By Rachel Brahinsky

HERE'S AN IDEA . Instead of telling the laundry workers who scrub blood- and shit-stained bedsheets at Laguna Honda Hospital they're out of a job, why not ask the city's top earners to accept a wage freeze, just for a year?

If every city employee making $100,000 or more gave up his or her raise for one year, the city would save more than $8 million. That's more than enough to retain all of the laundry workers slated to lose their jobs because of cutbacks recommended in Mayor Willie Brown's proposed fiscal year 2002-03 budget.

There's plenty of money at the top. Eight years ago, before Brown took office, only a small percentage of the city's workers – a total of 186 – made more than $100,000 a year. But the number of top-dollar staffers has skyrocketed: in the current fiscal year, there are 1,973 who break the six-figure mark.

And even adjusted for inflation ($100,000 in 1993 is equivalent to about $130,000 today), the high-salary club has grown. These days there are 388 people who earn $130,000 or more. That's an increase of more than 50 percent since Brown took office. And according to the City Controller's Office, nearly every single one of those big earners is getting a significant raise this year.

A quick perusal of the long, long list of high-wage employees shows that most city departments claim a couple top-dollar staffers. But a few are notably plush. Law enforcement is living large, as you might expect. The San Francisco Police and Sheriff's Departments combined account for 26 percent of all high-wage employees. Go to www.sfbg.com for a link to the whole list, which was provided to us by the city controller and which is a public record.

Not all of the high salaries are excessive: many city workers who earn in the six figures have specialized degrees or training (doctors and lawyers, for example), while others head huge city agencies (like the SFPD or the San Francisco International Airport). Many of these people could earn much more doing the same work in the private sector, so we're not begrudging them their salaries, in most cases.

But we're willing to bet that every single one of them – earning as much as six times the typical laundry worker's salary – can afford to forego his or her raise just this once. They can certainly afford to have a wage freeze far more than the $30,000-a-year laundry workers can afford to lose their jobs.

And that's just one place the city could look for savings in the cream of the city payroll. Certain top-dollar employees also qualify for performance-based bonuses. All but a tiny portion of the 735 managers who tried for the bonuses in 2001 got them, bringing the city payout last year to $1.4 million. Just for a year that money could be used to help workers on the bottom rung.

Ray Sullivan, head of the Municipal Executives Association, which represents managers under these contracts, did not respond to our request for comment. On the other side of the ring, Sal Rosselli, president of Service Employees International Union, Local 250, which represents the laundry workers, said he agrees the performance bonuses should be scrutinized for cuts this year. Rosselli wouldn't go so far as to say that all top-dollar employees should forego raises – but he agreed some are clearly being paid too much. "There are a number of positions [that could be cut], like the special assistants," he said. Another target: the cops. "There are a number of administrative positions in law enforcement. We're saying, let those positions be filled by clerks" who are paid less than highly trained officers.