the main culprits with retiring and rehiring and higher paid employees leaving for even higher paid jobs at other state institutions. It’s all there if someone takes the time to look. Too much back scratching going on in an agency that is supposed to be the administrative agency for state government. Just start at the top and work your way down. Disgusting.
By Joe February 22, 2010 at 9:11 am
TERI = NO UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS – WIN, WIN for SC