Never Believe What Execs Tell You

[trainman8119]

What else needs to be said:

http://www.suntimes.com/news/watchdogs/129...chdog24.article

[Busjack]

What else needs to be said:

http://www.suntimes.com/news/watchdogs/129...chdog24.article

Probably more. The Sun-Times article didn't say who makes what (except for Rocky), but just that the number that made over $100K increased. It also said something about more help being needed with taking over city paratransit.

Also, no comparison of salaries to those at RTA, CTA, and Metra.

In this case, they put more on the cover than the substance inside. Now, if they had demonstrated that any of these jobs were unnecessary....

[trainman8119]

Probably more. The Sun-Times article didn't say who makes what (except for Rocky), but just that the number that made over $100K increased. It also said something about more help being needed with taking over city paratransit.

Also, no comparison of salaries to those at RTA, CTA, and Metra.

In this case, they put more on the cover than the substance inside. Now, if they had demonstrated that any of these jobs were unnecessary....

I will agree that the article had little substance. In fact, it seems to be taking a jab ar Rocky more than anything else. They needed to dig deeper. But are think about it...how many people there deserve $100K ???? And, why is it that for an agency that always cries poor that the number in that range is in the 20's and not 2 or 3 ??? I think that is what the article is asking as much as anything else. Nobody questions added bodies for the Paratransit onslaught, but does this require high amounts of overpaid execs, when they claim they have justification for fare increases ????

The scary part of this article, is that Pace is low end of the pay scale in the region. What does that say for the rest of our overpaid transit leaders ??????

[Busjack]

The scary part of this article, is that Pace is low end of the pay scale in the region. What does that say for the rest of our overpaid transit leaders ??????

As I indicated in my prior post, probably well more at RTA, Metra, and especially CTA. Now, the latter is a place where people have continually been asking for an investigation of that.

[artthouwill]

As I indicated in my prior post, probably well more at RTA, Metra, and especially CTA. Now, the latter is a place where people have continually been asking for an investigation of that.

It's funny that everyone thinks they are worth X amount of dollars and deserve more, but the next guy doesn't. In this country, executives command a certain amount of dollars based on education, expertise, and experience. This is not limited to the public sector. A lot of companies and governments have to pay top dollar to attract top talent. You might believe the powers that be at CTA, Metra, and Pace are overpaid, but if they were not paid what they felt they were worth, they could easily make more in the private sector. Then where would the agencies be? Yet we would want someone who could/would get the job done and not be a rookie getting on the job training. I experience this while working at a large airline when the company was asking everybody to freeze wages or take a pay cut, then the airline award the CEO about 3 to 6 million dollars of stock in the company, which sent the rank and file into a tizzy. That executive since took the same position at another airline.

[Busjack]

It's funny that everyone thinks they are worth X amount of dollars and deserve more, but the next guy doesn't. In this country, executives command a certain amount of dollars based on education, expertise, and experience. This is not limited to the public sector. A lot of companies and governments have to pay top dollar to attract top talent. You might believe the powers that be at CTA, Metra, and Pace are overpaid, but if they were not paid what they felt they were worth, they could easily make more in the private sector.

The problem in the private sector is that the CEOs control the boards, or have a mutual admiration society, thus setting their own "competitive salaries," and recent events show that they aren't accountable.

The problem in the public sector is that most of them probably can't make it in the private sector, except as lobbyists. However, most of their salaries reflect that. For instance, I don't know what Huberman's salary is, but probably in the less than $200,000 range (they say Jody Weis is the highest paid city official at about $350K, but he gets the pay for two). If Huberman were really a private sector wiz, he would be there, instead of crying about his police pension.

The issue in the Sun-Times article is that they seemed to be complaining about the number of the over $100K execs, but, as I previously noted, except in one instance, didn't say what they did or how many there were.

What I would want to know is how many, especially at CTA, are patronage workers, and how many are needed (certainly they have a large PR department that accomplishes little). You see articles and blog posts about Ron kicking out Frank's people, and bringing in his own PowerPoint crew, but you wonder if the track inspectors that the NTSB caught, even though they might make only $50K, are typical of the CTA workforce.

[trainman8119]

The article stated that in 2006, Pace had 16 over $100K and that the number is

currently 20. Way, way, way too much for that agency.

The problem I have is not necessarily that they make the money, but that they

are not transit people, don't know anything about what they are doing nor the

consequences of their actions and are nothing but yes men to the pols. In so many cases

these people would not know the difference between a bus stop and a bus shelter.

Their only issue is whether or not they get the extra pay for themselves at

the end of the year (note Phil Pagano's constant whining about free rides

for seniors).

[artthouwill]

The article stated that in 2006, Pace had 16 over $100K and that the number is

currently 20. Way, way, way too much for that agency.

The problem I have is not necessarily that they make the money, but that they

are not transit people, don't know anything about what they are doing nor the

consequences of their actions and are nothing but yes men to the pols. In so many cases

these people would not know the difference between a bus stop and a bus shelter.

Their only issue is whether or not they get the extra pay for themselves at

the end of the year (note Phil Pagano's constant whining about free rides

for seniors).

True, but they are businessmen. Ray Kroc was not a hamburger guy, the McDonald brothers were, but Kroc made McDonalds what it is today. For what iit is worth, CTA is a business, Pace is a business, Metra is a business. While many could tell where they think routes should go, etc, how many can do cost analysis, budgets, forecasting, lobbying,planning,etc. I'm sure a lot of people wouldn't sunk any money into Block 37, but that was the mayor's dream, and since HE appoints people to CTA, he actually is the one running the agency amok.

As far as free rides for seniors go, I'm not necessarilyagainst them receiving free rides, but even at half fare (which is what they were paying before), that is a significant loss of revenue that has to be made up somewhere since the law requires that a certain percentage of the budget MUST come from the farebox. While seniors got free rides, the cost of fuel skyrocketed, the sales tax increase is not generating therevenue as advertised. Like it or not, these people earn their money and they have tomake some tough and unpopular decisions. Is there some patronage, probably so, tell me where there isn't any in government, and to a certain degree, even in the private sector.

[jajuan]

I think if the transit agencies were a bit more transparent in their budgets in terms of why does this item cost X number dollars and what makes that item cost Y number of dollars, there would be less temptation to jump to assume that every expenditure a full or partial government entity makes is a waste of tax dollars. I'm not saying that there can't be improvements (the insane number of CTA bus swaps this year comes to mind), but a better communication of how the money is spent can go a long way with public perception. Also remember that Chicago's media sometimes likes to see conspiracies everywhere even when there's not one. President-elect Obama's comment to Senator McCain at their recent meeting about the national media being tame compared to the Chicago media says a lot about how tough the media here likes to play.

As for Huberman's push to keep his police pension, to be fair to him, why should he be penalized and take a much smaller pension if he were to only take the CTA pension when he's paid into the police pension fund a lot longer than he has in the CTA fund. He's only been at the CTA for a year. Like it or not, he earned the right to the police pension because he did pay into the fund. It's not his fault that the Mayor kept appointing him to key high level city positions in a short span of time. He does seem to be one city official who actually earns his pay. I think the media would have ripped into him by now, as they have the mayor, Todd Stroger, and the governor, if he wasn't.

[Busjack]

As for Huberman's push to keep his police pension, to be fair to him, why should he be penalized and take a much smaller pension if he were to only take the CTA pension when he's paid into the police pension fund a lot longer than he has in the CTA fund. He's only been at the CTA for a year. Like it or not, he earned the right to the police pension because he did pay into the fund. It's not his fault that the Mayor kept appointing him to key high level city positions in a short span of time. He does seem to be one city official who actually earns his pay. I think the media would have ripped into him by now, as they have the mayor, Todd Stroger, and the governor, if he wasn't.

Nothing has been indicated that what he paid into the police fund isn't vested. What was disputed by the Sun-Times was why he claimed he was still a patrolman and thus entitled to pay more into it.

I also remember the stink when Kruesi tried to somehow augment his CTA pension (another deal in trying to combine service) until Daley told Jarrett no deal.

The whole government pension business in this state is such a mess that something radical needs to be done, such as merging all government employees into one plan, and basing payments on what was paid in, or as in the case of private industry, the last five years salary. None of this business like Bobbie Steele being county board president for two months, and then resigning because her pension doubled.

I can somewhat see putting employees in traditional union positions, such as bus drivers, into their own plan, but only because those were once part of private enterprise. Everyone else, though, goes into a common state plan.

Finally, I don't see how the state thinks it gets pension liabilities off its books by bonding them out. That might have worked when bonds were 3% and stocks returned 8%. However, I wonder how the CTA Pension bond deal is going now, with the real estate transfer tax not pulling in the expected revenue, and the stock market down 40% this year. Maybe the CTA didn't get the bond money in time to invest it, but otherwise that's not looking like a good deal, either.

[jajuan]

Nothing has been indicated that what he paid into the police fund isn't vested. What was disputed by the Sun-Times was why he claimed he was still a patrolman and thus entitled to pay more into it.

Yes I know that was the stink. But, if memory serves he never officially left the police department. He's been listed on an admittedly ridiculously long leave of absence since the start of his rise through the ranks of city government. Should that have been caught early on? Yeah perhaps. However he was allowed to pay into it after that point so he is entitled to it. I'll agree with you that the whole government pension system in this state needs to be reformed so that not only do you eliminate the Bobby Steele fiasco, but you don't have an official who fast tracks through the local government without being given an opportunity to set roots in one department for long, being put in a position of making a move that people will question so that he gets a pension that reflects his total service time in that local government. Though I understand Huberman's move being questioned but again his CTA pension alone will not reflect his total time worked in city government. In this case, I still say why should he be forced to start all over on his pension just because the Mayor kept promoting him for his work and hasn't given him a chance to set down some roots in any one area of government for too long? Unlike a lot of others who have risen through ranks of City Hall, he has earned his keep in each job held without getting dirty so far, or else we would have heard it in the local media by now.

[Busjack]

According to the Sun-Times, the gov is now on this bandwagon.

While, in my opinion, this just shows that the governor is becoming delusional in his last days if he thinks the legislature is going to make this a priority, the people who put comments on the forum seem to support the idea.

[jajuan]

According to the Sun-Times, the gov is now on this bandwagon.

While, in my opinion, this just shows that the governor is becoming delusional in his last days if he thinks the legislature is going to make this a priority, the people who put comments on the forum seem to support the idea.

While I'll agree that some of these salaries need to be held in check at the transit agencies, the governor really needs to stop misleading the public about how much the agencies are actually getting from the transit funding legislation. There is no way they are getting close to what government pencil pushers were projecting because of the economy being so out of whack compared to how it was when the law was passed. No one's buying many houses these days on top of a lot of people struggling just to keep the houses they do have, leaving the real estate market in a mess and much much lower tax dollars from the real estate transfer tax the city agreed to raise as part of the funding deal. People are watching what they buy and only going the the essentials given the job market is also in a shambles and so many people are either currently laid off, soon to face a layoff, or scared they might be facing a layoff if their companies are on shaky ground. Also take into account that in Cook County that Todd Stroger's 1% increase, which still didn't do much to pay on the waste in the couty budget, also has people watching what they spend, the sales tax revenues received may not necessary be as high as the governor's boasting that the agencies are receiving. He also likes to conveniently forget that those free rides he's giving everybody, which he cut the subsidy that helps pay for it, do cost money to the agencies to give them and they do have to be paid for somehow. Finally even if CTA hadn't gotten crazy with all these shifts in equipment which make little sense, whether anyone wants to admit it or not the agencies have been hit in the pocket just like the rest of us from the high fuel costs of earleir this year, and in Metra's case for the Electric Lines and CTA's case for the L, higher electric rates.

The governor's a joke. If any of us jump on his bandwagon of what are the transit agencies doing with the money from the transit bill as if that money is somehow magically the amount projected from wishful thinking of a good economy throughout 2008 which obvious did NOT happen, then we'd have to ask him what did he do with the money from everyone's state income taxes and the state's 6.25% (is that still the rate?) portion of the sales tax collected. If he wants us to give the state a bit of a break about its budget because of lower tax revenues because so many less people are working, he shouldn't be tooting his horn too louldly at the transit agencies when the funding sources for the revenues used by the state to fund them are a heck of a lot smaller because again less people are working let alone trying to buy house. Let's try to keep that in mind when he goes running off at the mouth about the service boards getting hundreds of millions of dollars from the state with the tax revenues from some sources barely half of what was projected if it's even that much.

The interesting part of that article is that if the President's salary were still at pre-2001 levels, the Metra executive, Mr. Pagano, would be paid about $60,000 more than either President Bush or his soon to be successor President-elect Obama. It's something that a transit official's annual salary is higher than what a US President used to get before President Bush first took office. Pagano's paid more than not only Huberman or the Pace top exec, but the RTA executive director as well. I would have thought Huberman and the RTA exec would have higher salaries.

[trainman8119]

I'll give Blago a little credit for a creative idea, although we all know he is blowing

smoke up all of our a@#$#$'s. What I have to question, when reading the comments

here is that from what I remember, the agencies were given the $250 million, less

the $25 million (they claim) it costs on the senior plan. The funding was funded from

the tax increase. I don't remember anything along the way that said if the state

didn't collect the tax money, transit didn't get their $250 million. The bailout terms

were, basically, you get the cash, and the seniors get the rides. The point of everything

after that is that CTA went on a huge spending spree after this. Remember...there

was no capital for projects, yet the Blue Line and the Loop L are getting practically rebuilt. It

has been stated here that these are projects that could never be done because of

lack of funding (be it federal, state, local, streetwise, or whatever)...yet almost

immediately after receiving the cash, the Blue was closed on weekends all summer

for (I will agree) necessary repairs. Where the heck did all of this money come from ???

Where has all the money come for all the unnecessary bus (and of course lets not forget

L car) movements. Let's not forget all the hybrid supervisor Escapes on the street now.

And although they will never admit it, they guys continue to get bonuses, if not also

salary increases. And I still wonder if leasing new equipment doesn't now fall under

annual budget, vs purchasing under a federal/state grant. Nobody ever talks about where

this money actually came from.

So why not put a little heat on these guys ???

As for "Uncle Phil" at Metra....if the numbers reported are true...he makes about 5 times more than he deserves. He serves no purpose related to Metra operations. I'd give anything to see this character take a pay cut. The sucess at Metra is because of Jeff Ladd, who got run off the Metra board. It was all his leadership that provided the spark which makes Metra tick today.

[Busjack]

What I have to question, when reading the comments here is that from what I remember, the agencies were given the $250 million, less the $25 million (they claim) it costs on the senior plan. The funding was funded from the tax increase. I don't remember anything along the way that said if the state didn't collect the tax money, transit didn't get their $250 million. The bailout terms were, basically, you get the cash, and the seniors get the rides.

I don't think that is the way it worked. Essentially how the law was laid out was that the RTA essentially got another .25% sales tax, and after stuff off the top (the Innovation Fund, ADA Fund, Suburban Mobility Fund, and South Cook Job Access fund), CTA got 58%, Metra 39% and Pace 13% of that .25%. The other .25% in the collar counties went directly to the county boards. (Link to the official site of the bill.)

The tax at the old rate continues to be distributed in the old manner--i.e. RTA gets 15% of the top, and then there were the various splits, depending on whether the money was generated in the city, suburban Cook, or the collar counties.

There is also the real estate transfer tax, which was to pay the CTA pension bonds.

Now, as jajuan points out, if sales are down (and certainly since real estate transfers are down), they aren't going to generate the tax revenue projected, regardless of the government entity involved.

There was no legislative guarantee of any amount. In fact, the governor vetoed the legislative appropriation for state reimbursement of half fares.

Unlike the federal government, the state can't print money; all it can do is be like Stroger and raise taxes (with the detrimental effect jajuan mentions) or sell lottery tickets. Which brings me back to my suggestion a couple of years ago to put slot machines on the wheel wells of low floor buses, but I see that the state legislature and CTA haven't acted on that yet.

Finally, for this point, I can see the point that diesel fuel costs should be going down, but I don't know if the transit authorities are now on the bad side of hedges.

The point of everything after that is that CTA went on a huge spending spree after this. Remember...there was no capital for projects, yet the Blue Line and the Loop L are getting practically rebuilt. It has been stated here that these are projects that could never be done because of lack of funding (be it federal, state, local, streetwise, or whatever)...yet almost immediately after receiving the cash, the Blue was closed on weekends all summer for (I will agree) necessary repairs. Where the heck did all of this money come from ???

Where has all the money come for all the unnecessary bus (and of course lets not forget L car) movements. Let's not forget all the hybrid supervisor Escapes on the street now. And although they will never admit it, they guys continue to get bonuses, if not also salary increases. And I still wonder if leasing new equipment doesn't now fall under annual budget, vs purchasing under a federal/state grant. Nobody ever talks about where this money actually came from.

I agree with this point. While the immediate source of money apparently consists of bonds and leases, there is very little transparency about the level of expenditure or where the money for paying the bonds and lease obligations will come from. If it is like the real estate transfer tax to pay the pension bonds, there will be trouble down the road.

By the same token, I don't see where the supposedly impoverished state gets the money to tear up every road in the area (Milwaukee Ave. being the latest example). Maybe it is more of a question of how many other projects would have been going at the same time if they got all the money they wanted. We probably would be permanently immobile in construction zones.

[RailBus63]

The problem shouldn't be that 'X' number of people are making over $100,000 per year at Pace. Chicago has a higher cost of living than most smaller U.S. cities, and as others have noted, you need to pay competitive salaries to attract the best talent. The more important question should be focused on the questionable jobs that are being filled at many agencies, regardless of the salary amount. I guarantee you that Pace, CTA, Metra and lost of other transit agencies have lots of friends of politicians and other connected people filling non-essential positions making less than $100k.

[trainman8119]

The problem shouldn't be that 'X' number of people are making over $100,000 per year at Pace. Chicago has a higher cost of living than most smaller U.S. cities, and as others have noted, you need to pay competitive salaries to attract the best talent.

If it were a case of attracting the best talent, maybe I'd be on board. However, I don't think

Ron Huberman is the best transit mind in the industry and many heads were scratched when

TJ Ross, someone who was not all that adored in Phoenix, was hired by Pace. And, well, see

above on my feelings on "Uncle Phil".