More than 6,400 Mass employees make over $100K

[Piscator]

Looks like UMass owns the top 9 out of 10 spots but $228,000 for a State Police Lieutenant? Wow, hope he's catching a lot of bad guys......


Massachusetts top paid employees for 2010 - Boston.com

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by Piscator

Looks like UMass owns the top 9 out of 10 spots but $228,000 for a State Police Lieutenant? Wow, hope he's catching a lot of bad guys......

Massachusetts top paid employees for 2010 - Boston.com

Shovel ready projects that require SP details. Getting paid overtime to sleep in your car must be nice.

[JohnR]

Surprised this did not get more traction.

A lot of these folks making large coin, especially in their last three years before retirement is a gift that keeps giving. Its great if you can have it but it is unsustainable.

[Karl F]

Originally Posted by JohnR

Surprised this did not get more traction.
.

Really?

Knowing that several jackbooted staties actually read striper boards?

I read my local town report.. local yocals are pulling in well over 100K working the OT, details, and "longevity" bumps, and they all can tell you exactly how many minutes until their pension kicks in, and the up to date balance in their plans....and the DD's is the best protected store front in town.

It's Mass.. the land of Patronage.. remember the 75K a year doorman jobs at the statehouse they were handing out 2 decades ago, to their cousins and in-laws... the 100K a year tool booth jobs...???
it got some ink, but not much action...

we are just used to it... effin SADLY....

[Fly Rod]

I didn't see the thirty five thousand dollar a year social worker on that list.

[TheSpecialist]

That list is crap, look at the 40 hour salary for putting your life on the line. I say good for them they are working many more hours than most of us. Any job that pays a decent hourly wage can turn into a high wage job if you want to work like a dog...

[Swimmer]

Originally Posted by JohnR

Surprised this did not get more traction.

A lot of these folks making large coin, especially in their last three years before retirement is a gift that keeps giving. Its great if you can have it but it is unsustainable.

Retirement isn't based on overtime, just your base salary, which for a lt. on the MSP is probably $120,000 walking in the door. All those details they get is the reason why none of them are ever working the regular shifts on the road.

On the Mass. pike troopers are ordered to work details. If a guy is exhausted after working a double shift, say 4-12 and 12-8, he gets ordered to work a detail during the day shift if no one else takes it, so it doesn't go unfilled. Kind of insane really, but that is the reason most of them are in the cruisers during the detail, because they are too tired to stand up.

[TheSpecialist]

Salary Labor Laws
By R. E. Peters, eHow Contributor
updated: December 22, 2010

Federal labor laws for salaried employees do offer some protections. The minimum wage and overtime requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) apply to all employees who come within that law's coverage, whether the employees are paid hourly or they are on a salary. The "white collar" exemption to the FLSA does exclude some salaried employees from the law's protections, but only if the employees' work duties meet the tests listed in the FLSA and accompanying regulations. The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) does not refer to salaried employees, but does specify that professional employees come within the coverage of the federal collective bargaining law. The NLRA does not require employers to bargain collectively with supervisory employees.

Fair Labor Standards Act: Minimum Wage
The Fair Labor Act is a federal wage law that sets the federal requirements for employee wages and work hours. The FLSA requires employers to pay their employees the specified federal minimum wage, although some states require a minimum wage higher than the federal level. Although the FLSA's minimum wage requirement is expressed as an hourly rate, the law does not exclude employees who are paid in some other way. If employees are paid a salary, or at at piecework rate, or if employees' pay includes tips, they are still entitled to receive pay that is the equivalent of the FLSA's minimum hourly wage rate. Labor laws for salaried employees are often different than those that apply to hourly employees.
FLSA: Overtime Pay
The FLSA also states that employees must be paid overtime at the rate of at least

1 1/2 times the employees' regular pay rate for all hours worked in excess of 40 hours in a work week. The regular rate of pay for salaried employees is calculated by dividing the salary by the total number of work hours for which the salary provides compensation. For example, if an employee receives a weekly salary of $450 and works 45 hours per week, the employee's regular rate of pay is $10 per hour. In addition to the weekly salary, the employee must receive overtime pay (an additional $5 per hour) for the five overtime hours in the work week.
White Collar Exemption
The FLSA exempts certain "white collar" workers from the federal minimum wage and overtime labor laws. Exempt from FLSA coverage are executive, administrative, professional and outside sales employees, as well as some skilled computer employees. For the exemption to apply, the employee generally must be paid on a salary basis at a rate of at least $455 per week. The employee's actual work duties must also meet all the tests listed in the FLSA and the accompanying regulations issued by the U.S. Department of Labor. For example, an exempt executive employee must not only be paid on a salary basis, but must also have work duties that involve managing a business, directing the work of other employees and having the authority to hire or fire employees. It is often difficult for salaried employees to receive overtime pay.
Highly Compensated Employees
The U.S. Department of Labor revised the regulations for the FLSA's white collar exemption in 2004 to provide a streamlined exemption test for employees who are paid on a salary or fee basis, and earn at least $100,000 per year. Such highly compensated employees are exempt from the overtime labor law if their duties meet at least one of the work duty tests listed in the regulations for exempt executive, administrative or professional employees.
No FLSA Requirements
Although the Fair Labor Act contains specific minimum wage and overtime requirements, the law does not set federal labor standards on a number of employment issues for either hourly workers or salaried employees. For example, the FLSA's provisions do not require premium pay for working on weekends or at night, do not set a maximum number of work hours per week, and do not address issues such as severance pay, vacations, sick leave, lunch breaks or pay increases.
National Labor Relations Act
The National Labor Relations Act is the U.S. labor law that governs collective bargaining between an employer and its employees' bargaining representative. Supervisory employees are expressly excluded from the NLRA's coverage. In other words, the NLRA does not require an employer to bargain with a representative of its supervisory employees. The NLRA's definition of a supervisory employee does not refer to whether the employee is paid on an hourly or salary basis. Instead, a supervisor is defined as an individual who has the authority to hire, fire or discipline other employees.
Professional Employees
Professional employees do come within the coverage of the NLRA. The definition of professional employee in the NLRA does not turn on whether an employee is paid on a salary or hourly basis. Instead, the professional employee definition is based on the employee's work duties, as well as the type of training and education the employee has received. The NLRA states that professional employees and nonprofessional employees will not be placed in the same unit or group for bargaining collectively with their employer unless a majority of the professional employees vote to be included in such a collective bargaining unit.


Read more: Salary Labor Laws | eHow.com Salary Labor Laws | eHow.com

[TheSpecialist]

BTW the NLRA which covers all employees both Union and Non Union was brought to you by the Labor Unions.

No need to thank us, but just don't hate.


If you want to hate, hate on the CEO's making far more money than they will ever need....

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by TheSpecialist

If you want to hate, hate on the CEO's making far more money than they will ever need....

Wrong again, because you don't get economics 101.

I agree that CEO compensation is insane. But CEOs in the private sector, unlike unionized employees in the public sector, cannot force anyone to absorb those costs.

If Bill Gates pays himself too much, the marketplace will respond by buying from his competitors. So Gates, unlike public unions, is only getting from his customers that which his customers freely choose to give him. He can't force his costs on anybody. Bill Gates isn't hurting anybody, the free marketplace does not allow him to do so. (On a side note, what he's doing is creating thousands of good jobs, and creating wealth for his millions of shareholders. He is also taxed at the highest rate, which reduces the tax burden on the rest of us.)

Taxpayers don't have the luxury of buying from someone else. Last time I checked, I don't have the option of not paying the portion of my taxes that I think are ridiculously excessive.

By what right do public unionized employees forcibly confiscate from taxpayers, revenue to cover costs that no one in the private sector would ever be williung to pay?

We have buried this issue for decades, but the check has arrived at our table, and it's a big check. We have elected politicians who are much more concerned with getting re-elected than they are concerned with solving tough problems, and it's about to blow up in our faces.

Or do you union guys not agree that we are facing a debt crisis, due in large part to your benefits?

I want to be clear, I do not hate cops and teachers. If my property taxes are raised so that cops and teachers don't have to live in trailers and eat cat food, that's one thing. If my property taxes are raised so that cops and teachers and cops can cling to insane, antiquated benefits that dwarf anything available in the private sector, that's something else. And no rational person can suggest that the latter isn't exactly what's happening.

In the private sector, we live with 401(k)s, and we pay, on average, 35% - 40% of our healthcare costs (the company pays the rest). And we all survive. There's no reason why public employees cannot do the same. They obviously won't LIKE making the switch, but that doesn't mean it's not the right thing to do.

I have never heard of anyone who had to sell their house because of Bill Gates. Lots of people are forced out of their homes by property tax hikes.

[Chesapeake Bill]

Swimmer,

You hit it right on the head. The overtime money is typically DHS funding through UASI grants and other Federal programs that are not counted toward retirement. SO using the salaries of employees (especially police) is not a good indicator of how much the state is on the hook for as far as retirement benefits go. It is an indicator of how well representatives are able to get funding back to their states. But why limit ourselves to the facts when we can have a proper witch hunt? The fire is so much brighter to the uninformed...

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Chesapeake Bill

Swimmer,

You hit it right on the head. The overtime money is typically DHS funding through UASI grants and other Federal programs that are not counted toward retirement. SO using the salaries of employees (especially police) is not a good indicator of how much the state is on the hook for as far as retirement benefits go. It is an indicator of how well representatives are able to get funding back to their states. But why limit ourselves to the facts when we can have a proper witch hunt? The fire is so much brighter to the uninformed...

Bill and Swimmer, here in CT, I do not know of a town where overtime does not contribute to cops' pensions. I have served on my town's board of education, so I know a lot about public unionized employees compensation. As a former benefits actuary, I also know exactly how much more expensive a pension is than a 401(k). If I'm uninformed, can you please point out somethiong I said that's wrong, instead of insulting me simply because you don't like what I'm saying?

Bill, instead of hurling insults at me (and baseless insults at that), can you try to answer a simple, direct question?

"If the entire private sector has to live with whatever we can accumulate in our 401(k)'s, why is it unfair to ask our public servents to do the same?"

Try not to call that question a "witchhunt", and instead try answering it.

And why on Earth is it reasonable that cops can collect those pensions afetr 20 years of service, with no age minimum? My first cousin was a police officer in New Haven, CT. He retired at age 43, and yes, his overtime fattened his pension. He works for 20 years, and gets a pension for 50 years?

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Bill and Swimmer, here in CT, I do not know of a town where overtime does not contribute to cops' pensions.

CT Town Reaches Police Pension Agreement
January 31, 2011 (PLANSPONSOR.com) – The town of Stratford, Connecticut, has hammered out an agreement with its police union to institute a 401(k) for new hires instead of traditional pensions.

A Connecticut Post story said under the new contract, the town will match 401(k) contributions made by future employees up to 6%. The agreement does not change the pension benefits for current employees.

About 60 officers hired between 1996 and July 1, 2010, will receive pensions based strictly on base pay. Officers hired before 1996 -- there are about 39 of them -- will continue to receive pensions calculated from their base pay plus overtime, the news report said.

Several police and fire department retirees now receive more than $100,000 in pension payments each year, including a police captain who retired last spring with an annual pension of $134,000 -- far above his last salary, according to the newspaper.

A $1,200 cap on health insurance obligations has also been erased, making current and future employees responsible for 12% of their insurance premiums. On July 1, 2012, that amount will increase to 13%.

The agreement still has to be ratified by the Town Council.

[TheSpecialist]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

CT Town Reaches Police Pension Agreement
January 31, 2011 (PLANSPONSOR.com) – The town of Stratford, Connecticut, has hammered out an agreement with its police union to institute a 401(k) for new hires instead of traditional pensions.

A Connecticut Post story said under the new contract, the town will match 401(k) contributions made by future employees up to 6%. The agreement does not change the pension benefits for current employees.

About 60 officers hired between 1996 and July 1, 2010, will receive pensions based strictly on base pay. Officers hired before 1996 -- there are about 39 of them -- will continue to receive pensions calculated from their base pay plus overtime, the news report said.

Several police and fire department retirees now receive more than $100,000 in pension payments each year, including a police captain who retired last spring with an annual pension of $134,000 -- far above his last salary, according to the newspaper.

A $1,200 cap on health insurance obligations has also been erased, making current and future employees responsible for 12% of their insurance premiums. On July 1, 2012, that amount will increase to 13%.

The agreement still has to be ratified by the Town Council.

Seems as though I am not the only one who has no idea about what sprouts from my mouth.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by TheSpecialist

Seems as though I am not the only one who has no idea about what sprouts from my mouth.

ZSpecialist, and Dad -

And the cops hired before 1996? I assume their pensions are fattened with overtime?

I never said there aren't towns that don't consider overtime, I said I wasn't aware of any, and now I am.

So Specialist, I guess there's no budget crisis facing governments because of benefits? Do you really believe that?

[Chesapeake Bill]

Jim,

My statement was not pointed at anyone in particular. But hey, if you feel guilty that's all on you.

It looks as though someone already answered the question for me.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Chesapeake Bill

Jim,

My statement was not pointed at anyone in particular. But hey, if you feel guilty that's all on you.

It looks as though someone already answered the question for me.

Bill, I think you'll agree that I responded dircetly to your many questions. You dodged mine completely. Who answered my question? Where? Please post the answer to my question, if you'd be so kind. Or better yet, please give me your own answer.

Is that too much to ask? If you want engaging debate, you can't just ask questions and hurl insults. My question is fair, simple, and gets right to the heart of this matter. Please answer directly. I sincerely tried to respond to your points, please show me the same courtesy.

[Piscator]

Details and overtime are typically viewed as two different things. Overtime counts toward pension and retirement "credit" and details do not as they are funded by the company needing it (which in turn passes the cost on to the consumer). Soooo, we are all paying for it in the end anyway. We are not paying the "detail" portion in pensions later.
The other question is, at what point does working all the "detail" & "overtime" hours impact the person performing their job. The rules are very lenient on allowing a lot of hours being worked in the course of the week and i hope it does not affect performance

[Swimmer]

Originally Posted by Piscator

Details and overtime are typically viewed as two different things. Overtime counts toward pension and retirement "credit" and details do not as they are funded by the company needing it (which in turn passes the cost on to the consumer). Soooo, we are all paying for it in the end anyway. We are not paying the "detail" portion in pensions later.
The other question is, at what point does working all the "detail" & "overtime" hours impact the person performing their job. The rules are very lenient on allowing a lot of hours being worked in the course of the week and i hope it does not affect performance

I wasn't going to get involved in this again, but in Massachusetts overtime does not add to police pensions. Not one dime. Detail pay does not count either. Base salary only counts toward retirement. For thirty seven years when the phone guy or the N Star/Edison crew went for coffee I had to pay for my own and they never took money from me for thiers. No coffee, no beer, and I worked with some pretty loose crews, but thier was never any quid pro uo, never. Everyone always wants to think the worse, no doubt thier are some #^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&s out there who try make all of us look bad, but we only look bad as the #^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&s, if we allow ourselves to be included in your and thier thought processes.

[TheSpecialist]

Originally Posted by Swimmer

I wasn't going to get involved in this again, but in Massachusetts overtime does not add to police pensions. Not one dime. Detail pay does not count either. Base salary only counts toward retirement. For thirty seven years when the phone guy or the N Star/Edison crew went for coffee I had to pay for my own and they never took money from me for thiers. No coffee, no beer, and I worked with some pretty loose crews, but thier was never any quid pro uo, never. Everyone always wants to think the worse, no doubt thier are some #^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&s out there who try make all of us look bad, but we only look bad as the #^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&s, if we allow ourselves to be included in your and thier thought processes.

[Piscator]

Originally Posted by Swimmer

I wasn't going to get involved in this again, but in Massachusetts overtime does not add to police pensions. Not one dime. Detail pay does not count either. Base salary only counts toward retirement. For thirty seven years when the phone guy or the N Star/Edison crew went for coffee I had to pay for my own and they never took money from me for thiers. No coffee, no beer, and I worked with some pretty loose crews, but thier was never any quid pro uo, never. Everyone always wants to think the worse, no doubt thier are some #^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&s out there who try make all of us look bad, but we only look bad as the #^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&s, if we allow ourselves to be included in your and thier thought processes.

Hey Swimmer, thanks for getting involved in the post again. You are correct. Quinn Bill $ does count but OT & Details do not. I stand corrected. More importantly, I apologize if my post lumped all the good in with the bad. It wasn't my intention and I should have been more careful. Sorry for that. Thank you for posting and pointing that out. The reason I posted is that I know of very specific instances where this quid pro quo happens consistently in a particular town/city with a number (not all) of particular officers. I know this because I have some close friends/relatives that are on the force there (& no, not the town I live in). You are correct, the few bad eggs make everyone else look bad.

One thing I don't get is why does a 4 hour and 30 minute detail get rounded up to 8 hours?

[Chesapeake Bill]

Actually Jim I don't care to debate with you. Much like the various televangelists you don't want to discuss anything. Instead you merely want to espouse your own brand of the King James Bible. You aren't going to sway me to your way of seeing the world so lets just leave it at that. You can pick up your bible and try to win over other souls...I can tell that your insults about people not understanding economics 101 is really working.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Chesapeake Bill

Actually Jim I don't care to debate with you. Much like the various televangelists you don't want to discuss anything. Instead you merely want to espouse your own brand of the King James Bible. You aren't going to sway me to your way of seeing the world so lets just leave it at that. You can pick up your bible and try to win over other souls...I can tell that your insults about people not understanding economics 101 is really working.

I don't want to discuss anything? Please. I answered all of your points, you are the one who refuses to address one simple question.

Coward.

[The Dad Fisherman]

I'm not Hyper-dissecting anything......it just sounded from your statement that everybody in the private sector gets salary and the public sector are the ones getting the overtime.

I was just clarifying


and trust me...I've done it to others too....

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

I'm not Hyper-dissecting anything......it just sounded from your statement that everybody in the private sector gets salary and the public sector are the ones getting the overtime.

I was just clarifying


and trust me...I've done it to others too....

Fair enough. How about answering my question?

[Jim in CT]

When I worked as an employee benefits actuary, there were 3 occasions where my firm was hired by towns to see what the savings would be if (1) public employees switched from pensions to 401(k)'s, and (2) public employees paid the same percentage of their healthcare costs as the average taxpayer in the town.

They were very cool studies. In all 3 cases, we determined that those actions would save each household about $1600 per year in property taxes. Those changes were not implemented in any of the 3 towns, and by coincidence all 3 towns were run by Democrats.

What that means is this. The average family pays $1600 per year just for the portion of public benefits that go beyond what's available to everyone else.

I'd like someone, anyone, to tell me why public employees have the right to take $1600 away from my kids each year, just so they can cling to benefits that don't exist anywhere else. Why is their financial security more important to society that the security of my kids?

And as a side note, that $1600 annual surcharge was at existing property tax levels. Now that towns are realizing they can't come close to paying for what the unions demanded, taxes will go up, menaing that annual surcharge will be much more than $1600.

Anyone in a union out there, please tell me why you deserve that money and those benefits. I'm a rational, reasonable guy, alwaya willing to listen.

Chris Christie for president!!

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Fair enough. How about answering my question?

How about the fact you added the question AFTER I made that post

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

How about the fact you added the question AFTER I made that post

Ok, I concede that I asked you that question after you posted. Whoop-dee-do.

Now, how about the fact that not you, nor anyone else, tried to answer it. If someone directly addressed my question, I missed it, so please show me.

Dad, it gets tiresome when I make the attempt to directly respond to dozens of questions and points, and no one will respond to one of mine.

You say folks "gave their take" on it? Where? Where did someone directly address the question I asked about the fairness of forcing taxpayers to bear these costs?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

How about the fact you added the question AFTER I made that post

Yes, how about that fact? Why is that important?

Dad, you seem, at times, extyremely rational, so I was curious to see your answer to my question.

Do you only feel comfortable answering questions that have been asked before you join the discussion?

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Yes, how about that fact? Why is that important?

Because you asked me why I hadn't answered a question....That I didn't know was asked

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Do you only feel comfortable answering questions that have been asked before you join the discussion?

as opposed to what.....answering questions that haven't been asked yet.