Bucks not deluxe
Should the governor of Oregon make more than $93,000 a year? Should Oregon's secretary of state, superintendent of public instruction, and labor commissioner earn more than $72,000?
These folks think so.
Should the governor of Oregon make more than $93,000 a year? Should Oregon's secretary of state, superintendent of public instruction, and labor commissioner earn more than $72,000?
These folks think so.
Comments (12)
That should put them up on par with Boeing Machinists (earnings and overtime) who are on strike.
Posted by John Benton | September 15, 2008 10:11 AM
Goes to show how out of touch with reality the government class is. People are struggling with higher fuel prices, higher food prices, and losing their jobs, and these clowns first priority is to increase government employee salaries. Not to mention accelerate the shortfall in the state budget. Maybe we can kick some more kids off the Oregon Health Plan so multi-millionaire Ted can make and extra $40 k a year.
Posted by John Fairplay | September 15, 2008 10:22 AM
More than adequate, considering the qualifications stated in the Constitution.
Posted by Bark Munster | September 15, 2008 10:23 AM
NO
Posted by mp97303 | September 15, 2008 10:27 AM
Salary level doesn't describe the whole package, so it's impossible to judge on the basis of that alone.
Posted by Allan L. | September 15, 2008 11:29 AM
Maybe we should take all the 100K+/yr jobs at CoP and re-distribute that income back to the State jobs.
I have to admit Fireman Randy making more than the governor is somewhat chilling - but then he does read books.
Posted by Steve | September 15, 2008 11:56 AM
Should the president of OHSU ($1 million plus) make more than the governor of Oregon ($93,000)? See the article listed below:
http://www.oregonlive.com/business/index.ssf/2008/09/when_it_comes_to_ohsu_executiv.html
Posted by Sadie | September 15, 2008 11:57 AM
Well, yes and no. Yes, the amount these people are paid is low compared to comparable positions in the private sector. (The governor is basically CEO of an organization with tens of thousands of employees.) On the other hand, the current condition of our economy makes this about the worst time to talk about giving politicians a raise.
I bet it doesn't get passed the legislature.
Posted by Rulial | September 15, 2008 11:59 AM
What I wonder is why the big shots at OHSU make about five times what the governor does.
Posted by Dave Lister | September 15, 2008 1:34 PM
I might vote (what? vote?) for a 15% raise for all these higher echelon plutocrats if they would sign an enforceable no lobbying agreement that would extend for a minimum of 15 years after leaving their post(s).
Posted by Lee | September 15, 2008 8:21 PM
What the Judges NEVER talk about is their retirement. If you add that into the equation, they are actually paid better than most jurisdictions. They add health care costs, which are above average, but never retirement.
Check out page 20
http://oregonbusinessplan.org/pdf/Total%20Compensation%20Review.pdf
The State pays about 29% of a judges salary towards retirement. Most other states are between 3% - $8%., So if add another 25% onto the salary to get total compensation.
If a judge was appointed at age 50 and retired at 60, they would be entitled to a retirement, starting at 37.5% of their salary. If the salary is $125,000, thats a retirement of $46,875/year at age 60 for ten years worth of work. And it gets adjusted for inflation. If you funded your own retirement at age 50 to get that sort of return, you'd have to bank about $55,000/year retirement account.
That may be approrpriate, but you HAVE to consider that as part of total compensation. The Judges simply want to ignore that
Posted by Spiderman | September 16, 2008 10:21 AM
Give 'em the raises. Although public sector salaries will never match the private sector, current salaries are low enough that we are not attracting quality candidates. Just take a look at the current ones.
Posted by drivin' fool | September 16, 2008 11:46 AM