- NEWS
- SPORTS
- O.C. players make an impact in NFL 3 hours & 57 minutes ago
- Big-play Trojans? Not this season 1 hour & 7 minutes ago
- Hudler, Physioc let go by Fox
- USC football: 10 reasons why it went wrong 3 hours & 57 minutes ago
- BUSINESS
- O.C.Biz Wrap: Hot cars, cliff hanging homes 1 hour & 7 minutes ago
- Creatively enhanced home listing of the week 25 minutes ago
- Really? Housing regulator defaults on loans 2 hours & 52 minutes ago
- California workers see bad job market
- ENTERTAINMENT
- Find out who won 'Dancing With The Stars' 29 seconds ago
- Rattle, Berlin Phil awash in Brahms 3 hours & 36 minutes ago
- Jim Gaffigan brings his new act to O.C.
- 'Little Women' well performed in Anaheim
- LIFE
- TRAVEL
- OPINION
Pension hike would mean windfall for top Met water execs
October 7th, 2009, 5:00 am · 79 Comments · posted by Teri Sforza, Register staff writer
(UPDATE: Our list of Met employees within striking distance of retirement has been amended to show just those earning more than $75,000 a year.)
If every employee at the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California with more than 20 years of service retired today - getting a pension of 2 percent of pay for each year worked - Met would pay $26 million a year.
Now, if these same employees retire next week - and Met’s board approves hiking the pension formula to 2.5 percent on Tuesday - Met would pay $32.6 million a year.
That extra $6.5 million wouldn’t put quite the same smile on all employees’ faces.
The guy on the list who stands to gain the most under the new formula? Gilbert Ivey, Met’s assistant general manager and CAO (who has been negotiating the new contracts with the unions). With more than 38 years in, and an annual salary of $239,625, Ivey would get 95 percent of his pay for the rest of his life. That’s a dollars-and-cents increase of $45,601 a year under the new formula - from $182,402 to $228,003.
We at The Watchdog asked Met to provide a spreadsheet of all employees with at least 20 years of service, along with names, titles and pay. We were surprised to find there are 492 such folks within putting distance of retirement - about one-quarter of Met’s work force. You can see the top folks on the list by clicking on this: met-employees-with-20-years-over-75000.
After Gilbert, the next-happiest person would probably be Debra Man, assistant GM and COO. With 23 years in, and an annual salary of $248,934, she’d see her pension rise to $146,622 from $117,298 - or $29,324 more a year, for the rest of Man’s life.
And then there’s Setha Schlang, senior deputy general counsel, with 32 years in and a salary of $177,840.Schlang’s pension would rise to $142,183 from $113,746 - or $28,437more a year, for the rest of Schlang’s life.
If you want to know what that means for General Manager Jeff Kightlinger, who earns $276,000 a year and has been with Met for 14 years - read our story here.
Would there be an exodus of talent and institutional knowledge if the new formula passes on Tuesday? Time would tell. But if you could get 95 percent of pay for not working, would you still drag your sorry self to the office?
Note here that our calculations assume that everyone on the list is 55 and would retire at precisely 2.5 percent. Actual calculations would vary depending on age at retirement. (Met is looking over our spreadsheet to see if it has anything to add; we hope to hear back by this afternoon, and will update you with any news.)
We noted last month that the top executives at Met - who argue that the controversial new contracts that would hike pensions 25 percent, and raise pay up to 23 percent - would leave Met stronger, financially, than it is right now.
We also noted that it’s the top Met executives - some of whom have been negotiating the deal with the unions, and trying to sell it to Met’s giant board of directors - will benefit most from the pension spike, in a pure dollars-and-cents sort of way.
The sweetened pensions would cost Met about $70 million over their life, at a time when Met’s investments are already down some $400 million.
Met quenches the thirst of 19 million desert-dwelling Southern Californians. It is governed by a 37-member board of directors. Those directors are appointed by its 26 member agencies - the cities and water districts of Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego and Ventura counties.
Those cities and water districts buy imported water from Met, and then sell it to you. Met’s water rates will have leaped 31 percent by next year. The rate hikes are not related to the proposed pay and pension hikes, officials say; Met’s massive infrastructure means most of its spending is there, as opposed to personnel.
An expert warned that legal troubles may loom if Met rejects the contracts at a special workshop last week.
More Watchdog:
79 Comments
Leave a Reply
You can follow this blog: on 
http://www3.signonsandiego.com/photos/2009/oct/05/64605/
Pension idea in line with other agencies
Water district meets fierce resistance
________________________________________
Outrage deluged the Metropolitan Water District after the regional supplier unveiled a plan to offer a more generous pension formula to its employees while customers are hit with double-digit rate hikes.
So how far out of line is the benefit the agency is proposing? Not very.
Of the 23 water agencies and city water departments in San Diego County, only one offers a pension payout formula as low as the current MWD plan — the Rincon del Diablo Municipal Water District in Escondido.
Even with the increase, the nearly 2,000 workers at the Metropolitan Water District would have a pension formula in the low- to middle range for public employees in San Diego County, according to a survey of benefits by The San Diego Union-Tribune.
The Los Angeles-based wholesaler, which provides water to 19 million customers in Southern California, says the high cost of water during a drought is causing rate increases — not employee benefits.
The MWD’s 37-member board, made up of representatives from water districts and cities, will decide on the proposal Oct. 13.
The Olivenhain Municipal Water District in Encinitas has been among the most vocal in opposing the MWD pension boost, calling it unconscionable. But like some districts, it offers the same formula as the MWD has proposed.
“It’s like a view lot,” said Mike Milliner, executive president of the union that represents about 1,500 MWD employees. “Everybody wants to stop development after they build their lot. Then, all of a sudden, no one else should be able to take advantage of it.”
If anything, the opposition may be less about the benefits and more about waiting too late to increase them.
“Timing is everything,” said Mark Muir, an Olivenhain board member who sits on the county water board. “Any other day, this might be acceptable. We were superfunded at one time. We had an expanding economy. We had a competitive market.
“In today’s environment, we don’t have that. We have unemployment reaching double digits. We have a troubled economy. We have double-digit rate increases.”
In the past decade, several area cities and water agencies enriched pension benefits, sometimes in exchange for employee concessions. That’s what the MWD is proposing to do.
Under a proposed five-year deal, MWD employees would give up leave payouts and performance bonuses and accept a longer vesting period for retiree medical benefits. New hires would be required to dedicate up to 8 percent of their salaries to fund retiree medical benefits — a move considered to be groundbreaking. However, neither existing nor new employees would have to contribute to their pensions.
The part of the proposal that is drawing opposition is the more generous pension formula.
Here is how the math works: Retirees’ annual pension payments would be 2.5 percent of their highest year of pay multiplied by years of service when retiring at age 55. The current multiplier is 2 percent. Under the proposed formula, employees with 30 years of service would collect pensions equivalent to 75 percent of their salary — an increase from the current 60 percent.
Under the proposal, MWD employees would have more generous pension payments than a few types of public employees, including teachers in the state retirement system, Poway city employees and new hires in San Diego city and county government.
MWD employees still would have benefits less generous than those offered at public agencies such as the airport authority, most cities and water districts in the region, and every police and fire department in the county.
Public safety employees, because of the nature of their jobs, generally collect pensions that amount to 90 percent of their pay when they retire at 50 or 55 after 30 years of employment.
San Diego Mayor Jerry Sanders, who pushed hard to lower pension benefits for new hires at the city, is a leading opponent of the MWD’s pension increase.
“Pension plans that are in place right now in government are not sustainable,” Sanders said, noting that he has also talked to the San Diego County Water Authority about the need to manage its pension costs.
Today’s workers are living longer and collecting pensions for decades after retirement, creating a financial burden on taxpayers, Sanders said.
With pension funds taking heavy losses in their investment portfolios, several public agencies are looking at revamping retirement formulas or requiring employees to contribute more toward their pensions.
When Olivenhain boosted pension benefits in 2004, its workers began contributing 3 percent of their salaries toward retirement. Previously, they paid nothing. Meanwhile, the agency did away with retiree medical care.
Not all districts have extracted such concessions. Like the MWD, the Ramona Municipal Water District does not require employee pension contributions. The agency offers more generous pension payouts than what the MWD is proposing.
Still, Ralph McIntosh, general manager of the Ramona district, wrote to the MWD, “This particular issue is hard to swallow here at the Ramona Municipal Water District in light of the large rate increases from MWD that we are currently passing on to our customers.”
Jim Bond, a board member of the San Dieguito Water District in Encinitas, said the MWD’s proposal runs counter to what other water agencies are trying to accomplish.
“It’s not going to help by having a big large entity like Metropolitan leading the field pushing” higher pension benefits, Bond said. “While we are trying to pull it in, Met is trying to push it out.”
Bond said the MWD’s proposal does not sit well with ratepayers in part because there is a growing sentiment that public employees enjoy more generous compensation packages than workers in the private sector.
When the contract for employees with the County Water Authority comes up for renewal next year, board member Muir said the agency board must examine pension benefits the same way it has scrutinized the MWD’s. “You’ve got to do it. You can’t be hypocrites,” he said. “You at least have to have the conversation.”
The water authority increased benefits three years ago, asking employees to contribute 1 percent of their pay toward their pensions.
Gary Arant, general manager of the Valley Center Municipal Water District, said if the MWD wants to boost pensions, its employees should cover the cost through payroll deductions, as his agency’s employees do.
Arant told his colleagues at a recent County Water Authority meeting that it’s unfair to denounce the MWD when almost all the water districts in the region offer a better formula.
“You can’t blame them for wanting a better plan,” he said. “It’s just that the timing is lousy.”
Union-Tribune
You’re kidding, right? Where are the salaries and pensions of all of the employees of Metropolitan’s 27 member agencies — especially those 85% with formula’s higher than Met employees have — those already at 2.5, 2.7 and even 3? Seems that would make even better reading. But wait, those employees aren’t already at the bottom asking to be raised a little bit — to the middle ground! This is ridiculous. If you want to reform CA pensions, do that. These 2000 employees just don’t want to be bottom feeders!
http://weblog.signonsandiego.com/news/breaking/PensionsMWD.pdf
Here is a good comparision of what MWD is asking for….
Not bad - Good Job to the San Diego paper for not being biased.
Seriously, stop using water folks. Let your yards die. I am fed up with all this greed. There are tent cities, vets not getting the care they deserve, unemployment highs, decreased real estate values etc What world do these people live in? What nerve.
Only one word describes this new giveaway…
GREED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Fire them all!!!!!!!!!!!
Investigate the crooks!!!!!!!!!!!!
Excellant iead. Remove the experience from the group that manages a 75 year old water distribution system, AND then let all the customers of the retail water providers that rely on that system find their own water.
Albertson’s can only sell so many bottles of water, and someone that lives in a condo has no where to dig an outhouse.. You gotta love iggnorance!
JR & GB…. get a REAL Life.
Did you actually READ the article fro San Diego?
Come on, MWD Employees are asking for a FAIR increase and GIVING UP alot to get it.
It’s 9:00 AM - go back to bed and turn the TV on.
Go on, Water Girl! MET employees DID give up a lot of what they’re used to. It IS a fair increase they’re asking for, too. Crooks? Bah! Wholesale water rates have been steady for 5+ years, but the local member agencies continue to increase the price of water and related services to its customers. Typically, when wholesale prices go up, retail (or end user) prices quickly, and logically, follow. However, MET has held firm on its pricing, and is FINALLY asking for a long overdue price increase on the wholesale side. DWP still has a higher wage for similar positions that MET has, yet DWP’s pipeline system is systematically falling apart! That’s wierd, huh?
m0
AS JOHN & KEN ELOQUENTLY STATED
——————————————————————————————————————————-
MWD pension increases must be stopped!
The Metropolitan Water District wants to increase employee pensions by 25%! Why do we have to pay more for water if they are going to turn around and give the money to the pension slobs?
You’ve got to stop this. These people are parasites and they are going to be leaching off of you until the day they die!
Metropolitan Water District Headquarters Tel: 213-217-6000
—————————————————————————————————————————– AND AS I SAID
——————————————————————————————————————————-
There are tent cities, vets not getting the care they deserve, unemployment highs, decreased real estate values etc What world do these people live in? What nerve.
Water Girl says:
October 7, 2009 at 9:08 amJR & GB…. get a REAL Life.
Did you actually READ the article fro San Diego?
Come on, MWD Employees are asking for a FAIR increase and GIVING UP alot to get it.
===========================
***MET SCAM ALERT***MET SCAM ALERT***MET SCAM ALERT***
Greedy welfare queen public employee spouting off pure NONSENSE!
Hey water girl, how about you stop whining like a little 3rd grader and be thankful of what you have, instead of trying to stick your fat, little, greedy hands in MY pocket.
You don’t DESERVE a RETROACTIVE pension raise that you did NOT work for or EARN.
You lazy losers have nerve-I swear!!!!!!
Let’s be fair and why not publish how much each of the Met Employees also pay in taxes and water fees.
As Met employees we pay our fair share of taxes (payroll, real estate, sales, etc) and we also do not get our water for free we pay the same as everyone else.
Last I remember I also have been spending my pay check in my community right here in Southern California which helps the local economy. One day I plan to retire here and spend my retire check here too!
Joe Public and Met Employee says:
Let’s be fair and why not publish how much each of the Met Employees also pay in taxes and water fees.
=========================================
Wow, another Jr Einstein MET loser, with more non related, non material nonsense.
Never stops with these guys!
You notice that when they can’t justify this big fat pension increase that will mostly benefit the big fat executive cats negotiating it, they obfuscate the issue with alleged ‘give-backs’ that they CLAIM will actually overall save the system money. Horse malarkey! In these desperate times ALL EMPLOYEE SALARIES AND BENEFITS should be reduced, just as what is happening in the private sector. You don’t see the private sector asserting …. ‘well, we are reducing salaries but increasing benefits’ Heck no! EVERYTHING ACROSS THE BOARD IS BEING CUT!!!! This is a shell game being played by MWD to fool the taxpayer and citizens!!! Call your local state official along with Boxer and Feinstein today to complain!!! I don’t know how much good it will do but everyone needs to be vocal about this!!! Don’t let them outright STEAL your taxdollars without speaking out!!! Let them know that YOU know what they’re doing!!! Unless there is pushback they will just steamroll right over top of you!!!
Water girl,
PLEASE. Delude yourself if you want to, but the rest of us aren’t that stupid or that greedy. The employees at MWD aren’t themselves giving up that much. They made sure that any new hires do. MWD employees have talked about other agencies with higher pensions, but as the papers said, some have minimal medical contribution, and yours would be the envy of every working person, or matching 401K’s, or the salary you apparently have according to this list either.
For the Chief Negotiator of this proposal to get 95% of his salary for life at he salary he’s making is criminal. And if in negotiating this perk for himself and the rest of management isn’t a conflict of interst, I don’t know what is.
So what trouble will the board be in if they reject this deal? That the unions will sue? From what I’ve heard and read about MWD, there’s they have never been discouraged by lawsuits. the same applies to their outside legal consultants who I’m sure make a killing off MWD. As for the threat that the employer/employee relationship will be damaged, I know a lot of people who work for MWD. They are already so fed up with the mismanagement of MWD that they can’t wait to leave. They won’t be happy, becuase this deal would mean that they could get out of MWD faster, but they will deal with it.
I don’t always agree with my own agency, but at least my agency was facing furloughs and layoffs, and the employees finally put up more money to get the older ones out.
Great idea!
If this information wasn’t about a public utility like MET, there would be no argument. Sounds a lot like the government in general: don’t ask, don’t tell. Kudos to MET for standing tall and leaving every door open for scrutiny and applause alike.
Joe Public and MET employee wrote:
“Let’s be fair and why not publish how much each of the Met Employees also pay in taxes and water fees”
BIG difference, Joe.
YOU DON’T PAY MY SALARY OR GUARANTEE MY RETIREMENT!!!
AND YOU DON’T GENERATE THE GDP THAT PAYS GOVERNMENT SALARIES AND PENSIONS LIKE I DO.
Now do you see the difference between you and me???
EVEN MORE FASCINATING..SOME OF THE CITIES THAT ARE SUPOORTING THIS THEFT ARE LOW-INCOME. YOU MUST BE REAL PROUD MWD…ROBBING THE POOR! PATHETIC
————————————————————————-
-Anaheim
-Beverly Hills
-Burbank
-Compton
-Fullerton
-Glendale
-Long Beach
-Los Angeles
-Pasadena
-San Fernando
-San Marino
-Santa Ana
-Santa Monica
-Torrance
Robbing the poor? These local utilities have been raising rates while MWD hasn’t. Since when are entire cities considered “low income” anyway? Looks about 1:3 ratio regarding low vs. high income on the above list.
Huh? says:
Robbing the poor? These local utilities have been raising rates while MWD hasn’t.
==================================
Dude, or should I say MET Employee, MET has raised their rates a WHOPPING 31% in just 18 months.
What the hell are you smoking?????????????
Smoking that stuff you sold me last week. By the way, MWD is hiring. Get in while you still can. You do realize that MWD’s pipeline is lined with gold? That’s why the pipes don’t bust open and flood your low income cities. MWD should raise the rates another 31%… in your neighborhood. Here’s the link for that job you probably need:
http://www.mwdh2o.com/mwdh2o/pages/jobs/jobs01.html
-Huh?
Just for the record, NOT ALL OF US approved of this contract. Fire them all, you say? I EARNED my job here; if you don’t like your job or the benefits aren’t to your liking, you could have applied here just like I did and been eligible for the same benefits that I and other Met employees receive. I LOVE my job and I enjoy coming to work every day. I’m also one of the lowest paid employees here. Not everyone makes a six-figure salary. Some of us make considerably less. Like you, I have a family, bills, and a mortgage to pay. I don’t get my water for free, nor do I receive a discount. Personally, I voted NO on the proposed contract–as did approximately 30% of the union. Do I like the contract? No, I don’t. I don’t like the fact that incoming employees will bear the brunt of the burden or that some of the benefits that we currently have are being given up in order to justify it. Giving things up is easier than getting them back. These are only two of the reasons that I—and many others—voted no. Financially speaking, I will not be able to retire at 55, and therefore, the 2.5 at 55 formula will be meaningless to me. By the time I retire—closer to 65—I will have EARNED my 2.5 at 55 with 20+ years of DEVOTED service. A sound retirement policy was one of the BENEFITS—all companies SHOULD have them—that I agreed to when I was offered my job. Why shouldn’t employees with 20+ years of service be entitled to a retirement fund? They earned that retirement fund. Do I think that it should be 2.5 at 55? Maybe not, but it’s unjust to point the finger at ALL Met employees when more than 1000 of us don’t fall into the 20+ years of service or make six figures a year. It also must be considered that some of us are ADAMANTLY opposed to this new contract. If the Board approves it on Tuesday, then we can only hope to change it again in five years when it expires.
Well said. People forget that many employees of public agencies are absolutely opposed to some of this stuff, and that the overwhelming majority of those who profit from this union trash are upper management and politicians.
However, I disagree with you one ONE thing. No one…NO ONE…should get a retirement paid for by the public taxpayers, save those who are injured in the line of duty. We should have fair retirement funds that are defined contributions, not defined benefits. It just isn’t fair to ask others to pay for our retirement, IMHO.
Further, no one should be able to retire at 55. Especially not on someone else’s dime.
Met Employee says:
I will have EARNED my 2.5 at 55 with 20+ years of DEVOTED service. A sound retirement policy was one of the BENEFITS—all companies SHOULD have them—that I agreed to when I was offered my job. Why shouldn’t employees with 20+ years of service be entitled to a retirement fund? They earned that retirement fund.
========================
No, you did NOT “earn” a retroactive pension increase-which is what this is.
And please-show me where, ANYWHERE, in the private sector where a person can work just 20 short years-like you claim- and then get a DB pension that is 50% of their final years salary-for life.
The private sector lives and works in the REAL world-not the Fantasyland of Gov employment.
90% of gov employees would not last 1 week in a real private sector job.
Another MET whopper shot down in flames.
Now it’s my turn to disagree with you. “The private sector lives and works in the REAL world-not the Fantasyland of Gov employment.
90% of gov employees would not last 1 week in a real private sector job.”
I have more than 20 years experience in the private sector, plus another 10+ years as a “government” employee. My employment history runs the gamut from minimum wage for NUMEROUS years, to welfare recipient, to working poor. Most of the employees here are and honest, hard-working. Yes, we work for the government–an opportunity available to nearly everyone. I’m assuming you CHOSE to work at your current job (assuming your employed) just as I CHOSE to work at mine. Before accepting my job, I was offered a higher paying position, but turned it down for the BENEFITS. Yes, I work for a public agency, and you have to consider the fact that not all of us public employees are the greedy monsters that you make us out to be.
As for a retirement paid for by the public or on the public’s dime, what about school teachers? Like Met employees, they pay into PERS. Should they be denied or punished as well or is it just Met employees that have a target painted on their backs?
I don’t claim to know all the details of the contract, the negotiations, or even the benefits or losses involved. I just feel like, for the first time in my career, I’m beng treated by the public based solely on my employer and the actions of the negotiating committee.
Like I said, many of us are opposed to this contract, but we were defeated. Some of us even believe that the voting process was tarnished. I’m not asking for a retroactive retirement plan paid for on the backs of my fellow employees–or on my husband’s (a member of the private sector–it’s being forced upon me.
JBGR said:
90% of gov employees would not last 1 week in a real private sector job.
***************************************************
I’m not sure I agree with the number, but I would agree that many long term government workers would be very hard pressed to survive in the private sector job markets, because we become very tunnel visioned and our programs and trainings are so very specific, it would be irrelevant in other jobs. Also, to be fair, many of our older workers (not all, but many) have been so protected and pampered in their “bullet proof positions”, they really became very lazy. So I agree with you, to a point.
But, on the other hand? I think that 90% of the private sector could not and would not last a week in some of our jobs. If you had to inspect rat infested buildings, or deal with a cottage full of severely emotionally disturbed toddlers/teens who have been removed from their parents, or if you had to take people screaming at you over their taxes, you might not do so well. We see people at their worst, and we take a lot of guff, because people think that because we are government workers, we “work for them” and they can treat us as they please.
Personally, I’ve had my car keyed by a client I denied, and been screamed at, assaulted and threatened. And no matter what our politics or personal views are, we have to administer programs and services with a smile, to anyone and everyone, regardless of how they treat us. I had a client threaten me just two days ago, and I still had to meet with him and let him verbally abuse me, all because the law says I can’t give him what he wants.
Additionally, at least in my field, we have specialized training, complex regulations, endless paperwork, political inter office game playing, deadlines, mandates, quality controls, performance standards and regulations. We are mandated reporters, on call emergency disaster workers (no choice, it’s the law) and we see and hear the worst of humanity. I’ve cried over the pain clients have had, and the frustration of not being able to help good honest people, while scam artists and criminals get benefits. Day in and day out, we keep working, and many of us are highly educated, skilled and dedicated, but we pick up the slack for the lazy, the slackers and the dead weight. We have to, because the union protects them, and because we feel an obligation to the public to help. We’re not noble. We get paid decently and have good benefits. I don’t think taxpayers should pay my retirement. I don’t want to retire.
But Johnny, I doubt that this job would be something that 90% of the public could do, either. The scum of the Earth, the con artists, the druggie psychos, the child abusers, the foul smelling drunks covered in lice, the people who speak no English, the truly needy, the kids having babies at 13…I work with all of them. It’s harder than people think, and no, most people wouldn’t last a week.
But that’s enough rambling.
My lunch hour is almost over. Bottom line, no one should expect anyone to pay for their retirement, especially not at 55. Dump unions, and let us rise in our jobs based on hard work and merit. That’s my stand.
You have obviously never heard of the Longshore Workers. 75% of them make more than mid range city, county or even MWD employees, they have a defined binifit retirement and a bunch of other stuff. I don’t hear you winning about them.
What a bunch of idiots! It saves money! The employee’s against it, want more, so they hope it fails!
You folks in O. C. , you know who you are, you poor, oppressed, spawn’s of John Birch Society, unemployable, nit wits, don’t seem to understand you are being played!
“It’s a wonder you can even feed yourself”
There aren’t many companies in the private sector that will hold on to ANY employee for 20 years. They will lay them off or fire their butts first. I came here mid career fromt the private sector, having endured three layoffs. So, I know what it can be like out there.
I was initially for the contract because I was led to believe it was revenue nuetral in terms of the ENHANCEMENT of .5%. Yes, the first 2% is based on contributions made by MWD on behalf ot its employees now, and would continue to be so under the new contract. The argument the union and management made alike was that it made enough concessions to cover the additional .5%, and was going to cost MWD any additional money. However, at the recent workshop, the actuary expressed concern, and I have my doubts myself.
If the contract does not pass, I think we ought to investigate whether we could change to a defined contribution system for ALL employees where MWD would kick in 8% and the employees would kick in 8% into PERS, very similar to how it is done in private sector with Social Security.
As for the approximately 25-30% pulling in six figures in current salaries, how does it compare to another utility like SDG&E or SCE. One can argue that those utilities are not public entities, but I certainly can’t choose from different electricity providers in my area any more than anyone can choose the water provider in theirs. My instinct is that their salaries are probably as least as good as not better, and though they may not have pensions, they likely get stock options that MWD employees do not. Rather than trying to bring our salaries down, I would rather see folks push more to bring salaries in private sector back up. The pendulum clearly has swung too far the other way to the execs and shareholders on the backs of employees. But, that is a discussion on another board, I think.
Can we stop the vitriole and have a rational debate here?
First off, last I checked water is still really very cheap - especially if you’re not wasteful.
Oh look, Freedom Communications Inc. - owner of the OCRegister is filing for bankruptcy. How much do you think the CEOs and executives of this multi-million dollar company still make, and how much will they walk away with even after their company fails? http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1004008192#
Are you upset at how much these news corp executives make off subscriber’s money, how about Time Warner Execs off your cable bill, So Cal Edison executives from your electric bill? Water agencies and MWD pay salaries and costs by selling at a tiny margin and not tax dollars. Get that straight at a minimum…
What all non-govrnement employees need to realize is that govenrment employees are still paying for the benefits by accepting lower salaries and no bonuses, which we’ve all heard of the public sector bonuses. The way it works is that we know that a percentage of “potential” salary is being redirected to CALPERS. We also don’t expect social security and medical and medicare to take care of us, like private sector employees do.
Below is the National Average Salaries for CEOs from Salaray.com. Compare that to the low $276,000 Met’s GM is making he falls below the 10th percentile, and he has a law degree.
10th% 25th% 75th% 90th%
$350,563 $493,025 $848,407 $1,029,502
Benefit Median Amount % of Total
Base Salary $649,500 51.5%
Bonuses $414,457 32.9%
Social Security $22,049 1.7%
401k / 403b $8,820 0.7%
Link to Salrary.com site: http://swz.salary.com/salarywizard/layoutscripts/swzl_salaryresults.asp?op=salswz_psr&hdOmniNarrowDesc=Executive+and+Management&hdOmniTotalJobsFound=150&pagefrom=selectjob&redbird=&jobfamilycode=10&joblevelcode=&hdLocationOption=&hdSearchByOption=0&hdKeyword=Cheif+executive&hdJobCategory=EX01&hdZipCode=&hdStateMetro=&hdGeoLocation=U.S.+National+Averages&hdCurrentPage=1&hdViewAllRecords=0&hdSortBy=0&hdJobCode=EX05000001&hdJobTitle=Chief+Executive+Officer&hdNarrowDesc=Executive+and+Management&hdJSBoolDisplayAdvertisement=&jobcounter=1&countertype=1&rdbSearchByOption=0&txtKeyword=Cheif+executive&totaljoblistnum=2&hdAjaxDisplaySection1=0&hdAjaxDisplaySection2=1&hdAjaxKeyword=Cheif+executive&hdAjaxKeywordWithOR=%23Cheif%23+OR+%23executive%23
I work for MWD, but I know I am earning better than my private sector counterparts. This was not always true, but in many areas of the private sector, jobs have been outsourced to temporary agencies, consultants, and worst of all, to places like India for lower rates. And, all too often, these temps, consultants and foreigners don’t do nearly as good as a job!
I can fully understand the frustration when the overall numbers for public sector employees average about 40 percent over private sector. But rather than trying to reduce our salaries wholesale, perhaps folks in the private sector should apply more pressure to get corporations to pry some of the cash loose from the top execs and shareholders and back in the pockets of the employees.
Back to issue at hand….I think a change to a defined contribution system makes sense where employees kick in half to PERS and employers kick in half too. I know many of my union compadres won’t agree with me, but I do believe the actuaries that say PERS is a house of cards with the defined benefit setup now. The hard part is the legal wrangling that is likely to occur should MWD try it.
I feel MWD should keep raising the rates to pay all thier employees an even better retirement package. To the people that are bitching are the retirment package, STFU! Thanks
Send a message to those “greedy” MWD workers…
Starting now, don’t drink their water. instead, drink Evian and other bottled water that cost $8/gal and not regulated by the EPA. Let them know that we don’t need their water that cost less than 1 cent/gallon and requires stringent EPA regulations during treatment. Heck! if you really want to send a message, don’t shower and go to the river instead. By sending these messages, those “greedy” people will eventually fold and their company will be financially affected. Once they are depressed, maybe they’ll cut back in cost during water treatment and not care and give us bad tasting and unsafe drinking water….then, we can really bash them some more.
Imagine the nerves of these public servants working all these years and supplying us safe water to drink and now they want some raise? They should have worked the private sector and made more money there and not depend on the public they serve. Instead, they worked as public servants and protected their company from collapsing during the recent financial meltdown, and now they want raise during their retirement years! That’s outrageous! and could drive our water cost from 0.3 cent to 0.5 cent per gallon (yes! less than 1 cent per gallon). What irks me is that you have lawyers working there for more than 20 years and making $178,000/year. Problem solved it those lawyers have taken private law firm jobs and be making 3x their salary now.
To the bloggers that bashed these people, let’s combine our efforts and hate these public servants that worked all these years and gave us good and safe water to drink. These people should have let their company collapsed during the financial meltdown. Instead, we’re stuck with this problem.
this is a test
I believe the increase should be in line with the average american person increase, as the government was invented to be the peoples right arm, kind of sort of but the rate of annual adjustment in pay should be in line with the increase of the cost of living as an avererage ( average with the rest of us)
I am going to be grinning like a cheshire cat when these public pensions start to collapse (inevitable) and the public REFUSES to bail them out regardless of what the regulations state. When people are standing in soup lines for their next meal you will be hard pressed to force them to pay your fat pensions. I suspect there will be blood in the streets first. But good luck with your entitlement. Hope it works out for ya. But odds are 7/1 it won’t.
I’m a public employee, but I certainly believe that we need to consider that there are a lot of people who are hurting in this economy, who are losing their jobs, and who are strugglling to make ends meet. I don’t want my pension fund to go belly up, I don’t want the anger of the public that I see in these posts and I’m sure that most other public employees don’t either. These pension increases at a time whem people are struggling and costs are rising make the employees seem arrogant in asking for more. But it is MWD Management that is the biggest beneficiary of this deal if nothing else but by virtue of their salary,. The Asst. GM is at $240,000! Why was this individual at the bargaining table when he stood so much to gain?
What can you do about it? Since the Los Angeles contingent on the MWD Board is apparently in favor of this proposal, according to the new account, write or email the Mayor of the City of LA who appoints the LA Directors. Do the same for the new head of the DWP - a guy named S David Freeman. The LA Directors are supposed to take direction from both the Mayor AND the DWP, from what I’ve heard. Make your voices known in LA. So far, this issue hasn’t been reported in the LA TImes and its flying under the radar. Politicians care about public opinion. It is time to give them some.
hey City of LA
Thanks for your logical and rational post, with the ‘go to’ information.
Your assesment is correct: it’s arrogant of public employees to continue to whine and want more during this economy. This has building up for years, but to rub this in the taxpayers face at a time like this, is infuriating. And if it continues, I think we will see a civil upheaval that will get very ugly. Thhere are too many people that have put into the system all their lives and are being abanonded; while the rest of us who are making it, are expected to carry the fat cats. I believe in helping those in need, not greed.
Regarding: The Asst. GM is at $240,000! Why was this individual at the bargaining table when he stood so much to gain?
Since Teri Sforza did not use the actual age of employees to compute their retirement the numbers for Asst. GM Gil Ivey, and others in his situation, are all wrong. Think about it, if he has been working for Met for more than 38 years he would not be retiring at 55. If he started working at Met at 18 that would make him 56 already, if not older since I do not know when he started. Therefore, the increase in his retiring salary is minimal and he doesn’t have that much to gain. He is most likely going from 2.30 to 2.50, big deal! Same goes for other’s who are already over the age of 55, their gain will be minimal, and in many cases employees on the “over 20 years list” are already 60 and they will have no gain at all.
Dont’ confuse em with facts, Gov!
What irresponsible behavior on part of the OC Watchdog. It is one thing to perhaps publish job positions, projected 2% pension amounts and 2.5% pension amounts for those with over 20 years of service, but to include NAMES?
Is the Watchdog nuts, in this world of computer hackers and terrorists? We are talking about the infrastructure that 19 million Southern Californians rely on to receive their water. Let us just hope that no hacker will get into MWD’s email and computer system nor that an Al Queda won’t find a way to harm these folks.
Talk about being GRATITUTOUS.
Hmmm… Very interesting that you decide to feel inclined to be our Watchdog for that mean old Water District that has provided a continuous supply of clean and safe water for how many years? Oh I forgot that would have taken some effort on your part to research. I do see on your Facebook account that you live in Laguna Beach, are you kidding me? I wonder how many of your faithful know that you live in an area that very few of us working stiffs can afford. Maybe that is one reason why you parent company is going under. Obviously they pay you WAY too much for your incredible journalistic capabilities. You continued to mention the 27 Member agencies but not ONCE did I see any data in your article about where MWD compares among these other agencies. Why don’t you go back and read the San Diego Tribune article that at least provides some facts and comparisons. Oh sorry that would have also taken some effort on your part, where do you live again? All the waste in our state and this is the area of focus? How much do we pay our legislature (and what is their retirement) to do NOTHING for us? You should take a good look at what it is you are trying to accomplish, Watchdog of what exactly?
Joe Water -
It would be silly to assume that you read everything I’ve written on this topic, but let me direct you to this story:
OC agencies have some of the sweetest public pensions in California
http://taxdollars.freedomblogging.com/2009/09/25/oc-agencies-have-some-of-the-sweetest-public-pensions-in-california/37557/
it ran more than two weeks ago, and points out that most of the agencies do have higher pension formulas than Met’s.
I am a big fan of the SD-UT, though.
Keep up the good work, Teri.
If not for you this scandal would have never come to the surface for the people to see.
Keep exposing the trough feeders.
Thanks.
Teri Sforza, Register staff writer says:
October 8, 2009 at 10:43 amJoe Water -
It would be silly to assume that you read everything I’ve written on this topic, but let me direct you to this story:
====================
That’s it Teri….lay some smack down on these over inflated money grubbing scammers!
why dont you put your energy into reading the over thousand page health care bill if you want to talk about where your taxes are going to go!
great idea! don’t save ALL American lives, JUST SAVE MWD FAT Employees Golden Years!
gimme a break!
and TRY AGAIN.
jr your a moron obviously!
I did not see your article so thank you for sending me the link. I guess where I am confused is if MWD and some of the other agencies are on the lowest end of the pension plan why are they being singled out? It is similar to the other bloggers noting the salaries of executives in the business world making a LOT more money than public agencies. So if you decide to work for a public agency (at less money) shouldn’t you look forward to a more generous retirement package? Trust me I would love to have some of those salaries and retirement benefits (I do not) but it seems as if that is what those folks signed up for, less salary “up front” and through your career knowing you can count on a comfortable retirement. All I know is I have never in my 53 years anyway had my water shut down. That is a pretty good track record.
Just so happed that their union contract with the District expired in the middle of a bad economy. Thus they become the target of opportunity. Same thing would have happened if the CalTrans engineers union were up for renegotiation. It’s bash the public servants month because they have a decent employment package while everyone else does not.
I’m agreeing that the bloggers attacking you for reporting the facts are being ridiculous.
But I also think that you do not report with any fair balance or show that there are employees of the government who agree with you and who are not “trough feeders”. But that would require you researching and talking to some of us.
Much easier to lump us all together to bash us, even if it isn’t fair, true or correct. And, as I said above? I doubt you could cut it in my job and last a week. I doubt any reporters at OCR could.
Well ms sforza,
I certainly hope your crusading does not result in harm coming to any individual at the hands of someone who reads this and goes out to harm one of the MET employees you listed.
Im sure a bottomfeeding lawyer would like nothing more than to put you behind bars if someone was harmed by your actions…..
I wonder if the SD-UT would ever stoop to gratitutously putting the names of employees for a critical infrastructure provider out for the world to see, opening up opportunities for computer hackers, wack jobs and terrorists to do harm.
I pray they would have better sense, Ms. Sforza.
the member agencies whom we deliver water to have more than generous retirements than we have, but you have to remember people its the recruitment of new personnel that we have to attract and if we have a lower retirement than other agencies we will be stuck hiring less qualified individuals whereas more qualified people end up staying put in their own water agency, also if i remember right it was met who didnt raise their rates for over 15 years alongwhile we passed bond measures to allow delapitated systems put in new pumping plants water projects etc throughout orange riverside sandiego counties. i find it funny how little people know about this and their willing to continue slamming us … people who know nothing should say nothing go to school learn something for christ sakes!
Classy.
How about those of us who just feel that the taxpayers shouldn’t pay for anyone to retire?
But, hey, don’t listen to anyone else. Just keep denigrading others and closing your mind.
your a dumb a$$
POOR WITTLE KEVIN IS HAVING A BAD HAIR DAY LOL
Talk about closed mind. Don’t you get it that MWD has a seporate account within the PERS retirement system, paid for with income of water sales?
It’s not much different that the retirement system at General Motors or Boeing.
You just see the word municiple and you assume your tax dollars are footing the bill.
I see the amendment to “limit” the list of to those making over 75K a year. So let’s see here, it is still okay to put these folks at risk of harm by some wack job deciding to pick on them because they work in the public sector?
And, many of the folks on that list are college degreed. If one was making a salary in the low 50s in PRIVATE sector years say about 20 years ago, they could easily have eclipsed the 75 mark with modest COLAs and a performance based raise here and there. I have friends in the private sector that also have college degrees, some advanced degrees like myself, and most ARE making 75K or more.
Context and basic common sense regarding security. It is sorely lacking here.
Jan, I empathize with what you are saying, BUT it is really unfortunate that the pendulum has swung so far, that it has tipped over. For years, all the private sector has heard from the public sector.WE WANT/NEED MORE and no matter how much they get , it’s never enough and they come back with their hands open for more. Meanwhile, the service provided is a joke. And now, we are in a recession. People are leaving the state, houses are distressed, we need federal assistance to float CA. WE DON’T HAVE IT. The system is broken and it is TIME the public sector fixes it, NOT the private sector. Honestly, I can’t believe MWD or anyone has the GALL to do this right now.
the service we provide is a joke! over 19 million people depend on me doing my job everyday! jacka$$
YEAH AND IT TAKES A BILLION EMPLOYEES TO DO IT. LOL
YOU JUST DON’T GET IT.
As I read the responses to the situation with the pension negotiations, I am reminded of my children when they were younger. If one child got more candy than the other, they would yell and scream that it was not fair that one child got more candy than they did, if my back was turned they would take the candy away from the child who got more, just to get even. I then would explain to them that it was to thier advantage to come to me and explain the situation with the candy and see if they could also get the same amount. It was far better that way than trying to harm the other child, just because they felt that the other child had an advantage.
I see much more emotional responses than logical and mental responses.
These people in the MWD were not given a birthrite to thier positions, they worked for and earned the positions they have. many were college educated and spent many years and a lot of money to get thier education. it only stands to reason that thier rewards would and should be a nice salary.
I am in the private sector and I do wish that I received the salaries that employees of the MWD receive. I also understand that because I do not receive the salary, that it is up to me to better the situation and find ways to make more money and possibly better my future retirement.
I suggest to those of you who are whining about what is fair and not fair, to go and take care of yourselves do your best to better your own situation instead of whining and crying and trying to destroy others. Act like a responsible adult and set better examples for your children and teach them about the importance of a good education, so they may receive good salaries in the future. That would be the responsible thing to do.
BTW Ms.Watchdog, bad move on your part for posting names and salaries. I do hope that someone does not post yours.
Private,
You don’t understand. The private sector buys the ingredients and makes the candy. Yet the public trough feeders end up with more than we do. Bigger salaries, outrageous pensions. more paid time off, better benefits, iron-clad job security. I think the candy makers have alot to be angry about here. Don’t you???
hey observer, again if it’s so great why don’t you go apply for one of these jobs? well anyway i’m sure your grab bag has more treats in it…cmon.
amen brother!
Private,
Well Said, its funny how the undereducated dont get that. The other funny thing is that the same folks dont remenber that the MWD labor force was created as part of a depression era work program.
Again I go back to my original post of the children screaming. Thnak you for proving my point. I appreciate it
Maybe the kids should bonk dad over the head with a bat and steal all his candy to divide amongst themselves.
Then dad would understand how the REAL producers in society who get fleeced by the public trough feeders feel.
hah!
private sector guy says:
Again I go back to my original post of the children screaming. Thnak you for proving my point. I appreciate it
=====================
Again, you are over paid, over fed and over benefitted and your retroactive scam is flopping -deal witht it
Jan. And a lot of the top earners on that list DO NOT have college degrees. Cronyism, legacy promotions, that is the norm. You know it.
As far as security, you know that everything done there, except for some personnel matters, is PUBLIC INFORMATION. The same rules apply. Just because you work at MWD, doesn’t entitle you to any less scrutiny than a city or county worker in the area you live.
Just be thankful that emails aren’t being published.
Yet…………….
I worked in private sector for over 20 years and saw cronysim there firsthand too. As for how many have college degrees or not, I don’t know the exact nunbers. But a fair number of them do have the sheepskin. Others have the higher wages because they have been with MWD since graduating high school. The union, which you were a part of for years, played a role in that, right? Are you now saying they played too big a role?
There was NO need to publish the names of those employees that were not the top level execs or on the negotiation team. Job functions and proposed salaries would have been enough and you know it. It was gratitous. One can have a debate and still maintain a level of anonymity.
I have put my name out there by choice and assumed the risk. I am not in that 20 year club and were I to retire at 58, I won’t be collecting more than about 40-50 percent in a pension, depending on whether the contract goes through.
What I have noticed in this whole debate is liberals suddenly not acting like liberals and conservatives not acting like conservatives. Interesting stuff, but surely the crabs in a barrel tendency of human nature has reared its ugly head.
these losers have nothing better to do than slam us through these stupid bloggs i only made 62k last year so fu not everyone makes these outrageous salaries like you dummies claim quit hearing voices and coming up with these figments of your imagination and take your medication and put the straight jacket on! LMAO!
Here are most of the reasons water rates are what they are. “YOU THE PEOPLE” The cost of makeing our water safe to drink. You take your high powered outboard motor boats to the water ways to polute the vary water that you and your loved ones have to drink. You go swimming in the water and are to LAZY to get out of the water and go to the rest room. You go fishing and through your gargage into the water. Your even to LAZY to through your dirty baby diapers into the trash can for proper disposal. John and Ken from KFI should focus on the real issues and talk about ways to put most of the cost on the people that make our water unsafe to drink. Millions of dollars are spent on expensive chemicals to make our water safe to drink. More millions are spent on disposing of the waste that are removed from your drinking that you and your loved ones drink. John and Ken said that “All the water workers are all lazy”. Who sits on there fFAT behinds and complains about things they don’t know the facts about? JOHN AND KEN is the answer . Who are the people that work hard day and night to bring safe drinking water into your homes to keep your loved ones from getting sick from poluted water . Who Maintains the hundreds of miles cannels and pipelines safe and strong. And who comes to the aid of local water companys with experts to help make repairs when there water lines break. Not John and Ken! There to busy sitting on there BIG FAT BEHINDS bitching about the cost of water. GUESS WHO COMES TO THERE AID? MWD thats who.
AMEN!!!!!
soundoff, if there was an award for the best post/comment you would win! nice job and good luck to all the hard working met employees……i support you guys and thank you for making our water safe, also for all the research on future water issues. btw i’m not a met employee.
Well, it happened.
Ms sforza, I hope you are happy, a met employee was threatened and another had his home vandalized. I hear that both local and fereral law enforcement are involved.
Maybe the tone will change when someone responsible for this mess is BEHIND BARS!!!]
Congratulations!
Wow!! Imagine if our grandaparets and parents had these soft gimmie something right now jobs? Where would we of learned a our work ethnic? Guess some of us didn’t of that ethnic. I’m not bitter for the things the ganster like unions do because they only get what we give them. My fault for not getting one of those jobs. I just had two work two jobs raise my family and put my kids thru college. All we get is what we “Earned” saved and hope ther will be some SS left anfter paying into it over 45 years. I refuse to be mad at you or myself. Yes I could of done better with a higher education but it doesn’ garentee happiness. I’m proud of my
trade and myself. I don’ t envy someone that takes from the public and calls it “earned”. Call it what you want but how much is too much?