Minutes - Council - 01/11/1992 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Are we in comnliance? On January 11, 1991 the City of Ramsey submitted a report with current salary information to the DOER and received notification that the City was in compliance. On November 6, 1991 the City of Rarnsey submitted a report with current salary information and received notification that the City was not in compliance. The current Act states that "a jurisdiction which was found in compliance at one time, but which is found not in compliance at a future date, may initiate the reconsideration request under part 3920.0900 of the Act." The City will be submitting the final report by January 31, 1992, as the Act states that the jurisdiction must submit a report to the DOER using December 31, 1991 payroll figures. What are future state rex!_uimmcnts? If a jurisdiction is in compliance, the DOER must notify the jurisdiction of the date on which the next implementation report must be submitted to ensure that pay equity is maintained. The DOER must list all jurisdictions found not in compliance in its annual pay equity report to the legislature. After the initial original implementation date and reporting date, a jurisdiction must maintain equitable compensation relationships and submit additional reports as required by the DOER. The DOER must monitor compliance on an on-going basis and must report to the legislature annually. Once pay equity has been established, each local government must maintain its job evaluation system, in order to evaluate new job classes and address any changes in existing classes. If the jurisdiction adopts a new job evaluation system, or substantially modifies its system, the jurisdiction must notify the DOER. Will wgges be frozen? The Act does not prescribe methods to be used to achieve pay equity, so local governments have a great deal of flexibility. FI0w do our positions bv class compare to other cities? See attachment number 2. Can we use benchmarks? Study wide benchmarks are shown as attachment number 3. The use of benchmarks is a Council policy decision. How does this study compare to the old study? See attachment number 1. Why are some positi0n$ itl classes ol[h~r ~;han what should have resulted with last study? It is unclear. Do my points reflect mv ability? My classification, thus my points, reflect the value of the summary of tasks that comprise my job. Issues such as ability, knowledge, seniority, or performance are not part of Comp Worth. Why does management ~[hink my job has less value than before? The TSP each employee fills out results in the job value. Management does not have an ability, to manipulate. What impact does Comparable Worth have 9n 1;h~ ~ompcnsation plan and future increases? Pay methods such as seniority and job performance are not affected by pay equity., These factors are B,pically recognized by movement through a pay range. The pay equity analysis is generally limited to a comparison of male-dominated and female-dominated classes at the maximum of the range. The pay plan currently proposed discusses pay range dollars which is a separate matter from Comp Worth. Can we Fandfather in posifion~ that went down? this is a policy decision with long range monetary impacts. Is Comparable Wor[h bargainable? Comp Worth relates directly to organizational structure. Thus, under Minnesota Statute 179A.07(1) it is an inherent managerial policy right. This, however, does not mean it cannot be discussed with employee groups. Wages resulting from a classification plan