OFFICEOFTHENEWYORKSTATECOMPTROLLERPortAuthorityofNewYorl{\andNewJerseyManagementandControlofEmployeeOvertimeCostsReport2009-S-87IThotnasP.DiNapoliThis page
is left intentionally blank.

# II

Tab le of C o n t e nts



# II Pa g e Authot

· ity Lettet·

. ..........

. ...........

. ...

. .... .. ...........

.. ...

. ............

. . .. .....................

. ...........

. . . .....

. ...•...

. .... 5 Executive Summary

....

. . ... ........ .....

. ... ..
. . . . . . . ..•..
.. .. .•. .......

. ...

. ........•.•......

• . . ..
. . . .............

. ....•......

.. .... 7 Intt·oduction

. ......

. ... •.. .....
..

. ..

. . ..................

....

. . •...

. .. ...

. . . .. ..... ...• ..... ..

. .. .......

. . ...••

• • .. ...

. •.

. ..... .....

• .. .. . 11 

# Baclcground

. ... .... .•.... ......

. ...

. .. .. ... ..

. ... ...

. ...

. • . ......•.....

. .....

. .........

. .....

. . . ....

. ...•.....
... .... .. ..........

. . 11 Audit Scope and Methodology ........

. . .. ..........

. • .............

.. .................

. .............

. ....

. ......

. ...... 12 Authority

..
. .........

. .........

. .. .... .....

. ............

. . .. ........ .... .................

. .....•..

. .......

.. .•.•........ .... •.

. . .. .... l3 

# Repot

· ting Requirements

.. ..
. . . ..•

. . . . .....

. . . .....

. •.

. •.

. ...

. ..
. .............

. • . ••..................

. .......

..
. . ....

. ..... 13 Contributor

s 

# to the 

# Repo

r t ..
. . .. ..
. . . . . . .... ... ...

. . . .... ..... .... ... .... ........

. . . .....
.. .•.

. . .... .... ...

. . . .. .... • ••.. 13 Audit 

# Finding

s and 

# Recommendations

. . .. .........

. ..........
... ..... ... .........

. ....................................

15 

# Ovet

· time Expense

..
. ..•••..........

. .......

. ..............

. ••....

. .... .. ..
. ................

. .............

.. .................

. .. 1 5 

# Unauthorized
and Undocumented 

# Ove1·time ...........

.. ................

.. ...............................

. .. 16 

# Management and Control
of Overtime

.... .... .....

. ......

.. ........

.. ..
. . .... .........

. .. .. .....................

1 7 

# Effect of Overtime
on Pension Costs
... .. .......... .......

.. .... ........

. .. ....... ... ......
.. ....... ...

. .... .....
.. 18 Recommendation

s .... ..
. ..... ..............

• . . ............

.. .........
...

. .. ....................

. ......

. ..

. ... .. .............

. . 19 Exhibit

A .......

. ... .. ........................

...

. ........ •....... ...

. .. •.

. ... .. ..........•.......•••.........

. ..

. ... .. ........

. . . •...

. . • ... 21 Exhibit

B •..

. ........

. . ... .........•

. ..........

. . . .. .• ..

. ........

. .. ....

. .. .. •...•......

. . •. .. .. ......

. ......•

. . . .•••

. ....
• .....

. •..

. ....... 23 

# Agency Comment

s ...

. ...............

.. ..............

. . . . . .. ... ..... ........

.. .....

. ......

. ......

. . . .......

.. ....

. ...............

. ... 2 5 State Comptt

· oller's Comment

s ...

. ..........
... .........

. . .. ............

... ...............

. . .. .......... ..... ............

.. . 31 Division
of State Government AccountabilityThis page is left intentionally blank.

# State of New York Office of the State Comptroller Division
of State Government Accountability August

1 7, 2011 

### David Samson Chairman Port Authority

of New York and New Jersey 225 Park Avenue South, 18

1 h 

### Floor New York, NY 10003-1604 Dear Chairman Samson: The Office of the State Comptroller

is committed

to helping State agencies, public aut horities and local government agencies manage government resources efficiently and effective

ly and, by doing so, providing accountability

for tax dollars spent to support government operations. Th e Comptroller oversees

th e fiscal affairs of State agencies, public authorities and local government agencies,

as well as their co mplian ce with rele vant statutes and their observance of good bu si ness practices. This fiscal oversight

is accomplished,

in part, through our audits, which identify opportunities

for improvin

g operations. Audits can also identify strategies for reducing costs and strengthening controls that are int e nded to safeguard assets. Following

is a report of our audit of the Port Authority

of New York and New Jersey: Management and Control of Employee Overtime Costs. The audit was performed pursuant

to th e State Comptroller's authority

as set forth in Section 7071 of McKinn ey's Unconsolidated Laws of New York. This audit's results and recommendations

are

r eso urces for you to us e in effect iv e ly managing your operations and in meeting the expectations

of taxpayers.

If you have any questions about this

r eport, please feel free to contact us. Re
s p ective ly s ubmitted, Office of the State Comptroller Division ofState Government Accountability Division
of State Government AccountabilityThis page is
l eft int e ntionally blank.AuditObjectiveStateofNewYorkOfficeoftheStateComptrollerEXECUTIVESUMMARYTheobjectiveofourauditwastodeterminewhetherPortAuthorityofNewYorkandNewJerseyofficialseffectivelymanagedandcontrolledemployeeovertimecosts.AuditResults-Summal'yThePortAuthorityofNewYorkandNewJersey(Authority)wasestablishedin1921topromoteandprotectthecommerceofthebi-stateportandtoundertakeportandregionalimprovementsnotlikelytobefinancedbyprivateenterpriseortobeattemptedbyeitherstatealone.TheAuthority'soperatingbudgetfor2010was$2.48billion,includingpayrollcostsfor6,977staff.During2010,theAuthoritypaid$85.7millionofovertimeto5,360employees.ThemajorityofAuthorityovertimecostsareincurredbythePortAuthorityTransHudsonRailway(PATH)andthePublicSafetyDepartment.Overtheapproximatefive-yearperiodendedDecember31,2010,thePublicSafetyDepartmentandPATHaccountedfor$217.5millionand$85.4millionofovertimecosts,respectively.Thesecostsrepresented66percentofthe$459.2millionoftotalovertimepaidbytheAuthorityduringtheperiod.WefoundthatAuthorityofficialshavenoteffectivelymanagedandcontrolledemployeeovertimecostsandwenotednumerousexamplesofovertimebeingearnedinexcessof$75,000annuallybyindividualswhosesalarybasewasatleast$75,000.Thefollowingareamongourkeyfindings:•PortAuthorityretireesaccountedfor71(24percent)ofthe300toppensionersintheNewYorkStateRetirementSystemasofDecember31,2009.Theannualpensionsforthese71employeesrangedfrom$125,612to$196,768withanaverageannualpensionof$143,253.MostoftheseretireeswereinAuthoritypositions(e.g.,PublicSafety)thattypicallywouldbereceivinglargeamountsofovertimecreditabletoretirementpensions.•Therewere24PATHandPublicSafetyDepartmentemployeeswhose2009overtimeearningsexceeded100percentoftheirrespectivesalaries.Forexample,oneemployeeDivisionofStateGovernmentAccountability

### with

a base salary of $107,878 was paid an additional

$ 153,530
in overtime. (See Exhibit A.) This high overtime earner was being paid for an average
of 34 hours of overtime every week throughout
the year. • Overall, for 2009, there were 25 Authority employees who earned mor
e in overtime than their respective bas e pay, 281 Authority emp

l oyees who earned more than $50,000 in overtime,
66 Authority employees who earned more than $75,000

in overtime,

18 Authority employees who earned more than $100,000
in overtime, and 77 Authority e mployees whose combined overtime and base salary exceeded $175,000. (See Exhibit B.) 

### • The 2010 budget that th e Authority submitted

to the Governor
of New York and the Governor

of New Jersey specified that overtime would be
r educed by 20 percent from the prior year. However

, this cost savings goal was not communicated

or implemented within the Authority and overtime costs for 2010 decreased
by only

3 percent {$2.8 million) from 2009 amounts, rather than being reduced by 20 perc

e nt ($17.7 million). • The Authority established

an informal benchmark
for each department

t hat overtime should be no more than 15 percent
of base salaries

. Yet, PATH and the Public Safety Department
eac h had overtime costs that, on average, doubled this limit over the past several years. • We examined one overtime payment transaction
for each of the top 39 overtime earners {25 from PATH and 14 from the Public Safety Department).
The samp le of payments tota

l ed $ 19,690

. According

to Authority policy, the samp

l ed overt ime transactions

r equ ired the prior approva

l of the Authority's Deputy Executive Director because the employees had already received overtime exceeding

50 percent of their base salary. However,
we found that the required prior approval was not documented and there was no written justifi ca tion

s howing why the work needed
to be assigned on an overtime

b as i s. Moreover,
the required

s ignatur
es indic at in g supervisory approval were la ck ing on the time sheets for 5 of the 39 sampled em ploye es who received overtime

. For two of the se five employees there was no record that the emp loyees comp

l eted either the requir ed sign in to begin their work

d ay or the required sign out to e nd their work day. The

l ack of approvals
on time sheets and the la ck of required sign in and sign out greatly increase the risk that this overtime may not h ave been worked. To add

r ess th ese findings, Authority officials need to take

a much more proactive approach

to the management and control of overtime. Existing policy and goals to limit and reduce overtime need to be comm unicat

e d, impl emented

a nd monitored
for co mpli ance. Also, internal contro

l practices and procedures
for documenting
the need for overtime, approving the ass ignm ent of overtime, and verifying the completion

of overtime work and proper preparation

of
t im e shee ts need to be strengthened

. Office of the New York State Comptroller

# Our report contains four

r eco mmendations addressing the Authority's management
and control of overtime costs. In response

to our draft report, Authority officials stated that, due to a decline
in overall Authority staffing over the past few years,

a nd the recent self-imposition

of a hiring freeze, overtime has become part of the Authority's business model. Th ey assert that they hav e always acted to protect Authority assets and have initiated several control and monitoring procedures to enhance their management

a nd control over overtime costs

. Auditor's Comments: Authority officials have th e responsibility

to weigh their various options and determine which strategies are most cost effective.

If reducing staff result

s in overtime that increases overall payroll cos ts, 

# then the Authority should rethink its approach.



# If overtime

i s the more economical option, the Authority still needs to ade quately monitor

i ts use and control

it s cos t. This report,

d ate d August 17, 2011,
is available on our website at: http:/ /www .osc.st ate.ny.us

. Add or update your mailing

li st ad dress by contacting

us at: (518) 474-3271
or Office of the S tate Comptroller Division
of State Government Accountability 110 State Street, 11th Floor Albany, NY 12236 Division
of State Government AccountabilityThispageisleftintentionallyblank.

# II Bacl<ground 

# Introduction



# II Created
in 1921 under the United States Constitution,
the Port Authority of New York and New

J ersey {Authority) was the first interstate agency permitting compacts between states

. The Authority's area of jurisdiction is called the Port District,

a bi-state region generally within 25 miles of the Statue of Liberty

. 1he Authority's mandat

e is to promote and protect the commerce

of the bi -state port and to undertake port and regional improvem

e nts not likely to be financed
by private enterprise

or to be attempted
by either state alone. The Authority provides transportation and port commerce facilities

to serve the New York-New Jersey Metropolitan region. The Authority

is governed
by a Board of Commissioners (Board) whose six New York members and six New Jersey members

a r e eac h appointed to a six-year term by their respective Gov ernors. The Board appoints an Executive Director who manages the Authority's daily operations. Authority departments include: the Port Author ity Trans-Hu dson Rail Road (PATH), Aviation, Tunnels, Bridges and Terminals, Port Commerce, World Trade Center (WTC), Construction, Real Estate and WTC Development,

a nd Public Safety. Th e Authority's 2010 operating budget was $2.48 billion, including $1.2 billion for payroll costs for 6,977 staff. Authorit

y base sa
l ary costs for ca lend ar years 2006 through 2010 totaled $2.86 billion, while overtime costs total ed $459.2 million. The Public Safety Departm

e nt and PATH accounted
for most of this overtime. Public Safety Department overtime total ed $217.5 million and its base sa lary cost was $727.4 million. PATH overtime tota

l ed $85

. 4 million and its base sa l a ry cost was $349.3 million. The average base salary per employee for the Public Safety Departme

nt and for PATH was $81,049 and $63,102,

r espect
iv ely. Cons iderin

g overtime and base sa lary, the total average compensation
per emp lo yee for the Public Safety Department

a nd for PATH was $102,4 74 and $8 1,046, respectively,
for 2009. Accordingly, overtime

, on average, accounted
for 20.1 percent
of each Public Safety Department employee's compensation for 2009, and 22 percent
of each PATH employee's compensation

for 2009. Publi

c Safety Department employees
are member

s of the New York State and Local Employee Retirement System

. Their total co mpensation is creditable

to their retirement benefit calc ul at i ons. PATH
D epa rtment employees
are members
of federal and union pension plans funded by the Division
of State Government Accountability

# Calendar Year 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 T otal 

# Audit Scope and Methodology Authority based on agreed-upon rates. According

to Authority officials, overtime

is not creditab

l e to their pension benefit calculations. As the following table shows, overtime grew steadily from calendar years 2006 through 2008 for Public Safety, and through 2009, for PATH. Public Safety's overtime for 2009 was
$ 14 .2 million

l ess than it was for 2008, and decreased

s li ght ly further for 2010. Employee Overtime for Public Safety and PATH For Calendar Years 2006 through 2010 Public Safety

PATH

T otal $43,915,888 $14,400,260 $58,316,148 $49,556,472 $15,183,698 $64,740,170 $52,384,170 $17,410,378 $69,794,548 $38,177,968

$ 19 ,343,850

$57

, 521 ,8 18 $33,500,462

$ 19,0 34,923 $52,535,385 $217,534,960 $85,373,109 $302,908,069 

# We audited the Authority's management
and control
of employee overtime costs for the period January

1, 2006 through March 31, 2010. We accumulated

sa lary and overtime cost information
for calendar years 2006 through 2010. We focused on th e overtime costs incurred by PATH and the Public Safety Department becau se they account

e d for more than half of total Authority overtime costs during the audit period. To accomplish our objectives,
we identified the top overtime earners to determine whether documentation supported that they worked the overtime that was

r eported for them and to determine whether there was written evidence that the work perform ed ne ede d to be done on an overtime basis. We int er viewed central office officials

to determine existing overtime policies and we interviewed department officials to understand procedures
for authorizing, scheduling and approv
in g overtime. We also review

e d availab
le supporting documents

s u c h as emp

l oyee time and attendance records

a nd related overtime requests and approvals. We made observations

at selected work location s w her e emp

l oyees were earning above average overtime,

a nd we

r e vi ewe d overtime

- related reports prepared for manag

e ment. We conducted our audit in accordance

w i th genera lly accepted government auditing standards

. Those standards require that w e p l a n and perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evide nce to provide

a reasonable basis for our findings
an d conclusions
bas ed on our audit objectives.

In this

r e gard, Public Safety officials wou

l d not Office of the New York State Comptroller

### Authority Reporting Requirements Contributors to the Report 

### provide
us with certain detailed records that we requested

in
s upport of police overtime (e.g., reasons, locations

, etc.) citing "public
sa fety" concerns. We believe that the information should

h ave been provided and we also believe that we could have inspected and reported
on any related findings with assurances that security

se nsitive details would be protected.

N e vertheless, despite these difficulties,
we b e li eve we did obtain appropriate evidence during our audit to provide

a reasonable basis for our findin gs and co nclusions based on our audit objective. In addition
to b e ing the State **Auditot~** 

### the Comptroller performs certai

n other constitutionally

and statutorily mandated duties
as the chie

f fiscal officer of New York State. These includin

g operating the State's accounting system; preparing the State
's financial stateme nts; and approving State co ntra cts, refunds, and other payments.

In addition, the Comptroller appoints members

to certain boards, commiss ion
s and publi

c authorities,

so me of whom have minori ty voting

ri g ht s. These duti es may

b e considered management function

s for purposes of evaluating organizational independence under generally accepted government auditing

s tandards.

In our opinion, these functions

to do not affect our ability to conduct independent audits of program performance

. We perform ed this audit pursuant
to th e State Comptroller's

au thority
as set forth in Section 7071 of the Unconsolidated

L aws of New York. The draft copy of this report was provided

to Authority officials for their r ev iew
a nd comment. Their comments were considered

in preparing this fin a l r epor

t an d are attached
in their entirety
at the end of the report. Authority officials assert that th e ir business mod

e l, which includes the judiciou

s u se of overt ime, serves them well. Nevertheless, they are committed

to con tinu
a lly improvin

g their proc esses

a nd hav e irritated

a number
of actions
to e nhan ce controls
ov e r overtime. Authority officials ag re e with our

r epo rt r eco mmendations
but do not b elieve

a n y co rr ect iv e actions are nece ssa ry re gar ding the overtime transa ct ions detailed

in our r e port. Within 90 days of th e fin a l r e leas
e of this report, we request

t h at the Chairman

of th e Port Authority
of New York and New Jersey report to the New York State Com
p tro ll er, adv

i si n g what steps were taken to implement the

r ecom mend at i o n s co nt ai n ed herein,

a nd where recommenda tion

s were not impl eme nt ed, the reasons why. Major contributors



## to this report were Frank Patane, Michael
So lom
o n, Randy Partridge, Orin Ninvalle, Elijah Kim, and Unal Sumerkan. Division
of State Government AccountabilityThis page

i s l eft intent

i o n a ll y blank.

### Overtime Expense 

# Audit Findings and Recommendations According

to Authority officials,
an individual department's overtime costs should not exceed 15 percent ofits bas e salary payroll costs. Officials not ed that this limi

t was not formalized

in writing and was to be used as a benchmark. Nevertheless, results show that overtime costs routinely and significantly exceeded the benchmark limit. For Public Safety and PATH, the average overtime costs for the period 2006 through 2009 were 35.5 percent and 26

. 4 percent, respectively, above annual base salary costs. (Publi

c Safety base salary cost was $5
1 8

. 3 million and its overtime total was $184 million. PATH base salary cost was $251.7 million and its overtime total was $66.4.) Moreover,

as illustrated

in the following table, in calendar year 2009, there were 1,573 Public Safety Department and PATH employees
(53 percent of total Public Safety staff and 58 percent of tot a l PATH staff) who were paid overtime that exceeded

th e 15-percent benchmark limit, including 914 employees whose overtime alone totaled
at
l east 30 percent
of their respective base pay. For 24 of these emp loy ees

, overtime pay actually exceeded base sa l aries

. (See Ex hibit A.) In one instance,

a "Power Rail Maintainer

1" in PATH was paid $108,033
of overtime
on top of his base salary of $75,725.
In another instance,

a "Public Safety Police Sergeant;' was paid $153,530
of overtim

e on top of his base salary of $107,878

. Moreover, payro

ll data indicated that the Power Rail Maintainer and the Police Sergeant, respectively, worked on average
38 hours and 34 hours of overtime

e very week during 2009. Public Safety
D epa rtment and PATH 2009 Overtime Pay as a Percentag

e of Base Salmy Annual 2009 Annu

a l 20 09 Overtime Pay as a Percenta ge of Number
of Salary Overtime Base Salary Employees

(in millions)

(in millions) Over

1 5%, but

l ess than 30%

657 $53.4 $12.0 At

l east 30%, but le ss than 50%

545
$46.4 $17.9 At lea st 50%, but le ss than 100%

347
$30.3

$ 1 9.8 At lea
s t 100 perce nt

24

$2 .1

$ 2 .3 Tota

l

1 ,573 $132.2 $52.0 

### Division
of State Government Accountability

# Unauthorized and Undocumented Overtime Authority officials maintain that they continuously monitor employee overtime cos ts. They indi cated that department management

is provided with various management reports that highlight

e mplo yee overtime earnings. Officials also assert that th e factors causing

th e need for overtime include insufficient staffing, coverage for absent employees and security requirements. Howev er, we were not provided with any written support that the Authority analyzed employee absenteeism

or examined hiring additional staff as part of a strategy
to a dd ress costly overtime. Such steps should be taken to effectively manage and control employee overtime. To determin

e whether Authority overtim

e costs we re supported and justified with documentation,

we selected

a judgment samp

l e of 39 overtime transactions

for the Authority's top 39 overtime earners (25 for PATH and 14 for Public Safety). These transactions totaled $19,690 and were paid during the audit period. For each sam pled transa ct ion, we requested documentation

to suppor

t th at the work warranted overtime, rather than work during norm

a l work hour s, and that the overtime hours paid for were actually worked. We found

t h at time and attendance records support the hours of overtime, but we found inadequate written support that the work was justified
to be performed
on an overtim

e ba s is. PATH 

# The 25 PATH overtime transactions

in our sample accou nt for
$ 11, 348. We found sufficient time and at tendance records
to
s upport the overtime hours that were paid

. However, Authority policy requires the prior approval
of the Authority's Deputy Executive Director for overtime to employees who have already received overtime pay that exceeds 50 p ercen

t of their bas e salary. This was the case with each of the 25 sampled transactions

, yet the required prior approval was not obtai ned and do c umented for any of these overtim

e transactions. When we presented this finding
to PATH management, officials indicated

th a t they decided not to implement the policy becaus

e it was impractical. However, officials could not provide documentation supporting that th e written policy should not apply to PATH or had been rescinded. Accordingly,

a man age m e nt con trol intend ed to justify and contain overtime cost was bypass

e d. When we exa mined the justifi cat ion for performing
the sa mpled work on an overtime basis, we found the
a vailable docum

e ntation was inadequ ate

. For example, written reasons for overtime included vague notations such as "67 Switch" and "6vacation:' We were informed that these notations meant work was needed on the number
67 switch, and an employee was n ee ded to cover for a worker on vacation. How ever, neither
th e notations Office of the New York State ComptrollerManagementandControlofOvertimenortheverbalexplanationsclearlysupportwhytherewasnoalternativetoovertimeinthesesituations.Wealsofoundthatforfiveofthe25sampledovertimeinstances,therewasnosupervisorysignatureontherelatedemployeetimesheets.Furthermore,intwooftheseinstances,theemployeedidn'tsigninorsignoutasrequired.Theabsenceofsupervisoryapprovalsonthetimesheets,coupledwiththeemployeesneithersigninginnorout,greatlyincreasestheriskthattheovertimepaidforwasnotworked.PublicSafetyThe14PublicSafetyovertimetransactionsinoursampletotal$8,342.AswiththePATHtransactions,wefoundsufficienttimeandattendancerecordstosupporttheovertimethatwaspaid.However,therewasnodocumentationofpriorapprovalbytheDeputyExecutiveDirectorasrequiredwhenovertimeinamountsabove50percentofbasesalarywouldresult.Also,therewasnodocumentedjustificationexplainingwhytheworkperformedonanovertimebasiscouldnothavebeenperformedduringtheemployees'regularlyscheduledworkhours.Inthisregard,Authorityofficialscitedconfidentialityandsecurityrisksasthereasonswhythejustificationscouldnotbeprovidedtous.AlthoughweunderstandthesignificanceandtheoftennecessaryconfidentialityassociatedwiththeworkperformedbythePublicSafetystaff,auditorsareboundtomaintainconfidentialityofauditeerecords.Assuch,thereisnovalidreasonforAuthorityofficialstowithholdthisovertimedocumentation.Authoritycentralofficemanagementisresponsibleforoverseeingadministrativeandfinancialmattersincludingsettinggoals,establishingandcommunicatingpoliciesandprocedures,preparingbudgets,andmonitoringperformanceforcompliancewithrequirements.Departmentlevelmanagementisresponsibleforfollowingcentralofficedirectivesandmanagingandcontrollingdepartmentoperations,includingtheauthorization,schedulingandpaymentapprovalforovertime.WefoundthatAuthoritycentralofficeanddepartmentofficialsarenotadequatelymanagingandcontrollingemployeeovertimecosts.Forexample:•Centralofficedoesnotrequire,anddepartmentsdonotprepare,overtimebudgetsusinga"zero-basedapproach:'Instead,prioryearexpendituressetthebaseforthesubsequentyear'sbudget.ThecurrentDivisionofStateGovernmentAccountability

# Effect of Overtime
on Pension Costs
year budget

is then designed



# to reflect circumstances anticipated during the year (e.g., pay increases, lay-offs, etc.). As such, overtime inefficiencies existing
in prior years ma y be in corp orated into current and future years. • Neith

e r PATH nor Public Safety prepar

e d strategic plans 

# to achieve the 20-percent overtim

e reduction specified
by centra

l office in the 2010 Authority Budget
as submi tted to the Governor
of New York and th e Governor
of N e w Jers ey

. As such, ther
e was no communication or implementation effort made in respon se 

# to this initiative.

If the specified reduction had been planned for and implemented,

the Authority may have

r e alized overtime savings of $12 million for 2010 as compared

to 2009. PATH and Public Safety official

s both maintained that they were unaware
of the requirements provided for in the budget. • Auditors found no documentation showing that the Authority had ana

l yzed the contributing factor

s of overtime costs,

s uch as absenteeism and employee hirin
g policies. Most full-time employees

of the Authority (e.g., Public Safety) are required

to join one of two cost-sharing multiple-employer defined benefit pension plans: the New York State and Local Employ ees

' Retirement System (ERS)

, or the New York St ate and Local Polic

e and Fire Retirement System (PERFS)

. Collectively, these plans

a re referred
to as the "Retirement System:

' The Retirement System provides retirement

b e n efi ts to employees based on their respec tive years of service and final average salary after

a set period of credited public service. As such, Authority employee pension contributions
and payouts are directly affected by overtime payments.

In fact, 100 percent of an Authority employee's overtime earnings during the "pension qualified period" (generally the
e mployee's final three years of service) are considered

in calcu lating the emp lo yee's annual

p e nsion benefits.
As a result, the more overt im e an employee works in th e years immediately preceding retirement,
the higher the pension benefit for that employee. According

to data we obtained from the R e tirement System,
71 (or 24 percent)
of the 300 individuals receiving the highest pension benefits from th e System are Authority retirees. The annua

l pensions paid to th ese individu

a l s ranged from $125,612

to $196,768, wit h an average annua

l pension
of $143,253. This average

is in sharp co ntrast to th e average annual New York Stat
e Retirement Syst
e m b e nefit of $27,629, fornonPublic Safety retirees, and $67,048 for Publi

c Safety retirees who retired during the fiscal year ended March 31, 2010. Furthermore,
our analy

s is Office of the New York State Comptroller

# shows that 60 of the 71 top pension earners retired from Authority job titles that are typically associated with the most overtime. The cost of these significant pensions should provide Authority management with additional incentive
to effectively manage and control overtime. It 

# should be noted that PATH employees are not eligible
to participate

in the Retirement System. For most of PATH's unionized employees, PATH contributes

to supplemental pension plans. Annual PATH contributions to these plans are defined
in various collective bargaining agreements. Recommendations

1. 

# The Authority needs to assess its business model and be proactive in the management
and control
of overtime costs.

It 

# should also study the use of overtime

(e

. g., overtime necessitated

by employee absenteeism)
and the policies and oversight measures affecting overtime
in order to identify actions
to reduce overtime costs. 2. Develop and communicate plans, policies and procedures

to achieve the 20-percent reduction
of overtime called for in the 2010 budget. 3. Require Authority departments

to justify their annual overtime budgets each year, specifying the circumstances where limited and justifiable overtime use may likely occur and how these situations will be managed. Monitor department compliance with approved overtime budgets and scrutinize the propriety

of the overtime expense. 4. Follow up on the questionable overtime transactions identified

in our audit and take corrective actions
as appropriate, particularly regarding instances where consistent lack of justification and required approval was not documented. Division
of State Government AccountabilityThis
p a ge is
l eft int e ntionally blank.

## E xhi b i t A Top 50 Overtime Earners Public Safety and PATH For the
P e riod Janu

a ry 1, 2009 through December 31, 2009 Compensa

t ion Job Title Division
Overtime

B a s e Salary

T ot a

l ** *Po

l ice Se
r gea nt

P S- L a Gu a r d

i a P o li ce



### $ 1 53, 5 30 $107,878 $261,408 *Po

li ce Se
r gea nt PS- JF K P olice


### 122,232

1 1 1,260 233,492 * P o li ce Se
r gea nt

P S- P ort Comme

r ce P o li ce 

### 121,466

1 1 2
, 126 233,592 * P o li ce Se
r gea nt

P S- N ewark Police


### 119,314 112,126

23
1 ,440 *Pol

i ce Sergea nt

P S-J F K P o li ce



### 116

, 593

1 02

, 693 219,286 * P o li ce O ffi ce
r

P S - Specia

l Opera

t io n s Uni

t



### 1 1 1 , 525 89,733

20
1 ,258 *P oli ce Se
r gea nt

P S- JF K P o li ce



### 1 09,675

1 00

, 177

2 0 9
, 852 *Ra

il Ma in ta

i ner

I

P A TH W ay 

### & S t r u c tur es



### 1 0 8
, 033

75

, 724 183,757 * P o li ce Se
r gea nt

P S - S p ecia

l O p e r a ti o n s Unit



### 10 7
, 054

1 06,633 213,687 * P o

l ice Sergea nt

P S -P A TH P o li ce



### 1 06

, 9 0 6 99,923 206,829 * T r ack
F ore m a n

I I

P A TH W ay 

### & S t r u c tu res



### 1 06

, 365

88 ,5 3 1

1 94,896 Poli ce Li e utenant PS-PABT

P o li ce



### 1 0 4 ,389

1 28

, 950 233,339 P o li ce Se
r gea nt
PS

- P A TH P o li ce



### 10 4
, 0 5 8

1 07

, 703 211,76

1 * Tr ack
F o r e m a n II PATH W a y 

### & S tru c tur es



### 1 0 3
, 042 88,375 191,4

1 7 P o li ce Li e ut e n a nt

P S - Cen tr a
l P o li ce P oo

l 

### 102,966

123

, 602 226,568 Po
li ce Se

r gea nt

P S- L aG u ard

i a P o li ce 

### 101,859 112,559 214,418 P o

l ice Se
r gea nt

P S -P A BT P o li ce



### 101

, 551 107,463 209,014 Po

li ce Li eute

n a nt

P S-PA BT Police



### 1 00,859

1 15

, 953 216,812 Pol ice Sergea nt
PS

- JF K P o li ce



### 97,794 112,093 209,887 P o li ce Sergea nt

P S- P o rt Commerce Police


### 97,66

1

1 07,4
7 9 205,

1 4 0 * P olice Off

i ce
r

P S-S
p ecial Opera

ti o n s Un

i t


### 95,3
4 2
88

, 927

1 84,269 Po
li ce Se
r gean

t

P S -N ewa

r k P o li ce 

### 94,474 98,358 192,832 P olice Lie u te n a nt

P S-Ce ntr al P olice Poo

l



### 93

, 063

1 1 3 , 363 206,426 * P o li ce O ff ice

r

P S- Sp ec

i al Op e r a t io n s Unit 

### 90,948

89

, 646 18 0 ,594 P o li ce Li e ut e n a nt PS

- G W B P o li ce



### 9 0 ,361

1 1 2
, 927

2 0 3,288 Po
li ce Se

r gea nt

P S -H ead qu a rt ers S u p p o rt U n it



### 90

, 321

1 07,723

1 98,044 P o li ce Li e ut ena nt

P S - Ce ntr a
l P o

l ice Poo

l



### 90

, 084

1 13,944 204,028 Po

l ice Sergea nt

P S- WT C P o

l ice



### 89,455
100

, 335 189,
7 90 De

t ec
t ive {CIB}

P S-

I nvestiga

t ive Svcs Burea

u 

### 89,198
105

, 104 194,302 Po

l ice Sergea nt

P S - GWB

P olice



### 88

, 374 95,448 183,822 P olice
Li eu

t e n a nt

P S-P

r o f essio

n al Standards



### 87

, 514 115

, 998 203

, 512 *T
r ack Forema

n

I I

P A TH W ay 

### & S tr uctu

r es



### 8 7, 299

76

, 566 163,865 Police

Li e ut e n a n t

P S -L T P o li ce



### 86

, 825 122

, 021 208,846 Po
li ce Li eu
t e n a nt

P S- HT P o li ce



### 86

, 678 123

, 620

2 1 0,298 P o li ce O ffi ce

r

P S- J FK P o li ce



### 86,066 89,646

1 7 5, 7 12 

### Division
of Sta

t e G overnment Account

a bilityCompensationJobTitleDivisionOvertimeBaseSalaryTotal**PoliceLieutenantPS-GWBPolice85,187113,911199,098PoliceSergeantPS-LaGuardiaPolice85,028105,069190,097PoliceSergeantPS-PATHPolice82,821102,546185,367*ForemanPATHCarEquip82,76079,318162,078PoliceLieutenantPS-LaGuardiaPolice82,726123,602206,328*RailMaintainerIPATHWay&Structures82,67572,241154,916PoliceSergeantPS-NewarkPolice82,06999,923181,992PoliceOfficerPS-GWBPolice81,92589,820171,745PoliceOfficerPS-GWBPolice81,82691,551173,377PoliceOfficerPS_SpecialOperations81,76590,772172,537*TrackForemanIIPATHWay&Structures81,63478,702160,336PoliceLieutenantPS-PASTPolice81,620123,621205,241PoliceSergeantPS-HQSupport81,59596,916178,511PoliceSergeantPS-HTPolice81,288102,678183,966PoliceSergeantPS-HQSupport81,032110,828191,860PATH-PortAuthorityTransHudsonPS-PublicSafety*Represents18oftheAuthority's25employeeswhoseovertimecostsmeetorexceedtheirbasesalaries.TheothersevenemployeesarenotpresentedinthisExhibitastheyarenotamongthe top50overtimeearnersforPublicSafetyandPATH.**Representsemployee'sovertimeearningsplusbasesalary.OfficeoftheNewYorkStateComptroller

# Base Salary and Overtime Statistics All Authority Employees Who Earned Overtime 

# 2009 

# Exhibit

B Number
of Employee

s Overtime Earnings Exceed Base Salary

25 Overtime Earnings Exceed 

# $50,000

281 Overtime Earnings Exceed 

# $75,000



# 66 Overtime Earnings Exceed 

# $100,000

18 Comb
in ed Overtime Earnings and Base



# 77 Salary Exceed $175,000 

# Division
of State Government AccountabilityThis page

i s l eft intentionally blank.

# II Agency Comments Ju

l ) 

# .!0

. ::! 0 

# I I M r. F rank Paton.: Audi

t Dir ecto

r Division

o f 

# State (hi\ 

# crnme nt /\ccoun tal-> ility 

# 1 2 3 \Vi 

# Ili u m S t r\'c
t - 

# 2 1

' 1 

# Fl oo r Ncw Y o rk. N Y



# I O O JH R c : Drn
fl 

# ,\u d i t R e p o r t 2009-S -87 Ocar
iv l r. Patom::

•'



# '·

...



# ' 1 .,-'f •,

I

t 

# · r hank you

f iJr tht.' opportunity

t o **.:~p nd** 


# t o )OUr
d ran
a udit

r eport wn :ri ng tho::
r .: 1 ir11 "f 

# T h e P11rt Au thor ity 1.1f 

# 1\.: 11 York and 

# New

.J rr s e)·'s Mana ge m .: nt and Co ntr o l nf 

# E mpl oyee Ovenimc
Co
s t s. \\' c **pprc iat**  **('** 

# th e efforts
th at yo u **nd** 

# your stnf fha vc **t:~ cn**  

# t o :1s scss th e con tr ols e s tnbli

s l ll'd by


# t h e Port 

# Authority
rd a ri vr to 

# our **m:tn: lgl'lll~** 

**H** 

# of ovN time

c os t s. W ..: wck

l lf ll<:! 

# :my

i nput wh

i c h c an furth er c nhatH:

e our bu s in ..:s s pr oc:esst.'s

. **~l c:n[ll** 

**n** 

# o ur co ntr o l s or reduce

o ur cos
t s in f unh
e mn ce of o ur **go~** 

# It o s:1 fcgu:1rd 

# asS\'t
s. With

r espect
io 

# our u sc 

# of over

t i me a s n 

# mana gc nu .:n t tl1t

) l. 

# th e l'<w lllml

t or i t) **opctat~s**



# itt a **sc cut** 

**~** 

# sc n s itiw.

**hi gh**  **y-un it~ni;,<'J.** 



# h <'.il'i

l y - n:gu

l ated. 2-l- h o ur-a

- d:t}, sc ven-,l.

t y - a -11 

# e.:" ..:r11 

# ir• >r mwnl.
In

l >t \ kr 

# Ill clfcc

t ivcly !ll<Ut:tgl'

< Uld 

# L'P• 't:ttc in s u r h rut 

# cu v i ro/Uncn

t , 11c e mp loy a **1->u**
**in e~s**  

# rn o d d 

# clc<;r g n cd
t l1 op
t i mi ze tltt u s .: o f **nn cnt**  **cso un.:c~.** 

**in cl**  **utl in~**  

# th c j udit.'

i• tu s 

# u sc o f ow

t t imc 11 h e n opcmt

i ona

l rc q uir.:-
r nt·nt:: dic
t a t e **~udt**


# u se. On:rall. 1w
**l'l i~w** 



# t lUr

**in c~~**  

# rn o Jcllt as sc r vctloL
tr s t ak dtoltlcrs 11d

l un d 

# co ntimtt .:s to :rll
l lW u s t o l:>c 

# goo d s iC I I ' ttr cls ol th e **:r~ ls**  

# an d 

# mi ss it l!l en tnr s t cd

t o 

# th e **i\uthorit~.**



# t\ s 

# s u r h , IH' brlicvc

ir impor

t ant

t o 

# th e n b j l·c ti vi t y 

# of th e uudit that rh c r e p or t tonsitkr

t h r b u s i m •ss cn1

· i ro n mc nt in 11h

i clt tht • Poll i\utltori

t y up.:rat cs. **i\cn:: tlhl'k>~.**  

# 1\t' arc: commiuc,

lt o cun ti nu

: rlly imp rov in g ou
t pr ocessl's And. 

# as **dc**
**~i k·**  **J** 

# in thl' aum:hcd

**cs**

**e** 

# to your rc \otn rn cHdntions,

h :l\ 

# c- t , t "t

' n 

# a n u m be r 

# u f **a~t ons** 



# l u fur th t•r e nh a n ce con

t ro l s o ve r t he u s r an d m a nag e m en t of 

# uv e rt i rnt! ac:ro

s ' 

# th.:-
:r g<' n cy. **~:J .~**  

## 1l: 1.k 1\1 -cntle Soutf

i . hth ffnot 

# Nct•;liJ•.\,
l:l

' IOVO.i T·

. ?12 ·135 7733 

# Division
of State Government Accountability



# IIf r
f ·rank
P at <>ll
l '

.].

Jul y 

### :w. 2 01

f II' you ha n: any
**illll** or r e quir
e ad d itiona

l inl o nnation.

p lea se c o n l :tl' t **i\mlr~w**
Ll

' l
' i n.:. **A:-. ~llll**  Di rl.'cto

r . AuJ

i t Department.

at 20 1- 2 1 n -6 0 -lS

. Sin c erdy, • ' 

### ~· 

### fYL :.._.n

'- Lu:. ,"-A)- **h<~e** Fabinno Chid f-inancial Orti.:t!r t \ ttachmcm CC:

f-l (ln. Da v i d S:uns0n,

C hairman. 

### Pr\ N Y N J H n n. D :w id S. S trin cr. C l wirnwn

o f th e Au d it Com mitt ee, PANYi\'J C' lu istophcr

U
. \V artl. Executive

D i r C'c t o r , P
: \ N Y NJ Ui
l l Baroni.

D cpu

t ) Exl·t.:utin: Dirt:t·tor,

P ANYN

J 

### Office of the New York State Comptroller**mnt~n ation** 
I.
'l he **.-luthoti~t·** IIL'<'cl.\ lu ci

. I SI'.

• I il o ' **husili<!~.\** mocM cmd
/;
, • rwocr.·im•

in !he• 111

. otugemcm and L"•ml rol o(

, JI'e!'lil

l t c ' t'll,\/1.

It sl u 111ld u lm S l lll(l

t l:<! ILl<' of ot

· erl

i me

( e . g **'<'tlin~o:** itccc
.•. lilat
e d 

### hy empl
o yc t' u/w

: ltlcJt

! i, \ 111) all{/ th e f !C tlicie

, , 11111

/ orer.•

· iglu m costtrc

• s affi:c

l illg Ol'I! I' /Wh' in on let 11 • t i!e !lli /,i
· actiCII:.• wn

• d uet
• m

· ei'fi l' lt' c osts liH: Pull **utht** opcmtt•s

i n :1 **-llll!Ctlli l.:d.**  h e\ \ \ i l y-r.:gulatcd

. **-d:~) sc,·~.·n**  **\\.;:;:h** l 'll\'i

l ulllllt' lll. In ord,·

, k

' c tT cc ti\'d) m n n :tgc :md o p era!<' in s uch :m t:ll\

i rt> mnc n l. we **~.·m o~**  .1 

### 11\00.:i desig ned

l O optim

i 7.t
' th e U S C **fpt'!lllOIIl~nt**
**r~:so uro.:** 

i ncludin

g th e **judi r•u**  **S~** O lC l\

' CI1 illlC \\hen op.:r:: ni o mtl
r cqu ircmcms

di c t a te s uch u sc

. S i g ni l i cant wrr

c •r :Ht! pract

i ces anJ pro cesses arc

i n p l act! go v e rn i ng the m onagcmc

n l unci **s~:**

( tf ow nim
c at th e p,,n Au th or it y. Tho! Ofl

i cc ()('
t h e C hief Operating Officer provides oversight

fo r 111 u nit o r ing conformon

ce w ith **:~gc cy**  ovt!r lim o! g uidant

t! .md budget ini
t i athes prim

a ril y t h rough hi-mo nthl y pe r fo r mance
m eeti n gs with lin e dcpnrt m cnt and

**S:~ 0t)**  Dl·purtmcnt manageme

nt 

## sta r r. A t th e se m ee tin gs. ovc llim
c u s a ge, inclu ding overt im e **statu~. reu~on**  \ •l' t-rl
i ntc, well as n amcs and **num**
of emp

l oyee

:; earn in g ovcnimc.



### i s d i scussed. The :V l anagcmc

n t a n d Oud gel Dcpnr

t m e nt **rovid~:s** additionu

l corp ora

t e over

s igh

t lhrnu

g h imf..:p

c nd c n t **ys~:l** cnndiiCl

e d o r age n cy O V L: rl i m e **C.** In **n~ccn** yc·ars. we h n 1 · e m ade sig ni f ica nt r c ducti. ms lo ou r '"''C'ntl

f UJcnt \\ork1 0r ce

. \\hi \'h

i s .:um.:nl

l ) a ! ib "- '" k1 .:-1 in -1 0 years. Yl'l lbpik

• sw.: h r.:du
c ti o n s . \\ c h a\'

· · b c l' n a b l e to eflc
c t ivdy

a nd cl1kicnt

l y fuliill

• t lll mission ami lllCd t)ur
r .·g
i P n:J
i llhli g atillll
S, as Li te m u dd\ \<: l'rllpl o) pmv id cs 11ith till' **nc·~d,·d**

l k:\ihi

l i l y h' **~[l( llld** 

l l' chan
g ing p r i or iti e s **uhing**

l rnm

in **~ss lrat.:gic**  tcdHtuh,git'!>
an,t chan ges in .: ...:nnomic
cn nditi \l n < 0\'t'ral

l , **belie\** our **t's~** llll1.lt'l htt$ s .:rwJ

n ur **wkd1oldcr** wd

I and co nt inucs
lo a ll ow u s
1 0 goo d steward

s o r t h t' **~sc**

a nd mi :;s ion
e ntru

s t e d to
t h e A uth ority

. l'\'-

' ' l! t1h t' l css. 1\ 'C ar c commillcd

l \' **miuut~ll** improv

i n g o u r pr ocesses nnd havt: wkcn

a numb

e r of

. tc t inns

t u fu r1ho::r

o.: nh a n cc con trol
s O\

' l!r the u se and n H ul agc m cnt or O\Trl

i mc **ilt-ro ~~**  th e ngc n cy

I n th e fir s t qua ne r o r thi s year. th e a g e n cy und
e ll oo k a r el'
i ew ol' co ntr o l s and bud ge
t i n g l or ovcrt illl (' anJ
a CllllCllr

r <'nt
r c \ **~w** o t'
, i ck < lnd in jury on JuLy **proc~dur.:-**

**s.**

, \llht > u g h t hat IC\'icw

is s till in p tog
r c ss

. a r c c o m ll l cn d mio u th a i e m e r g ed from th e rcl'icw has hcc u im plcn1

e ltt C' d in C• l njuucti

o n with

t h e **cm-y'** 20
1 2-20 I-I pl an n i n g p roc.:ss

t hat is **e~cn undc'rwa~** 
Et'f cct

i Vl

' f or



### 2 0 1 2 B ud ge t , <Ill d c par

t m.:nt

i.l l b u d ge t s u h rn i s.s i n n s arc n .:q uir c d lt > i nclud

e **11pp** doc um e m mion

l or th e mw

t im e h o u rs b u dgeted

f or eac h j ob ti t le. n nd
t lt c **nlli**

o ver

t i me is n eces

s ary

. Thi
s w ill in 1 prDI

' l' l li l' t r a c kin g 3ntl nwnngctllL'Ill

l 1fov cr ti mc an d. a s req u i re d . faci

l itntc

a dju
s tin g om **hu~ in~**  **~s** n w d c l t o a d d re ss **cha ge~**  in husin..:ss c n mlttinns

1 1r op.-ra

ti o n :J I r c:: y ui r em.:nt

s . \V .: h al'c ubo impl

e m t: lll l.'d m.:i!

s u res LO **bl!ll~r** address Mn f f ntt

' :Jnc

i cs f i>r c riti cal on·ni mc el igib

l e p os iti o n s, an d h a n : und
e rw ke n a numb er 

### of ini ti ativc::s
in Publi

c .S<t!i.:

t y, whit: h. n s ad,n
o wkdgcd

in
t he audit

, tc s ult c d iu O\'l'

l tim,

· bein g rcduc.:d
hy

i n ex c: ess 

### of S!O mi lli on dtuing thL' auJi

t p c ti o d . 

### Division
of Sta te G ov e rnmen

t A ccount

a bilityRct:ummt'lllhtion2.ncve!opwuiL'OIIIIIIIIflintle(!fans.policieswulf!r.JCo!durc'srnachiel'•'t!z.•211fll!rcenlrt'dllcJionofon'r/;lllt't'ul/e,ifiJrinllw]I!}(}Wctuadliewthercuuctillninm·cnimcasanAgencyn:;p,111ol'thc2010Gudgdprocl.'sSinpmtdll<'ttlundnpcrntirmnlnotatthetii11L'the20II)Uudg.:otw:'L'>11hichoccurredduringlh'!sel'ondhalfnf2tJOIJ.In20I0.amunlx:roft"'JNiistincid,;onlsl<10kplace!througlwutlhework!11hieh.gii'C!ltho..:highprn(i[eoi'tJUr!iu:ilitics.r<!::;ult0dinhcightcnecl$ecurityinitia1iwsthatdirect!)llh'rtimc.The!$<:induJecllhel\(,\sC<'Wsubwaybombing.tltcTimesSqu:1rct'<lrbomb,thtbomhJoundonboundlt1rth<:U.S.lrcnnYemen,andthediscoi'CI)'ofpackagedincar1ridgcs.Inudditiontothl'SCkrTOrthr..:ats.nnumberofsignificantweatherincidentsalsooccnrrdin20I0whichimpactedl\1rtJ\uthorityovc11imclc\els.includingtheEurop.:;1nushcloudnnd1lwDcCL·muc'rbliu:mis.Werecognizeandncknow!.:dgctheimponnnceorcontrollingandminimizingOl't)ltimecosts.whilethesametimecontinuingtom:-rintainonrunJop.:rating.standan.b.Assuch.lht•Agencyiscommilledtoimprovingnurprocessesnndstreng1henourL'OnlrolsIlladdrc'ssth.;issuesidcmifi.:"diuthct\uditReport.:Uldha\'llimplcment<:dsignilicantchan):tc'Sforthe20l_-1014rlnnningprocessthatiscurrentlyund<'tway.Asp:u·toftlwnewproce';.:;,all<kpnruncntnlbudg<·tsubmissioJJsrequiresupportingdo..:umcntmionforthehoursreqllin::dforl.'ao::hjobtitkandtho::reasonfortheovertime.Theserequirementshavebl'cncommunicmet.lagency-wideaspartofthe2012·201.JMultiYearandCaf'italPlanninl;Paiodfn.rrntcliomissuedbytill'i'vbn;JgcmentnndUudgctDcpartnK'nl.Requiringt.locum..:nm!lon3Spanofthebudgetproc..:ss1\·illallo\1'furbclll'roversightbythl!OnircoftheChiefOperatingOfficerandthei'v1anag_cmcntandBudgetDcpartmenl.andsendsastrongsignalthroughouttheAgencythatreducingovertimet!.'\pemliturescriticalareaonwhichtherenlustbecnll;inCCJfocu.s.lhcommcnrlarion3.Rl'quire..Jutlwrityd<Jjlartmeul.rlojll.l'ii}i1!heirmmuolOl'<'l'lilllchlll(f!.t!l.\'eodt)'Car.lyMd{yin:;;ill£•circwmroncc.\'"herelimitedam/iusrijiaNc.nrcrlillle11.1\'occurtmdh<Mthese,,iruorionswillb,•mmrug,•dMonirortfep,rrlllw/11ro11tplitmcewit/1appro1·edO\'el'limchudgeisa11dsc·rurinirctliPpropri,•tynftlll•overli111e.r.q.\'IIW!.,\sno!L:din0urresponsetoRccllllllllendatiClnsIand2,eftecti\'t:lorthe2012Budget,alldepartmentalbudgetsubmissionsarcrequiredtoincludesupportingdocumentationlbrtheovertimehoursrequiredforeachjobtitleandthelor1hcovertime.TheOlliccoftheChiefOperatingOflic<'rtoP\·ersightforcompliancewith:l[!<'llCYo1·crtimepoliciesandhudgcturyandtheManagl:'mcntandBudgetDepartmentwillprnvidcadtliti<malcorp<>r<ll<'ov<'r:;ightthroughindcpendem;nwlysesofagencyovertimeuse.2OfficeoftheNewYorkStateComptroller**n~comm~ntla**

**on** Fol!ml'-llf' :11/llrt' 1{1/t.'

. l/iOIIllill

t • f)\V!'Iilllt'

( 1'(1/L\"Odi

fl ll\ id,

· mi
i i. • d ;,; IIIII' 111!</if

t i.'Jd ltlk e

;

' :1/'1' <

' ' '/ll'

( ' 11<'/ill/L\

t l \ llfi/)I'Op/'1

, 111! /'01'/iCII/cll
l'('g (l rcfmr,: iii.\

' (W / CC\ ll'h"n' **t\t.** luck < !! jlt

l /iji c fl t/ 1111 mul l'i',lllil\

' tl ilf

l f 1 1'ill til Ill(

\ !/Ill dol'l/1/l<'ll

h

' tl. 

### \\.: r, , , ie11i.'d **•lran tctiPn:;** 
**k•n ili~d** 


### a ,: qu c , t i onah

l \! **h~** the u ud
i t and. ltllhuugh 11..: **a~ro:c** th Jl
i n SO l Il L' **ins!ll!l('** just

i lkntion

l or th l.' ll\\!

t ti m.-

s h v uld h a1

· c b <.'<'n he ll t ' r **~ntd,** \lc d

i J no tl inJ

**ar ~:~b**  **1\h~:rt·** corr..:ct

i 1 · c ac
l ivn (::IS **opp ~d**  to **~:nnl im1in** 
th e li< 'L' J fi•r h,•tt.:r d• ·tum.:n

l . tlion am
i **hli hting** 

l h l' n .:.:J li.1r po t ent in
I J..'l.•licy adju

.'S tm cm
s ) was **m:ce 11~**  I n an eOI1r

l to I X' Her **lren gth.:**  m·crsight

an d docu m e n ta t ion > u p p o nin g owr
ti m.: **.ms**

w e 11
· i ll i mpkm<'nl

pe ri o d i c ind.:
J x: nd c nl qual

i ty c ontrol **ell~**

t u **cn~ure** Co11llp

l i ai1CC with 0\'L'

I iimc

j u s tifit ';ll
i O II r equ

i r.:lllelllS.

\\ C \\li ll co nt inue lO rl lt:U S [' 4\ ll i.:uf:tr tmc m i on 1111 individual

iu s t:m ccs

1 1l 1<: r c m

· c n i m c i s exc eedin
g lill y 1 x·rc.:
n t or th e in,lividu:ll's

ba s e sa l ary as
1 • :.: r ecog
n i z e th at th es e in s tmtecs

h a n: the potential

t o dimin

i s h t ht' pu bl ic pc.:rc.:-p

t i1 m o f t hl.' **!\~ c.:n**  **~)**

a good **ti.'II'J.rd** of th e assets

a n d m issio

11 cnln1s

t c d t oil. Ot h c· r 1\ la tter.; I n th e i n t e r est of' pres
e ntin g n f ':t i r **;~nd** objcc tii 'C ass es s ment

, we ul so r,

· qu.:

s t t hat certa in s t at c m cms con tain ed in th e dr:tfl rq 1ort b.;: 

### r l a r ificd

a s fo ll o ii' S. 

### •

· · T i t.: 2010 buJ g cl tkn **\uth rit~** 

:. u bm ittcd to
t he Gov.::mor


### of New Yor k **;~nd**

t h e Uo\crnu

r o f Nc.: w **~cy**

s pecif

i e d tlut O\Wtillle would be reduced by 20 **~cn** t'rl111l

tl w prio

r yc.1r.

I ft ) llen :r,
t h t• policy
w a s not
c n mmunicmcd

or impkmcm

e d 11 i thin

t he Authority and o1

· crtime Ct'S

i s l o r 2 t) I 0 d ccr.::
a sc· d by o n l y:>

r ercc lll (S2.8 milli on)

l h •m 2009 amount

s, rath
e r th a n b e in g t ( ·duccd

b y 20 perc
e n t ($1 7.7 mill ion).'' **(p:~gc**
SJ



### * Comptroller's ' I he 20 % n:duction in'" cr t i n I t! lit! h opl:.'
J

I P a c h i <'l '<! **\\'a.** nm
:J **J1'1tf** but rnt h..:r
a gu alth
c Comment **ngcnc~**

c s t . . I bl i shl'l

l i n l 'O I \ iunc ·t i nn 11 i lh **h~ ~0**  I 0 Au.lg

c" t. As n ott :J
i n l> Ur r<

' -' fX>IlSl'tll RI.' Will llll'II
J

: 1 1 i<>n :!. \\'l' **11~ ro:**  unuhle

II • ;1chit!l'l:.'

l h< • 20"1,, r.·dm:

l i•>n d u.:
t o 5.:c w i l ) a nd **o~x-rationn**

i ssuC's

n o t ruuil: ij' ,lll' d at l hc·
t i111c

t hl:' **~0** Ill Bu J gc t \\'a s d..:1 'Cl opc d. ll' h ich occu

r rrJ d uring

t h e S(

· eond

l w l fo f 2<l OlJ

. A d , l it i unall,v

. t he g L1J it o r cducc 01 c r t in 1 c by :!fJ' h , 11a s W 11 l llllllli

c: med .1\ gc n c) _ , ,ide in the 20
1 11 - :2012
p lnnn in g **tru-:t**

**~d** thr \\ ll gh d c.: p:l rlmen

t a l hud g.; t **~ub**

an J in th e bcclll
iv l' IJin::
c t n r'> **llad c:t.~**  **tlo** 

### tbc **gen~;y**

; 1! kr th e 2 0 I 0- :2\ l 1 2 Bu dgd **a.~** app r< ll' l
' l l. ''T he tot:J

I co mp
o: n s al i o n i s crL·Li ita bk
Il

l t h .:

**liys t<!m** 

li > r b oth
l' uhli

t.: S:1 i'e t ) and

1 I'AT II e mploy ee s .'' (p :Jgc

I I )

r---:

• .-----, Comptroller's 01'erti m c i s n n t c r cd it n bk
f or P Xfl

l employe es.

Com ment 2 3 *See

S t a t e Com ptroll

e r' s Co mm
e nt s, p age 31. 

### Division
of State Government Accountability*"\\'caskedforblllnotpro\'idcdwithanexplanwionlorthercdlh.:tivninPuhli..:Comptroller'sSufdy::1009Ipag<'!2)CommentTheauditors\Vt:n:.onnumerousincludi11gattheexitcont'ercncc.providedandd;:tnilingthercn.;on:;thl.'Po;t;-\utlwiityabletoreducePublicSafc.tyll\'ettimein2009.\\'cwouldbetoprovidethisinformationugain.''Theyindicatedthatdep;1rtmcntmanagementisprovidedwithvariousman11gcmcntreport:-;thathighlightemployeeoveriinwearnings.''(pageIIi)Thisslatements1.•emstoimplythatwewereunnbletodemonstratetothethevariousreportsusedbyPortAuthoritymanagementtomonitorovertimewhcn,ina3munbt'rofthesereportsfurnishedtothemduringthecourseoftltcreview.These.---...,..---,*includedspc:t:ifiepreparl'dbylHirManagementanuBudgetDqxlflmcntthatov<:!rtimebydep;1rtme111andemployee,andlhntmepro,·idedIt-'theChief'OpcralingOfficerfordiscussionwithc:1chDepartmentDirector.4*SeeStateComptroller'sComments,page31.OfficeoftheNewYorkStateComptrollerComptroller'sComment4IIStateComptroller'sCommentsII1.Wehaverevisedourreporttoindicatethatthe20-percentcostreductionwasagoal.Thecitedmethodsofcommunicatingthegoalwerenotprovidedtousduringtheaudit.2.Thereporthasbeenrevisedtoclarifythisdistinction.3.Wehavedeletedthestatementfromourauditreport.4.Weacknowledgepriorreceiptofthesereports.WealsoacknowledgethatAuthorityofficialsarecorrectinstatingtheconcernthattheAuthoritywasunabletodemonstratehowthereportswereusedtoeffectivelymonitorandcontrolovertime.DivisionofStateGovernmentAccountability