Commission Impossible

This is an April Fool's joke right?
How many of those jobs require a 4-year college degree?

I know money isn't everything, but all the years I spent in school sure is making me look stupid right now.

TJ,

Any ideas where the budget problem is coming from? I just summed up the over-time pay column and it equaled $2.8 million for 2006. That's half the "structural deficit" problem.

Maybe Wahl should propose an over-time freeze?

Lon

Lon,

I don't think I can afford to waste any more time at the city financial budget meetings anymore.

http://www.indeed.com/salary?q1=firefighter&l1=Beverly+Hills%2C+CA

Lon,

I know they said that it is cheaper to work public safety employees overtime than hire new ones because of the benefits package. Do you have any information on what percentage the overtime has to get to regular time before it makes sense to hire another public safety employee?
I guess what i am asking is, can overtime exceed regular time and still be saving the city money?

Are benefits the problem?

Did the public safety unions bankrupt our city?

Is there any information how much in union dues we pay compared to other cities?

Is Jimmy Hoffa really dead?

As noted by Dan Nguyen-Tan, the city of Chico released 2006 salary information because the Enterprise-Record filed a public records request under the California open-records law.

Sincerely,
Ryan Olson
Enterprise-Record

Wheres the Merrit Pay List?

Lon,

First, don't mistake my comments for not appreciating what our public safety personnel do, but I have a few questions that don't make sense to me. The difference between the police and fire pay structures seems to be a bit wide.

Is 19 Fire Captains for a town the size of Chico excessive? Why do 25 fire fighters have to work an average of $11,949 of OT just to reach an average total pay of $61,692, when the 19 fire captains are at a total regular and OT average of $119,126?

As I said, please don't think I don't believe they deserve the pay for the job, they do, but looking at these figures obviously show there is something wrong with the system. Do I think this is the problem with the budget? Not completely, but left unaddressed, it could be in the future.

TJ,

Do you have any information on what percentage the overtime has to get to regular time before it makes sense to hire another public safety employee? I guess what i am asking is, can overtime exceed regular time and still be saving the city money?

I'm not "in the know" as far as how benfits are calculated, so assume this is just a surface level understanding. You can also assume that different unions may have negotiated different agreements. But here's my impression.

Retirement benefits are calculated from gross wages, which include overtime pay. Public safety employees contribute 9% of pay to retirement benefits, but the city has negotiated to pay 7% of that amount, leaving a 2% contribution by the employees. The employees do not pay taxes on the 7% of their contribution the city pays. Other benefits, like life insurance and medical may have fixed costs.

But high percentages of overtime pay suggest that the City is paying more retirement benefits per hour worked than they pay for regular hourly pay.

I've heard that $0.62 / dollar of wages is what the city pays for public safety benefits. If that is a fixed number then fewer employees and more overtime pay would be less efficient than more employees and less overtime.

Are benefits the problem?

Yes and no. Statewide public safety employees are receiving similar benefits. They are much higher than the private sector. One police officer pointed out to me that a 40 year old officer still has to wrestle down a 25 year old drunk. As far as the police are concerned they stand a greater chance of injury than other occupations, and probably warrant higher benefits.

But that doesn't erase the fact that the City of Chico has bought into these agreements and we cannot afford them.

Did the public safety unions bankrupt our city?

No. These pay agreements were negotiated by city management that are not part of the public safety unions. They were agreed to by the City Manager and approved by the City Council. The unions did what unions are supposed to do, which is negotiate increased pay for their members.

The City Council did not do what they were supposed to do, which is look after the financial well-being of the entire community. That includes the 25% raise over the next 6 years that the fire fighters recently completed negotiating. I'm not blaming the existing council, or the liberal majority, for these contracts. It goes back a ways. Contributing factors include national and state economic impacts.

It is not the public safety unions who are saying that reduced pay, reduced benefits, employee cuts, hiring freezes, or dramatic changes in our Police and Fire Departments should not be part of the budget solution. I doubt they would say that, but those opinions are coming from others.

Is there any information how much in union dues we pay compared to other cities?

No. But it is interesting that the City deducts dues payments from union members and writes the check directly to those unions. As far as I can tell the City is putting money directly into union Political Action Committees that work to elect officials that will put more money into the PACs through increases in compensation. I haven't looked at the election documents lately but I do think at least one PAC had contribtions directly from the union.

Is Jimmy Hoffa really dead?

You got me.

Lon

Todd,

My hope would be that information like this will create a public conversation that answers your questions. To date that discussion has not occurred.

The answers to your questions relate to negotiated staffing requirements made between the fire department and the city management in years past. Some discussion needs to occur over the need for those staffing levels.

Lon

Is there any end in sight? (I mean besides the end where the City finally goes belly up or the end where Chico residents are paying for public employees' private vacation islands in the Bahamas.)

I am no whiz at this kind of stuff, and I agree with others that fire and police deserve decent pay, but this seems far and above what should be expected (although I confess I had to smile when I noted that an attorney is at the top of the list).

The City Council is very aware of these figures. Why they are afraid to act willfully against this overexpenditure is beyond me. There are more regular folks living in Chico who vote than there are public employees.

Lon, you mentioned that you hoped this would create a public discussion of the issue. I agree to a point. It's important for people to participate in public life and public discourse, but in defense of the average person, many simply don't have time to follow everything. We elect City Council members to protect us physically (through police and fire) and financially, and we expect that they will do their job without constant hand-holding and admonishments. It's not easy serving the public through sitting on the Council, I know, and folks who serve on the Council are to be commended for what they have taken on, but they must take tough positions from time to time even when there are uniformed people in the audience showing their support for fiscally unsound positions.

What an incredible list!

It seems that the fire department would be well served by hiring more fire captains, or spreading their workload out. How can a man who works 70 hours a week every single week be efficient? Is this an accident waiting to happen? The City should have an absolute maximum amount of available overtime per year that would prevent burnout and address the employee safety issues associated with burnout.

It also appears that Chico has a top heavy management structure.

Shatzi,

In my opinion the public discussions are leading to a request for a tax increase. I think there will also be a request for a public bond to pay for the police station that appears to be $23 million short of funding. Maybe there is other funding and I'm just unaware of it.

The information I posted is on the "volatile" side of things. But I think it is in keeping with the importance of public awareness on our budget issues, and definitely meets the desire expressed by our leaders to educate the public.

Lon

Ryan,

Hats off to the ER for making the request. The document was widely distributed by the time I posted it.

Lon

I just had a side conversation regarding benefits and how they are calculated. I was told that it is likely that the retirement benefit payments are not calculated using gross total pay, but more likely on regular pay.

If that's the case, and when you include training and human resources costs, it would be more fiscally sensible to have overtime versus additional employees.

Therefore, I don't know for a fact whether overtime or additional employees is more efficient. I think the city should produce a document that describes the transition point where it makes most sense to hire new people, versus overworking the people you have.

Lon

Two things jump out when looking at the OT earnings table.

First, 22 of the top 25 OT wage earners are fire department employees. Second, 12 of the 19 fire captains are in the top 25 OT earners.

The fire department OT system appears to be in need of adjustment.

I received an email from Jennifer Hennessy the Finance Director for the City of Chico. She runs the Finance Department. She wanted to clarify how benefits are calculated for public safety employees and is aware that I am posting her comments.

Before I post her email I want to point out that while public safety employees receive the highest benefits in Chico, the other City employees are not far behind. In fact I think only the PERS contributions change (if I'm wrong I hope I get another email).

Email from Jennifer Hennessy
Lon -

In response to your blog today, I wanted to offer some further insight/confirmation to you and your readers about the benefits structure for Public Safety.

1) Overtime pay does not contribute to an employee's retirement, nor does overtime increase a person's retirement benefit. PERS (Public Employee Retirement System) is only applied to "regular pay", meaning straight time, plus some smaller specialty pay assignments (ie. Detectives, School Resource Officer, Hazmat).

2) The Benefits rate for a Public Safety employee is approx. 62%, comprised of the following:
PERS (Retirement) = 38% for Police (fully paid by City)
PERS (Retirement = 35.2% for Fire (Fire pays 2% of their contribution)see note below
Workers Comp = 7%
*Life Insurance = 0.4%
*FICA - Medical = 3%
*State Unemployment Insurance = 0.1% Medical/Dental/Vision Insurance (flat rate) = approx. $800/month/employee
Long-Term-Disability (flat rate) = approx. $16-20/month/employee
Trust Contribution (flat rate) = approx. $200/month/employee (PD) or $250/month/employee (Fire)

* = benefits that apply to overtime (approx. 10%)

3) So, this leads to the question of whether overtime is "cheaper" than hiring a new employee. The $ for $ answer is that it is basically a push (because OT is paid at time & a half plus benefits of 10%). In the long run however, related costs, such as increased workers comp and disability should be factored into the overtime equation.

Hope that helps. Feel free to let me know if you have any further questions.

Thanks,
Jennifer

Note from Lon added 11/11/07: In an earlier comment I mentioned that 9% is contributed for retirement. This is the employee contribution. For the IAFF 7% of the 9% is paid by the city. So the employee contribution of the 35.2% for fire is reduced from 9% to 2%, with 33.2% paid by the employer.

Your Beverly Hills Fire can't be accurate see below,

http://www.indeed.com/salary?q1=firefighter&l1=chico%2C+ca

Wow, I never would have believed this morning's ER article if I hadn't already seen it on yesterday's Commission Impossible!

Now I'm afraid I'm on the Fire Dept's "Friend of Lon, Just Let 'er Burn" List. I'm keeping my fire extinguisher with me everywhere from now on.

Brian, (and I guess TJ who posted the first link to that job page).

I didn't think that page was representative of fire fighter pay.

Here are more accurate examples.

Sacramento fire fighter:
http://www.911hotjobs.com/find-a-job/show-details.asp?id=759&page=

It shows a firefighter in Sacramento $63K-$76K. There are a couple of points that should be made. There are probably more than 1 structure fire per week in Sacramento, and the job description doesn't mention $20K+ in overtime pay.

Here's a Roseville fire fighter/Paramedic job ~72K
http://www.911hotjobs.com/find-a-job/show-details.asp?id=3377&page=

And here's a Vacaville help wanted...
Job Title: Firefighter/Paramedic
Closing Date/Time: Mon. 11/26/07 5:00 PM Pacific Time
Salary: $7,094.00 - $8,623.00 monthly
$85,128.00 - $103,476.00 annually

Job Type: Full-Time
Location: Various Facilities, Vacaville, California

The Problem with examples:
Unions point to other communities and the pay they receive and say "me too". They use comparisons to justify raises.

It would be great if I could tell my clients that I need to be paid as much as an engineer in S.F. that charges more than I do. Instead, if I want the business he has I may have to charge less.

Regardless of what Sacramento, Roseville, Vacaville pay their employees Chico has a specific funding capacity based on its population and tax income. To think we can spend more than we have, because other communities pay better wages is fiscally irresponsible.

Lon

Gregg,

From now on I'm carrying a polaski and 4 buckets of water wherever I go. I've also switched the address number on my house with my neighbor. Sucks to be him.

Lon

Lon, Gregg, Brian, et al,

I should apologize for the link to B. Hills. I was raging pissed at the wages spreadsheet and I had a couple beers in me too.

All my first posts were in the first few minutes of reading the spreadsheet. I hate it when people link to bad information on the internet and I just did it myself.

The next morning I did the same thing Gregg did and looked up Chico's firefighter's from the same link and found little difference. I was embarrassed, but I figured that maybe Lon really does only have 7 regular readers and I could pull it off without anyone calling me out.

I am still pissed, but definitely more rational. I didn't mean for the conversation to get hi-jacked into talking about whether or not sources are accurate. I didn't intend to misdirect the central theme of the conversation. I hate it when that happens too.

That being said, I was wondering if there wasn't also a problem that there are very many lower ranking employees making more money than their bosses. In a male dominated career environment I don't really see that happening for long before the bosses start demanding more money. I undrstand that overtime and regular are different working situations.

Would a lower ranking firefighter ever turn down promotion to management (salary positions with no overtime) because they were making more at the lower rank and could count on the overtime carrying them over the top? Even if that is not happening yet, it looks like it could and that should be a sign that we are looking at our map upside-down. Are we losing firefighters in management positions going to other cities because that is the fastest way for them to get promoted to a higher pay level faster?

Is this like free agent sports athletes that jump from franchise to franchise seeking higher wages. I keep hearing that public service employees are leaving because of burn-out. Is that because of the physical demands of overtime or is it because of the better-pay-for-same-job mentality?

Is it that physically demanding to put out the average of one fire a week that they are getting burned out because of it? If they responded to less paramedic calls would they be less burned-out?

I am thinking that when we vote for pay raises for the public services sector we are not appreciating that that is (eventually) a vote for everyone up the ladder too. Do we really understand how much of an impact a small raise for the little guy on the chain has to the entire chain of employees and to the overall budget?

I am just pissed because as an architect I work in the private-side of public service and I have to adjust my fees to the community that I choose to live in.

I pay a big price to live in this community and I am realizing there are others living next door to me that don't have to. That is really just a personal problem of mine and I will get over it.

If a Chico firefighter moves to a community with a higher cost of living do their wages adjust upwards accordingly? So, the Chico firemen that are leaving here after getting trained are making even more money as you get closer to the bigger cities?

Are firefighters subject to prevailing wage zones?

Does the routine use of overtime change the nature of their job descriptions to make it more sense to call those hours that are expected as part of the normal course of the job and should be treated by paying salaries instead of by the hour? The police and fire chiefs have no overtime but I am sure they put in more than 40 per week and they have to respond on-call as well.

Could that be what is hurting all the rest of these small cities in the state too? Are they paying big city prices for small town services?

I think that is an old argument here in Chico. The one about paying too much money to get and keep good help, the Chet Francisco (school superintendent), and Greg Jones (city manager) and hospital CEO problem.

I think that was where I was originally going with the link to Beverly Hills.

Lon, I know I am probably asking more questions than you have answers, so don't feel compelled to answer them. My goal is to start asking more questions and providing less opinion. And stop drinking beer before reading your blogs.

TJ,

Those are a lot of questions. Just let me know when you're drinking beer and I'll try to publish my blogs shortly before that. But honestly, I don't think your reaction is much different than anybody else.

Three Fire Captains earning more than the Police Chief, is that right? One earning more than the Fire Chief, is that right? Logging 4500 hours in one year, which is a 90 hour week, can that even happen?

There seems to be something wrong with the pay system, specifically regarding the Fire Department, and more specfifically the Fire Captains. Everyone at the city has been aware of these numbers, and it has never been discussed as a problem. There was one suggestion of a reduction in fire overtime pay by $300,000-$400,000, but the Fire Chief says it's not workable. So what is going on?

I'm sure there is some information that will explain some of the overtime costs, and valid reasons for some of it. But the fact that nobody has mentioned this before leaves me wondering if anyone is really looking out for the taxpayer.

Lon

Lon,

The top paid Fire Captain worked a total of 4511 hours last year. Dividing that up by 52 weeks in a year is 86 hour work weeks for the whole year. That is without calculating any vacations or PTO even.

Working 86 hour work weeks is tolerable once in a while, but every week of the year? I am sure some weeks were less and some were even more. How sharp do you think that guy is on the job after that kind of routine over time? Are we setting him up for an on the job accident?

Are we managing our available resources well? I would think that the bulk of overtime hours could be projected out a year ahead of time and they would spread the load out amongst all of them, but there is pretty large disparity in the overtime hours for each individual.

Are we allowing that guy to burn himself out early? Are the unions ok with that?

Something's not making sense with the physical side of these overtime figures.

When you talk to the IAFF person maybe you can ask him about that?

TJ,

Nobody worked 86 hours each week. I'm not sure how the shifts are defined, I think 24 hours, but I'm sure much of that time was staffing the station. So working out, training, cleaning, sleeping, eating, watching TV, etc.

Some of that overtime was reimburable to the city (by the state or fed. govts.) because the employee was fighting a fire out of town. But even when that happens, another fire fighter has to cover the guys in-town job, creating overtime costs that are not reimbursable.

I've heard the E-R is writing a story. Maybe they'll have some answers. I think they've had this information since last Friday.

Lon

TJ, Lon
Regarding the question of 86 hr work weeks, I think what you have to realize (sort of like Lon already pointed out) is that fire employees work and get paid 24 hrs a day. . .my step brother used to do this. . so if he went on a fire out of town for say 10 days, that would be 240 hrs, most of overtime. Or a straight 7 day week, that would be a 168hr work week. If they are in their home Chico stations they work a 24 hr day, then off a couple, then on 1. So working 2 out of 7 days is a 48 hr work week. Make sense? I still wouldnt know how to figure out statistics either though.

So do we pay $87k a year (base pay scale) for a Fire Captain to work 2 days a week?

And the rest of the week is overtime?

I think this is the work schedule that Chico's firefighters have.

- - -

Many fire departments consist of three platoons of firefighters who works shifts of 24-hours. Their work schedule is a consistent rotation of 24-hour days on-duty and 24-hour days off-duty.

Example 1: X=on-duty, O=off-duty, XOXOXOOOO=a three platoon, 9-day rotation with a 4-day break which makes an average of 56 hours per week.

Example 2: ABC=shift letters for 3 platoons, ACABABCBC=the same 9-day rotation with a 4-day break which makes an average of 56 hours per week.

One possible reason for the huge overtime numbers. One of my close friends in another local valley city is a firefighter.

When a call went out for station coverage due to multiple incidents simultaneously, he would rush to the station to provide coverage in case of another call out.

Sometimes he would be there for 10-15 minutes, sometimes for a couple of hours or so. Regardless of actual time spent working, he was provided with I believe it was 4 hours of OT pay. As a result he would respond every time his pager went off, because 90% of the time he would be back off work in a half hour and would have 4 hours of OT pay in the mail...

Perhaps Chico has a similar system and makes the seemingly impossible OT hours possible?

Can someone from Chico Fire please just explain why there are such high numbers...

Also I just don't understand how our fire personel are paid more the our police. If you compare the percentage of "work" hours that are spent providing actual service to the public, the police would be far higher. Our graveyard shift of police do not get to sleep until a call comes out.

Brian,

People from the fire department do read this blog. If they don't want to respond, for whatever reason I'll call someone at the department on Monday to ask some questions.

If anyone has specific questions please post them.

I agree with your premise that police should earn more than fire. I think they do work harder, and spend more of their work day perfroming the actions they are trained for. I find it troubling that three fire captains and even the fire chief earned more than our police chief.

I think it comes down to politics and union effectiveness.

Lon

Lon,

I would not say that our Police work harder. I would just say that the Police officers have a job which requires them to work harder a greater percentage of their time "working". I have seen first hand how hard our fire fighters work when called upon.

Part of me really does not understand overtime pay. I have only worked in professions as a salaried employee and have always had to work the number of hours required to complete my job responsibilities. If someone else was sick they or I would just cover the slack for the sake of the greater good. If we had a large project we worked more hours to get it completed. I did not get paid extra for having to work extra to fulfill my job description. I sure wish I could have received OT pay for the last 10 years of working 60 hours a week for my 40 hour a week job...

I am assuming Fire personnel don't start accruing OT until after a 56 hour work week? Or do we pay them 16 hours a week of OT automatically?

B

I've been told the the position of Police Sergeant is the equivalent to Fire Captain. With overtime it looks like the PD make roughly $28,000 less when those positions are compared.

Lon