Laserfiche WebLink
through tw~ty S~¢ale and a display would be provided so that each of the AFSCME members <br />knows exac{ly wgat job number within the Stanton Class Five Survey is being compared to their <br />individual ~Osit~n in Ramsey. Also for display purposes, but not mathematical purposes, <br />Columns H~and I~, which are the performance and goals columns, could be merged. Council also <br />directed that~imp~vements in the performance evaluation system will occur with employee input. <br /> <br />AFS CME I~sin~,ss Agent Nelson expressed disappointment that the latest AFSCME proposal was <br />not considered. ' He stated there is a distrust of the employees regarding the fairness of <br />performanc{ gra~ing. He added that with management's proposal, the Public Works employees <br />will be the l~Wesi paid in the State. Mr. Nelson stated that employees are also uncomfortable that <br />the City Adminisffator has the final determination when it comes to reviewing the market appeals. <br /> <br />City Administrat0r Schroeder stated that with the Appeals Committee never having met before, <br />he's uncom~r)rtab[e delegating the final authority to them. He added that their recommendations to <br />him will definitely, be considered. <br /> <br />Personnel Cbord~ator McAloney explained the appeals process. The Comparable Worth Appeals <br />Committee ~vie,),,s the percentage of time spent only if there is a dispute, not points and the Market <br />Appeals Co~nmitiee reviews what was used for market comparison, not dollars. <br /> <br />AFSCME Slewed Rogers stated that it was decided to forego the 5% increase for last year in the <br />hopes that the m6ney saved could be used to put people in a fair market range. She read excerpts <br />from 1991 NegoOating meeting minutes. She added she does not feel that AFSCME is out of line <br />with what t~ey arte asking for. <br /> <br />AFSCME ~sin~,ss Agent Nelson stated that AFSCME has a meeting scheduled for April 30, 1992 <br />and they wil~ let Mr. Schroeder know their decision on May 1, 1992. <br /> <br />Consensus Was to adjourn the meeting. <br />The Negoti~ng ~ommittee meeting adjourned at 6:00 p.m. <br /> <br /> Respectfully submitted, <br /> <br />/JRecording S~re~ <br /> <br />~~'gchroeder <br /> City Administrator <br /> <br />Negotiating Committee/April 21, 1992 <br /> Page 2 of 2 <br /> <br /> <br />