I am proud that Susan Elliott stood up to this board and actually told the truth. The Sacramento County Management Association has been before the board several times the past few month, and its interesting the BOS hasn't listened to one of the things they have stated... like equality among the workgroups, represented and unrepresented. What few benefits managers have, that are different than represented employees, isn't unlike some of the other benefits managers don't receive such as educational level salary bumps of 5%, longivity of service 5% and 10% depending on the years of service. Managers receive none of this. Managers have 1% match by the County to a 401a retirement account as long as the manager contributes 1% of her/his salary towards the 401a account. Anything beyond 1% is not matched. Unlike the educational and logivity pay percentages that increase overall yearly salaries for represented employees, and positively effect their retirement accounts in the future, the 401a is but a small step established a couple of years ago to provide managers with a benefit... not a perk... but a benefit that helps managers save money for retirement when they don't receive the same benefits as represented employees. This county pits is own employees against each other, and I swear the BOS must love the inequality they provide to employees across the board... its keeps all county employees eating their own. Managers and supervisors, supervisors and managers, supervisors and line staff, line staff and supervisors, and the list goes on. As long as inequality in pay and benefits there will be strife. Inequality breeds this type of discontent, just as women's pay and a man's pay for the same job are often different... it breeeds discontent and rightful speak of inequality. For those who complain of county or governement beneifts, both pay and retirement, and "perks", may I remind you, they work for an employer who represents the taxpayers of the County of Sacramento, which I am one. I would like to suggest to the BOS to look at making benefits equal for all, instead of having two differing or multiple differing benefit packages for the various work groups or represented and uprepresented employee groups of the County. As a government employee I believe those outside governement are wrong to state that are benefits, retirement, etc. are outlandish and ridiculous in comparison to those in the private sector. You chose the private sector, which can and does give bonuses, job pay increases, cars, perks, etc. for its managers... that does not happen for the majority of Sacramento County's managers, except perhaps the top 12 with a car allowance. We don't get bonuses, are pay scale is public knowledge, and our retirement is NOTHING to scream "inequality" about. We don't get medical care in retirement unlike some in the private sector, or at least some type of subsidy.... we may have the OPTION of retiring at 55.5 years old, but who can do that if you don't get medical care until you are social security age? The County will now and always continue to harm itself by offering retirement at 55.5 without medical, as employees will stay until they can reach social security age for medical coverage, thus increaseing their retirement percentage. If the county figured it out, they would better off offering minimal group medical coverage and allowing empoyees to retire att 55.5 with 2% for each year of service, rather than having someone retire at 65 with 2.6% for each year of service. It only makes fiscal sense... but then again, when has the BOS actually thought fiscally about anything.