Money, money, money, money

I got more than one call Thursday from people - state employees, every one - asking me how much money I earn. They were whipped into a frenzy by the publication, on the State Journal's Web site of the salaries of those who work for the state.

"Invasion of privacy!," they cried.
"Sensationalism!"
"A cheesy scheme to pit state employees against each other!"
OK. Fair's fair. My annual pay is $76,544. Date of hire: Jan. 10, 1977. Job description: newspaper columnist. Town in which I ply my trade: Lansing. Now you can still call me a muckraker, but you can't call me a hypocrite.
By the way, I personally have nothing against publishing a list of State Journal employees and their salaries, top to bottom, as some have demanded. But even the most irate state employee has to admit it's not the same thing.
State employees are paid with public money, and taxpayer have the right to know where - and to whom - their money is going.

Comments

[Terry Buback]

Printing state positions and salaries is not a problem for me, printing names is! I see no logical benifit in doing this. Have I commited some kind of crime by becoming employed by the state that I have to have my name plastered on the internet. What is different about me or your employees? Tell your employees each and everyone of them that your going to do the same for them and I bet you are going to get the same reaction from them. I now know why they call your newspaper THE STATE URINAL!!!!!!!!

[Lisa Thompson]

Why aren't appointed employees included? Just wondering since they have the highest salaries.

[JLB]

Yes, I have a choice and will cancel my subscription. I have made note that the LSJ is taking a nose dive of late. Not just publishing state employees names along with pay and other information. The article on the unfortunate death of the woman in Clinton County was not worthy of a front page story. It was a private matter, needing to be treated with respect not headlines. This is just so much tabloid junk passed off as journalism. Also does the LSJ have anyone who's up on grammer and spelling because your spell checker just isn't working as it should. And just so you'll know, John, I think your salary is too high.

[MIB]

State Employee's are sick of hearing that they are paid by public money and taxpayers have the right to know where their money is going. State Employees are also taxpayers just for future reference. Where is our tax money going? To our own salary? What about our families tax money?

I agree with the previous post your newspaper has turned into THE STATE URINAL!!!!

To be vilified for being overworked and underpaid does nothing to encourage us to continue to go above and beyond to service the public's needs and/or demands.

State employees buy their own cars, pay for their childrens education, and many other things that other taxpayers pay also. To continue to vilify State Employees means that more people will leave the State of Michigan and then where will the state be without the tax money it so desperately needs?

Before you start putting down State Employees and how much they make why don't you look into how they are actually living on what you say is to much money. Lets see you support a family of 4 on $35,000 a year.

[Lechler]

You have a spelling error. You have "Invasion or privacy!"...I believe it should be "Invasion of privacy!"

Just my two cents...

[KA]

Dear Mr. Schneider,

I am glad that you feel so free to tell us your salary. However, I do not feel so obliged to tell you mine and I feel that you should not be able know my salary as I am not an elected or appointed state employee. I was hired into the state just as I have been hired into private companies I have worked for, and as with a private company I expect my salary to not be public information with my name published next it, along with my hire date, job title, and work location.

Yes, I do agree that elected and appointed state employees salary information can and should be public information as they received their position through political means. I however, did not receive my position through political means and I feel that as a result, state employees who did not receive their positions through political means are entitled to have their information kept private, just as it is in the private industry.

I would have been ok with the LSJ publishing statistical information on the average, max, and min salaries within classifications and titles. This would have provided the public sufficient information on the salaries of state employees within a classification and title, while protecting the identity of state employees from theft.

The Lansing State Journal’s actions have made it a lot easier for criminals to commit identity theft against the 53,000 state employees that the LSJ published such detailed information on. My family has been a victim of identity theft in the past, and it is frustrating the amount of effort, time, and money it takes to clean up the damage from identity theft.

In my position I have access to all state residents’ salary information as employers must provide this information to the state by law. I am obligated to keep such information private and only look at such information if needed in the performance of my job. I would like to give your readers who are not state employees some food for thought. The state has all of your salary information in several databases in several departments throughout the state. I wonder now if I could file a Freedom of Information Act request and receive a copy of all of these salary databases for all of the state residents and legally publish such information on the Internet since the state has possession of this information.

Think about how you would feel if the LSJ published your private information on the Internet.

Also, will the LSJ be paying for identity theft protection service for the 53,000 state employees it felt so free to publish such detailed information on. I think that the LSJ might just be responsible for doing so under the recent identity theft protection law that was recently passed. I would have to consult with a lawyer to know for sure.

[Debra Cross Desrochers]

I am a state employee and I understand my salary is public information. LSJ could have listed
worksites, positions and the salary each job paid. In addition, each position could have stated the level of education and / or training requirements for securing employment! However, LSJ chose our individual names and work site
departments for publication along with our date of hire. The action
taken was legal butI personably find it is morally and ethically reprehensible.
In addition I find it ironic
that my husband wanted to cancel
our subscription several times but I insisted on continuing it. Per my request he stopped the paper today. I will honestly miss your articles. I have been a fan since
James Hough was the author of the ONLOOKER series. What I am NOT going to miss are the biased views expressed by the Journal. Thank
you for your past inspiration.
State of Michigan employee/AKA
public servant; Ms. Debra Cross
Desrochers

[Doylet41]

One of the foundations of business ethics is the fact that just because something is legal, it does not mean it is ethical.

In addition to identity theft there are home invasion, free junk mail databases, individuals who may be eluding prior abusive spouses, etc., etc. Moreover, yes, they could request this information from Civil Service, but in individual cases, it would require a paper trail and perhaps the question why do you need the information. There is a real possibly of matching names with available address information. Unfortunately, many times complaints fall on death ears. Thus, the saying “don’t complain about anything you are not willing to do something about.” Perhaps financial ramifications have become the only way to be heard in this new technological world. The canceling of enough subscriptions will perhaps be the only catalyst to express dissatisfaction with the publishing of issue irrelevant (but possibly individually damaging) facts.

[JRS]

I am not a state employee so I have no personal axe to grind on this issue but I feel the LSJ has
sunk to a new low by doing this.

I am sure the motivation was to tap into the anger of people out
there who feel that state employees are overpaid and underworked by giving them the specific information and stir up
some populist rhetoric in a time
of extreme budget problems with the state. I agree with the earlier comment that a general
salary range for positions would
have been OK but specific information about an individual
was going too far. This was a cheap and low stunt on the part of
the LSJ.

[rod]

Tell us all of your co-workers (and non-worker management's) salaries, departments, and dates they started work too. You can tell us yours - but you shouldn't tell us theirs - that's the difference.

[not a state employee]

ps: "State employees are paid with public money, and taxpayer have the right to know where — and to whom — their money is going."

so LSH should disclose salary info to advertisers and newspaper purchasers.