Subject: Reply to city tax relief in as Published in Houston Chronicle July 31st, 2007 (A1 + A4)
Thursday, August 02, 2007
Subject: Reply to city tax relief in as Published in Houston Chronicle
The city’s reasoning while well intended buy the Houston Organization of Public Employees is very good and well needed for civil servants such as police, law enforcement and
it’s a very good idea and also for recruiting more officers, maybe even other exemptions might be in order such as TAX breaks for law enforcement officers or employees on personal autos or “family autos” to further encourage them to live in the city limits
Those who serve risk their lives, giving back and serving to the community, its time to give back to then and well deserved, but some of the Unions requests could lead to costly lawsuits.
I think the city is in the right direction not requiring fire or
The problem with the request is the extra sixty-eight dollars per a paycheck for bi-lingual employees. It might encourage discrimination based on ethic background, or future law suits based on the touchy subject of Bi-Lingual, EOE, ERA, or future law suits involving pay-razes or union disputes or contracts.
For example Bi-Lingual is often thrown out with the presently touchy subject at the local state, and federal and upcoming presi8edental election and terrorism / home land security by many groups for political reasons and elections
It could cause the city to be in non-compliance with EOE or hireling discrimination. For example, lawsuits over pay might happen. Suppose the city hires someone who speaks English and Russian or Arabic or French or German what if they do not or payroll does not give them their sixty-eight dollar per a week subsidy.
While not being discrimationry “bi-lingual” in the southern states often means English-Spanish and some northern areas means “French-English” spouse someone a current of future employee is denied that right for “BI-LINGUAL” pay and sues and wins. For many years back pay, legal fees, pain, and suffering etc. it could cost the city in debit, to tax payers dearly.
Shift deference pay is good, even for evening and night shifts those spots are often hard to fill.
Especially for younger employees and new recruits.
And what about those who don’t own homes should they get an option for extra pay or bonus or toward their retirement or every employee the option for a check every year, or a break on other tax’s (boat, RV, personal auto or truck) and it should be changed to be tax free not a taxable-compensation it defeats the reasoning in the first place.
The other problem is bi-lingual is by some folks viewed as racist, or engorges favoritism and reverse dissociation or racism and the fact might be use illegal immigration amongst pro and anti immigration reform. The other thing is if the city does not encourage law enforcement to enforce federal immigration laws should they not encourage the city to cater to those who might be here illegally or not have legal citizenship or immigration status.
This is just A honest un-biased unpinned with looks from different viewpoints, I myself am an independent very liberal, and non-conforming impudent and right-wing on some other issues (mildly)The Bi-Lingual Pay Issue also may cause non-compliance amongst city divisions, irritate some workers, law enforcement and
It could for hourly or bi-weekly employees increase hiring costs by $3536 a year to a weekly employee for nothing other than to speak another language and also could very quickly add up to a hefty lawsuit based on back pay or union disputes with the city or a contractor where as for a salaried employee its only $816 a year chump change not more even the tax break doesn’t pay off that much those who are not eligible should get it for giving their lives and duty and risking their lives to serve the public in this city.
Lee McInnis Gaetjens
LEEMCG.COM
MEDIA GROUP
MCINNISLEEGAETJENS @ GMAIL .COM