Sinking Ship of State: Ferrying Your Money to Mileage Reimbursements and Lapel Pins
Posted by Brett Davis - January 14, 2010
The first thing you’ll probably notice is that these deck and engine workers are paid very well, with most making over $100,000 a year. Now take a gander at the mileage reimbursement rates, which almost across the board, are in the thousands of dollars. In fact, one employee, in addition to his or her annual salary of almost $115,000, claimed nearly $22,000 in mileage reimbursements. Nice work if you can get it! Last year’s IRS-approved mileage reimbursement rate was 55 cents per mile for business miles driven. That means this person drove some 40,000 miles last year. That breaks down to more than 109 miles per day, seven days a week.
What’s going on here? Why do government employees get special treatment? After all, the IRS generally doesn’t allow you or me to deduct miles (or get reimbursed as a deductible expense) between home and work. Surprise: It’s all about union contracts (see Section 8.06) which call for these WSF employees to get paid to travel from their homes to their floating workplaces—a big taxpayer rip-off, to be sure. You can read WSF’s e-mail response here.
Meanwhile, in other government spending news, WSF is also looking to spread your wealth on custom lapel pins—similar to the one in the picture—for the launch of a new ferry later this year. (Does WSF still do that—you know, launch new ferries?) As you can read, the request is for 250 lapel pins for WSF/Department of Transportation staff, Office of Financial Management staff, shipyard staff and state legislators. To be fair, a purchasing agent informed me that the quantity has since been reduced to 150, for an estimated ballpark figure of $3,000, plus shipping, set-up charge and applicable taxes (of course). That’s not a lot of money, but spending taxpayer green on trinkets for state bigwigs does illustrate a mindset not conducive to prioritized spending during a budget deficit and economic downturn.
Thoughts? Add Comment -
Dave said on Jan 14 2010 at 2:38pm
The premise for this article is utter nonsense.
The IRS **does** allow you to deduct mileage between home and work. I've been doing it for the last 22 years. And I work in a private sector job that does indeed pay me mileage to drive to work.
Do your homework next time.
Ed said on Jan 14 2010 at 3:44pm
Thanks for the expose on another scam by our state government. Well of course the IRS provides mileage deduction 'Dave'; it's the manner in which it is done is the premise of the articles comment which escaped your notice. She's already clearing $115K AND she's soaking us for the additional mileage claim of $22K. What the hell does she do for the states taxpayers for that kind of money? Is she a ferry captain? It's no wonder the system is in the red.
The unions and democrat leaders have been taking the taxpayers to the cleaners. I've seen enough of these 'experienced' ferry workers to know that you ought to be able to get a like replacement from the Millionaire's Club for a lot less than pay them a wage the likes of $100k. It's no wonder the WSF & DOT hide behind the 'RED' the system is in and yet clamor for higher ferry rates.
It's long overdue to privatize the ferry system and gut the government gravy train and union slush funds.
TS said on Jan 14 2010 at 3:58pm
Hhhooolleeessshhheeettt.
Amber Gunn said on Jan 14 2010 at 4:34pm
Dave,
The IRS allows a deduction if the taxpayer is "traveling away from home" for business or a job. However, "away from home" means traveling away from the general location of the taxpayer's work area. "Generally, your tax home is your regular place of business or post of duty, regardless of where you maintain your family home. It includes the entire city or general area in which your business or work is located," explains the IRS in Publication 463, Travel, Entertainment, Gift, and Car Expenses.
If not traveling away from home, generally you can only deduct commuting expenses if:
1. You are a small business owner or self-employed person, and
2. You have two offices or work locations: one outside the home (Office #1) and one inside the home (Office #2).
So Dave, if you know some magical loophole about tax law that we don't, please fill us in, and send me the link for the IRS publication.
Amber Gunn said on Jan 14 2010 at 4:39pm
And you definitely can't deduct your mileage while also getting reimbursed, regardless if you meet the criteria for deduction in the first place.
Another Dave said on Jan 14 2010 at 9:23pm
Wow. I wish I knew Dave's loophole, too. My employer will reimburse me for mileage for work related travel (I am in sales) LESS my typical commute to and from the office. On my taxes I can only declare UNREIMBURSED mileage and commuting to/from my office cannot be included in that. Maybe Dave better find a good tax preparer or maybe a good attorney becuase if he is ever audited he is going to be surprised when they want thousands from him.
Henry said on Jan 15 2010 at 4:52pm
The Union contract has nothing to do with the IRS. The contract specifies Deck Officers that are assigned to more than one "route" get paid "mileage" from their primary or "assigned" work terminal to any other route assignment. For example, lets say a Deck Officer lives in Anacortes, but brilliantly bids (or what ever the Union specifies) to be assigned to a Seattle (Coleman) route as his/her "primary route". Clever scheduling gets this Officer working out of the Anacortes dock almost 100% of the time. The Union contract pays that Officer 134 miles for every day worked. It does not matter the Officer rides his bike down the hill to the Anacortes dock, or drives from Seattle. It is Round trip mileage from the primary assignment to the temporary assignment. The pay is the same, where you live HAS NO BEARING on the $$$ mileage pay. The IRS deductibility part is not an issue here anyway.
Amber Gunn said on Jan 15 2010 at 7:54pm
Henry,
Thanks for clearing that up. The only reason we brought in IRS rules is because they were getting paid to commute from home to work, and we were trying to point out that doesn't occur in the private sector. WSF was slow and reticent in answering our questions. They certainly would not have admitted something like that to us.
The situation you have described sounds like fraud.
phred said on Jan 15 2010 at 11:20pm
We pay them too much to work. We pay them too much to get them to work. Then we, the taxpayers, also pay 1/2 of their meal costs while they are on the boats. The employees get a half price discount on all food purchased onboard and then the ferry system pays the concessionaire the other half. We also give the employees (and retirees) and their families, free passage on the ferries.
Kay Nichols said on Feb 09 2010 at 10:06pm
Ferry employees do NOT get paid mileage to go from their home to the work place they are assigned to; they ONLY get paid that if they HAVE to work at a different terminal, ship yard or are working on a day that they normally would be off.
MOST ferry employees, not even a fraction of them, do NOT make a $100,000 thousand dollars a year. The ones that do are highly trained individuals that could make a lot more money working "off-shore", if life for them were only about money. The schools they attend are reknown for the excellent standards they have. Not only are they well trained in the profession they are working in, but most of the vessel employees also have to attend fire fighting school, and be trained for medical emergencies. These are employees who have to react well in an emergency, supervise other employees, keep the safety of the riding public in the forefront at all times. Along the way they have saved many, many lives of passengers and non-passengers alike. And, since 9/11, they also serve as additional "eyes" to abort any terrorist activity that might be planned aboard a ferry.
Check the IRS regs; you can deduct transportation costs if you work in more than one location.
Your lies and inuendo are ridiculous.
I dare you to put this on your web-site.
Brett said on Feb 18 2010 at 11:38am
Kay, the IRS allows a deduction if the taxpayer is "traveling away from home" for business or a job. However, "away from home" means traveling away from the general location of the taxpayer's work area. "Generally, your tax home is your regular place of business or post of duty, regardless of where you maintain your family home. It includes the entire city or general area in which your business or work is located," explains the IRS in Publication 463, Travel, Entertainment, Gift, and Car Expenses.
If not traveling away from home, generally you can only deduct commuting expenses if:
1. You are a small business owner or self-employed person, and
2. You have two offices or work locations: one outside the home (Office #1) and one inside the home (Office #2).
There seems to be a lot of working at a different terminal, as opposed to the primary terminal. That doesn't strike me as a very efficient way to do things. A lot of those mileage reimbursement rates seem quite high--and taxpayers are footing the bill.
Perhaps you are one of “most” ferry employees. If that's the case, I should think you would be angry that a select few ferry employees are not only raking in the cash salary-wise, but also padding their salaries with mileage reimbursements at the expense of everybody else. Obviously they are getting special treatment that other employees are not. Instead of defending this behavior, why not demand reform?
Liberty and Truth said on Feb 26 2010 at 10:19pm
1. A small percentage of WSF employees are paid for their TIME and mileage when they are assigned to work on a run that does not depart from their Home Port.
2. Such WSF employees are RELIEF Employees.
3. Most WSF employees are not Relief Employees.
4. Relief Employees are NOT paid TIME and mileage from their HOME, rather, they are paid from their Home PORT.
5. Most Relief Employees are NOT often assigned to non-Home Port runs; most will not earn even close to $22,000 in travel TIME and mileage, the ATYPICAL and thus misleading example you used in your 1/14/10 post.
6. Your example reflects not only your sloppy research, but your flawed reasoning. The EXCEPTIONAL employee who earned $22,000 was mostly being compensated for travel TIME, not mileage, thus, your 40,000 miles driven is meaningless information.
7. Travel TIME and mileage is: (Relief Employee's hourly wage x hours from his or her Home Port to the assigned run's port) + mileage.
8. Most Home-Port-to-run-port distances are much less than the maximum distance, from Anacortes to Tahlequah at Pt. Defiance in Tacoma, which is assigned about 3 hours travel TIME and about 125 miles.
9. WSF Dispatchers are ordered to AVOID non-Home Port Relief assignments; most Relief Employees have been disappointed in their hopes to earn much extra compensation for travel TIME (mileage is not a big component), for more often than not, they are "Home Ported."
10. You, Mr. Davis, could choose to live much closer to your job than you do; your analogy about being paid to drive from Pt. Orchard to Oly is off point.
11. A more accurate analogy would be to argue that you should be paid the travel time and mileage from Olympia, your "home port," to work assignments in Seattle, Spokane, and Walla Walla. And I think you WOULD be paid by your employer. That would only be fair, would it not? The government should follow the fair business practices of private enterprise, should it not?
I applaud the work of the Evergreen Freedom Foundation. Government IS, indeed, best which governs least. I wholeheartedly support EFF's mission to protect individual, Constitutional rights.
Until I read your post, on a subject about which I know something, I trusted EFF's publications to inform my opinions and help me argue the case for freedom versus tyranny. Your poorly researched and appallingly uninformed post has shaken my faith in EFF. Regretfully, I can no longer rely on EFF's reporting in areas about which I know little, for I no longer trust EFF to give me FACTS.
I hope that someone at EFF besides you reads what I have written. I hope it is someone with the authority to assign someone to verify your accuracy before you are allowed to post. Otherwise, writers like you will destroy EFF's credibility and without credibility, EFF is done with its noble efforts to protect our liberties.
Amber Gunn said on Mar 12 2010 at 5:00pm
Liberty and Truth,
I find it hard to believe that you are a genuine EFF supporter with concerns about our research. If that were the case, I have no doubt you would have and could have contacted Brett or someone else at EFF personally to state your concerns about research integrity.
As it were, you have posted an anonymous comment on our blog that turns out to be completely misinformed anyway.
Legislators are considering axing these posh mileage and TIME reimbursements, because of the negative press they have been getting. After our story, the Everett Herald and King 5 ran separate investigations. As it turns out, things are actually much worse than we originally thought. http://heraldnet.com/article/20100306/NEWS01/703069870
The data we received from the incensed legislator was accurate, but it included TIME reimbursements as part of the salary. In the case of the man who claimed more than $22,000 in MILEAGE reimbursements, his salary was actually only $60k, but he claimed $72,950 in TIME travel reimbursements.
If you truly have a problem with our research or analysis on an issue, then contact us directly. Anonymous blog comments are hardly helpful.
Amber Gunn said on Mar 12 2010 at 5:04pm
P.S. Here is the King 5 story as well. http://www.king5.com/news/local/Investigators-Some-ferry-workers-paid-to-travel-to-work-87024087.html
The mileage and time reimbursements are due to generous CBAs that allow certain ferry employees that are part of IBU to choose their preferred locations by seniority.
We didn't make this up. It's in the agreements.
And by the way, I think you owe Brett an apology for impugning his integrity. I don't have a lot of patience for those kinds of unfounded accusations.