Probation Officers in Clearfield County Have the Lowest Pay in PA

CLEARFIELD – Probation officers in Clearfield County are the lowest paid in the entire state.

This fact was shared with the media in a special meeting with Shawn Burkhart, director of probation services in the county, and F. Cortez “Chip” Bell III, court administrator, on Thursday.

Staffing issues have become a hot button issue recently since Rick Redden, director of Clearfield County’s Domestic Relations Section, and Bell met with the media to voice their concerns on that office being short staffed and to discuss possible solutions using state money available to the department.

In Thursday’s meeting, Burkhart explained that at this point, the union contract negotiations with the county have stalled.

He reviewed a proposal from President Judge Fredric J. Ammerman that would increase the probation supervision fees from $25 to $50, which would finance increases in salary for the officers and other members of that department. The current $25 fee is among the lowest in the state.

To be a probation officer, you have to have a four-year degree, which can cost more than $100,000, he said.

“There is a considerable expense to work in this field.”

In addition, the officers have to be trained and certified to use weapons.

As with the Domestic Relations office, Burkhart said they are training people who quit after a short time to take the same position in a different county. They have lost 18 people in the last five years.

There is a risk factor for these officers and if they make a mistake, they could cause damage or injury, which make them a liability to the county, he said.

“Officers are placed in volatile situations regularly and there is a real danger in dealing with offenders not only in an office setting, but also on their ‘turf’ in their communities and in their homes,” he said in a statement released to the media.

“Pay and good-working environments are then key in recruiting and retaining qualified and experienced employees.”

Right now, the starting rate for probation officers is $25,650 per year. Even the next lowest starting wage in a similar county is close to $4,000 more.

He went on to point out that many county employees are working for lower wages because of the benefits, specifically the health insurance policies, which can include their spouses.

This is possibly going to change with the current proposals to the various unions limiting this benefit if a spouse can get insurance from their employer.

If employees lose this benefit, there is a fear that the county will lose even more employees.

“There will be no reason for people to stay,” Burkhart said.

The current contract offer from the commissioners does include an increase of $5,500 for probation officers, but that is the total over a five-year period. The amount of the raises decreases each year as does the health insurance benefits.

“Instead of investing in their employees, they are disinvesting in their employees,” Burkhart noted.

Under Ammerman’s proposal, officers would have a starting salary of $28,500 with additional monies depending on length of service. For example, someone with four to six years of seniority would get an additional $6,000 per year.

The funds from the supervision fees can also be used to supplement the salaries of the clerical staff in the Probation office and any additional monies could be used by the county to increase other county employee salaries.

This new money would cover any increases in pension costs, Bell said. Previously the commissioners have said this would fall on the taxpayers to finance.

In fact, between this proposal regarding the supervision fees and the state money available to Domestic Relations, there is $1.2 million available to the county for increases in salaries, Bell noted.

At this point, the county commissioners have refused to sit down to discuss these possibilities with either department. Burkhart pointed out that they have been negotiating with the unions through a Pittsburgh attorney.

Information he was able to obtain shows the county has paid over $353,000 to an attorney for contract negotiations since 2010.

“Monies that could be put to better use by investing it back into its county employees and to be spent with the local community,” he commented.

Both the solutions for Probation (through supervision fees) and Domestic Relations (from state money) salary problems have money waiting to be utilized.

“Without costing the law-abiding county taxpayers a single dime, wages could be increased to a competitive level where Clearfield County could attract and retain qualified and experienced employees, but the commissioners must be willing to sit down with us and discuss the possibilities and solutions,” Burkhart said in his statement.

In response to the previous concerns expressed by the Domestic Relations office, the commissioners, Dave Glass, Tony Scotto and John Sobel, issued a statement, which reads in part:

“Any negotiated wage or benefit increases must necessarily contemplate the county and its employees as a whole, and must appreciate the county’s responsibility to ensure that fair and competitive wages and benefits are available to all county employees.

“This goal cannot be accomplished unless the county structures its negotiations to account for rising health care costs and to ensure that sufficient funds are available to provide all county employees with fair wages and robust benefits, and this goal is not served by public undermining of negotiations, employee morale and the county’s strenuous efforts on this front.”

The article regarding Domestic Relations staffing can be read here.

Exit mobile version