Total public employee pay should be disclosed

THE CONTRA COSTA Board of Supervisors is to be commended for its efforts to disclose the total compensation of county employees that will culminate soon with the posting on the Internet of each worker's salary and benefits. It's a model other public agencies should follow.

The move is in complete accord with last year's state Supreme Court ruling that affirmed the public's right to that information. This is certainly not the first time that public employee salaries have been posted on the Internet for taxpayers to review. State employees' salaries have been available for years. What makes this move unusual is that it includes the cost of benefits.

That's the most responsible way to disseminate the information. All too often, public employee salaries are published without consideration of the value of the benefits. But the benefits vary widely and are tremendously valuable for the workers and costly to taxpayers. The proper way to compare compensation is to examine the combined cost of salaries and benefits. As we've seen with many recent reports about pensions and health care benefits for public employees, salaries alone only tell part of the story.

Not surprisingly, some county employees and one county labor union have protested the move. Many of the complaints incorrectly assume that the county is going to release private identification numbers such as Social Security, driver's license, home address and telephone — information that would expose employees to identity theft. According to county officials, there are no plans to release that information.

Some of the complaints contend that the salary and benefit information should not be public information. That's simply wrong. As the Supreme Court ruled last year in a case brought by the Contra Costa Times, the public's interest in disclosure of how taxpayer money is spent far outweighs any privacy rights of government employees.

"(W)e recognize," wrote Chief Justice Ronald George, "that many individuals, including public employees, may be uncomfortable with the prospect of others knowing their salary and that many of these individuals would share that information only on a selective basis, even within the workplace. ... Nonetheless, in light of the strong public policy supporting transparency in government, an individual's expectation of privacy in a salary earned in public employment is significantly less than the privacy expectation regarding income earned in the private sector.

"... Counterbalancing any cognizable interest that public employees may have in avoiding disclosure of their salaries is the strong public interest in knowing how the government spends its money."

Some of the Contra Costa employee complaints argue that the compensation should be published without the name of the person earning it. Quite the contrary. Members of the public should be able to know how much the individuals that serve them earn. Without names, it would be much more difficult to identify financial abuse.

Finally, some of the complaints suggest that county supervisors have been secretive about their plans to release the information. That is also wrong. The decision was made earlier this year at a public meeting. It was on the agenda in March, available for all to see. Labor union representatives attended the meeting.

Government workers should remember that they work for the public and that taxpayers fund their compensation. If they're uncomfortable with that, they're welcome to find a job in the private sector.

http://www.contracostatimes.com/opinion/ci_9823621?nclick_check=1

Business Financial Services

Total public employee pay should be disclosed