Retired Police Captain Cashes Unused Sick Leave for $115,900
“One of the unaccounted-for expenditures from the city’s general fund this year was a lump sum payment to a police captain who retired and cashed in 2,240 hours of unused sick leave for $115,900. The benefit, which allows staff to convert unused sick leave into an annuity, was originally instituted to discourage employees from taking unnecessary time off. It caps at one year for the rank and file but is unlimited for managers and supervisors. “These are big numbers that are kind of hidden,” said Councilmember Bendy White.”
It has been almost a year exactly since a similar story was written about the accumulated vacation hours of our Elected County
TUESDAY, AUGUST 23, 2011
Vacation pay raises questions Santa Barbara Elected Officials cash out $100,000 under county program
http://www.thedailysound.com/vacation pay
Vacation pay raises questions Santa Barbara Elected Officials cash out $100,000 under county program
http://www.thedailysound.com/vacation pay
Vacation pay raises questions
Elected cash out $100,000 under county program
By COLBY FRAZIER — Jan. 12, 2010
Elected cash out $100,000 under county program
By COLBY FRAZIER — Jan. 12, 2010
The Independent story leaves a lot to be desired, so let’s start at the beginning and try to fully understand the issue at hand. I think you will need this document for starters located at the link below.
CITY OF SANTA BARBARA
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA
TO: Mayor and Councilmembers
FROM: City Administrator’s Office
2010-2012 Police Management Memorandum Of Understanding
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA
TO: Mayor and Councilmembers
FROM: City Administrator’s Office
2010-2012 Police Management Memorandum Of Understanding
Once again the public has some strong opinions about all of this
Comments
Now I believe that this is a perk. I've heard of these types of muddied perks before and even in the private sector. But "incentives" are a corporate inspired perk and in the case of improperly used 'sick time' abuses can be ferreted out and backed up with disciplinary action. The SBPD deserves the wages and benefits negotiated in good faith for the compensation for the work performed and to compensate for the cost of living but this is compensation for work not performed.
If the "one year" cap had applied to this guy, it still wouldn't have changed the total payout much.
........ the captain just got what the union negotiated for it's members in their contract with the city .... city leadership caving into the unrealistic demands of a union
This is absolutely outrageous. Sick leave should be actually that and it should not be able to be converted into dollars when the employee or former employee is not sick! Don McD is absolutely right: this is payment for work not received.
Sure, these numbers are hidden, but, Bendy White, what are you going to do about it? You're up for re-election and if ever there were a time to stand up for the voters in this city, this is your time.
(Why is this former public employee receiving public monies not named? If he stopped a thief, he'd be named; to some this is taking from the public treasury and he should be named.)
The caving was perhaps following the conservative mantra that government should act like a business, i.e. perks or compensation for doing nothing. That golf club and cocktail corporate model has been transplanted into the worldwide American psyche. Just look at Botany as an example.
This manipulation of the system has absolutely got to stop. Someone has got to stand up to the unions that are responsible foir this type of abuse to happen in the first place. ENOUGH!
Way to go JOEY!
Don't blame the retiree. He used a benefit to which he was entitled. Usually sick leave is not a vested benefit in the corporate work world i.e. you are not entitled to the money if you don't use the time. But some companies do pay out as dollars to encourage employees to NOT use sick leave. That is other risk: employees taking the time so as not to "lose it". The union environment is a very difficult one in which to manage. Disciplining union employees for what may appear to be unwarranted use of sick time can be very difficult. Most companies have combined sick/vacation time. That way if the employee wants time off, it doesn't matter the reason. And every company I've seen has a cap on the number of time off hours one can bank. But again, in a government union environment...
Don, our watchdog against union excess and waste. Now that's funny stuff!
I don't see anything wrong with what he did.
Thanks, Don. Coming from you, I'll take that as a compliment. At least I don't depend on the government to take care of me. I'm one of those productive people that actually funds the government, but Don thinks I'm the enemy.
Don't like this. Then the city should not agree for such unlimited cash-out provisions to be in the contract for managers bargaining unit, which is up for approval any week now.
At the same time, recognize that employees close to retirement may be "sick" quite a lot in order to expend the hours not subject to the cash-out limit. Pay then or pay later.
Awesome, I got a comment removed! Is this the work of the POA I wonder? Well now lets see, doesn't he get half his salary or all of it for the rest of his life too? I am sure none of us would have turned it down, but isn't that close to a teachers salary that we are laying off for two years? LAME!!!
Anti-Union folks get your facts straight first. This guy is not part of an actual Public Employee's union. He is part of a Police Management group that is very similar to the other Management group in the City, and that if you read their contracts, you would find that they give themselves very generous perks. The actual Unions that do exist at the City have much more modest terms. The management groups are often overlooked (and they like it that way.) At the end of the game though...it's all being paid out from CalPers
I don't think most people are anti-union. Unions have done great things for the American worker. I do think most Americans are anti Public Employee Union. Public Employee unions goals are against the interest of the public in general. The conflict of interest between those elected by the public and unions representing those employed by the public can't possibly be resolved.
Almost exactly a year ago a similar story was written about our Elected County
TUESDAY, AUGUST 23, 2011
Vacation pay raises questions Santa Barbara Elected Officials cash out $100,000 under county program
http://www.thedailysound.com/vacation pay
Vacation pay raises questions Santa Barbara Elected Officials cash out $100,000 under county program
http://www.thedailysound.com/vacation pay
Vacation pay raises questions
Elected cash out $100,000 under county program
By COLBY FRAZIER — Jan. 12, 2010
Whether they went on vacation or not, five elected officials in Santa Barbara County government accepted more than $100,000 combined in vacation payouts over the last four years, raising questions about how such benefits accumulate and are subsequently deducted from elected leaders who answer to no time clock.
Since 2006, the district attorney, clerk-recorder and assessor, auditor-controller, sheriff and treasurer-tax collector have been allowed to accumulate and be paid for 80 hours of vacation each year.
But unlike all other county employees, chief executive included, who are supposed make note of the vacation they take so it can be docked from the amount they’ve accumulated, elected leaders have no such obligation. They receive payment for 80 hours of unused vacation regardless of how much they actually used.
During each of the last four years, county documents show that Auditor-Controller Bob Geis, Clerk-Recorder and Assessor Joe Holland and Treasure-Tax Collector Bernice James each accepted a cash payment of $6,919 for 80 hours of vacation time — the maximum amount that can be paid out each year to managers.
Sheriff Bill Brown, who was elected in 2006, received $7,254 checks during the last two years, and District Attorney Christie Stanley has accepted three annual payments of $6,895 for her vacation.
County officials said the vacation payouts are made in order to give elected department heads “equivalent” benefits to their appointed counterparts, who have long been paid for unused vacation time.
Elected cash out $100,000 under county program
By COLBY FRAZIER — Jan. 12, 2010
Whether they went on vacation or not, five elected officials in Santa Barbara County government accepted more than $100,000 combined in vacation payouts over the last four years, raising questions about how such benefits accumulate and are subsequently deducted from elected leaders who answer to no time clock.
Since 2006, the district attorney, clerk-recorder and assessor, auditor-controller, sheriff and treasurer-tax collector have been allowed to accumulate and be paid for 80 hours of vacation each year.
But unlike all other county employees, chief executive included, who are supposed make note of the vacation they take so it can be docked from the amount they’ve accumulated, elected leaders have no such obligation. They receive payment for 80 hours of unused vacation regardless of how much they actually used.
During each of the last four years, county documents show that Auditor-Controller Bob Geis, Clerk-Recorder and Assessor Joe Holland and Treasure-Tax Collector Bernice James each accepted a cash payment of $6,919 for 80 hours of vacation time — the maximum amount that can be paid out each year to managers.
Sheriff Bill Brown, who was elected in 2006, received $7,254 checks during the last two years, and District Attorney Christie Stanley has accepted three annual payments of $6,895 for her vacation.
County officials said the vacation payouts are made in order to give elected department heads “equivalent” benefits to their appointed counterparts, who have long been paid for unused vacation time.
S.B.C.C.C. A place where COMMON SENSE never goes out of style!
You can view the original story in it's entirety @
You can view the original story in it's entirety @
Continuation of Daily Sound article;
However, elected officials, who answer to no boss except an electorate that typically has little idea how benefits packages are paid out, or if they even exist at all for salaried politicians, are exempted from keeping track of their vacation time.
The payouts, though linked on paper to vacation, appear to be nothing more than several thousand dollars worth of bonuses at the end of each year.
Regardless of what they’re called, the payments appear to be legal, and were authorized by the Board of Supervisors.
But in the midst of an economic recession that has forced county leaders to carve tens of millions of dollars from its operating budget, the payments stand out.
And because the elected officials receiving the payments all draw annual salaries that hover near $200,000, which they appear to receive regardless of how much time they take off, the 80-hour vacation payouts create a possible situation in which the recipients are being doubly compensated.
Revelation of the payouts sparked one member of the Board of Supervisors to say that at the very least, the practice needs to be called what it is: An extra chunk of cash. And at the most, should be rolled back.
“It’s just not right,” said 1st District Supervisor Salud Carbajal in a telephone interview. He added later, “You can’t have your cake and eat it to. If it’s salary, then let’s call it salary. It’s either vacation or it’s not.”
FOR THE SAKE OF FAIRNESS
For years, appointed department heads, like the director of public health or probation, have been allowed to receive annual cash payments for up to 80 hours of unused vacation time. Lower-level employees can be paid out for 40 unused hours.
Meanwhile, elected department heads, who aside from having campaigns operate very similar to their appointed counterparts, were left out of the payment scheme.
However, elected officials, who answer to no boss except an electorate that typically has little idea how benefits packages are paid out, or if they even exist at all for salaried politicians, are exempted from keeping track of their vacation time.
The payouts, though linked on paper to vacation, appear to be nothing more than several thousand dollars worth of bonuses at the end of each year.
Regardless of what they’re called, the payments appear to be legal, and were authorized by the Board of Supervisors.
But in the midst of an economic recession that has forced county leaders to carve tens of millions of dollars from its operating budget, the payments stand out.
And because the elected officials receiving the payments all draw annual salaries that hover near $200,000, which they appear to receive regardless of how much time they take off, the 80-hour vacation payouts create a possible situation in which the recipients are being doubly compensated.
Revelation of the payouts sparked one member of the Board of Supervisors to say that at the very least, the practice needs to be called what it is: An extra chunk of cash. And at the most, should be rolled back.
“It’s just not right,” said 1st District Supervisor Salud Carbajal in a telephone interview. He added later, “You can’t have your cake and eat it to. If it’s salary, then let’s call it salary. It’s either vacation or it’s not.”
FOR THE SAKE OF FAIRNESS
For years, appointed department heads, like the director of public health or probation, have been allowed to receive annual cash payments for up to 80 hours of unused vacation time. Lower-level employees can be paid out for 40 unused hours.
Meanwhile, elected department heads, who aside from having campaigns operate very similar to their appointed counterparts, were left out of the payment scheme.
I have only shared 50% of the Daily Sound story but again here is the links to the original Daily Sound story @
http://www.thedailysound.com/011210va...
http://www.thedailysound.com/011210va...
In 2006, as county CEO
Auditor-Controller Geis, the only elected official except for Sheriff Brown who commented for this story, said because the performances of elected leaders aren’t reviewed by the CEO’s office, he and his colleagues wouldn’t be eligible under the new program to receive raises in the same manner as appointed department heads.
Geis summed up the negotiations between the elected officials and the CEO’s office this way: “We’ll buy into the leadership thing if you make our benefits package equivalent [to appointed department heads].”
Geis, whose job it is to ensure that the county’s finances are in tip-top shape, defended the payouts as an “equivalency” benefit. He said the whole issue boiled down to fairness. “We had an issue with what our peers were making,” he said. “Really, what we were doing is leveling the field between appointed and elected.”
During an interview in his third-floor office in the county administration building, Geis spoke frankly about the payouts. He pointed out that by law, elected officials aren’t granted vacation, and that’s why he and other elected department heads don’t dock themselves vacation time.
Auditor-Controller Geis, the only elected official except for Sheriff Brown who commented for this story, said because the performances of elected leaders aren’t reviewed by the CEO’s office, he and his colleagues wouldn’t be eligible under the new program to receive raises in the same manner as appointed department heads.
Geis summed up the negotiations between the elected officials and the CEO’s office this way: “We’ll buy into the leadership thing if you make our benefits package equivalent [to appointed department heads].”
Geis, whose job it is to ensure that the county’s finances are in tip-top shape, defended the payouts as an “equivalency” benefit. He said the whole issue boiled down to fairness. “We had an issue with what our peers were making,” he said. “Really, what we were doing is leveling the field between appointed and elected.”
During an interview in his third-floor office in the county administration building, Geis spoke frankly about the payouts. He pointed out that by law, elected officials aren’t granted vacation, and that’s why he and other elected department heads don’t dock themselves vacation time.
S.B.C.C.C. A place where COMMON SENSE never goes out of style!
http://santabarbaracriminalcourtcorru...
http://santabarbaracriminalcourtcorru...
This story leaves a lot to be desired, so lets start at the beginning and try to fully understand the issue at hand.
CITY OF SANTA BARBARA
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA
TO: Mayor and Councilmembers
FROM: City Administrator’s Office
2010-2012 Police Management Memorandum Of Understanding
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA
TO: Mayor and Councilmembers
FROM: City Administrator’s Office
2010-2012 Police Management Memorandum Of Understanding
S.B.C.C.C. The place where COMMON SENSE never goes out of style!
August 9, 2012 at 7:22 a.m. (Suggest removal)