The value of salary surveys

We're no fan of expensive compensation comparison studies purchased by government officials and paid for by taxpayers.

Each time Kootenai County has embarked on such a venture over the past decade - county officials spent $60,000 on a salary study in 2005 and, just three years later, invested another $15,000 for a third party to generate data showing how Kootenai County employees compared to alleged peers elsewhere - we have balked at the costly exercise.

Now that the Board of Commissioners is considering three bids to do it all over again, we've donned our balking shoes one more time.

In fairness, commissioners need good information to help them assess how adequately county employees are being compensated. Depending upon who you talk to, the rather steady migration of some government workers throughout Kootenai County to similar jobs in Spokane County is all about pay. We agree that training and then losing valuable employees isn't a good return on taxpayers' investment, but we also insist there's much more to this story than the bottom line on an employee's check.

If a study is to have real value, it must go beyond pay and benefits of similar jobs across the private and public sectors. How happy are employees working there, and why? How positive is the leadership? Aside from retirement pay, vacation and health insurance, what's good about working for the county? While pay and benefits are certainly very important factors in career decisions, they are far from the only factors. Working in satisfying jobs with good co-workers and responsible management is essential to longevity for many. Will a consultant-contracted study shed light on these significant areas? Unlikely.

Over the years we've beat the drum for the county to use its own human resources personnel to conduct similar studies and gauge fair compensation standards. In 2008, we noted that overseeing projects like this would be a natural function for the county manager or administrator - a concept the voting public has clearly not embraced.

As it stands, the county likely will hire a consultant and pay anywhere from $9,750 to $50,000 to learn that by and large, its employees can make more money somewhere else. In the meantime, a study like this will do more than put a dent in the general fund. It will raise expectations for workers who will have some semblance of evidence that they deserve more money, and when they don't get that raise or benefit boost, morale sure isn't inclined to rise.

For the cost of a hefty consulting fee, commissioners will see how an unhappy workplace can become even unhappier.