L.A. Employees’ Cell Phone Use
Re “Dialing for Dollars,” series, Jan. 7, 8:
The lack of oversight by L.A. government on cellular phone use borders on gross negligence. Over the last several months The Times has shown large-scale waste in the L.A. County health system, the new computer system for the Department of Motor Vehicles and the use of outside consultants by Orange County.
Such articles reaffirm my belief that government is large enough and has enough resources to meet its requirements. I oppose increased taxes and government spending, not because I lack compassion, but because I oppose waste and mis- management.
TED PAUL
Irvine
* As a county public health nurse, I do potentially dangerous fieldwork every day as I make home visits in the Westlake/Pico Union neighborhoods. I carry my own personal cellular phone with me for my own safety and for emergencies. The county does not provide the phone nor does it pay my bill. These abuses of cell phone privileges serve to reinforce the negative image of government employees at a time when we most need the public’s support.
As a hard-working line staff worker trying to serve the taxpayer, this is beyond distressing to me. As to the problem of government employees making use of commuting downtime by being on the phone, I have a solution. Government workers should be required to live in and spend their money in the jurisdiction that pays their salary, be it city or county. My personal commute is 15 minutes one way.
KATHLEEN SMITH RN
Los Angeles
* An issue needs to be addressed and, to my knowledge, has attracted virtually no public scrutiny: the excessive cost of cellular telephone use. It would be virtually impossible for a county employee, for instance, to generate a $746 per month land-line telephone bill (as cited by The Times as an average for cellular use) without some heavy-duty long distance charges. It is easy to do with local calls only, at the whopping approximately $1-per-minute prime-time charges of the cellular companies.
I do not claim to have any knowledge of the cost of operation of a cellular telephone; however, since it is generated via radio frequencies, the cost should be less than that for land-line telephones, which require that the parent company provide a system of wires, distribution boxes, etc.
Yes, we need to control unauthorized telephone costs by government employees, but even more, we need to control the excessive cost of cellular telephone usage.
DIXON GAYER
Huntington Beach
* “Lack of Review Blamed for Big City, County Phone Bills” points to the failure to bring the controls of fundamental business tools to our city and county government officials and users. It would benefit the taxpayers to have all the cellular phones required for use by individuals be purchased by department officials or workers and their billings deducted as a tool expense via their tax returns.
This logic is an extension of the kind of work environment that many craftsmen and journeymen face to stay employed, as they must provide their own tools.
DION KRAFT
Paramount
* A new version of the old joke:
Los Angeles department head: “One of my low-level staffers had his cellular phone cloned. The thief is running up a huge bill in fraudulent calls.”
Concerned citizen: “Why don’t you have the phone shut off?”
Department head: “Why? He’s still spending less than my staffer used to.”
BARRY GOLD
Los Angeles
