Sunshine List or Faulty Spotlight?

[Big Guy]

So we have yet another annual publication of the Ontario “Sunshine List” satisfying the “Public Sector Salary Disclosure Act”. In 1996, then Ontario Premier Mike Harris was targeting public service sector employees and under the guise of transparency he launched his political attack. He decided to publish the names and salaries of every civil servant earning $100,000 or more a year. Subsequent Premiers continued this peep show and continued to subject public workers to this humiliating process.

Every year, many members of the public scrutinize this list while wagging their fingers and reinforcing their perception that even more government “fat cats” are feeding from the generous public trough. I have quickly browsed through the 2011 list of about 80,000 names and do scratch my head at the report of the $million + salaries of some CEO’s of hospitals and other public organizations. But why include the salary of the nurse (with lots of overtime), the law enforcement officer working many extra hours or the manager who has put in 40 years of service?

I have a problem with this list because;

1. Mike Harris’s arbitrary benchmark of $100,000 in 1996 is the equivalent of $140,000 to-day.

2. There are no objective comparisons given between the public service job/salary and the job/salary (plus benefits) in the private sector.

3. The publication of this list has no social value but leads to the vilification of good people working in the public sector. It drives a wedge between the public and public servants. It discourages the friendly cooperation between those receiving public services and those providing them.

4. It is a cynical political tool used by politicians to obfuscate poor political fiscal and organizational decisions.

5. With 80,000 names now on the list it has become bloated and pointless where the exorbitant salary gets lumped in with the more realistic incomes.

I see in our area where 19 Norfolk County employees are on the list – there would be only 2 if the post inflation equivalent figure of $140,000 was used instead. As a taxpayer, do I think that these 19 on our list deserve what we are paying them? I would have a far better idea if I knew the job description, hrs per week, responsibilities, number of staff to supervise, department budget, years of experience, efficiency rating etc. I do know that they all competed for the jobs and were chosen because they were considered the best candidates at the time.

How much is an appropriate income? I do know that on the professional golf tour, every week somebody gets well over $1 million for 4 days work hitting a ball. Former Premier Harris gets at least $750,000 annually for just his part time work with Magna International. There are surgeons who prolong and save lives daily who receive in a year what some basketball players get for one week playing during the season.

Enough already! This "Sunshine List" was a poorly focused political spotlight in 1996 and 16 years later has become a dim bulb under which some people practice public salary voyeurism. And besides, there are only two people who really deserve more money than how much they are getting – you and me. And I am not so sure about you.

[jacee]

I have a problem with the identification by name, as it puts people at risk of crazies, etc. It should be just by Position, imo. I made the list once because of a pension payout, and suffered some personal backlash from some crazies because of it. That doesn't seem right to me.

I also agree that the threshold for the list - $100,000 - needs to be updated.

In general, though, I don't mind the concept. It's public money ... our money ... and we deserve to know how it's spent, but by position/function, not by name.

[CPCFTW]

So we have yet another annual publication of the Ontario “Sunshine List” satisfying the “Public Sector Salary Disclosure Act”. In 1996, then Ontario Premier Mike Harris was targeting public service sector employees and under the guise of transparency he launched his political attack. He decided to publish the names and salaries of every civil servant earning $100,000 or more a year. Subsequent Premiers continued this peep show and continued to subject public workers to this humiliating process.

Every year, many members of the public scrutinize this list while wagging their fingers and reinforcing their perception that even more government “fat cats” are feeding from the generous public trough. I have quickly browsed through the 2011 list of about 80,000 names and do scratch my head at the report of the $million + salaries of some CEO’s of hospitals and other public organizations. But why include the salary of the nurse (with lots of overtime), the law enforcement officer working many extra hours or the manager who has put in 40 years of service?

I have a problem with this list because;

1. Mike Harris’s arbitrary benchmark of $100,000 in 1996 is the equivalent of $140,000 to-day.

2. There are no objective comparisons given between the public service job/salary and the job/salary (plus benefits) in the private sector.

Stopped reading here. You are out to lunch if you think the benefits in the private sector are even close to those of the public sector. As someone with family members who make over 100k in both the private and public sector, I can tell you the member in the public sector has far better benefits (and will be retiring with over 2 years of banked vacation days).

And since when is it an embarrassment to earn more than 100k? The only reason anyone should be embarrassed is if they didn't earn their salaries. Taxpayers have a right to know where there money is going.

Edit: took the time to read the rest of your post and the comparisons to golf and basketball players is laughable. You honestly don't see the difference between people willingly giving their money to buy tickets that pay for athlete salaries vs people having 30-60% (income, sales, property taxes and fees) of their money taken from them to pay for services they may or may not want?

Edited March 28, 2012 by CPCFTW

[stopstaaron]

They shouldn't publish the names of the employees who make six figures.

[Big Guy]

I do not work in the public sector but I too have family working in both the private and public sector. Both of these individuals are in approximately the same field. There are benefits and liabilities of working in either area and that is the decision of the individual choosing where they work. Those in the private sector are free to apply for an equivalent position in the pubic sector and vice versa. We still live in a free society.

All of that information in the Sunshine List is available to the public anyway if you are really interested. The decision to actually gather and publish the names and salaries of those in the public sector making over $100,000 was a vindictive and cynical political decision at the time and is now used as a wedge issue during negotiations. I think it is irresponsible, demeaning, provocative and not very productive.

[MiddleClassCentrist]

Stopped reading here. You are out to lunch if you think the benefits in the private sector are even close to those of the public sector.

Public plans don't cover extravagances like 3D ultrasound, or weight loss support.

I know a few Private Sector jobs that do.

There are Private Sector jobs offer higher quality plans than public sector ever will.

People lash out at the public sector for being able to bank sick days as a retirement perk... but if you have a good job and work half decent, retirement packages and retirement severance is normal in the private sector.

Public sector is pretty good, but I can make more in the private sector than I'd ever make in the public sector. And my benefits are better.

Edited March 30, 2012 by MiddleClassCentrist

[MiddleClassCentrist]

Keeping it at $100,000 is simply an attack on regular workers.

How DARE public wages keep up with inflation... when wages for the wealthy exceed inflation...

Let's keep the general working public down!