Editorial: Put end to inequity between employees

The Senate Finance Committee's decision on Wednesday to amend Assembly Bill 289 and allow some money to be diverted from prison welfare funds to provide perks for prison employees is poor public policy. The committee vote effectively turns AB289 on its head, because the bill was supposed to end this diversion.

The controversy has its roots in a 1992 decision by the state Prisons Board that revenue from vending machines in prisons could be used to pay for personal items for prison employees instead of being spent, as it was intended, on medical care and the law library for prisoners. As much as $100,000 a year is being diverted from inmate welfare funds in the prison system to pay for perks for prison employees, including Christmas parties, summer picnics, microwaves and refrigerators for guards at their posts, flowers for funerals of deceased prison employees and plaques for retirees.

Prison employees, who legitimately contend they are being underpaid, say the funds help build morale. But questions have been raised about the appropriateness of such a policy, especially since no other state employees are permitted to use state funds from vending machines for such uses and instead must dip into their own wallets to pay for them. Besides, these are public funds that are supposed to be used for the public's benefit, not personal use.

Assemblywoman Chris Giunchigliani, D-Las Vegas, the author of AB289, understandably is upset by the Senate Finance Committee's decision. The remedy for bad morale isn't allowing one set of workers to get indirect compensation that others don't receive. State legislators instead should do a better job of paying adequate salaries for state prison employees in the first place, which would preclude the need for backdoor benefits.

archive