We’re not crying for government workers
To the editor:
City union chief Don King does an excellent job explaining the deprivations that may be inflicted upon his members as a result of the present budget crisis ("Public-sector workers repaid with contempt," Sunday Review-Journal). They potentially include: a flattening of all wage increases; no cost-of-living adjustments; no step increases; a freeze on longevity pay; furloughs; a four-day week; splitting the PERS rate increase with employees; and no guarantee on employee restorations from layoff lists.
I'm retired after 45 years in the private sector, where pay was based on results. When business was bad, we accepted pay reductions to save the jobs of colleagues and retain their skills and knowledge to help in the recovery. After all, if the company couldn't sell enough product, there wasn't enough money for pay and benefits.
Mr. King exhibits the typical public-sector "entitlement" mentality. Wage increases, cost of living adjustments, step increases, longevity pay, etc. -- an inflated benefits package to begin with -- must all continue regardless of the conditions needed to pay them.
As for loyalty to those who may lose their jobs, that's where union solidarity becomes, "I'm all right Jack, pull up the ladder." In other words, "I have more years of service than you, so you're the one who has to go. Tough."
Think you're being treated with contempt, Mr. King? Congratulations. You've earned it.
Graham H. Tye
North Las Vegas
The problem
To the editor:
I read Don King's commentary in Sunday's Viewpoints section. While he concludes that "we are willing to be part of the solution," he presents no counterproposals to the city's positions. He offers only the status quo and whining.
It is a fact that the taxpayers can no longer afford to pay the generous salaries of the past, and it is clear that Mr. King is part of the problem, not part of the solution.
Pat Sharp
Las Vegas
Critical stage
To the editor:
Don King makes the statement that employees in the public sector need their jobs because they have mortgages to pay and many workers are single parents or one-income families. Well, that happens to also be the case for private-sector workers, most of whom are paid less for similar jobs, yet subsidize the salaries and nice benefit packages of the former group.
Ultimately, I can't help but feel that if unions were never involved from the very beginning, we wouldn't have reached such a critical stage in our economy.
Annoula Myers
Las Vegas
Our masters
To the editor:
Sunday's article about Clark County Family Court sealing protection orders in cases of domestic violence inadvertently stated the problem with government at all levels, from local homeowners association boards to the Oval Office. A court official stated in a suggestion to the Nevada Supreme Court that the sealing of protection orders is in the public interest because "the written record is often skewed by one-sided documents" and the public is too ignorant to make an informed judgment.
I would submit that our elected representatives not only believe that we are too ignorant to make an informed judgment but that we are also too unintelligent to be entrusted with such weighty matters as the conduct of the process and practice of governance. Is it any wonder, with these two premises as a starting point, that our government has evolved into the benevolent dictatorship that now exists?
We get exactly the kind of government we deserve. By means of our own apathy and appalling indifference, we have allowed our servants to become our masters.
Bob Glover
Las Vegas
Harry's worth
To the editor:
In response to the Sunday column by Glenn Cook, "Harry Reid's easy ride almost over":
What does it take to be an editorial writer for the Review-Journal? Obviously, a command of relevant facts isn't one of the necessary qualities.
Mr. Cook wonders how "a man who's been an elected official or public employee his entire working life becomes a millionaire who pays cash for a Ritz-Carlton condo." Well, here's a clue and it's not a secret. Sen. Harry Reid had a successful career as a lawyer until 1982 and, like other Nevadans, made profitable investments in real estate.
In 2008, before this election spin cycle kicked into high gear, the Review-Journal reported on a project by the Sunlight Foundation, a nonpartisan public interest group. The project reported on an officeholder's growth or loss in personal net worth since the record keeping was computerized in 1995. In that year, Sen. Reid had a net worth of $5.4 million, according to the foundation. By 2006, that figure had dropped more than $2 million to $3.3 million -- a fact attributed to the expense of putting five kids through college. Hardly the picture of sleaze that Mr. Cook paints.
Even though actual facts seem insufficient to penetrate the craniums of your editorial staff, I think your readers deserve to know them.
Mary McCarthy
Las Vegas
Saved by Harry
To the editor:
Amidst BP's catastrophe of failed "fail-safe" devices, and the fiasco of the government's response to the tragedy in the Gulf, has anyone considered Yucca Mountain and Nevada's vulnerability to the nuclear industry's oopses? Thanks again, Harry Reid, for all of us.
Rich Owens
Las Vegas
