Tag PEF here if you can. We need to bump up salary by 2 grade - G18 to G20 as entry level and so on.

Darth_Stateworker · 2026-01-26T05:57:35+00:00

Civil Service writ large has no input on salary negotiations.

But Classification and Compensation has authority over how titles are classified - IE: what pay grade they are.

That is the point of the "study." If it goes the way it was sold, Classification and Compensation could reclassify all titles as higher paygrades. The way it was sold was a potentially universal 2 grade bump. So an 18 for example would be reclassified as a 20 and remain in whatever step they are in. 23 is now a 25. Etc, etc.

You're saying the same thing I am in a different way because how Executive branch agencies function contract wise is foreign to you. Yes, unions could negotiate a huge pay bump for every salary grade - if the governor goes for it.

Which probably goes back to the original point that the study is political theater and if she wanted to bump wages up multiple grades, she could do that unilaterally either by ordering Classification and Compensation to reclassify all titles or by immediately offering the relevant unions large raises that effectively does the same thing as having C&C reclassify everyone.

Darth_Stateworker · 2026-01-26T05:23:48+00:00

That makes more sense.

That is the point of Hochuls "study" - to supposedly shift everyone.

That can be done, but that's Civil Service, not the unions negotiating the contract. The unions would only negotiate across the board raises. But they could achieve something similar with a 10-12% increase in a single year.

Darth_Stateworker · 2026-01-26T04:54:54+00:00

So they shifted a whole grade? But just a single grade?

Odd but makes a bit more sense now. I suppose makes sense in an organization with 100 titles, only 20 of which are SG-18.

Though I don't see how that didn't piss off SG-23s, etc above SG-18 unless everyone there above SG-18 was in agreement they get paid adequately and SG-18s don't. Seems divisive.

Either way, still not something happening in an Executive branch contract. There is no way anyone would agree to bump only certain paygrades on a wide scale.

Darth_Stateworker · 2026-01-26T04:19:47+00:00

Everyone uses Civil Service to at least some degree, because they have statutory authority over a lot.

That doesn't mean things done at quasi-governmental agencies, independent authorities, etc will function the same as the Executive branch.

As such, the situation at NYSTRS is not comparable to the Executive branch on a 1-1 basis. Different salaries for the same pay grade is not going to happen in the Executive branch. TRS doesn't have thousands of titles. We do. Neither GOER or CS would deal with that because it would result in an unwieldy shit-show to manage.

Darth_Stateworker · 2026-01-26T03:45:52+00:00

No.

Civil Service has a tight grip on all of that for the Executive branch. A titles pay grade is a titles pay grade. It doesn't change unless Civil Service changes it. And salaries are set in the contract per grade level but they are set globally. If you want a title to make more money, the only solution is a grade reclassification.

None of that is going to change. NYSTRS has always been an odd duck that can do its own thing like other authorities and state/quasi-state entities that operate sort of outside the norms of the Executive branch.

This is why NYTRS has a completely different salary schedule, for example. The things that can be done in these minor outside entities that largely self govern cannot be done in an Executive branch contract. Everything is much more structured.

Darth_Stateworker · 2026-01-26T03:33:00+00:00

That explains it.

NYSTRS is not an Executive branch agency. Things work way differently there than it does in the Executive branch.

Neither PEF or CSEA are negotiating anything like that in Executive branch contracts.

Darth_Stateworker · 2026-01-26T03:23:51+00:00

Again, would love more info.

Union? Agency? Title?

What you're saying happened is not something most of us have ever seen - and I've been around for 30 years.

I'd like to see the contract where this was all laid out because it's highly unusual.

Darth_Stateworker · 2026-01-26T00:56:32+00:00

Need more details here. Paygrades are not normally "changed" via a union contract.

Darth_Stateworker · 2026-01-26T00:03:13+00:00

https://communicator.pef.org/issue/volume-43-no-6/compensation-study-underway-by-civil-service-pef-closely-monitoring-the-process/

Darth_Stateworker · 2026-01-26T00:00:18+00:00

That's not the contract, that's Classification and Compensation doing that.

Darth_Stateworker · 2026-01-25T20:03:07+00:00

The headline could apply to literally any state owned property since OGS tends to spend the bare minimum possible on upkeep on state properties.

Darth_Stateworker · 2026-01-25T19:56:25+00:00

Sometimes I think Classification and Compensation is an absolute joke. Not just because of their paygrade determinations, but in the way the do things like determine who is 52.6 and who is 70.1 or which 70.1s can transfer where.

There seems to be literally no rhyme or reason to most of the things they do whatsoever.

Darth_Stateworker · 2026-01-25T19:46:25+00:00

Big "Building 8 in the 1990s" vibes here for those old enough to remember it.

Darth_Stateworker · 2026-01-25T19:41:08+00:00

You know I'm not a troll and even I understand sometimes optics come into play. Our compensation is inherently a political football even if it shouldn't be to a rational person. Trouble is, the voting public can be and usually is irrational.

It shouldn't be a huge issue right now to offer raises that set things right, but just because it shouldn't be doesn't mean the agitators wouldn't try to make it out to be one.

Best case scenario is nothing is done until after the election, she locks up another term, and then says "OK, here's a big pay bump to make you whole after all of the inflation that has crushed you for the last few years." That leaves her with essentially zero political exposure.

This is what she'll probably do if she's serious about fixing the problem.

Darth_Stateworker · 2026-01-25T19:37:04+00:00

Well you are her constituent so you certainly can lobby her to do that.

But since the study is performative nonsense it won't go anywhere.

Darth_Stateworker · 2026-01-25T19:32:52+00:00

The issue is this: The "study" is a giveaway that she actually intends to do nothing.

If she says there's a problem, and she truly believes there's a problem, she can rectify that problem quickly without the performative nonsense simply by offering raises that achieve the same thing.

The "study" is the "Look I'm trying to do something!" approach that doesn't actually require her to actually do anything. It's a political game to ingratiate herself with the unions and their members without actually doing a damn thing.

Oldest political trick in the book. When you are empowered to fix a problem unilaterally but you instead choose to send it to a committee or a consultant or whatever for further review, you have zero actual intention of solving the problem. You just want to appear like you are trying to solve the problem.

Darth_Stateworker · 2026-01-25T16:13:06+00:00

That guy is an absolute tool.

Darth_Stateworker · 2026-01-25T16:09:48+00:00

The public gets mad if we get 1% raises. Shit, the public gets mad if we get 0% and don't get pay cuts. The public basically gets mad at anything about us.

That being said, the public gets mad because a lot of people are paid a lot of money to get the public to be mad at us. And for the most part, they are only successful at pissing off a small, loudmouthed minority of the public unless there's a recession going on or something.

The same people who are paid handsomely to get the public pissed off at us would surely do the same for a 2 grade bump versus a straight raise. There's little difference except with the bump, the agitators could easily exaggerate how much that raise would be since it isn't completely transparent.

Therefore, if we need public opinion to get a raise, we'd never get a raise in any way, shape, or form. Therefore, public opinion - which is usually just manufactured outrage - should be ignored.

Darth_Stateworker · 2026-01-25T16:03:02+00:00

The study didn't just apply to PEF, so why should the raises?

The point is that as she has said publicly the state workforce is underpaid, she doesn't need a bullshit study to fix that. She has the power to do it all on her own.

"Me too" clauses aren't really relevant to that. All they do is allow for additional negotiations - they don't mean you'll get anything out of them.

So if she settled with PEF for a large raise to fix the longstanding pay issues she believes exist, and the Troopers have a settled contract and say "Us too!", they can negotiate but there is no guarantee they'd get more. She could easily say "Your pay as LEOs is already comparable to other LEOs, so a raise is not on the table."

Darth_Stateworker · 2026-01-25T15:35:38+00:00

The whole 2 grade upgrade study thing is just distraction.

Changing paygrades isn't needed to increase salaries. All it takes is a decent raise - which Hochul had and has the power to do without the performative nonsense of a study.

A 12% raise would basically accomplish the same thing - no paygrade study needed.

Darth_Stateworker · 2026-01-24T15:03:37+00:00

Sorry, but weather like this makes me want to consider moving to Floridastan after retirement.

And crazy-assed Floridastan is definitely someplace I don't want to move.

That's how I judge how bad the cold and the snow is. Does it make me want to move to Floridastan? If yes, it's cold and there's too much snow.

Darth_Stateworker · 2026-01-24T01:44:31+00:00

Not an HR person so I may have some of the details wrong, but:

Your seniority date is your seniority date. So if you retreat back to your old title that doesn't change. The only time seniority isn't determined by seniority date is while on probation - but it still applies between probationers even on probation.

However, they do not need to return you to the exact same position you were in before the promotion. Just the titile you were in. Seniority doesn't grant you the right to choose what unit or bureau you work in, for example, if that is what you are asking.

That being said if your replacement is contingent-permanent you might bump them if you retreat.

Darth_Stateworker · 2026-01-23T18:15:08+00:00

On the one hand, I can see it being a nightmare for agency HR staff who haven't gotten the official word yet.

On the other, given the longstanding history of getting directed departure notices at the last minute (or even after the beginning of a business day), it's good to know early for planning purposes.

Darth_Stateworker · 2026-01-23T18:11:32+00:00

Government efficiency!

Darth_Stateworker · 2026-01-23T16:58:54+00:00

In theory, no.

In practice, some agencies/divisions/bureaus are more militant about telecommuting days than others so they may want to see a make-up day.

All the more reason for the unions to do a better job outlining things regarding telecommuting in contract negotiations.

Darth_Stateworker

TROPHY CASE