Old Habits Die Hard
Tuesday, July 21st, 2009 By Lynn WalshLast year Columbus saw over $28 million in overtime pay; almost half of that overtime pay went to employees in the Division of Police. 2009 is a new year and a new year means a fresh start; but, it seems for the Division of Police old habits are hard to break.
The Division of Police has paid out more than $2.5 million in overtime pay this year for police officers alone. Close to another million dollars in overtime pay has gone to civilian employees. This combined with shift differential pay (increases in the base pay rate for employees who work evening and night shifts) totals almost $4.5 million over base salary wages in 2009. Add to that another $3.7 million spent on paid holidays, including birthdays, and the total comes to $8.2 million in just six months.
If the level of spending stays on course throughout the remainder of the year the grand total will be $16.4 million. The division has only budgeted $12.3 million this year to pay its officers’ overtime, holiday and birthday benefits. That is more than the combined base salary of the 247 most recently hired officers which is $11.5 million. Diverting the $12.3 million in overtime, holiday and birthday pay to cover base salaries could create 296 new officers at the lowest pay grade.
Could hiring new officers and cutting overtime pay be a money-saving solution? The numbers say yes, but the politics are a little more sticky. A better question may be: Are they are even needed? Adding an additional 296 officers would bring the number of officers per 1,000 people in Columbus to three; 150% above the national average.
July 21st, 2009 at 5:14 pm
I hate to sound picky, because the series of postings about city expenses is excellent. I am also sure that some are gaming the overtime system, and that reform is in order. Nonetheless—a few points:
1. A lot of overtime is court time. For example, an officer who works at night and arrests someone is issued a subpoena requiring his or her attendance in court during the day. In other words, some overtime will always be required (and, having said that, I will note that the court overtime system is not efficient).
2. You cannot just compare the overtime costs to the base salary of a new officer. A new officer also has benefits in addition to the salary. This probably adds about 30% (which you do not need to add to the overtime costs since benefits are already paid before any overtime is earned).
3. If you hire new officers at a base salary, they only earn that for a year. Then their pay goes up. It does not take very long before they are earning a top salary (about five years, I think).
In conclusion–I am sure that some money could be saved by cutting overtime and hiring new officers, but I do not think that the results would be as dramatic as the posting suggests.
July 22nd, 2009 at 4:41 pm
I appreciate the response. I am going to look for more details involving your number one point. As I stated in the article this may not be a solution to the budget hole or OT costs. What I hope these articles do is raise bigger questions about how this system currently works.
If it really does take just five years to earn a top salary, should it continue? Raises and higher salaries are fine, but should they be guaranteed or assumed after just a year or so?
I am not sure if hiring new officers is the solution, and obviously if all of those officers were hired it would not save money because of benefits; but, if just some were hired could it make difference? Possibly. Are new officers even needed though? That I believe is also debatable!
July 26th, 2009 at 9:39 pm
Hi. I am the wife of a CPD officer and I have to say that, although resources could certainly be allocated more appropriately, we do not have an overabundance of police. Before my husband began his assignment near german village I was, like many law-abiding suburnanites, extremely naive about the amount of crime in the city. From my perspective now, I think a more interesting avenue of inquiry might be the many ways that officers are prevented from doing their jobs because of politics, paperwork, and an extremely innefficient court system. I can assure you that, even though my husband has nearly “topped out” in pay, we are not getting rich here, and if there was a way to schedule court so that we could keep our family time on my husband’s day “off” we would be interested.
July 29th, 2009 at 2:49 pm
It sounds like the real issure may be in the politics behind the spending and not in the number officers.