Columnist Sandy Thompson: Longevity pay: A necessity or luxury?

Sandy Thompson

Friday, May 18, 2001 | 4:12 a.m.

Sandy Thompson is vice president/associate editor of the Las Vegas Sun. She can be reached at 259-4025 or e-mail at thompson@lasvegassun.com

"LEAVE ME alone; sock it to someone else" is becoming a popular refrain these days as the county, state and school district sing the budget woes blues.

You've heard the chorus of teachers who want a small raise and to be compensated for extracurricular activities.

You've heard a few sour notes from state child welfare workers who want the same pay and benefits as their county counterparts-to-be.

Both are legitimate requests. But there's not enough money to go around, so something has to give. And that may require a closer look at salaries and benefits, which comprise the bulk of school, state, county and city budgets.

One benefit causing a slight stir in these lean economic times is longevity pay for government workers. The disparity in that pay is an issue in the transfer of child welfare services from the state to Clark County. But the issue extends way beyond the child welfare component.

Consider these differences in longevity pay offered by the state and Clark County:

After eight years, a state worker receives semiannual payments of $75, no matter the salary rate. The amount increases by $25 each year, but is capped at 30 years. So a 20-year state employee receives $375 twice a year for a total of $750. The maximum longevity payment is $1,250 a year.

Contrast that with Clark County's longevity pay: After eight years, workers receive a lump sum annually. The formula used to calculate the amount is the hourly wage x 2,080 (hours in a year) x .0057 x number of years of service.

An eight-year county employee earning $50,000 receives an annual lump-sum payment of $2,276. That's in addition to merit and/or cost-of-living increases. That amount rises significantly the higher the pay and the years of service. Some longtime department heads, for example, receive more than $15,000 each year.

The city of Las Vegas also offers longevity pay, but rolls it into workers' biweekly checks. Longevity pay begins after six years of service and is based on 3 percent of the biweekly base pay. It increases by one-half of 1 percent each year thereafter up to a maximum of 10 percent.

The average length of service among the county's 5,800 full-time employees is estimated to be 10 years, so a lot of dollars are being paid in longevity benefits. The average length of service in the city is said to be five years.

Claudette Enus, director of human resources for the city, says that in view of today's economy, the city's longevity pay is being reviewed, and other alternatives and options are being explored for new employees.

Susan Laveway, assistant finance director for the county, says longevity pay is a contracted benefit and must be negotiated. The contract expires next June.

At one point, she says, longevity pay for workers began after five years. It later was changed to eight years, which meant some savings in the county budget. Management's longevity pay, though, begins after five years.

Last week a legislative subcommittee, facing a budget shortfall, proposed delaying the transfer of child welfare services to Clark County to save an estimated $8 million. Salaries and benefits comprise a large part of the overall price tag for the new, enhanced child welfare system.

Washoe County, however, is expected to go ahead with the switchover. Its pay and benefits are more in line with the state's. Washoe also has a steady source of funding for the programs and has the infrastructure in place to handle increased services.

Everyone agrees that children will be better served by a streamlined, locally controlled child welfare system.

The good news is that the much-needed transfer will (and must) happen in Clark County; the only question is when.

The bad news is that children will linger longer in foster care limbo. For them, each day is an eternity. And they don't get longevity pay.