RELATED CONVERSATIONS:
BLOG ARCHIVES:
- 2012
- 2011
- 2010
- 2009
- 2008
RECENTLY ON TOL:
TOL Our Town
- A tumblr site dedicated to the people and places that make up Oregon and Southwest Washington.
TAGS:
"The First Unemployment Claim" of Measure 67
Soon after last Tuesday's Measures 66/67 Have Passed show, we got a message from our guest Brent DeHart. (He owns Salem Aviation and DeHart's Mission Street Shell, and was one of the chief petitioners for Measure 67.) Brent said that immediately after he got off the phone from the show, he laid off an employee who had worked with him for 14 years, leading to "probably one of the first unemployment claims of Measure 67."
When I followed up Brent, I asked for some more of the numbers behind his decision.
Brent said that his personal salary was $76,000 last year. The employee he laid off was making $40,000. And his extra Measure 67 tax liability was about $4,000. I asked how he could blame a $4,000 expense for the move to cut a position that cost ten times that amount.
He said that this was the straw that broke the camel's back.
"I began 2009 with about $6,000 in debt, and ended with about $60,000," he said. "Now that it’s clear that the recession will be prolonged by this ill-advised tax policy, I can’t go another $50,000 in debt."
Was he second-guessing his decision not to lay off an employee earlier?
“Maybe I should have laid her off a year ago," he answered. "But the vote made it crystal-clear and made it immediate.”
-
Excellent point. As an accounting major, I know that a sole proprietor does NOT receive a salary, but is able to take capital (money) out of their business by use of a Drawing Account. Does anyone REALLY NEED a $76,000 salary?
I would question the salaries of those who hold statewide positions (governor, secretary of state, attorney general), as well -- do they legitimately need to be six-figure salaries?
-
Comments are now closed.
I'm curious why Mr. DeHart didn't cut his $76,000 salary in half and keep his employee?