Carroll Commencement
Fairborn commencement
Badin graduation
Ellen Belcher is the Dayton Daily News opinion pages editor. She writes about state government, education, the environment, higher education and all things Dayton.
Martin Gottlieb is an editorial writer and columnist for the Dayton Daily News opinion pages. He focuses on the political process itself and does such national issues as war, the economy, taxes and Social Security, as well as a hodge-podge of local and state issues.Home > Blogs > A Matter of Opinion > Archives > 2009 > December > 06
Sunday, December 6, 2009
Editorial: Dayton’s pay plan sets wrong example
Maybe Dayton’s perks to its top-ranking managers made sense once upon a time. But those days are gone.
Recently, City Manager Tim Riordan suspended contributions to what’s called the “Executive Savings Plan.”
Currently, 17 managers are part of a program whereby they accrue money — the equivalent of a day’s pay for every month worked — in an account that is set aside and can be emptied out only when they leave.
There also are other deposits — an initial payment of a week’s pay upon becoming a manager, as well as a buyout of unused vacation pay and portions of unused sick pay if an executive is promoted from within.
Then, when the manager leaves, he or she receives a payout that may not exceed a year’s pay.
The benefit has resulted in significant checks being written to exiting employees.
Since 2005, a total of $1 million has been dispersed to 17 persons. Meanwhile, the city is carrying a liability that totals almost an equal amount for 17 other employees who will be due money when they quit or retire.
Mr. Riordan, who left a job with Dayton in 1998, received $87,019.
The reason to discontinue the plan is not that it’s ridiculously rich. Rather, the problem is that it masks what people are really being paid.
Transparency should be the operating principle in public employment. No, the pay plan is not a secret; all payments, in the end, are public. But who’s kidding whom?
This money is off-the-books in an important way because it isn’t reflected as compensation unless a person knows to ask about it.
It’s this sort of arrangement that makes the public suspicious of government, and public employee unions suspicious of their bosses. Both groups wonder what else isn’t apparent or being disclosed.
The practice is right up there with the retire-rehire gig that is becoming so common in public service, wherein public employees quit their jobs, begin collecting their pensions, and then are hired back to their old job or possibly a different public position.
Those cushy financial arrangements, too, might or might not be known.
At a time when taxpayers are being told that governments are hurting as never before, exposure of these sorts of deals breeds cynicism that’s corrosive to public confidence.
Incidentally, Dayton employees who aren’t considered executives also have their own generous exit payout plan. Upon leaving the city, they can convert portions of their accrued unused sick time and vacation they’ve carried over from previous years to cash.
It’s possible to walk away with six months of pay for sick time and vacation you never used.
There is, and always will be, a subset of people who will be against government — and taxes — no matter what.
But there are at least two other kinds of people who contest that view:
One large group believes government is good and necessary and is competent more often than not.
And there’s a third group that’s open-minded, willing to believe that when government officials say they’re financially pressed, they really mean it.
Ensuring that salaries are exactly as they seem is important to these open-minded people.
One of the justifications for Dayton’s executive pay plan is that other employees who have been on the job for long periods can get up to 32 days of vacation, while managers max out at 20.
It’s telling that that argument is being articulated. Of course, managers are going to want as much in the way of benefits as the rank-and-file receive, especially when there’s this kind of disparity in time off.
But if managers are going to justify their perks based on amazing deals they (or managers before them) have cut with unions, we’re in a deep and vicious cycle.
Nobody is going to be inclined to give up anything — even benefit packages and pay packages that are out of line with the private sector or simply unaffordable.
A suspension isn’t the right approach. The plan has to go — permanently.
Permalink | Comments (14) | Post your comment | Categories: City of Dayton, Editorials, Ellen Belcher
