Supervisors and department heads are paid more because they are responsible for overseeing other workers and for troubleshooting, and their work often extends well beyond normal business hours.

When a person accepts such a position, he or she is aware of the responsibilities and the extra time that might be required to complete all of the work. The higher pay he or she receives is intended to compensate for the work required.

Going in, such individuals know what their responsibilities will be and, by accepting their positions, acknowledge that the accompanying compensation is fair. If they have second thoughts about the work-versus-compensation guideline, they always have the option of shopping their talents and abilities elsewhere.

That said, raised eyebrows among taxpayers in the wake of Wednesday’s county salary board meeting seem justified.

Anytime a unit of government hands out a 20 percent salary increase on top of an increase that an employee — supervisor, department head or not — is scheduled to receive is a legitimate reason for taxpayers to raise questions.

In the case in question, the salary board’s generosity could negatively impact the county’s position in future negotiations with its employee unions. County negotiators might have a tough time poor-mouthing to union workers when the county can afford a raise of more than $12,000 for one worker.

And, the raise in question doesn’t just impact 2012, but will have a cumulative negative effect on future county finances as long as the employee works for the county.

It is the county government’s personnel director, Lori Altman, who is the subject of the salary board’s questionable decision. Effective Wednesday, Altman’s salary, by way of the 20 percent increase, jumped to $72,829 from $60,503.

But that isn’t Altman’s only compensation increase. County taxpayers also will foot the bill for an additional increase, estimated to exceed $5,000, due to a 3 percent increase to which she otherwise was entitled plus an increase based on seniority.

County Controller Jack McMillin, who expressed concern about the size of the increase during an interview, pointing out that Altman’s new total salary would be about $78,000, said Altman’s salary would now exceed the salaries tied to numerous county positions having equal or greater responsibilities.

Taxpayers are justified in asking whether Altman’s increase might be a precursor to big salary boosts to others.

It was the three current county commissioners — Dale Pinkerton, Jim Lokhaiser and Bill Patterson — in their role as the salary board who voted for Altman’s increase plus a couple of smaller department head increases. McMillin, who also sits on that board, did not attend Wednesday’s meeting.

Pinkerton and Patterson defended Altman’s increase by pointing out that she has worked long hours on such matters as union contracts and other employee issues.

But such hours go with the job, and Altman was aware of those time challenges when she accepted the position.

Perhaps she was due some extra compensation because of her performance. However, given the economy and the serious challenges many county taxpayers have in operating their households — including scraping together enough money to pay their taxes — Altman’s pay hike was irresponsible.

The commissioners/salary board should have acted on behalf of the county government’s finances and the taxpayers’ best interests, not in the spirit of excessive holiday gift-giving.

It is to be hoped that the two new commissioners taking office Jan. 2 — who will take seats on the salary board — will act more responsibly.