I asked the mayor a few weeks back to change the employee salary listing on the city website. The new listing is now available (PDF). It is broken down into departments, alphabetically and they now have the YEARLY salary listed instead of bi-weekly. I thank Mike for fixing this, as he and I discussed at JazzFest, it wasn’t his doing, the past administration felt the need to be less transparent (Munson / Holsen). But now it is fixed and less misleading. SUCK ON THAT DAVE!
(sample image)
I commend you Scott. No way did I think this was possible. Munson/Holsen must be wondering just what the hell happened to THEIR brand of transparency. Thank you Mike. Job well done.
Lotsa’ research to do here. Just off the top. Cotter made $148,000 when the year started. Now he’s making $156,000. Must be those water rate increases that justify an $8,000 increase in less than 6 months.
And Human Resources? A manager for every bean counter? Gimme a break. Reid Holsen…off the street for $84,115.20 to lob beachballs at the mayor on “Ask The Mayor”.
Well Done Scott…Well Done.
Reid makes more then the city clerk!!!!!! Travesty!
What is his title anyway?
Some observations:
What’s the difference between a HR Director and a HR Manager? So is Holsen in charge of the HR department and O’Toole in charge of Holsen? Confusing.
Seems Engineering has a lot of chiefs and not a lot of indians. What surprises me about this is all the EXTRA money taxpayers dole out for private engineering consultants. Seems we are paying good salaries to a buttload of engineers, why do we need to dole so much out in private engineering consultants when we have all this high paid internal talent? They would probably have to hire a consultant to answer that question đ
In the PD department, it shows that an animal control officer makes $17.22 per hour. You would have to pay me a Hell of a lot more to wrestle critters down. Heck a couple of the graphic designers in the media department make more than that.
There is some Librarians in this city making some serious dough. One of the Librarians listed as ‘just’ a librarian, not management, makes over $69,000 a year! Holy shit!
It also amazes me that the Light Super makes $84,000 a year and the Light Supervisor makes $70,000 a year. If the light department in SF was huge with a ton of clients, I would say it was justifiable. I can guarantee these guys WOULD not be making that kind of money in the private sector.
It seems middle management is where it is at if you want decent pay without a lot of obligation. I find many low level workers don’t make very good money, not even close to livable wages.
What is his title anyway?
Reid Holsen, Human Resources Manager/Labor Relations.
OK. He has a fancy title, a desk, and draws a pretty fair chunk of change. But…just what does a Labor Relations Manager do 8 hours a day 5 days a week?
What the hell is a Benefits Technician, and why are they making over $25 an hr?
Caller: ” I’d like to take some time off and go on vacation”
Benefits Technician: “Looks like you’ve got three weeks of vacation you can use. Enjoy”
Caller: “Thank you”
Beer Jew – Funny!
Once again – we have an individual that the Mayor doesn’t call a Chief of Staff – but makes over $77,000 and from what I can tell – should earn more around $40,000. WTH does Kendra do? I have seen her at a couple of press conferences tense as a tick and looking like a pitbull if anyone asks the Mayor any sort of question that hasn’t been scripted. This girl needs to lighten up and look like she at least enjoys drowning in taxpayer dollars for her salary. You are a Special Projects Manager for a city of 150,000+ and you are make $.50 off of every single one of us. Enjoy it while it lasts.
I was under the impression (told by city employees) that no management people were getting raises this year. At a glance, it looks like all the directors (who Huether didn’t replace) got up to 5% raises this year.
I bet the rest of the employees will be happy about that. I guess only department heads’ cost of living went up.
Why are you personally attacking people? Ask questions about the job and what it pays, fine. You all sound like you have salary envy. You don’t even know what these people do. You just make absurd assumptions and insult people. Nice job. Call the City and ask what a benefit technician does or one of the other jobs you are bitching about. Then maybe your comments would have some merit. This is just another example of what is wrong with this country.Just worthless and mindless opinions. Oh, and attack the comment that doesn’t agree with your mindset. There is just no class to this blog.
Hey, I was defending the dog catcher! And I do agree with you, no need to really use people’s names. I think I pointed out some fair questions (especially about the engineering department). I prefer to say I have no shame, but to say I don’t have class, that just pisses me off.
It is more than fair to question what a person does with taxpayer dollars and to observe what and what not you see them doing. Salary envy – no. Concerns that we have extremely high overhead – yes. M2CW38 – if I didn’t know better – I would think you work for the city. By the way, if you don’t like this blog or it has no class (according to you), why are you reading it?
I think what’s truly wrong with this country, M2CW38, is the vast majority of people these days can’t handle reading anything they don’t agree with 100%.
Of course it is fair to question how taxpayer dollars are used. Of course city salaries are public information. But these are real people doing real jobs. All I am saying is question the salary of the jobs, not the people in them. They are just hired to do a job. I read this blog for the humor value and yes, the real value at times. Why do you have to assume I work for the city just because I don’t agree with the comments against the city? Just debate the issue. I like a good debate and it doesn’t have anything to do with agreeing or disagreeing with your position.
Scott you are right.
M2- Well let’s debate it. Do you think it is equitable to have such a large engineering department when we pay private consultants to do work for us. One or the other in my opinion. If we need professionals working for us, fine, pay them what they deserve, but with that pay and employment comes responsibility. The finance department does the same thing, hires consultants. Why? If we don’t have qualified people working in these positions they need to be replaced. I am all for people in the public sector making a good wage, as I mentioned, the dog catcher makes less then a graphic designer with the city. I question this.
If I might – a “Director” signifies somone who has authority to set policy, and/or long-term goals for a particular function or department. A “Manager” assures that those policies are followed and the goals worked toward on a day-to-day basis.
Although, I must say, all of this discussion oftitles and what they eman and what sorts of responsibility levels are associated with them reminds me of my past life – and it’s kinda fun. Of course – the last executive positon I held, the Board of Directors asked me when I was hired, “What would you like as a position title?” That was fun too. Yeah, nerdy-wierd, I know.
PS – a “Technician” is someone who performs some task FOR a “Manager” in order to meet the goals and policy requirements of a “Director”.
If you think about it in theatrical production terms, “Director” tinkers with script, set, lighting, camera positions, pace, and so on. Actor/”Manager” gets to navigate through/within that set (set-up) and collaborate with other actors/managers in order to get his/her lines spoken in the context of the interaction of all those elements. “Technician” runs a boom, or Foley, or Camera, etc. as part of the “background” to what we all pay attenetion to as the end product.
I enjoy reading these debates, but I primarily stick to reading them, not participating due to the most vocal (Poly, l3wis, & even SouthDaCola himself) that eventually resorts to accusing anyone who disagrees with them of being a city employee.
Sad thing is, most of the time I think they’re right, I just wish they could debate on a more adult level and not use attacks to try and make a point.
I actually agree with you on the consultant issue in the Engineering department. Big department of engineers and they still hire consultants. What do they have – engineers managing engineers. Seems like duplication to me. If you go in to the city website and look at the jobs you will see the dog catcher requires a HS degree or GED with a at least one year of working with animals. The graphic artist job requires a college degree and 4 years design experience. Big difference. That might explain why the salaries are different.
I have worked as a designer for 18 years, got paid the best at my last job working full-time as a designer. In my freelance I pay myself about 4 times more then what a designer with the city makes. Not my point. IT IS A VERY DANGEROUS JOB to work in animal control. Don’t care how educated you are. Climbing around in people’s attics for disease ridden bats can’t be as fun as designing a flyer. TP, South DaCola is L3wis, or Detroit Lewis, me, Scott Ehrisman, just thought I would clarify that. Do I think city employees come here? Definately, I know for a fact it is read by many councilors, city employees, probably even the mayor. How often do they comment? Probably not much. I look at IP’s and haven’t been able to track any city employees. Maybe family members, who knows, who cares.
Just because it’s a dangerous job doesn’t mean it should pay more than another job. If that was the case then crab fisherman, coal miners, timber cutters and our American soldiers would make more than Bill Gates. Jobs pay what society values.
I agree education is important, but I still think it is kinda low pay for what they have to put up with.
Benefits Techs are a bargain compared to the rest of their department.
Here’s a typical day for a benefits tech. Say, for illustrative purposes only, I retired from the city six years ago in March. Say I made $108,700 a year.
Caller: I’d like to hitch up my golden parachute and retire.
Benefits Tech: How many years you got in?
Caller: 30, and I’m 57 years old.
Benefits Tech: Your high three year average was $108,700. You will recieve 70% of 108,700 per year, or $76,090 a year for your lifetime.
Caller: Are you sure? Seems your manager assured me it would be more. The director of that manager even said so.
Benefits Tech: Oh, I almost forgot. We will cut you a check for $53,654 the day you retire for your unused sick leave hours. We will also add that amount to your last years wages for figuring your pension check. That means your three average is $126,584. 70% of that is $88,608 per year for your lifetime. Cost of living increases of course will also be factored in. Have a good life.
Caller: Thank you taxpayers.
Benefits Tech: I hear ya. I’ll be hitchin up my golden parachute next year.