COMMUN ELECTRICIAN - CARLOS, JOSE - $49,128.28
COMMUN ELECTRICIAN - GOMEZ, JOHNNIE - $48,424.33
COMMUN ELECTRICIAN - PHAINGDY, BONA - $47,384.57
SR COMMUN ELECTRICIAN - WU, TOM - $41,133.55
COMMUN ELECTRICIAN - VO, HUNG - $40,854.42
COMMUN CABLE SUPV III - CISNEROS, RITO - $40,511.95
SR COMMUN ELECTRICIAN - MURRAY, RONALD - $38,408.34
COMMUN ELECTRICIAN - MOY, BRIAN - $36,236.11
COMMUN ELECTRICIAN - FETTERHOFF, EARL - $34,466.41
COMMUN ELECTRICIAN - CASTELLANO, ALAN - $34,142.85
COMMUN ELECTRICIAN - RUIZ, ALEJANDRO - $33,511.98
SR COMMUN ELECTRICIAN - HYBARGER, JOHN - $33,477.80
COMMUN ELECTRICIAN - NUNEZ, EDUARDO - $32,091.31
COMMUN ELECTRICIAN - CORNEJO, CARLOS - $31,925.68
SR COMMUN ELECTRICIAN - ARGUETA, CHRISTIAN - $31,469.79
COMMUN ELECTRICIAN - DINH, KHAI - $30,654.41
COMMUN ELECTRICIAN - MORENO, FRANK - $29,463.48
SR COMMUN ELECTRICIAN - DANG, HEIN - $29,166.87
COMMUN CABLE WORKER - IRVIN, CLARENCE - $26,952.19
COMMUN ELECTRICIAN - SCHULER, ANDREW - $26,710.04
COMMUN ELECTRICIAN - TRIPP, CHARLES - $26,146.78
COMMUN ELECTRICIAN - SONG, HUI - $25,791.00
For ITA, it's all about keeping the City communicating. While the Daily News is sensationalizing this subject, and the Mini Mayor is politicizing City employee salaries and benefits, it's also about dedication by these employees and lack of planning and foresight by ITA management.
As reported on Mayor Sams Sister City blog today:
What's behind the overtime? You guys are going to love this. Mayoral spokeshole Matt Szabo told the Daily News that 'much of the extra pay is being driven by the cost of providing necessary city services and security for special events - from marathons to parades - that are granted fee waivers."
The City doesn't hire enough staff, is forced to pay overtime to dedicated employees, but waives the special events fees for the politicians friends, yet the Mayor and City management want to make you look like the bad guy.
__________________________________
A couple valid comments:
Anonymous said... Is this for real? Can't Randi manage resources any better than this? Will the Mr. Mini-Mayor go after the violating GMs? This is on her watch, correct? Is this OT in cash or time? Regardless, I'm in the wrong bureau! May 13, 2008 9:28 PM
Worried and Concerned said... The truth lies somewhere in between. A great portion is due to providing essential 24/7 support and service to all the city's Public Safety entities, mainly LAPD and LAFD. Some is to provide the "extra" communications support for law enforcement at many of those "special events". These costs need to be recouped from the events organizers who enjoy those "waived fee's" and all the extra security provided at these events, including communications - why is the taxpayer footing these bills? Notice where the largest share of overtime is being generated. The real cause behind this has been the unchecked decimation of Communication Services personnel over the past years by 14th Floor ITA management. Their past and present myopic vision along with a complete disregard as to the consequences of their actions has left no other course of action than to incur these huge overtime expenditures in order to provide the proper 24/7 support required by LA's Public Safety departments. When we experience a major disruption to the communications system by a disaster such as a large earthquake these systems will have to be brought back on line by an ever decreasing core of people. The very same dedicated employees that are currently being highlighted in this blog. It's not the cost of the overtime budget we should be concentrating on - it's the gross reduction of skilled manpower that is the root cause. However, what is more troubling to me is "Who will pay the ultimate price when their call for help goes unanswered during a major disaster due to the lack of skilled personnel necessary to restore these communications systems that the LAPD and LAFD rely on 24/7"? May 13, 2008 11:57 PM
7 comments:
Is this for real. Can't Randi management resources any better than this? Will the Mr. Mini-Mayor go after the violating GMs? This is on her watch, correct? Is this OT in cash or time. Regardless, I'm in the wrong bureau!
The truth lies somewhere in between. A great portion is due to providing essential 24/7 support and service to all the city's Public Safety entities, mainly LAPD and LAFD.
Some is to provide the "extra" communications support for law enforcement at many of those "special events". These costs need to be recouped from the events organizers who enjoy those "waived fee's" and all the extra security provided at these events, including communications - why is the taxpayer footing these bills?
Notice where the largest share of overtime is being generated. The real cause behind this has been the unchecked decimation of Communication Services personnel over the past years by 14th Floor ITA management. Their past and present myopic vision along with a complete disregard as to the consequences of their actions has left no other course of action than to incure these huge overtime expenditures in order to provide the proper 24/7 support required by LA's Public Safety departments.
When we experience a major disruption to the communications system by a disaster such as a large earthquake these systems will have to be brought back on line by an ever decreasing core of people. The very same dedecated employees that are currently being highlighted in this blog.
It's not the cost of the overtime buget we should be concentrating on - it's the gross reduction of skilled manpower that is the root cause. However, what is more troubling to me is "Who will pay the ultimate price when their call for help goes unanswered during a major disaster due to the lack of skilled personel necessary to restore these communications systems that the LAPD and LAFD rely on 24/7"?
Fee waivers for events a costly gift City officials all agree reform's needed, but will it happen now?
In the history of Los Angeles city bureaucracy, the special-event fee waiver might be the most talked about budget reform that has never been acted on.
Three times a week, the Los Angeles City Council writes off thousands of dollars worth of city employee time for working at fairs, awards shows, parades and countless other special events held by businesses and community groups.
Last year, such fee waivers cost the city some $11 million. But those write-offs are becoming a growing point of contention as Los Angeles faces a record $406 million budget deficit - and the mayor says the city can no longer afford to foot the bill.
"In my budget proposal, I'm saying, hold it," Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa said. "In fairness, I was a council member and I know the pressure you get to do these events.
"When we're looking at a budget deficit of this magnitude and an economy that is the worst in memory, we're going to have to pare down."
After years of delay, council members now agree that the system is broken: The city has no policy for deciding which groups should pay to close a street and which should reimburse the city for police or traffic officers to keep the peace and divert cars.
The Academy Awards? Free.
The Daytime Emmys? They have to pay.
USC graduation? Free.
UCLA graduation? They have to pay.
"As a Bruin, that's not fair," said UCLA alum Councilwoman Wendy Greuel. "That is just one example of how our special-event fee waiver, or lack thereof, needs to be changed.
"When we're talking about cutting services, cutting program hours in recreation and parks and libraries, we need transparency about our priorities."
Special events that get city fee waivers can range from block parties and community festivals to corporate-sponsored marathons and awards shows.
Fees typically are supposed to be charged to recoup the cost of city workers closing streets, directing traffic, providing security and cleaning up - often on overtime.
When those fees are waived, the city swallows the cost. Earlier this week, Villaraigosa said in response to a Daily News report on city workers' overtime costs that special events are part of the problem.
Last year, the city Department of Transportation spent $5.2 million sending officers to control traffic at about 1,500 special events. This year, the bill is expected to top $6.8 million.
At the same time, fewer than 5 percent of events have to reimburse the department for staff time, DOT officials said. Traffic officers earn overtime pay of roughly $35.97 an hour for staffing the events.
"When we exhaust the (salary) account, we have to find ways to make up the deficit, and that's a challenge," said Selwyn Hollins, the DOT's head of budget and administration.
The Los Angeles Police Department absorbed about $2 million in overtime last year to staff special events - less than the DOT because the LAPD is able to assign police officers to supervise events during their regular work hours.
The Fire Department spent $2.1 million in 2006-07 to supervise and ensure that fire codes were met at public gatherings that had their fees waived.
And the Bureau of Street Services absorbed $1.8 million providing barricades and cleaning up after special events for which fees were waived.
In total, the city covered $11.1 million in expenses associated with special events - enough money to hire 100 police officers.
The City Council has been considering a special-event fee-waiver policy since at least 1999, when then-Councilwoman Rita Walters complained that the city was giving away thousands and thousands of dollars.
Yet nearly a decade later, city workers are still attempting to craft a policy that passes muster with the council.
In 2003, the city administrative officer and chief legislative analyst proposed reforming the special-event fee-waiver system by charging commercial events and creating a one-stop permit shop to coordinate and bill for special-event staffing.
That proposal stalled in committee.
Late last year, CAO Karen Sisson again called for a moratorium on fee waivers. Again, the council said it would consider it.
Now, however, the council's Budget and Finance Committee has committed to enacting a policy that restricts waivers. But still there is no agreement on how to limit special-event fee waivers.
Councilman Tom LaBonge believes that the city should subsidize neighborhood events while big commercial events, such as the Oscars, should have to pay.
But council President Eric Garcetti has said the city should waive fees for major events - such as the Oscars - that earn money for the city by attracting hotel visitors and tourists, but could choose to move to other cities.
The city waived an estimated $75,000 in fees and staff time associated with the Academy Awards ceremony at the Kodak Theatre in Hollywood.
And with no set policy, waivers now can seem arbitrary or suspect.
The council waived at least $7,500 in fees and staff time for traffic control for USC's graduation ceremonies. But UCLA paid $14,409 to the Department of Transportation for traffic officers during its commencement.
Several council members said that without a formal policy, they are hesitant to reject or challenge waivers requested by colleagues on behalf of for-profit groups and events.
"When you say no, there is a backlash," said Councilman Jose Huizar, who represents downtown and Northeast L.A.
He recently proposed waiving $163,000 in fees for Fiesta Broadway, a free Cinco de Mayo festival with music and booths that is organized by a for-profit company with corporate sponsorships.
Historically, the council member representing the area has agreed to waive fees, but Huizar said next year the organizer is going to have to pay a portion of the fees.
"Collectively, as a council, we have to fix this," Huizar said. "If a single council member says no, you'll become a target in your district."
Still, the council is constantly under fire from community activists and gadflies who complain at council meetings about how the city is wasting money supporting special events.
"It's embarrassing," said Councilman Greig Smith, who said he's not ready to cut event waivers altogether because there is value in supporting some organizations.
But he said he does want to cut fee waivers in half by limiting who can get them.
"We're giving away things we shouldn't," he said. "We're laying people off and then giving someone a fee waiver and they're charging admission to their event? C'mon."
BY THE NUMBERS
During the 2006-07 fiscal year, Los Angeles spent $11.1 million staffing special events that did not have to pay city fees.
$5.2 million - Department of Transportation
$2.1 million - Los Angeles Fire Department
$2.0 million - Los Angeles Police Department
$1.8 million - Bureau of Street Services
seconding "worried and concerned"
The previous poster is correct. Much of the OT
listed is used to provide the 24 x 365 coverage
needed by police and fire communications systems.
For these systems, on-call programmer support alone
is not sufficient, because programmers do not
support the communications hardware.
Another aspect of the problem was not mentioned.
The Communications Electrician, Sr. Communications
Electrician, and Communications Electrician Supervisor series has some of the most extreme pay disparity with DWP that can be found. For example, a person can be a supervisor in a Council-controlled department but transfer to DWP and make more money without even being in the supervisor class. The IBEW local that
represents them does NOT have any re-opener to
even discuss parity with DWP! As well as the history
of bad management cited by the previous poster, the
disparity also poisons labor relations.
I have great respect for these people and the work
that they do to support our mission-critical systems, as I have had the opportunity to work with them.
I challenge Ms. Randi Levin and every other GM to prove to the citizens of Los Angeles that this outrageous amount of overtime compensation is in fact due to situations that their personal safety was in danger. Or Ms. Levin was it for some political serving "special event" or "high profile" project(3-1-1)? It is so easy to hide the truth behind the cover of "Public Safety" and "Special Events". Any IT situation in ITA can be twisted enough to fall under or behind the label, "Public Safety". Even communications!
The public should be screaming for Ms. Laura Chick to come in and audit all department's OT spending and let her start with ITA.
To: May 14, 2008 8:44 PM
Ever hear it's better to be thought a fool than to open your mouth and prove it. I've worked Communications for many years and find your comment as stupid as I've ever heard. If you had a clue to what the communications people do in over 10 divisions of ITA and what systems they support you would change your opinion. Over the years I have worked overtime on fires, floods, earthquakes, riots, North Hollywood Bank Shooting, and many other events and usually at 2:00 in the morning while your tucked away safe in bed. Our communications people maintain every aspect of Police and Fire Systems and support every activity that requires communications at all levels. Randi or any other GM doesn't owe you sh*t.
Those supporting communications account for over 300 people of this department. This is over a third of the department. Given this level of responsibility the two directors of communications should be AGMs. At least they should be given membership on the exec team.
Compared to others at the equivalent ISM2 level the directors of communications have way more responsibility than any of the ISM2s, and even some AGMs. the old gaurd agms have used gerrymandering and divide and conquer tactics to dilute the power of communications services and it has worked very well for them.
The overtime numbers reflect the attempts of exec team to further pare down communications services staff. now there is no choice but to shore up services using overtime.
Randi had no idea what she was in for when she signed up for the job. What we need are a GM and AGMs recruited from either the communications ranks or someone recruited from the telecomm business like Verizon or AT&T that understands communcations.
Post a Comment