Weighing Fairness in Salary Study

* As the debate continues over the pay and benefits of public employees, I can only wonder why there is the perception of a Rolls-Royce package. I have been a career civil servant and my wife spent her entire career in the private sector. Thus I feel well exposed to both worlds.

When [comparing] the private sector to that of the public, I have always seen a striking difference. Traditionally, public employees negotiate only for salary and benefits, while in the private sector there is the pursuit of the total compensation package. With the rarest of exceptions, public employees do not have such compensation as profit-sharing, stock options, bonus incentives, matching deferred compensation, and company products at an employee’s price. For those who still believe that the public sector is too overpaid in Orange County, I offer the following challenge:

* Review the number of graduates from top colleges going into public service.

* Review the number of public employees living in the many exclusive areas of Orange County.

* Look in the public employee parking lots; they are not filled with high-dollar cars.

* Review the cost of paying overtime versus hiring a new employee.

Yes, I am thankful for what I receive as a civil servant, but do not call a Chevrolet a Rolls-Royce and do not expect a Chevrolet to run like a Rolls.

IRWIN FEUERSTEIN

Police Officer

City of Huntington Beach

* You recently reported on the Orange County Board of Supervisors’ proposed review of the comparison of wages and benefits of public versus private sector employees to determine whether or not public sector employees are reasonably compensated. That the board would treat the compensation issue in this manner illustrates perpetuation of the fallacy that led to overcompensation of public employees commencing about 25 years ago.

Governing bodies within the public sector are abysmal failures in setting or controlling compensation for public employees. Management determines its compensation and that of subordinates, and the governing bodies blindly adopt those self-serving decisions. Elected officials often form personal bonds with managers and other employees, and the money being spent is not their own and is spent accordingly. I recall some years ago a city manager arguing persuasively, according to most council members, for a raise because he managed a city of 30,000 people. He then considered it unfair to adopt his argument and fix his wages proportional to the $200,000-per-year salary of the president of a nation of 250 million people.

There are fundamental differences between public- and private-sector employees (including those who are self-employed), albeit they may perform the same work. Taxpayers support the former. Regular increases in compensation are expected, demanded and generally granted. There is an element of job security in the public sector, and that must be factored into the rate of compensation.

Compensation within the private sector, however, depends upon the marketplace and the financial condition of the employer, who is spending his own money. Risk is a major element in the private sector, and a private-sector employee’s rate of compensation, as well as the job itself, depend upon these criteria. Accordingly, the private sector employee is entitled to greater compensation than his public sector counterpart.

B. PATRICK LANE

San Clemente