State and local governments employ approximately 20.6 million workers who keep our communities safe, educate our children and deliver other essential services. Yet with an estimated 222,000 federal job cuts announced so far this year — and similar efforts brewing at the state level — the value of public servants’ work has loudly been called into question.
Already, we’re seeing a “trickle down” effect from the efforts to reduce the size and scope of the federal government. There has been a surge of anti-union activity, and at least 11 states have created Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)-inspired operations.
In February, for example, Utah Gov. Spencer Cox signed into law a bill banning public-sector unions from collective bargaining — impacting thousands of teachers, police officers and first responders. According to the Economic Policy Institute, public-sector collective bargaining rights narrow the pay gap between public- and private-sector workers by 8 percentage points. Efforts are currently underway to gather 200,000 signatures to qualify for a referendum to give Utah voters the opportunity to overturn the law.
These attacks are not new, and tend to be cyclical. In 2011 and 2012, following the Great Recession, we saw large-scale efforts to undermine public-sector unions when 15 states passed laws restricting collective bargaining rights. The recent efforts, however, represent a reversal of positive momentum in the labor movement, including Michigan’s repeal of its right-to-work law in 2023.
The policies create lasting damage, though ultimately harming taxpayers as well as the state and local government workers who serve them.
From school bus drivers to fire chiefs, state and local public servants make up approximately 13 percent of the workforce. While transparency and efficiency are important for any organization, a slash-and-burn approach may ultimately drive up costs for taxpayers while reducing the benefits they enjoy.
We’ve seen the harmful effects of shrinking the state and local government workforce before. When firefighters’ jobs were cut during the Great Recession, some departments were forced to resort to “rolling brownouts” that led to delayed services and increased risks to property and citizen lives. Similarly, when 350,000 jobs were cut from K-12 public education between 2008 and 2012, we saw lower school completion rates, larger class sizes and widening student achievement gaps.
Further, this approach may not account for long-term costs for taxpayers. Largely due to the mission-driven work and incentivized tenure provided by pensions, the public sector has significantly lower turnover rates than the private sector. The estimated costs for losing an employee range from 30 to 200 percent of the individual’s salary, meaning any new hires down the road would come with hidden expenses.
Widespread layoffs in the public sector may also have unintended consequences for the health of public pensions and the economy. With fewer active employees contributing to pension plans, taxpayers may be on the hook for increased contributions needed to fulfill those plans’ obligations. If benefits are tiered down further, the resulting reductions in consumer spending would also harm the economy.
Currently, public-sector pensions distribute nearly $400 billion in annual benefits. When taking into account the impact of pension retiree spending and investment of pension assets, an analysis of 2023 data by our organization found that every dollar taxpayers contribute to state and local pensions supports an additional $13.40 in total economic output.
It’s clear that growing distrust of governmental entities has led many to question the value of public servants’ work. But it’s important to consider where we would be without these vital workers. How would our schools function? What would happen to our parks and shared community spaces? Who would you call in an emergency? Now is the time to shift the narrative around the vital importance of public service.
Hank Kim is executive director and counsel for the National Conference on Public Employee Retirement Systems.
Governing’s opinion columns reflect the views of their authors and not necessarily those of Governing’s editors or management.
Related Articles
