scarmig parent
I 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.
If 401k contributions are included in earnings, why shouldn't pensions be?
Adding the cost of an employee's health care plan to their earnings is an easy way to mislead people since most people have no idea how much their health care plans even cost.
I don't think people typically include 401k matches in what they say they earn.
That said, state pension contributions are a significantly greater part of state employees' compensation than 401k matches are for private employers, so it does merit something. Perhaps a phrasing like "Top Paid LA Lifeguard earns $270k plus a $60k pension benefit" or whatever would be most descriptive.
Is this also including medical insurance? I can't imagine it is cheap to insure a pool of firefighters and lifeguards...
Is 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.
Overhead costs for most jobs including benefits are typically only 120%-150% of salary (people in sales are typically 200% of base salary with most of that being travel and expenses, but they are the ones bringing in top-line revenue for the company so doing more than most CEOs).
You can easily use that to compare apples-to-apples. And doing that this is still extreme.
Why? That's literally what a company is paying you. It's your fault if you don't realize it and negotiate for terms that are in your favor. Do you think this money isn't yours? It sure isn't the companies.
Oh, you don't care about $10,000 in medical benefits because your spouse has them? Great, roll that into my base.
Obviously I look at the respective benefits packages when comparing multiple offers. But it's definitely not a norm to, when asked how much you're paid, include not only salary and fungible compensation but also your valuation of the benefits package. That'd be considered a lie (and, if you're e.g. applying for a mortgage, literal fraud).
The only reason the author does it here is because the actual salary would draw traction as a headline, and his organization paid good money to get this editorial presented in Forbes.
The monetary value of the benefits are stated in the article.
The headline is deceptive. When someone says "I'm paid X" no one thinks it includes benefits.
Many 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.