San Diego Fire Chief retires at 53 with $123K/yr pension for life…

[blahblahblah]

The average non police life expectency for males in the us is in the high 70’s, police life expectancy is between 53 and 66 depending on the study (various studies for different departments, some including less traditonal “cops” like park rangers, federal agents, marshals, etc. but the best scenario is 66), I imagine fire is similar. For the boys and girls who strap it on and head into the actual fires or fights, they will live only into their fifties, so do you really envy them now?

Ummmm I don’t think this is the right website to be using the statistical mean as the basis for your argument 🙂

Certainly average life expectancy is lower among these groups, but I’d wager that the standard deviation in life expectancy is much higher than in the general population due to the dangerous and stressful nature of the work. More low samples due to on-the-job deaths and the mean is of course lowered. That doesn’t necessarily mean that a 60 year old retired firefighter is less likely to make it to 75.

I’m just sayin’…

[SDEngineer]

[quote=XBoxBoy][quote=SDEngineer] the most appropriate comparison to the commander of the fire department would be a CEO of an equivalent sized company[/quote]

I don’t think this is a valid argument for two reasons

1) It implies that the CEO’s of private sector companies are fairly paid. (Highly dubious in my mind)

2) It implies that private sector and public sector are equal and comparable. (I wouldn’t call this highly dubious as I did reason one, but I think this assumption definitely needs to be questioned.)

It would seem to me that a more appropriate criteria would include questions like:

1) Does this person bring enough added value to the organization to justify their pay.

2) Can this job be filled by an equally capable person for less pay and retirement.

Question 2 would seem to me to be the kicker. While I don’t know the specifics, my bet is that there would be a number of good people in the firefighting organization that would be willing to take the job for a lesser salary and would be plenty competent to do the job.

[/quote]

You could use this argument against every position in every company, public or private, and wind up proving that virtually everyone is overpaid.

Besides, I think 250-350K is a pretty reasonable salary for someone in charge of and taking responsibility for a thousand person company (which were the numbers I was using as a minimum comparison against her salary). In fact, I’d consider that to be a bit on the cheap end. What I see as unreasonable are the 20+ million salary packages being paid out to a lot of CEO’s.

[SDEngineer]

[quote=XBoxBoy][quote=SDEngineer] the most appropriate comparison to the commander of the fire department would be a CEO of an equivalent sized company[/quote]

I don’t think this is a valid argument for two reasons

1) It implies that the CEO’s of private sector companies are fairly paid. (Highly dubious in my mind)

2) It implies that private sector and public sector are equal and comparable. (I wouldn’t call this highly dubious as I did reason one, but I think this assumption definitely needs to be questioned.)

It would seem to me that a more appropriate criteria would include questions like:

1) Does this person bring enough added value to the organization to justify their pay.

2) Can this job be filled by an equally capable person for less pay and retirement.

Question 2 would seem to me to be the kicker. While I don’t know the specifics, my bet is that there would be a number of good people in the firefighting organization that would be willing to take the job for a lesser salary and would be plenty competent to do the job.

[/quote]

You could use this argument against every position in every company, public or private, and wind up proving that virtually everyone is overpaid.

Besides, I think 250-350K is a pretty reasonable salary for someone in charge of and taking responsibility for a thousand person company (which were the numbers I was using as a minimum comparison against her salary). In fact, I’d consider that to be a bit on the cheap end. What I see as unreasonable are the 20+ million salary packages being paid out to a lot of CEO’s.

[SDEngineer]

[quote=XBoxBoy][quote=SDEngineer] the most appropriate comparison to the commander of the fire department would be a CEO of an equivalent sized company[/quote]

I don’t think this is a valid argument for two reasons

1) It implies that the CEO’s of private sector companies are fairly paid. (Highly dubious in my mind)

2) It implies that private sector and public sector are equal and comparable. (I wouldn’t call this highly dubious as I did reason one, but I think this assumption definitely needs to be questioned.)

It would seem to me that a more appropriate criteria would include questions like:

1) Does this person bring enough added value to the organization to justify their pay.

2) Can this job be filled by an equally capable person for less pay and retirement.

Question 2 would seem to me to be the kicker. While I don’t know the specifics, my bet is that there would be a number of good people in the firefighting organization that would be willing to take the job for a lesser salary and would be plenty competent to do the job.

[/quote]

You could use this argument against every position in every company, public or private, and wind up proving that virtually everyone is overpaid.

Besides, I think 250-350K is a pretty reasonable salary for someone in charge of and taking responsibility for a thousand person company (which were the numbers I was using as a minimum comparison against her salary). In fact, I’d consider that to be a bit on the cheap end. What I see as unreasonable are the 20+ million salary packages being paid out to a lot of CEO’s.

[SDEngineer]

[quote=XBoxBoy][quote=SDEngineer] the most appropriate comparison to the commander of the fire department would be a CEO of an equivalent sized company[/quote]

I don’t think this is a valid argument for two reasons

1) It implies that the CEO’s of private sector companies are fairly paid. (Highly dubious in my mind)

2) It implies that private sector and public sector are equal and comparable. (I wouldn’t call this highly dubious as I did reason one, but I think this assumption definitely needs to be questioned.)

It would seem to me that a more appropriate criteria would include questions like:

1) Does this person bring enough added value to the organization to justify their pay.

2) Can this job be filled by an equally capable person for less pay and retirement.

Question 2 would seem to me to be the kicker. While I don’t know the specifics, my bet is that there would be a number of good people in the firefighting organization that would be willing to take the job for a lesser salary and would be plenty competent to do the job.

[/quote]

You could use this argument against every position in every company, public or private, and wind up proving that virtually everyone is overpaid.

Besides, I think 250-350K is a pretty reasonable salary for someone in charge of and taking responsibility for a thousand person company (which were the numbers I was using as a minimum comparison against her salary). In fact, I’d consider that to be a bit on the cheap end. What I see as unreasonable are the 20+ million salary packages being paid out to a lot of CEO’s.

[SDEngineer]

[quote=XBoxBoy][quote=SDEngineer] the most appropriate comparison to the commander of the fire department would be a CEO of an equivalent sized company[/quote]

I don’t think this is a valid argument for two reasons

1) It implies that the CEO’s of private sector companies are fairly paid. (Highly dubious in my mind)

2) It implies that private sector and public sector are equal and comparable. (I wouldn’t call this highly dubious as I did reason one, but I think this assumption definitely needs to be questioned.)

It would seem to me that a more appropriate criteria would include questions like:

1) Does this person bring enough added value to the organization to justify their pay.

2) Can this job be filled by an equally capable person for less pay and retirement.

Question 2 would seem to me to be the kicker. While I don’t know the specifics, my bet is that there would be a number of good people in the firefighting organization that would be willing to take the job for a lesser salary and would be plenty competent to do the job.

[/quote]

You could use this argument against every position in every company, public or private, and wind up proving that virtually everyone is overpaid.

Besides, I think 250-350K is a pretty reasonable salary for someone in charge of and taking responsibility for a thousand person company (which were the numbers I was using as a minimum comparison against her salary). In fact, I’d consider that to be a bit on the cheap end. What I see as unreasonable are the 20+ million salary packages being paid out to a lot of CEO’s.

[La Jolla Renter]

[quote]A sole proprietor would have to have a 2 million dollar retirement fund which yields 6% per year which would get you the $10,000 per month..

So obviously the fireman/woman didn’t kick in this much him/herself…it is the taxpayers that are getting bled.[/quote]

Larry… very worth repeating!!!

[La Jolla Renter]

[quote]A sole proprietor would have to have a 2 million dollar retirement fund which yields 6% per year which would get you the $10,000 per month..

So obviously the fireman/woman didn’t kick in this much him/herself…it is the taxpayers that are getting bled.[/quote]

Larry… very worth repeating!!!

[La Jolla Renter]

[quote]A sole proprietor would have to have a 2 million dollar retirement fund which yields 6% per year which would get you the $10,000 per month..

So obviously the fireman/woman didn’t kick in this much him/herself…it is the taxpayers that are getting bled.[/quote]

Larry… very worth repeating!!!

[La Jolla Renter]

[quote]A sole proprietor would have to have a 2 million dollar retirement fund which yields 6% per year which would get you the $10,000 per month..

So obviously the fireman/woman didn’t kick in this much him/herself…it is the taxpayers that are getting bled.[/quote]

Larry… very worth repeating!!!

[La Jolla Renter]

[quote]A sole proprietor would have to have a 2 million dollar retirement fund which yields 6% per year which would get you the $10,000 per month..

So obviously the fireman/woman didn’t kick in this much him/herself…it is the taxpayers that are getting bled.[/quote]

Larry… very worth repeating!!!

[UCGal]

[quote=LarryTheRenter]A sole proprieter would have to have a 2 million dollar retirement fund which yields 6% per year which would get you the $10,000 per month..

So obviuosly the fireman/woman didnt kick in this much him/herself…it is the taxpayers that are getting bled.[/quote]

A sole proprietor often has equity in the business that they can sell/cash out when they retire.

I’ve seen it happen a lot. Build a business – sell it, retire on the proceeds.

[UCGal]

[quote=LarryTheRenter]A sole proprieter would have to have a 2 million dollar retirement fund which yields 6% per year which would get you the $10,000 per month..

So obviuosly the fireman/woman didnt kick in this much him/herself…it is the taxpayers that are getting bled.[/quote]

A sole proprietor often has equity in the business that they can sell/cash out when they retire.

I’ve seen it happen a lot. Build a business – sell it, retire on the proceeds.

[UCGal]

[quote=LarryTheRenter]A sole proprieter would have to have a 2 million dollar retirement fund which yields 6% per year which would get you the $10,000 per month..

So obviuosly the fireman/woman didnt kick in this much him/herself…it is the taxpayers that are getting bled.[/quote]

A sole proprietor often has equity in the business that they can sell/cash out when they retire.

I’ve seen it happen a lot. Build a business – sell it, retire on the proceeds.

[UCGal]

[quote=LarryTheRenter]A sole proprieter would have to have a 2 million dollar retirement fund which yields 6% per year which would get you the $10,000 per month..

So obviuosly the fireman/woman didnt kick in this much him/herself…it is the taxpayers that are getting bled.[/quote]

A sole proprietor often has equity in the business that they can sell/cash out when they retire.

I’ve seen it happen a lot. Build a business – sell it, retire on the proceeds.

[Author]

Posts