Daily Egyptian
Fall '03 Edition
SIUC Police Officer claims University inflated retroactive pay figure
Lindsey J. Mastis
Daily Egyptian
SIUC Police officers have their contract, but one officer claims the University is inflating its figures for payment and blaming the department for budget cuts.
Scott Miller, University police officer and negotiation team member, said he suspects the University has exaggerated the amount of money needed for the retroactive pay.
Contract negotiations between the SIUC Police Department and the University have taken almost three years.
The officers were granted an 8-percent raise beginning in the 2001-2002 contract year and an extra two percent for the 2003-2004 contract year. They asked for no raise for 2002-2003. The SIUC Police Department was not granted the longevity pay and educational incentive pay. The contract expires in June 2004, and another contract will have to be negotiated.
Miller said the 2-percent increase is what the officers asked for because another union within the University received the same amount.
"The arbitrator noted in his decision that we weren't asking for anything more than at least one other union had asked for and had been granted already by the administration," Miller said. "We were just asking for what we thought was fair and just and obviously were supported by the arbitrator through all of our facts and figures we presented."
Miller said the University's figure of $420,000 is too high. He cites the 34 officers represented by the union who make about $45,000 per year on average. After adding the salaries, overtime and holiday pay, Miller estimates that the University would have to pay the retroactive amount of $330,000. Miller's figures include amounts for officers, corporals and sergeants. Miller said if his number is correct, the University's figure is inflated by nearly $90,000.
"I think they're off by at least $50,000," Miller said. "I would like to see how they are coming up with that figure."
Officers would receive two-thirds of that figure after income tax and other fees, such as union dues. Miller said the University would most likely cut each officer a check for the full amount.
"What they have done in the past is a one-time payout," Miller said. "It will either be in a regular pay period on our regular Friday paycheck or they can issue a separate check for that retroactive amount."
The University initially offered a figure of 6 percent. Miller said the University should have already saved the 6 percent at minimum.
"So they knew they were going to be out at least 6 percent for at least one full year," Miller said. "So they should have been planning ahead at least that much for the last two and a half years."
Miller said the University has given pay raises to administrators without complaint.
"They hurt to pay raises when they don't want to pay them," Miller said. "But when they want to give them to the employees they think deserve it, they don't gripe or complain about trying to find that money, they just give out the rate."
Miller said the University has not complained about the amount but has given an inflated figure.
"We're not the lowest paid by any means, but we're definitely not the top paid either," Miller said. "For the size of our campus and the student population and the crime rate we have here, we're actually probably even lower paid than it really appears."
Miller said the reason the department did not ask for a raise during the 2002-2003 period is because of proposed budget cuts.
"We didn't ask for any money at all because we do understand that the state was in problems and that the University is in financial problems," Miller said. "We sympathize with that."
Miller said the public information about the final budget during the 2002-2003 year indicates that there was a surplus. He said the University should not cite budget cuts as a reason to complain about paying the officers. Miller said the University should have at the least put some of the money in reserves anticipating at least a six percent raise for the officers.
University Spokeswoman Sue Davis said the University cannot save state money regardless of a surplus.
"You can't save state money from one year to the next," Davis said. "You can't hold it. Otherwise, you'd have people holding on from one year's appropriation to the next and the state doesn't allow you to do that, so you couldn't have put back that money."
She said the initial estimate is $420,000 for retroactive pay. Davis said that figure came from the SIUC Police Department and includes overtime and holiday pay.
"That is the most current estimate that we have based on going back over things for the last two years," Davis said.
The University will take money from tuition dollars to pay the officers.
"Our plan right now is to use tuition revenue to cover this because you have to have continuing dollars," Davis said. "And continuing dollars can only come from a continuing source of funds. So either you have a state appropriation for salaries, which we have received none on this year, or you look to tuition dollars to take that because you can't count on grant and contract money for salary dollars in a continuing line."
Lindsey J. Mastis can be reached at: ljmastis@dailyegyptian.com
Today's News | Sports | Voices - Editorial | Letters
Newsbriefs | pulse - Arts & Entertainment | Calendar | Photo Staff
Apts & Rentals | Photo Personals | Live DE NewsCam | Classified Ads
Last update: Sunday, December 7, 2003 at 7:39:57 PM
Copyright 2009 Daily Egyptian