The proposal to strip the appeals process from state employees when they are fired has advanced one more step towards the inevitable implementation.
The reps for the state workers argue that this job security is one of the trade offs for taking less money to serve in the public sector. Let’s face it — it’s been a several tough years for our SD state employees. But at the same time, it’s been tough in the private sector too. Is job security an area that should be sacrosanct for gov’t employees.
Those who support the change suggest it is to make sure a judge doesn’t order the state to continue paying someone whose job has been eliminated. I’d really be surprised if a judge actually overruled the legislature if they cut a job or department because of budget or if funding run out. But just because it’s not likely, does it mean it shouldn’t be changed.
Recently I was visiting with someone about pay for gov’t employees….and the response was pretty straight forward….In the private sector the money is better but in the public sector they have power.
I understand the concerns raised by the state employees representative — but I also understand the argument to change the rule.
How do you see it….