Why did I get zeros when I should have gotten a 3% raise this year?
SF Gate article
Thursday, November 19, 2009
BART director Tom Radulovich , who represents San Francisco,did not ask for a raise at Thursday's marathon of a BART Board of Directors meeting -- but he did suggest that board members deserve one for the long hours and hard work they've put in this year.
And he was the lone member to vote against a proposal to have the board waive its annual cost-of-living increase, which would have amounted to about $39 a month.
"I feel like we've done a lot more work this year," he said. "It's becoming like another full-time job."
The nine members of the BART board do not get paid a salary but they do receive a stipend -- about $1,300 a month if they attend all scheduled meetings. The BART board does not set it's own salaries, as is the case with many government agencies. As one of the two elected transit district boards in California (AC Transit has the other), BART directors' compensation is set by the state Legislature, which, in 2007, passed a bill calling for annual cost-of-living increases based on the Consumer Price Index.
The index for 2009 has not yet been calculated, but BART spokesman Linton Johnson said the presumption is that it will be about 3 percent.
The year started with a BART officer shooting and killing an unarmed Oscar Grant, which morphed into ongoing meetings about a police review committee. Then there were the worse-than-usual budget hearings and the seemingly endless BART labor talks.
Radulovich, whose real full-time job is as executive director of transit advocacy group Livable City, noted that despite the heavy workload, directors have no staff.
"It's a hardship,'' he said. "You have to decide (that) this is the amount of time I can give to BART this week because I have to do my real job."
Radulovich called on BART's staff to conduct a compensation survey comparing pay with directors of other districts, and to look at whether it makes sense to have state lawmakers set directors' pay."I want to be the director my constituents are demanding I be," he said.
As a member of the Police
As a member of the Police Officers Union, I went to many of the same meetings these board members did and most were on my days off! I work a full time job too. How about kicking me another 3% cost of living? I also had to do more this year!
$1.3k per month = $15.6k per
$1.3k per month = $15.6k per year
As a union police officer something tells me you make a hell of a lot more than that, probably upwards of 7 or 8 times as much or more.
Don't complain about your pay when you are living high on the hog.
Oh that is some great
Oh that is some great socialist thinking. Let's see...If you don't make as much money as the other guy, its alright to get cost of living raises until we all make the same amount of money for doing completely different jobs! The point I was trying to make is that TRUE LEADERS SHOULD LEAD BY EXAMPLE.
Don't give yourself a raise when you are asking me to cut an additional 5% (after already "giving back" on the contract) this year and asking for 10% more next year.
"Has anyone seen my hog? Poor little emaciated fella."
Anyone who disagrees with you
Anyone who disagrees with you is a socialist? You make a great Republican.
I agree with you. Everybody
I agree with you. Everybody from top to bottom should share the pain. The top should set an example for the working class. If the board gives themselves a raise, the unions should strike and I will support the unions.
The board members don't work
The board members don't work full time, so you would have to multiply their salary by at least two to compare it to a full time job. If you were actually making a point and not blowing smoke out of your ass to get a reaction you would look up the police salary instead of 'betting'. You just prefer to argue for the sake of arguing.
Boo hoo for the overworked board. If they had to do more because it was a difficult year, and they think it is too much work, they can step down and work their full time jobs. I'm sure someone would be willing to trade their extra time for the power these elected officials have, not to mention am extra 15k for attendance. Last time I checked I didn't get paid more because I was busy.
And cost of living is not a raise, it prevents loss due to inflation . People are just sacrificing because they'd rather take an economic paycut then have no job at all. I give those on the board who voted not to take their cost of living increase kudos for being sensitive to economic conditions.
[img]http://petersonstory.fil
[img]http://petersonstory.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/confused-full.jpg[/img]
How am I supposed to look up his salary when I do not know who he is?
Do you really think these board members also have time to work full time jobs?
Elected officials are public
Elected officials are public servants. They shouldn't be making large salaries. The draw to serve as an elected official should NEVER be about the money, at all. It should be about wanting to serve the community. And if you can't handle or don't want to put the time and energy into serving your community, you shouldn't run for office.
Politicians voting for pay raises for themselves is just about one of the most absurd things I have ever heard of. It's just too bad the voting public generally doesn't remember their elected official's greed come voting day.
Here's a web site with a good
Here's a web site with a good Cost of Living calculator. http://www.aier.org/research/worksheets-and-tools/cost-of-living-calculator. For example, I started at BART making $73K but left making just over $90K. To have stayed even with the Cost of Living calculator, I should have made $105K, which is about what I'm making now on the outside. I really started to feel the pinch the last few years when I found myself having to do more work, yet give up more stuff, each year. It wasn't worth it so I headed for greener pastures. To those with technical skills still at BART--GET OUT!--there's a whole world out there where you can do a LOT better.