The Oregon state employee., July 01, 1947, Page 21, Image 21

19
State Pay Compared to Private Firms
In our last issue, we announced that
our special wage survey committee^
consisting of Floyd Query, Ellis H.
Jones and E. H . Clymer, would soon
have a report ready for O.S.E.A. mem­
bers.
Under date of July 21, the commit­
tee reported and copies of the report
have been mailed to. the Chapters. •
An analysis of the report, which
compares the state’s average pay for
nine representative classifications, with
the same classes of positions in private
industry; both in May, 1946; and May,
1947; reveals the following interest­
ing facts:
1. The per cents of increase in the
average earnings during the year re­
ported on, by private industry and
the state, ‘appear to be:
Classification
% Increase
F 'ri.In d . State
Unskilled Labor
-13.6 10.3
Laundry Worker
„22.4
8.9
Bookking Mach. Opr. „14.9 13.8
Bookkeeper _____
_ „12.1
8.0
Stenographer „ ______ „10.0 24.8
Store Clerk __
„ 9.6
4.0
Engrg. Chainman
„12.0 None
Erigrg. Instrumentman „10.0
8.8
Carpenter . . _ _
„12.Í
6.2,;
2. In all cases except that of ste^
nographer, it appears the state rates
o f pay are continuing to get more and
more out o f line, and less and less, in
comparison with private industry .„
J. In the case of stenographers, it
appears that this class of employee is
beginning to be appreciated as worthy
of its hire. As an employer, the state
now apparently appreciates that it is
good business to try to decrease. its
present large employment turnover, in
this class at least, by offering and pay­
ing a compensation more in line with
private industry.
4. The above classifications are in­
dicators of what is happening in all
classifications in general.
The present state pay schedules were
set up by the Civil- Service Commission
based on surveys made in the early part
of 1946, with slight modifications
made therein in the latter part of the
year by special requests of some of
the department heads.
Employees came under these pay
schedules March 1, 1947, at which
time many well-trained, efficient em­
ployees with long service records be­
gan to receive the MINIMUM salary
payable for the service which they had
rendered the state for years! Many new
employees hired since March 1, 1947,
are getting the same pay as they!
Salary advancements which are sup­
posed to overcome this disparity are
limited to a small portion of the em­
ployees and cannot be granted more
often than once a year to the limited
number!
In fairness to all employees it seems
proper that Oregon’s state salary prob­
lem receive the favorable attention of
those whose responsibility lies- in seeing
that the public receive good service
from its employees.
To us the problem appears to be one,
of merit and good business. Problems
of revenues, disbursements, budgets and
appropriations are financial matters of
concern to all, Oregon citizens and are
capable of solution by brilliant minds,
with which Oregon is freely blessed.
However, the problems of employee
morale,Efficiency, fair treatment, re­
ward of service and honesty— these áre
personnel matters Which are not meas­
urable in dollars. Loyalty, fidelity, in­
tegrity and other personal attributes
are above price! When every employee
feels that he is being treated fairly and
is recognized as an individual worthy
of appreciation, only then can the po­
tential value of personal traits be fully
contributed to the public service. A
tangible token of appreciation can be
shown by providing a fair compenas-
tion on a parity with that which in­
dustry is willing to pay. This does not
seem an unreasonable expectation for a
state employee to entertain.
(Continued on page 39}