Actually, no. In most cases firefighters do not get social security. So when a pension fails we have nothing to fall back on.

quote:

Originally posted by recoatlift:
That mug is certainly increasing his social security retirement check.

quote:

Originally posted by hbabler:
Actually, no. In most cases firefighters do not get social security. So when a pension fails we have nothing to fall back on.

quote:

Originally posted by recoatlift:
That mug is certainly increasing his social security retirement check.

I am sure the Democrats won't let that happen.

A few years ago a Baton Rouge PD Lt. made right at $200,000 for a couple years. He made more than any one in the BR city government. Seems like it was $55,000 more than the Mayor.

quote:

Originally posted by Scoutmaster:

quote:

Originally posted by hbabler:
Actually, no. In most cases firefighters do not get social security. So when a pension fails we have nothing to fall back on.

quote:

Originally posted by recoatlift:
That mug is certainly increasing his social security retirement check.

I am sure the Democrats won't let that happen.

Many municipalities including Los Angeles do not contribute to social security and the retirees do not collect SS in retirement. Neither Democrats nor Republicans will be changing this anytime soon.

quote:

Originally posted by PD:

quote:

Originally posted by Scoutmaster:

quote:

Originally posted by hbabler:
Actually, no. In most cases firefighters do not get social security. So when a pension fails we have nothing to fall back on.

quote:

Originally posted by recoatlift:
That mug is certainly increasing his social security retirement check.

I am sure the Democrats won't let that happen.

Many municipalities including Los Angeles do not contribute to social security and the retirees do not collect SS in retirement. Neither Democrats nor Republicans will be changing this anytime soon.

In CA, the public employee unions primary (only) goal is "more money/benefits/privileges for us". And they use all their political clout, much of which is to influence voters, for that purpose. My reference was that Democrats will not likely let public employee retirements, whether social security or otherwise, be in jeporady, as in CA public employee unions are prob the Dems largest voting block (maybe next to illegals).

Union contracts are their own universe. I am aware of a union Tug Boat contract that if you got called in, and stayed at least one hour during an 8 hour shift, you got 8 hours pay. If you stayed into the next shift for at least 1 hour, you got 16 hours pay. So theoretically, you could be on site for 2 hours, and collect for 16 hours.

I'm not understanding something here. Does this guy get to decide when and how much overtime he can take on his own? Doesn't it have to be authorized by management? For my work, anything over 40 hours has to be authorized by my manager and if I have unauthorized hours at work I can get written up for it.

quote:

Originally posted by Paten:
I'm not understanding something here. Does this guy get to decide when and how much overtime he can take on his own? Doesn't it have to be authorized by management? For my work, anything over 40 hours has to be authorized by my manager and if I have unauthorized hours at work I can get written up for it.

Management may well be complicit in the fraud.

Typically there a minimum staffing requirements. When a city fails to hire enough employees to deal with attrition those spots still have to be filled. So betweent attrition, sick time and vacation a spot for OT or in our world a hireback is created. Some departments have a voluntary list so that on your shift you let the chief know you want to get a hireback if one is available. Other departments will tell people that they have to work. Finally another aspect of it is that some slots can only be filled by people with special training, IE hazmat, or a USAR rescue technician. So if you hold those certifications you can be eligible for more OT then someone who doesn’t.

quote:

Originally posted by Paten:
I'm not understanding something here. Does this guy get to decide when and how much overtime he can take on his own? Doesn't it have to be authorized by management? For my work, anything over 40 hours has to be authorized by my manager and if I have unauthorized hours at work I can get written up for it.

quote:

Originally posted by hbabler:
Typically there a minimum staffing requirements. When a city fails to hire enough employees to deal with attrition those spots still have to be filled. So betweent attrition, sick time and vacation a spot for OT or in our world a hireback is created. Some departments have a voluntary list so that on your shift you let the chief know you want to get a hireback if one is available. Other departments will tell people that they have to work. Finally another aspect of it is that some slots can only be filled by people with special training, IE hazmat, or a USAR rescue technician. So if you hold those certifications you can be eligible for more OT then someone who doesn’t.

quote:

Originally posted by Paten:
I'm not understanding something here. Does this guy get to decide when and how much overtime he can take on his own? Doesn't it have to be authorized by management? For my work, anything over 40 hours has to be authorized by my manager and if I have unauthorized hours at work I can get written up for it.

And on the police side, massive amounts of officers are required to staff events. We are 10% short, something around 200 officers below full staffing. We are told to volunteer to work on our days off frequently. This weekend they pulled around 400 officers to work a festival. Ruined my family’s beach trip.

Last week my boss brought us a list of panthers games and told us to sign up for four each.

Until they fill the open slots, which is nowhere in sight, it’ll only get worse. Officers here don’t make anything like that firefighter did in OT, but $20,000 in extra work related to off duty traffic and security, as well as these special events, is not unheard of.


My thing...these mandatory off duty pulls should pay double time. They are weekends you would have been off, usually over night, in addition to regular hours. And we only get overtime if we work 171 hours in a 28 day pay cycle. It’s bullshit.

quote:

Originally posted by hbabler:
Just FYI:
While around here we tend to be the public safety whipping boy let me get a couple facts together for you.

We generally work 24/48’s so that means on our off time most of us have second jobs.
<snippage>
Did I mention my health benefits suck?
Finally if you want this gig then come on it doesn’t require a secret handshake to get hired or anything.

Exactly this. More guys have 2nd jobs AND work OT than you could imagine.
I started in 1978 when it was perfectly acceptable to muck out fire while it was still smoldering wearing only boots and helmet. The dept had just started mandating SCBA use in fires. There were still "leather lungers" who scoffed at the idea.
If the bennies are so good and having a 300% increased chance of cancer is your thing, by all means take the next FD test.

quote:

Originally posted by Scoutmaster:

quote:

Originally posted by Paten:
I'm not understanding something here. Does this guy get to decide when and how much overtime he can take on his own? Doesn't it have to be authorized by management? For my work, anything over 40 hours has to be authorized by my manager and if I have unauthorized hours at work I can get written up for it.

Management may well be complicit in the fraud.

Yes and the time sheet has to get signed off again by someone in a fiscal department. The firefighter asked for the OT hours and the pay that goes with it. Then, a whole lot of NON-UNION people agreed to it.

Thanks to double and triple time rules for overtime, I'm not surprised to hear of someone being paid for "working" more hours than there are in a year.

quote:

Originally posted by PD:

quote:

Originally posted by Scoutmaster:

quote:

Originally posted by Paten:
I'm not understanding something here. Does this guy get to decide when and how much overtime he can take on his own? Doesn't it have to be authorized by management? For my work, anything over 40 hours has to be authorized by my manager and if I have unauthorized hours at work I can get written up for it.

Management may well be complicit in the fraud.

Yes and the time sheet has to get signed off again by someone in a fiscal department. The firefighter asked for the OT hours and the pay that goes with it. Then, a whole lot of NON-UNION people agreed to it.

So only UNION people can be dishonest or complicit?

From my earlier post here

quote:

. . .There was a report some months ago re a CA BART janitor who made almost $300K in a year with OT, security cams showed him sleeping much of the time.. .

When BART management was confronted with the matter, the response was basically "so what, no action will be taken".

Some years ago San Francisco had to cancel some public bus routes in that city due to a lack of working busses. The problem was some of the bus mechanics, who work nights, would punch in at 10:00 pm, go home and go to sleep, come back to punch out at 7:00 am, then go to their day jobs. And management was participating in the fraud. (Seems the mayor wasn't getting a cut of the deal, so he put a stop to it).

Ever heard of phantom or ghost employees in the public work force?

quote:

Originally posted by Scoutmaster:

quote:

Originally posted by PD:

quote:

Originally posted by Scoutmaster:

quote:

Originally posted by Paten:
I'm not understanding something here. Does this guy get to decide when and how much overtime he can take on his own? Doesn't it have to be authorized by management? For my work, anything over 40 hours has to be authorized by my manager and if I have unauthorized hours at work I can get written up for it.

Management may well be complicit in the fraud.

Yes and the time sheet has to get signed off again by someone in a fiscal department. The firefighter asked for the OT hours and the pay that goes with it. Then, a whole lot of NON-UNION people agreed to it.

So only UNION people can be dishonest or complicit?

I never said that.