L.A.F.D. overtime pay rises as Mayor spins budget

Mayor Tony gave his State of the City speech last week, telling us what we already knew- that the city was spending more money than it had. The Mayor continues to proclam the theme he's pushing, "Everyone has to share in the pain of the financial hardship." More symbolic than "painful," he's even pledging to cut an hour of his own pay. I dare say that his hour of lost pay will barely be noticed in his life style and pay rate- it's like swatting a fly at a picnic for him, but for others much lower on the pay scale, it's closer to bumping into a beehive with angry bees joining your picnic. But we can quibble later about the fallacies of his speech and actions. Meanwhile, the story of the L.A. Fire Department "overtime costs" continuing to rise has surfaced in numerous news outlets (but not much in the L.A. Times here) and there's been a lot of views on "why" this is happening, and "what" it means, and "what" cutting might do to hurt the public and "what's" responsible.

All well and good to find these things out, but as the "powers that be" start to look for solutions as to this aspect, you are witnessing a "circling of the wagons," a normal behavior when there's an agency, company or department of any group that comes under scrutiny of any sort, especially when it has to do with money operations.

The L.A. Daily News is on the topic, "L.A. Fire Department overtime pay going through the roof," By Jason Kandel, Staff Writer, April 19, 2009. [http://www.dailynews.com/news/ci_12175241 link earlier omitted in error.]

The story observes that,

Los Angeles firefighters now average six times more overtime than their counterparts in Chicago, five times more than in Houston and two times more than
in San Diego - a city that has roughly the same ratio of firefighters-to-residents as Los Angeles.

Some of the information is an eye-opener, to say the least.

The Daily News analysis found:

--56 firefighters earned at least $100,000 in overtime on top of their annual salaries last year, up from three in 1999 and 10 in 2005.

--The average Los Angeles firefighter earned about $36,500 in overtime in 2008, compared with $29,000 in 1999. Their average salary and overtime compensation totaled $117,000.

--The department's top earner racked up a total of $570,276 in overtime in the last three years, including $206,685 in 2006. His three-year overtime total was nearly double his base salary for that period.

The story also includes views on why the overtime situation is justified and may still be cheaper than hiring more persons to fill the need. It's something that's been going on for years and growing. You have to wonder why some of the solutions were not considered earlier. It has to come to reaching this "city budget crisis" for any examination of internal operations to come to the light of day.

You might check the Daily News story and form your own impressions. The story is being treated in assorted ways by different people and groups. The KTLA TV news story, Report: Los Angeles Fire Department Racking Up Overtime states "The Los Angeles Fire Department is apparently under fire for racking up the overtime." While it tries to handle this topic delicately, adding the word, "apparently," does appear to be hedging the bet needlessly. Firefighters and a fire department are essential components of city services. But that still creates no entitlement to "carte blanche" terms as an expense. No one wants to see the loss of city services or the unnecessary spending of tax dollars. The city needs to cut expenses or collect more money overall and this area looks like it could use some changes.

I heard one question on the radio about whether as some calculate, that a pension is calculated with the highest yearly (or series of years) income used as the base to set the pension value. So "spiking" the pay with lots of overtime has the real benefit to come up for an even longer lasting benefit. That is just someone's speculation and there's not anything to say if that would apply to city service in any way, but if it does, there's another bit of motivation for an employee to keep up earning the overtime hours.

Neither losing services or paying more taxes is a choice that city residents will enjoy. But that's the way that the Mayor is begining to build his case. I think that there's a need to get into this topic before the city goes entirely down the drain. (I am still trying to see how the Mayor's "Summer Midnight Basketball" pet program fits in as an additional expense to a service-slashing endangered parks and recreation dept.)

If we think this is all part of operating a big city and we have to just suck it up, then I ask, "Why don't other big cities have the same catastrophic sized budget conditions?" Management would be the word you might look for, good management, actually. We don't have that. Look for more taxes- sales taxes- to be the way out for those who see taxes rising to meet expenses instead of better management. Check how much is going to sales taxes NOW and think about another 1% here and .5% there. I say we need to check "expenses" and if current management (Mayor and City Council) can't do it, then we need new attitudes and new people without that DNA spending gene so prominently operative to be our leaders.

On top of all this financial chaos, Mayor Villaraigosa continues to have his eye on the prize, in this case, it's the Governor's office. Villaraigosa's speech says "share the pain" and still no layoffs in city service- he does not want to have anyone angry at him, not city employees or trades unions or anyone who could possibly be a vote. There's some real wheeling and dealing going on by Tony to try to keep his chance at being Governor of California within his grasp, so keep that in mind as you read more on the city scene. "It's not all as it appears to be," is the punchline to a colorful story involving cellmates in prison, told to me years ago in a different setting to illustrate the point. These are words to keep in mind to apply regularly in connection to current events.