What is his salary? Is his State position a full time job? What are his
duties? I'm sure that there are many people who are paid by the State in
various capacities because keeping them on retainer is cheaper than paying full
price when they are needed. However, paying someone a full salary should also
require that he give full time to that job. Before deciding whether he is
"double-dipping", it would be nice to have all the pertinent
Dr. King is supposed to work full time (40 hours a week or 80 hours every two
weeks) and he is paid $141,950 which includes salary and benefits. He is also
provided a vehicle (Ford Expedition) in which the citizens of Utah pay fuel and
maintenance costs for his drive from Axtell to Salt Lake City. It is a 140 miles
from Axtell to Salt Lake City for those that are wondering.
It looks like Wyatt Frampton has made a solid case against Dr. King.
Although business often brags about being better than government, they often cry
foul when government can provide services at less cost. Since I assume that the
state veterinarian is charging the going rate when performing private services,
I also assume that writer's motive is to reduce the number of
veterinarians. Practice what you preach, if you don't like your
job and it rewards, quit, and do something else. Let a free market work.
On second thought, maybe it would be better for all people in government to exit
the business world. If we could get business people out of government we could
actually have government for the people by the people.
Interesting to see our favorite "keep the government out of our
business" commenter advocating for legislation that affects exactly one
person in Utah government. And as long as Dr. King actually puts in 40 hours per
week, where do we get off telling him he can't work more hours at his
chosen profession? Do we--should we--pass laws to keep cops from moonlighting as
bouncers and security guards? Or school teachers as private tutors? If Dr. King
isn't meeting his contractual obligations, there are other ways to rectify
that situation, including canceling the contract. Seems an overreaction to write
a law about it.
I don't see why being employed by the government (as a vet) should
disqualify him from doing any other work. He shouldn't be
able to use his government office or contract as a competitive advantage, but I
don't see how being the State vet would give him an advantage in his
private practice. I wouldn't go to a vet just because he's the State
Vet.Most Legislators have other careers/jobs... why can't the
State Vet have a job outside his government job? Lots of people work more than
Should those who work for the State be allowed to compete directly with those
who are in the private sector? Are there other veterinarians in the Gunnison
area? Does the fact that Dr. King receives a fairly substantial salary as the
State Veterinarian allow him to under-price other veterinarians in the area?
Would it be fair to everyone if Dr. King was restricted from handling any
veterinarian business except when no other veterinarian was available? Should
the State Veterinian be required to add a surcharge to his private patient bills
to offset the normal and customary costs that private sector vets have to pay as
part of their business expenses?It seems prudent that when someone
has been hired by the State that he would voluntarily restrict any
"outside" work while he is employed. It would also seem prudent that
the State would bill for his services directly at the State's usual and
customary rate and that he would not receive extra compensation for performing
those services.No one is forced to work for government. No
government employee should compete against non-government businesses.
So.. should teachers (State employees) not be able to have a second job? Not
even in the summer?Should police officers not be allowed to
moonlight at other jobs?As long as he's not using State
resources in his second job, I don't see why he should be restricted.It's not like his state job gives him any advantage as a vet.
What advantage does it give him?If he used the state car or other
state equipment in his other business or something that would be different and
obviously already prohibited. Just like a police officer can't use his
car for private business.
Should attorneys within the office of the Attorney General be allowed to take
cases on the side on their own time?? Hey, why not, what could possibly be the
problem with that??