655
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 17 Jul 2026
655 points (100.0% liked)
politics
30843 readers
1875 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
So then why did he appoint people who would recommend this?
City Council is all elected, not appointed.
I think the person you're replying to was responding to this bit from the article:
The fuck do you expect me to do. I can't read
As far as I understand it, this is probably not a pay raise. The news says that it would be the first raise since 2016. If you look at the inflation of USA, you can see that $100 in 2016 are $138 today. So if you raise it by 18%, you have not even covered the inflation.
Bro, no common workers raises are meeting inflation rates.
I looked up their salaries and they seem plenty even by NYC standards. So a pay cut doesn't seem like a big problem to me.
I'm open to hearing why this was needed but so far I haven't seen a good reason for it.
Did you look up the policy around increasing salaries? Because I can guarantee you there’s a policy for civil servants that either pegs salaries to inflation or pegs it to comparable wages in similar positions.
So the people who he hired went to apply existing policy, and he said “no.” And they said “OK.”
All seems perfectly reasonable to me. Salaries need to keep up with inflation when there’s no disposable income. At his level, there’s already plenty of disposable income, and he’s independently wealthy.
Basically the city council is catching up on backlog and the last two mayors had a mandate to convene a pay commission and failed to do so. Mamdani and the person who led the commission both declined the raise but moved it forward. I honestly think they're trying to clean up house and a pay raise after 10 years isn't crazy. This comes after they already addressed the budget deficit he inherited, passed the luxury second home tax and cut out almost 2 billion dollars of expenses iirc.
When I got to leadership at work, the first year I reviewed the budget, interviewed employees for their long term career goals, helped make them annual goals to get there and quarterly coaching check ins. Recommended raises for everyone who was underpaid and or promotions for all who earned it or were already assuming the responsibilities without the title. Everyone got COLA and everyone got a bonus tied to kpi. I know public sector is different but a good leader makes sure people are taken care of. One of the most expensive cities in the world going 10 years without addressing the pay is crazy. Its all officials even city attorneys who could leave and make double at any corporate firm in ny
Always one of you.
New York City council members are elected, not appointed, unless I'm missing the joke.
This was a recommendation from a commission which as I understand was appointed by Mamdani. Obviously he doesn't have total control over them but it seems he would at least have a lot of influence.
Why would he try to influence them? Why go through the process of selecting a commission just to push them to make every decision like he would?