Thursday, August 04, 2022

Agenda posted for Joplin City Council work session



Anonymous said...

Please define equity.

Anonymous said...

See, THIS is why these dopes have NO clue about how to solve our financial problems. A little too much focus on the racist shadow of "equity". All 9 need to be tossed out on their ears and asses.

Anonymous said...

Hey bigoted moron at 10:32 - it’s a salary study. Has nothing to do with you being triggered about race.

Anonymous said...

Equal pay for equal work. Job description and pay comparisons

Anonymous said...


Equality of opportunity means that discrimination on the basis of race or sex, or national origin, or religion is illegal.
We already have these laws.
Equality of treatment is the same, individuals must be treated fairly and not differently based on the same criteria above. We all support this.
Federal and State law already. Joplin does well with this effort, as compared to many cities I have lived in.

Equity means equal outcomes.
This means that race differences and sex differences may not result in a disparate result.
First you analyze the workforce by race and sex.
Then you search for differences, and then you label them as disparate outcomes.
Example: Joplin has 10% of race xyz, therefore why do you have only 2% of race xyz among your city employees? Racism and sexism is claimed. Hiring on the basis of quotas must be considered, folks from the HR and other communities will say. This is wrong, IMHO.

Remember, for the Biden admin. you do not have to be guilty of discrimination, only that a disparate impact has resulted.
Once you have a study that shows disparate impact, then the door is open to 'solutions.'
These are usually lawsuits, and in comes the specialists in filing them, and an IDE (inclusion, diversity and equity) czar must be appointed to oversee hiring practices to increase race and sex inclusion,and monitor mandatory re-education courses.

That is what is happening here with this study.

Usual fee by these consultants is about 30--50 thousand dollars, about what it would take to hire two police officers.

That is the trade off here made by the city manager and the council when they approved this expenditure. I just think that is a bad decision.

Give me 2 officers of any race or sex instead.

That is what the council should have done. Now they have to nip this process in the bud at this work session and table the study and request time to understand it and the implications, and who authorized it and supports it.

Anonymous said...

Scuttlebutt has it that the work session now is stating that the 'Equity Study' is about re-aligning jobs within classes and classifications.
If so then the word to use is 'parity', not equity, which is instituting equality of outcomes for individuals within a job classification for certain racial, sex, or privileged/underprivileged defined groups. For equity the basis is 'social justice' and re-alignment based on that premise.
Parity is the correct word to use if that is not their intent.
Watch out for the 72 cents on the dollar myth between men and women workers: if they state that this has been debunked. Men tend to work more dangerous jobs, with more weather stress, outdoor environments, and so on, and tend to request more overtime and added job assignments.
Women workers tend to have child care needs and tend to pursue office jobs and avoid extra overtime so they can balance families and work. Tend to, is the key phrase. Individuals vary of course. When the studies are done and allow for those variables there is no pay disparity.

Anonymous said...

The grapevine also is alive with this:
The work session and next council meeting will address raising the new Joplin city tax levy.
A very quick addition to the agenda. Aug 15 for comments, final adoption 8/22. Very very accelerated timeline.

This will be an increase above present levels and is a multiplier upon property taxes.
See your recent property tax statement.
You take your assessed value, divide by 100 and multiply by the Joplin levy, now about 4.98% or a 4.98 multiplier. They want it to go up.

Tues. was the tax proposal rejection.
On Fri. (2 days later) now we have the tax levy elevation officially discussed.
This means that this is plan B. It is happening too fast to be otherwise.
And it was always known as plan B when they were promoting the new property tax proposal.
When asked by citizens, 'what is plan B?' they said 'we have none.'
The police and fire union heads, Mr. Edwards, and council members all said this.

Now we could reasonably assume that was not fully correct or an honest answer.

Raising the levy is plan B and always was.
Our leaders were not transparent.

Now ask yourself this question: if plan B was always available as a backstop to raise the levy, why even ask the voters for the property tax elevation, as they did with the SAFER campaign?
They knew the levy elevation would work but they asked for the added tax on Tuesday
anyway. And put us through all that emotional process, and division among citizens.
Wow, and wow, and more wow.