There are times when I simply shake my head after reading an article in the newspaper. This is one of them. In a (short-sighted) discussion about the State of Wisconsin's projected (perhaps, better said, guaranteed) budget shortfall, one of the areas where spending is being evaluated is with regards to state workers receiving pay for overtime hours. Notice I say receiving pay for overtime hours and not working overtime hours.
"The Journal Sentinel reported last year that eight of the 20 top-paid correctional officers in 2006 called in sick for a shift and then worked the immediate next shift at least once. Those employees earned eight hours of regular pay for the time they were off and eight hours of time-and-a-half pay for the shifts they worked."
What is being described here is not working overtime. This type of scheme makes my head spin. How does someone who hasn't even worked their normal shift receive overtime hours for showing up to the next shift (forget the idea of having to reach 40 hours before receiving overtime because many places - including our company - you receive overtime pay for working beyond your shift)?
In the end, I think the focus on overtime in it and of itself is completely misguided. Already trained workers being paid time and a half for overtime hours are likely to be more efficient and conscientious than someone who has been hired solely because too many overtime hours have been worked by the current staff. When we look at the details, however, of how overtime is defined, the question that needs to be asked is, "what is the state thinking?" And, if this type of financial behavior exists with something as simple as defining overtime, imagine what other types of ridiculous indiscretions take place.
via 25 State Workers Earned More than $50,000 in Overtime in '08 - JSOnline
