By Amanda Morrall
A quantum leap in Earthquake Commission (EQC) staffing levels driven by the Canterbury earthquakes has pushed the government agency's payroll up by close to NZ$138 million.
EQC today disclosed staffing related costs because of "recent interest'' in the way EQC staff were remunerated as well as recruited, EQC's chief executive Ian Simpson said.
Between September 1, 2010 and June 30, 2011, the EQC has paid a total of NZ$137,985,883 in wages, ranging from rates of NZ$17 per hour to NZ$120 per hour for senior staff with responsibility for large teams.
Simpson said the scale of the Canterbury earthquakes "clearly justified the numbers of staff employed and the amounts they are paid."
Prior to the September 4 earthquake, the EQC had a core staff of 22. That rose to "well over 1,000" by February when the second, more damaging quake struck.
Simpson said the increase was a reflection of EQC's attempts to deal with insurance fall-out as expeditiously as possible.
"Our aim has, from the beginning, been to give our claimants certainty around their situation as soon as possible. We needed to grow the team as quickly as possible to achieve this. "
Simpson said salaries and wages were set in September with the "expectation that people would be employed for six months with assessments due to finish in March.''
He said the February 22 earthquake "changed the landscape completely for EQC meaning a few people continued to be employed for a much longer period.”
Simpson said the wages were justified in order to retain "qualified and experienced assessors'' noting in a press release on the matter that it would be an expensive and time consuming exercise to retrain new staff.
EQC has completed 144,091 full assessments since the first Christchurch quake on September 4 last year and has paid out more than NZ$1.5 billion in claims.
8 Comments
maybe Ian Simpson should review the minimum wage .....$60-75 an hour should cut it. its the going rate. No wonder no money left in the kitty. the guy i had out was barely 20 years old and the other assesser had came out of retirement, and I will quote what he said " this is too good to be true pulling in 4k a week" they had smiles from ear to ear.
Indeed, a close relative of mine has no qualifications other than a BCom and an some OJT in the Financial sector while on OE and is now in a senior position in assessments pulling in $150k. Is a great rort while it lasts, just hold your bucket out into the waterfall!!
Tailside has nailed that small important piece of information "While it lasts".
Originally the assessors would have been long gone by now but Mother Nature decided to chuck in another few quakes that kept on adding extensions.
And face it if you want specialised staff on short term contracts then you may have to pay just that little bit more per hour to get them. And from what I have heard those assessors who do not perform are very quickly flicked.
However it does not help one bit with an assessor arriving at some poor person's door that is fighting bankruptcy and making comment on what a great pay per week he is scoring.
What we really should be looking at is the question "Is EQC working as the legislators originally proposed?"
There are plenty of private investigators and the like who are down there...their usual charge out rate is about $70 an hour..and this will be one of the benchmarks EQC have used in setting rates..............
However.......most will tell you that prior quake they very very very rarely charged out a 40 hour week...reason being so much competition from other ex coppers sharing the same cake, insurance companies cutting budgets etc
before the quake windfall most would struggle to charge out 20 hrs per week...so effective rate was more like $35 an hour on a 40 hr week...
EQC has been sucked in here....they could have got them for heaps less...but I guess Jenny Shipley is leading by example.....snort snort...
and don't forget... a heap of them are on Nat Super as well
From my basic calculations that averages out at $120k per employee, which is many times the everage wage in NZ. Surely if these worker were working 10 hour days, their hourly rates should be reduced for the additional hours they are working. The wages they are paying are almost 10% of the total they have paid out so far in claims. Maybe my numbers are wrong.
We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.
Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.