In Eagle-Vail manager discussion, are we really comparing apples to apples? (letter)
All this apples to apples talk. It could give this ole gal a fit of appleplexy.
The Eagle Vail Metro District’s Human Resource Committee has been busy deciding if reduced duties are really reduced duties and if the compensation package for an employee who once worked for both the District and the Property Owners Association (whose compensation package had been split evenly between the two) should remain unchanged.
The committee was assigned the task of comparing apples to apples. To compare apples, the committee used a new job description and list of similar salaries for similar positions in similar communities that they prepared for the District board. Data missing for the comparison were actual job descriptions for the positions the committee identified as similar.
In January, the Property Owners Association replaced Community Manager Jeffrey Layman with a private management company at significant savings. Now, the Human Resource Committee has recommended that the District board approve keeping Layman’s base salary the same ($109,634, plus benefits totaling $30,161).
The committee’s recommendation was based on their belief that the District should stay the course and not have a knee-jerk reaction to the change in Property Owners Association management. The Finance Committee thought differently and felt the reduction in duties warranted cutting Layman’s base salary in half to $54,500 but offered an incentive package with the potential for earning an additional $26,150. The Human Resource Committee rejected the Finance Committee recommendation.
In a District with very serious structural deficit concerns, the Human Resource Committee seems to be saying that while the Property Owners Association had paid for a seven-year supply of apples, it did not receive those apples. If the apples weren’t received but the Property Owners Association transferred money to the Metro District to pay for the apples, then shouldn’t the District refund the Property Owners Association for the apples?
No way. The Human Resource Committee wants this ole gal and the Finance Committee to accept that apple procurement is different in the private sector than in government, where no matter how many or how few apples you buy or receive, the price should legitimately remain the same.
This apples comparison business looks and smells a lot like a very, very overripe Yellow Transparent to this ole native Washington state apple connoisseur. It gives an entirely new meaning to the saying, “There are apples … then there are apples,” doesn’t it?