 calgov2002: for old calgov2002 articles. calgov2002: for new calgov2002 articles. Other Bump Lists at: Free Republic Bump List Register |
Posted on 07/28/2002 11:10:42 AM PDT by John Jorsett
Fifty-five thousand dollars a year is pretty good coin in Kern County, where the median annual income is $35,446. But that $55,000 is just the tip of the iceberg for veteran California correctional officers.
They can also make significant amounts in overtime, especially now that a new contract has given guards a lot more leeway in how they use sick time.
Overtime, bonuses and other types of pay can double some guards' salaries to more than $100,000 a year.
Of the 115 California correctional officers who are on pace to increase their pay to six figures this year, five work at the California Correctional Institution at Tehachapi, according to records from the state controller's office. Names were not released with that payroll information.
At the other two state prisons in Kern, Wasco State Prison and North Kern State Prison in Delano, none of the correctional officers appeared to be near that level of pay.
In the next few years, prison guard pay and perks are going to get sweeter.
The new contract, which went into effect in March, also is expected to increase pay for correctional officers at least 34 percent by 2006. And it lowers the retirement age by five years to 50, with guards keeping up to 90 percent of their salary annually upon retirement.
Keeping a lid on California's criminals is a tough job, no doubt. But no college degree is required and it comes with its own state-paid training program and generous benefits.
The Californian is exploring the issue of public pay in a variety of fields to help better inform the public how their tax dollars are spent.
In the case of the new prison guard contract, at least two state senators and a taxpayer watchdog group have serious concerns about whether the public's money is being wisely spent.
"There's a lot of stuff in this contract that doesn't look to us like sound fiscal management at all," said Larry McCarthy, president of the California Taxpayers Association. "We question what is going on and what in the world these people were thinking about. It's certainly not in the interests of taxpayers."
But officials for the guard's union -- California Correctional Peace Officers Association -- say if taxpayers want competent correctional officers, they're going to have to pay, just like they do for good law enforcement.
"I fail to understand why this is such an issue," said Lance Corcoran, vice president of the union. "We're a legitimate part of the law enforcement community, and we're in competition for the same personnel pool as the California Highway Patrol and local police departments."
"If people want safe and humane prisons," he continued, "I think you have to reach out to people who are going to commit to this line of work as professionals."
The contract was negotiated and signed by Gov. Gray Davis' administration last year and then ratified by the Legislature in January.
Almost immediately, sick time usage skyrocketed, increasing more than 30 percent in March, April and May, records show.
And because wardens often have to replace guards out sick with other guards on overtime, those costs shot up as well, jumping 20 percent so far this year.
Those statistics have raised eyebrows as did the fact that Davis' campaign war chest has some hefty checks from the guard's union. The union donated $2 million to Davis' first campaign for governor in 1998 and has given him $662,000 since. That includes $251,000 given to the governor in March, just two months after Davis signed legislation implementing the new contract.
Davis and other administration officials insist the union's contributions had nothing to do with the contract.
"No one put any pressure on me," said Marty Morgenstern, the head of Davis' Department of Personnel Administration, which negotiated the pact.
Morgenstern acknowledged he always briefs the governor in advance about his goals for a major contract negotiation and gets the governor's approval.
The union's Corcoran also bristled at suggestions that the contract negotiations were influenced by the organization's campaign contributions.
"That's obviously ridiculous," he said. "No one complains when white-collar attorneys and doctors and teachers participate in the process, but when blue-collar prison guards do it, there's some kind of taint to the system."
Morgenstern said the increases in pay and benefits were designed only to bring compensation for prison guards closer to that of highway patrolmen and state firefighters to help the prison system fill more than 1,000 job vacancies.
Only two state senators criticized the contract: Sen. Richard Polanco, D-Los Angeles, a longtime foe of the union; and Sen. John Vasconcellos, D-San Jose.
"This agreement is going to cost the taxpayers a tremendous amount of money at a time when our state is facing the largest budget deficit in its history and eliminating critical public services," Polanco said. "We simply cannot afford the costly provisions of this five-year agreement."
Kern County lawmakers of both parties support the contract's improvements in pay and benefits.
That includes GOP Assemblyman Phil Wyman of Tehachapi, who lost a primary election last March in Los Angeles and San Bernardino counties at least partly because the union backed his opponent heavily.
While he said he has had his differences with the union leadership, Wyman added, "I have always had the highest level of respect for the men and women of the (union)."
Democratic Assemblyman Dean Florez of Shafter said he thinks the timing of the $251,000 contribution to Davis was "unfortunate," but he supports the contract.
Kern's lawmakers all have hundreds of prison guards living in their districts and most have received campaign contributions from the union.
The state prisons employ numerous people in Tehachapi with 944 guards; Wasco with 628 guards; and Delano with 577 guards.
Skyrocketing costs
The contract was signed at a time when the California Department of Corrections was under growing criticism for its rising operational costs, fueled by soaring overtime and sick leave.
Both the nonpartisan legislative analyst and the state auditor have repeatedly criticized the Department of Corrections for what they say is poor personnel management. The analyst's office has estimated management problems cost taxpayers an unnecessary $35 million a year in overtime and other costs.
The contract also comes at a time when the department has serious difficulty living within its budget. The prison agency had to come back to the Legislature for an extra $277 million to balance its budget for the fiscal year that ended June 30. The previous year, it would have been in the red by more than $100 million except for some unexpected onetime savings.
In the first four months of this year, the department spent $45.8 million on overtime, records show, an increase of nearly 20 percent over the same period last year. At that rate, the department's overtime costs will reach $137.4 million for the year.
In the next few years, the Corrections budget will increase even more because of the new contract, which included a salary adjustment mechanism that ties correctional officers' pay increases to those of CHP officers and police and sheriff's deputies in Los Angeles and San Francisco.
Most estimates say that will result in a pay increase of at least 34 percent by the year 2006. That would put a veteran officer's pay at more than $74,000 a year, not counting overtime.
However, the new system will not give prison guards the same salary as CHP officers. Morgenstern said it will peg correctional officers' pay at $666 a month less than patrol officers, whose pay also is tied to the Los Angeles and San Francisco jurisdictions.
Currently, correctional officers start out at $13.11 an hour while they attend the state's 16-week training academy.
Upon graduation, they start out at $2,675 a month, or $32,100 a year, with step and merit increases up to the $55,000 level.
The first across-the-board raises under the contract are not until next year. Union officials said they agreed to forgo immediate raises because of the state's dire financial condition.
The union also agreed to delay until 2006 the new retirement provision.
It will allow veteran officers to retire at age 50 with up to 90 percent of their last year's salaries. That replaces the current system under which they can retire at 55, and with less money.
Other major provisions of the contract went into effect immediately, including an increase in the incentive bonus for physical fitness from $100 a month to $130.
In addition, the contract allows guards to bring a note from a doctor certifying that they are physically fit. That allows them to skip a physical endurance and agility test administered by the department.
Those provisions and others infuriate critics like Polanco.
"What does the taxpayer get out of this agreement," he said, "or is this just a one-sided giveaway?"
Morgenstern's answer is a firm no.
"They are a tenacious union and they fight hard, but so do we," he said. "In the end, I thought we did pretty well."
No, of course not. Davis gives away bushel-baskets of our money to big donors out of the pure milk of human kindness.
How fitting.
I would not consider prison guard a riskier or more difficult job than CHP.
D
|
calgov2002: for old calgov2002 articles. calgov2002: for new calgov2002 articles. Other Bump Lists at: Free Republic Bump List Register |
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.