I do not believe the reasoning behind the additional 2-2.5 percent pay raises for management staff at St Lawrence County. First of all, when non-union people are hired by the county, the salaries are …
This item is available in full to subscribers.
To continue reading, you will need to either log in to your subscriber account, or purchase a new subscription.
If you are a digital subscriber with an active, online-only subscription then you already have an account here. Just reset your password if you've not yet logged in to your account on this new site.
Otherwise, click here to view your options for subscribing.
Please log in to continue |
I do not believe the reasoning behind the additional 2-2.5 percent pay raises for management staff at St Lawrence County. First of all, when non-union people are hired by the county, the salaries are negotiated with the legislators and county administrator. It is not like a union position where salaries are set according to the pay schedule. Therefore, if a Director/Administration position is actually paid less than his/her employees they are supervising, that is their fault for accepting that pay salary to begin with. In addition, this is a very rare exception to the rule when you have an employee earning more than his/her supervisor. If in fact it happens, most generally it is because the person earning more has worked for the county a very long time, 25-plus years. The fact is that this was not the case of management automatically getting more than union employees until approximately 6 years ago when the legislators passed a resolution giving management the extra percents. A lot of these management people are also earning longevity bonuses in addition to the extra percentage, so in fact some management people are getting 4.25-4.50 percent raises with an additional $1,000 added for longevity. Not fair. The legislators should have all voted no to these extra percentages and Karen St. Hilaire should know the county cannot afford this. The rich just keep getting richer.