Debating the Need for Overtime Pay

* I have read with great interest the recent articles debating the salary, benefits and overtime compensation paid to employees and managers by the County of Ventura. As a 13-year employee and a peace officer in a supervisory position with the county, I feel compelled to offer my opinion.

The April 21 article focused on the cost of employee overtime and the cost of perks and benefits of managers. The focus should be on the value received as a result of the expenditure, rather than the amount of the expenditure itself. When assessing the value of the expenditure, it becomes clear that there are profound differences between an employee earning overtime and the compensation packages of managers.

The employee working overtime is filling a vacancy that exists in the work force. The value of the expenditure can easily be assessed by evaluating the need for the service and the cost of various options to fulfill the need. Since the demand for emergency personnel, such as law enforcement, fire and rescue, is rarely constant, it may be cost effective to pay overtime rather than to hire additional employees.

In contrast, the value of managers may not be so easily assessed. County Personnel Director Ronald Komers tells us that the perks and benefit packages for managers are necessary to recruit and retain high quality managers with unique and specific qualifications.

I would challenge this notion, as a significant number of managers have not been recruited, but rather are long-term county employees who were promoted to their current positions. Their most unique qualification may be the ability to climb the county ladder, and, therefore, retaining them should not require such generous expenditures. It may also be discovered that the Peter Principle is alive and well in the County of Ventura.

DOUGLAS B. SCHULZ

Ventura