How do we compare?
Article in St. Louis Post discusses the abuse of the sick leave policy and how it cost hundreds of thousands of dollars to the taxpayers. The policy is outdated and virtually unheard of in private industry. How does Madison County and the local communities do in comparison?
St. Louis’ sick-day payout drains city of millions
The Associated Press
ST. LOUIS –
In the last five years, the city of St. Louis has spent more than $4 million buying unused sick days from dozens of employees, an analysis shows.
And while advocates say the generous policy helps offset low worker salaries, those who gain the most are managers who already are at the high-end of the pay scale.
Some say it’s time to scrap the program for a more equitable pay system that also could save the city money.
Bill Fronick is one who benefited. He hardly ever stayed home sick, and retired as assistant director at Lambert Airport in 2003 with months of unused sick time, worth a lump-sum payout of $65,680.
He said the program kept him at his city job when he could have pursued a higher-paying one.
One outside expert said St. Louis has turned sick days into an investment vehicle for workers.
“You’ve, like, got better than a 401(k) here,” said Peter Ronza, benefits manager for the University of St. Thomas in St. Paul, Minn.
Under the plan, St. Louis city employees can bank all sick days they don’t take and exchange them for lump sum payments and a higher pension upon retirement.
The result: Employees come to work even when they are ill, use only a handful of sick days over years or decades of employment, and walk out with five-figure payouts at a time when the city is strapped for cash.
The system is uncommon in corporate America and hard to find in government.
Former Mayor Clarence Harmon pushed the practice 10 years ago as a way to encourage seasoned employees to retire.
The Post-Dispatch analysis found that taxpayers paid at least $4.18 million to purchase unused sick days from 281 employees since January 2003.
The newspaper found more than half walked away with at least $10,000; 15 of those workers received more than $50,000.
The median payment was $10,590. Two workers got payments higher than their annual salary.
City Hall workers can exchange half of their unused sick days for cash when they retire. The other half of accrued days can be used to increase an employee’s monthly pension.
It’s a perk the city, which increased the sales tax recently to help pay for pension obligations, no longer can afford, one alderman says.
“We’re eliminating jobs through attrition so that we don’t have layoffs,” Alderman Matt Villa said. “And then you have departments that have huge deficits because of pensions and the sick-leave buyback.”
Gene Brantley, a former information systems manager who cashed out his sick days for $58,000, agreed.
“It doesn’t look good. It’s a lot of money going to a few people. It probably could be done some other way.”
Kansas City places a ceiling on how many sick-leave hours employees can collect.
Mayor Francis Slay prefers a system that, like St. Louis County and the city schools, allows for paid time off that can be used for sick days or vacation, his chief of staff, Jeff Rainford, said.
“We’ve got to find a way to pay our people more,” Rainford said. “But we have to do it through the front door, and not the back door.”
A change in policy could generate opposition from unions representing city workers.
The city could cap sick days for future employees, but it cannot take away sick days already earned by current workers
April 9th, 2008 at 6:23 pm
I think there definitely needs to be a cap on the amount of sick days paid out. I’m a former state employee, and my first position was a rather low-paying position. However, I accumulated a decent amount of sick time (I pretty much never used it) and vacation time, and when I later got a much higher paying job with the state, all of my time transferred over, at the higher rate. So, the day I resigned, I was able to take all of the vacation time and half of the sick time in cash (at the higher rate). So, it was almost like an investment.
There has to be some sort of balance, and I think the State of Illinois took a step in the right direction when, in 1997 (I believe) no longer paid out 100% of sick time upon separation of employment. If I’m not mistaken, all sick time post-1997 is paid out at 50%. This is an advantage for 2 reasons: 1. it cuts the state’s burden in half on this type of accumulated pay, and 2. it still gives the employee some incentive to not burn all of their sick days…which reduces productivity.
I think if they wanted to take it a step further, they could either reduce the payout to 25%, or pay it out at the rate it was earned, rather than the final rate (which is typically always much higher, as folks get raises and promotions over the years).
I’m a big fan of “wellness days” instead of so many sick days. This allows employees some days off, without having to come up with excuses, or feeling any guilt…and the employees should be encouraged to take them.
I think local governments should (if they haven’t already) adopt a version of the state’s system on paying out sick time.