Study said N.J. has about $497 million in excess payroll
State workers heading home walk past the Statehouse in this file photo.TRENTON — Gov. Chris Christie wants to cut 1,300 workers from New Jersey state departments this year. But an analysis released this week by the chairman of Columbia University’s political science department suggests there’s far more fat to trim from all corners of state government.
Using a statistical model, the study said New Jersey’s state work force is bloated by at least 12 percent — or 19,000 workers — for a state with its characteristics, third-highest in the nation. It said the state has about $497 million in excess payroll.
“While (Christie’s) proposal has stirred up strong, organized opposition, our results suggest that if anything it is quite modest,” according to the study, which concludes New Jersey “stands out as the strongest candidate” among high-population states for pay cuts and layoffs.
The study was immediately blasted by state workers unions and praised by Republican lawmakers who support Christie’s call to lower the cost of state government.
John Huber, the study’s coauthor, said it was prompted by talks of cutting work forces in states across the nation.
“If states are contemplating balancing their budgets by making public-sector cuts, relative comparisons across states is a tractable way to think about which states are the strongest and weakest candidates for such cuts,” the study said.
The authors used variables such as population, economic activity, density, poverty and number of local public employees to predict the number of employees states should have.
Using this model, New Jersey’s work force would be 19,000 to 28,000 less than the actual 156,000 state workers counted in the 2008 U.S. Census. The Census data include workers in hospitals, universities, transit, police and prisons, and the legal system, among other areas.
Christie has proposed trimming 1,300 workers from the executive branch’s roughly 70,000 workers, which does not include areas such as state colleges and universities. A Christie spokesman declined to comment on the study.
The authors did not conclude why New Jersey’s pay and number of employees were higher than would be expected, speculating that strong public unions could lead to higher pay. They said New Jersey may have “made a conscious decision to use public-sector employment as a policy strategy for redressing inequality or helping disadvantaged groups.”
State worker union leaders said that omission is a major flaw in the study. Hetty Rosenstein, the state director of the Communications Workers of America, which represents 40,000 state workers, called the study “stupid” because it didn’t go deeper and compare services states provide.
“Without looking at the details, it would be very difficult to determine if you’re always comparing apples to apples,” she said, citing areas such as prisons, psychiatric facilities and child protective services. “The question is, do you want to provide the services, and what kind of society we have and what kind of society are we? … I don’t think anyone can honestly say that we are overstaffed.”
State Sen. Michael Doherty (R-Warren) said he uses studies like this to make his case for cutting workers.
“You need to run the state of New Jersey by comparing it to other states, and you have to ask yourself, ‘Gee, why is it always more expensive in New Jersey than other states?’ ” he said. “I think it’s indefensible.”
One of the factors in predicting the baseline for New Jersey was the number of local workers. States were expected to have fewer workers if there were many workers at the local level.
Joseph Seneca, a public policy and economics professor at Rutgers University, said the state’s work force in New Jersey needs to be looked at in conjunction with the local work force to have real meaning. “If the issue is to look at the size of the public sector that’s supported by the tax base within the state … then an examination … of total state and local government employment would be more appropriate,” he said.
New Jersey trailed New Mexico and Alaska in the percentage of “excess workers.”
The study ranked New Jersey 10th on the list of “excess public pay,” which was topped by Iowa.