Lifeguarding in OC: $200,000 (Newport Beach, Laguna, Laguna Beach: camping, live, move)

[eureka1]

They're taking about THIRTEEN PEOPLE. Public safety employees who risk their lives daily. Grow up.

[CAVA1990]

Originally Posted by slo1318

This has to do with an over-correction on our "appreciation" through pay and benefits that has put cities, counties, and the entire state budgets and economies in jeopardy. Thats like saying its ok to pay them $2 million dollars a year because they put their lives on the line. Its not sustainable.

I'm pretty sure the good folks in NB could pay these guys $1 million a year without putting any stress on their fiscal situation. With their tax base, they can sustain it, believe me.

[Fontucky]

Seeing as how we're discussing a beach community and well-compensated public servants, I'd like to extend an attaboy to the lads currently fighting a nasty house fire in Sunset Beach. 3 story structure, zero lot lines, fully involved, and a brilliant save of an adjacent exposure on the part of the firefighters manning the master stream appliance.

[technocrat]

[quote=killer2021;19117099]



The location doesn't matter. What matters is letting the free market dictate the wage.


Awesome!! Even better....lets outsource to the Chinese or the Indians...we may even get it for under $2000.00/year
Problem solved

[Phil306]

Originally Posted by 415_s2k

The main thing I take fault with are the pensions.

When cities pay 90% pensions and someone retires at 50, the city/state/county can dole out $90k+ per year for another 30, 40 years. Times 14 lifeguards, you're looking at over a million dollars a year. Over 2 and a half decades (let's assume people start to die off around then), you're looking at about $25mil for people who are no longer working.

The government does need to provide retirement for its employees for their years of service, but hell...

Maybe, possibly, perhaps, but I don't know. You see, these guys lead pretty stressful lives, just like police officers and firefighters. MOST police officers and firefighters live an average of about 4-6 yrs after retirement, then die; due to alot of factors. Mostly the stress of the job. Throw in poor diet, lack of physical fitness, et al.

I'd like a study done on lifeguards, to see what their average life expectancy is after 50. Then, you can really crunch the numbers. Whay you have outlined is in a perfect world and everyone knows, this world aint perfect.

[Phil306]

Originally Posted by 415_s2k

The main thing I take fault with are the pensions.

When cities pay 90% pensions and someone retires at 50, the city/state/county can dole out $90k+ per year for another 30, 40 years. Times 14 lifeguards, you're looking at over a million dollars a year. Over 2 and a half decades (let's assume people start to die off around then), you're looking at about $25mil for people who are no longer working.

The government does need to provide retirement for its employees for their years of service, but hell...

Oh and one more thing:

Everyone please understand the formula CORRECTLY and quit spouting off some fallacy. First off, it is IMPOSSIBLE (unless you can be hired prior to age 21, which I don't think you can, since its sworn position and by state law you must be 21) to retire at 50, with a 90% retirement. The math just won't add up.

The formula is this: 3% at 50 yrs. So, you multiply 3 times the number of years of service. So, IF you were lucky enough to land said job right at age 21, at 50 you would have 29 years of service. 29 X 3=87%.

VERY FEW people get hired right at age 21. Most people are 24-30. So at age 50, they are no where near this "magical, mystical" number of 90%. What that 90% is what could occur, however rarely does. I've been a public employee for 22 years now. I've seen literally dozens, upon dozens, of people retire. Maybe 3 or 4 of them retired at 90%. And those that did, stayed until they were 57 or 60 years old. I've never seen ONE PERSON retire at age 50 at 90% or even 87%. Most have somewhere around 50 or 60%.

Now, take a police office, firefighter, or lifeguard. 29 years of wear, tear, stress on their bodies and minds, what toll does that exact on them? Due you know the psychological damage done to a police officer who is involved in an officer involved shooting? The stress of lawsuits? The toll on the home and family life?

Can you imagine, for one moment, what it would be like, to be a lifeguard, trying to rescue a child drowning and losing the child in your arms? What sort of emotional damage does that lifeguard suffer? Harbor for the rest of their lives? How much are they eaten up inside? Torn apart? How much does that lessen their life span?

[Hwy phantom]

Originally Posted by Phil306

Maybe, possibly, perhaps, but I don't know. You see, these guys lead pretty stressful lives, just like police officers and firefighters. MOST police officers and firefighters live an average of about 4-6 yrs after retirement, then die; due to alot of factors. Mostly the stress of the job. Throw in poor diet, lack of physical fitness, et al.

I'd like a study done on lifeguards, to see what their average life expectancy is after 50. Then, you can really crunch the numbers. Whay you have outlined is in a perfect world and everyone knows, this world aint perfect.

Sorry, that's just a myth made up by the Union thugs to try and justify the pensions. Besides I'm pretty sure even the pensions are passed on to the wifes when the pensioner dies and the money is still dished out. That might make sense back in the 50's when most women didn't work, but not today.

"And according to a 2006 report to the Oregon Public Employees Retirement System, these are the age-60 life expectancies for the system’s workers (meaning how many years after 60 they will live):

-- Police and fire males: 22.6
-- General service males: 23.4
-- Police and fire females: 25.7
-- General service females: 25.7

So we see that police and firefighters who retire at age 60 live, on average, well into their 80s. That’s real data and not the hearsay used by apologists for enormous police pensions.

Police Pensions and Voodoo Actuarials | Newgeography.com

[CAVA1990]

Originally Posted by Hwy phantom

For the pay and benefits offered, I bet there are thousands of qualified applicants.

I'll bet there aren't.

[Oerdin]

I would say this is an honest case of folks getting way over paid. The public would be better served by having more life guards who were paid less. Fortunately, it is only one county.

[Everest209]

Originally Posted by jazznblues

Is a 20 year lifeguard better than a 2 year lifeguard? I don't believe there is a huge skill development that comes with vast experience for lifeguards. It is possible that older, more expensive lifeguards, are not as fit as a 22 year old ex-NCAA swimmer that California produces in large quantity. And that 22 year old is probably happy to do this luxury job for $35,000.

This job should not be structured for long term employment. It should be thought of as a 5 year job at most. Set max pay at $50K and you'd get turnover, with a steady flow of younger people willing to work for much less than they are paying now.

I don't get it, I don't think you guys understand these aren't lifeguards that would be at your local city pool.

These guys are dealing with numerous different obstacles like drownings or other medical emergencies. Not to mention all the while trying to stay focused around numerous so cal women . I don't know about 200k, but they are definitely worth more than 35. And come on, I'd much rather have a 20 year lifeguard in the water trying to save me than a 2 year lifeguard.