19 ms·
Top Paid LA Lifeguards Earned Up to $392k in 2019
- yeahboats 6y agoI wouldn't assume beach lifeguarding to be an easy job, and I would expect a job that puts my life at risk to compensate me fairly for that risk. The overtime numbers are concerning, however, since the last thing I would want is to have exhausted lifeguards on duty.
- np_tedious 6y agoI did this in New York when I was younger. Not as highly paid, and shorter seasons of course. The common thread I see here is that the pay scales with seniority/leadership more than with risk. The main difference is that this can be someone's career in LA, whereas in New York it's more or a seasonal supplemental (usually only teachers are longtimers) thing.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- Sebguer 6y agoSpeaking of New York, they've had their own lifeguard controversies (a lot more legitimate than the one this guard is trying to imply) https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/06/peter-stein-nyc-lifeguards.html https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/06/peter-stein-nyc-life...
- yostrovs 6y agoI doubt that the risk to lifeguards, that have a flotation device with them, approaches anything experienced by fire fighters, cops, truck drivers, etc. As noted in the article, valor in rescues doesn't seem to correlate with pay. The danger is mostly from sun exposure. This is outrageous, frankly. The job is really not that hard.
- zacharycohn 6y agoDid you read the article? > Macko jumped into the rough waters in a remote Palos Verdes gorge and pulled a man to safety through potentially skull-crushing swells and over razor-sharp rocks.
- syspec 6y agoDid you read the article? > The 2020 Medal of Valor winner, Edward “Nick” Macko, an ocean lifeguard specialist, earned “only” $134,144 in compensation.
- throwaway0a5e 6y agoMost lifeguards will never be put in a situation like that hence why he was officially recognized for going above and beyond.
- jsharp 6y agoDo we really think the top lifeguard in LA is putting his life at risk? More like managing the lifeguards doing the tough work. And being a lifeguard itself isn't even a dangerous job. Not even the top 25 most dangerous according to this chart. And notice that all of these people make 1/4 to way less than these lifeguards... https://www.ishn.com/articles/112748-top-25-most-dangerous-jobs-in-the-united-states https://www.ishn.com/articles/112748-top-25-most-dangerous-j...
- yostrovs 6y agoI'm surprised that small engine mechanics are #18 and supervisors of mechanics are #19. Since the two are so closely correlated, perhaps this is caused by duels or something violently similar, between mechanics and supervisors of mechanics. It just seems it shouldn't be life-threateningly dangerous to be a small engine mechanic.
- jasonwatkinspdx 6y agoIt'll be car crashes. Any job where you're in the field around vehicles will be pretty dangerous. It's why garbage collectors and delivery drivers are high on that list too. Cars are very convenient, and necessary in many places. But we really underestimate just how dangerous they are, and how bad the US is at regulating them. Our society is nearly identical to Canada, yet we have twice the traffic fatality rate. Something has gone very wrong with US car culture.
- JumpCrisscross 6y ago> Do we really think the top lifeguard in LA is putting his life at risk? Risk is meaningful to this discussion in that it deters people from taking the job. That reduces supply and boosts price. I don’t think lifeguards are paid a premium for being supply constrained. California has a public sector compensation problem. (In particular, its unwillingness to investigate overtime fraud.) But estimating pay solely based on how dangerous the job is won’t be accurate.
- jsharp 6y ago
- briffle 6y agoThe second person on the chart has base pay of 140k, and overtime of 131k. If they have 1.5 overtime rate, then that is an AVERAGE of 62 hours a week, every week.
- dls2016 6y agoI know utility workers that make over $250k/year due to extreme overtime. Often a sticking point with their salaried management. It's not a lifestyle I would choose, but I can see the allure of being top dog in a close knit team. I heard an NPR interview the other day with a CA firefighter. He basically admitted to working so much because 1) he didn't know how to function at home with his family and 2) he was a respected crew chief. When you're "married to the sea" you have a routine of people getting your coffee, etc., that I'm sure you don't receive at home.
- Shivetya 6y agoEasy or not, the pay numbers are obscene regardless. Let alone how many employees are in the 100k club. The danger is how much this contributes to their retirement payout. California had to change the law to prevent ridiculous retirement payouts and that is where the ire belongs. There is no logic to public employees pulling down 100k retirements but this is where we are. People bemoan private employer payouts need to be watching their backs as they are fleeced by public employee salaries, boosted by overtime and other bonuses, and then their retirements. My favorite is Forbes's work on Illinois 100k club[1] Look, the average pension for many public servants is not all that grand, it is the big money people who are fleecing not only the tax payers but other public service retirees. There is every reason a retiree should have a good retirement payout but when you start getting into multiples of what the average income of someone in your state is someone needs to step back and say, what gives. Let alone the pension debt Illinois carries - this is not uncommon across the country [0]https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/the-state-worker/article233539467.html https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/the-state-wo... [1]https://www.forbes.com/sites/adamandrzejewski/2018/10/26/illinois-100000-club-94000-six-figure-public-employees-and-retirees-cost-taxpayers-12b/?sh=3b0325ab481a https://www.forbes.com/sites/adamandrzejewski/2018/10/26/ill... [2] https://www.illinoispolicy.org/moodys-report-illinois-pension-debt-reaches-record-high-317-billion/ https://www.illinoispolicy.org/moodys-report-illinois-pensio...
- jsharp 6y agoI think it's great that lifeguards are paid well but close to $400k a year? I know Cost of living in LA is outrageous but WOW. Teachers even in LA aren't making 1/4 of that even at the top of their pay charts they'd be lucky to just touch $100k a year. We need good lifeguards, sure, but we don't need to pay them $300-400k a year...
- throwaway44234 6y ago> We need good lifeguards, sure, but we don't need to pay them $300-400k a year... I wonder, why does that apply to lifeguards but not to a FAANG employee?
- Snoozus 6y agotaxpayers money vs. sharehder money mostly
- thisisnico 6y agoAlso FAANG employee is paid according to value created, they'd have to create more value then they are paid otherwise they wouldn't be employed. Lifeguarding value is determined differently and is independent of pay.
- mrweasel 6y agoAlso lifeguards are viewed as an expense, who deliver no direct income to the city/county. A developer has his/her work translated into direct value to the company.
- throwawayboise 6y ago> A developer has his/her work translated into direct value to the company. Only in companies whose product is software. In other companies, IT and in-house/backoffice software systems are a cost center, just like the accounting department.
- jsharp 6y ago
- diogenescynic 6y agoOvertime abuse seems to be a thing. I bet if people were looking into these, they probably aren't working all the hours they claim. Same thing with the BART janitor they found sleeping in a closet who was racking up massive overtime.
- hpkuarg 6y agoThe Massachusetts State Police also had an overtime scandal that was exposed last year.
- throwaway0a5e 6y agoAnd one three years before that. And one two years before that. If you Googled it back when the most recent "scandal" was new you'd see multiple years of news results because the new stuff hadn't dominated the algorithm yet. It's not a scandal, it's the known status quo of that organization.
- borroka 6y agoThat's a scam if there is one, I hope someone with a straight spine will look into it. A similar investigation would be warranted for LEOs making similar money in Northern California.
- throwaway0a5e 6y ago>Overtime abuse seems to be a thing. It's absolutely rampant in government and other industries with seniority based pay and assignment preferences.
- gnopgnip 6y agoWhat is the line between overtime abuse, and what the union and government both agreed on?
- oh_sigh 6y agoWhen you're claiming overtime but are actually sleeping in your bed, for example. https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/bilks-nypd-unearned-overtime-promoted-article-1.3877314 https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/bilks-nypd-unearned-ove...
- scarmig 6y agoI really hate this trend of including benefits in someone's earnings. Yes, it makes sense logically, but 90% of people are going to assume it means salary, especially since a lot of the time they don't even know the monetary value of their own benefits.
- yostrovs 6y agoThe monetary value of the benefits are stated in the article.
- scarmig 6y agoThe headline is deceptive. When someone says "I'm paid X" no one thinks it includes benefits.
- yostrovs 6y agoMany of us do. These benefits often include a car, gas, per diem, pay for one's internet and other expenses that are normally paid out of one's pocket. It's a way to boost pay without increasing salaries.
- rory 6y agoIs the "benefits" portion mostly money in a retirement account or something though? Otherwise I don't understand how a single person can have $125,900 in benefits.
- 6y ago
- antattack 6y ago"The 2020 Medal of Valor winner, Edward “Nick” Macko, an ocean lifeguard specialist, earned “only” $134,144 in compensation. His compensation ranked 167th out of the 1,001 employees in the L.A. lifeguard corps." Salary data is from 2019 and "Nick" won the Medal of Valor in 2020.
- nova22033 6y agoVery likely he was doing a very dangerous job in 2019, no?
- rhacker 6y agoI guess the article is asking for LA to lower the pay. And maybe that's correct. However some of the people in these jobs have saved lives. So maybe they are overpaying by $8M per year... but if they cut that back, should the talent saving maybe 10 or 15 people decide to quit... would that be worth it? Each person that is saved is arguably worth millions to their family (we're just talking money here not love etc...) and millions to the GDP over their lost lifetime (we're talking about people that can afford to live in LA).
- realo 6y agoYes but... Where is the line drawn? 1M$ a year for each lifeguard? 2 M$ a year? 10 M$ a year? When is the pay for a life-saving job « adequate »?
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- syspec 6y agoYes, but it's not exactly a skill which is marketable otherwise, so most of those people (the top earners making over 200k) will do the same work for half the pay because there is no other market for thier skills
- bisRepetita 6y agoGet ready for a major pay increase for nurses then. There are a lot of them. Not against it, btw. If we cannot pay everyone $300K with our taxes, who should get it first?
- rhacker 6y agoSame here, would not be against that.
- ggggtez 6y agoThat's silly. If we want to look at it in a purely utilitarian view, you could spend $8M per year and spend that on doctors and nurses, or EMT. Swimming is a calculated risk. While I appreciate what life guards do, that doesn't necessarily mean that they are more important that other jobs that save lives. You can avoid drowning by simply choosing not to go swimming. If we really want to base things on cost-benefit analysis, someone with some actuary knowledge could probably make a more efficient investment here.
- antattack 6y agoWhy so much overtime? Is there a shortage of qualified Lifeguards?
- sjg007 6y agoYes. Cops and Firefighters have lots of overtime too.
- renewiltord 6y agoBART's explanation for this is that heavy overtime plus few employees results in lower total lifetime costs to cover the same area (of time or space) than no overtime and more employees. This is likely due to post-employment costs since most CA pensions are defined benefit not defined contribution. I would be unsurprised if this weren't also true for other CA departments. Though there is a likely positive feedback loop as increasing compensation with a fixed budget results in fewer hires, more work, and therefore more compensation.
- flr03 6y agoThat'd be interesting to compare the values with what a Fireman earns. They also put their own life at risk to save others.
- kritiko 6y agoit appears that in LA, lifeguards are part of the fire department. the "top paid lifeguard" is a fire chief. If you look at other top compensated LA public employees, there's tons in the fire department and port pulling down "$400k+" if you count benefits + whatever "other pay" is.
- Kranar 6y agoI mean based on the article the top paid lifeguard is a firefighter and is the chief of the Los Angeles County Fire Department. His responsibilities include, among other things, managing the the lifeguard department. So yeah, this article is incredibly deceptive.
- kritiko 6y agoIt seems very misleading to include "perks" - undefined in this article - and benefits as earnings. Obviously they have an impact on comp & what taxpayers spend, but you wouldn't include it if somebody asked how much you make.
- dougb5 6y agoIt would be good to know the median compensation for the lifeguards instead of just some outliers. Focusing on the highest paid earners gives readers a false sense of the distribution. Imagine a similar article that listed the top incomes of FAANG employees!
- papreclip 6y agoPublic vs private funds. If you told me some private resort with $800/night rooms paid their lifeguards this much, I would think nothing of it.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- bernardv 6y agoI very much doubt the pay scale is based on risk. Something not quite right about this... something in the water maybe.
- TheMagicHorsey 6y agoPublic sector employee interest groups have an outsized influence on every city government in CA, as well as in Sacramento. Its another reason why CA government is dysfunctional. CA tax revenues are so high, citizens don't know, for the most part, how much they're being ripped off.
- smhinsey 6y agoIt's a lot of money but it's also a weird job. Lifeguarding at the ocean isn't like sitting beside the neighborhood pool. It's a pretty niche skill and seasonal on top of that. It sucks that we have to spend so much but given that, it seems inevitable that you either have a well paid staff or a less qualified one. A friend of mine was recently rescued from a tricky situation after getting pulled offshore in a rip current and I definitely know which side I'd come down on.
- ahi 6y agoThis is a terrible article. In this case, "lifeguard" is anyone in the 1000 employee lifeguard unit. The $392k is attributed to Fernando Boiteux who is an Assistant Chief in the LA Fire Department. Do you know a lot of people with 1000 people reporting to them who make less than 400k?
- SheinhardtWigCo 6y agoForbes lends out its SEO juice to any content marketer willing to pay them for placement, this is the result.
- ahi 6y agoI wasted some of my time and tracked down the "Open the Books" org. It's a disingenuous non-profit that is part of the right wing bullshit industry. Think James O'Keefe, Newsmax, Heartland Institute, Sinclair, etc.
- mbostleman 6y agoI spent a couple minutes looking at their site. What is it that you find disingenuous?
- ahi 6y agoIt's not about good governance, it's about low taxes and whatever else Thomas Smith, founder of Prescott Investments, cares about.
- AniseAbyss 6y agoThe Dutch prime minister.
- jfengel 6y agoAnd the US President makes exactly that much ($400k).
- iandanforth 6y agoLifeguards are first responders and medical professionals in a specialized field. Boiteux is also a firefighter managing 900 personnel. So yeah, I'm ok with him having a salary equivalent to a Staff Software Engineer.
- cosmodisk 6y agoThis belongs to the same category as 'newly baked CS grads getting $500K from top companies'.
- sevsec 6y agoAs interesting as this article is, the related article is even more interesting: https://www.forbes.com/sites/adamandrzejewski/2020/05/19/why-california-is-in-trouble--340000-public-employees-with-100000-paychecks-cost-taxpayers-45-billion/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/adamandrzejewski/2020/05/19/why... Primarily because 1. California has over $1,000,000,000,000 in unfunded pension benefits promised and 2. It only takes one year of employment to reap these lifetime pension and healthcare benefits. I wonder what will happen in the long run, especially if high-earning tech companies continue to allow remote workers and the California exodus continues.