Salary bumps a tough sell in proposed budget
Original post made on Jun 4, 2013
Read the full story here Web Link posted Tuesday, June 4, 2013, 9:09 AM
on Jun 4, 2013 at 10:56 am
Everybody in Palo Alto knows that once you include the value of PA employees' fat retirement/healthcare packages, many of which amount to many millions of dollars apiece, PA employees are massively overpaid relative to PA residents doing comparable work. And it's those PA residents who pay for those packages too. Certain PA staff think we're all either arithmetic-illiterate, or asleep, or both.
Go to a rational retirement/healthcare system, and retire at the same age all the rest of us do, and then let's talk about pay raises.
on Jun 4, 2013 at 11:13 am
Before raises for SEIU employees, the council should check the salaries for similar positions in the private sector. Raises if needed, which is highly doubtful considering the fact that we have tree trimmers making $100K, should be based on merit, not across the board.
on Jun 4, 2013 at 11:15 am
I find it humorous and highly ironic that the same night the council removed dollars from the budget for possible employee raises that they also directed the city attorney to draft an ordinance that would eliminate the Council's current 2 term limit(8 years total) and allow unlimited terms. The Weekly missed that this Charter amendment, if passed, will guarantee LIFETIME healthcare benefits to council members who serve more than 2 terms. Currently newer council members are now prohibited from receiving retiree healthcare because the minimimum years of service for retiree healthcare is currently 10 years. Kniss and Klein already have this time in the system. But the others do not. By allowing the Mayor and others to run beyond 2 terms allows them access to lifetime benefits for them AND their families. A sneaky way for the Mayor to get the retiree healthcare he can't get on his own as a sole practitioner. I guess benefit cuts are ok with Scharff as long as his own benefits are increasing.