|
completion of background checks and an employment physical and drug screen. Furth~ofre~..
<br />staff recommended two alternatives be named in the event Mr. Holman does not~,.
<br />position. Alternate one would be Scott Bradseth and Alternate two would be Jim N~y?'
<br />
<br />Monon by Councllmember Connolly, seconded by Chmrperson Anderson, .~.E?.~co~d that
<br />the City Council authorize hiring Dan/el Holman as Public Works M~' ~nce ~¢~er at
<br />$11.92 per hour contingent upon successful completion of a background ~h~ and employer
<br />physical and drug screening. Naming Scott Bradseth as ~e ~:~tma Neeley as5%
<br />
<br />Motion carr/ed. Voting Yes: Chairperson Anderson and Cc Cbnnolly. Voting No:
<br />None.
<br />
<br />Case #4:
<br />
<br />Request Approval to Enter into
<br />Program (PEIP)
<br />
<br />,ecs Insurance
<br />
<br />Human Resources Manager Heryla stated that for the past six yea~zs,:~.the City?f Ramsey has
<br />offered medical and life insurance t%its employees through the ta..:~c Employees
<br />Insurance Program (PEIP). In the.A~{wo;~years, PEIP gave the Ci ~i premium rate
<br />increases of 8% and 4% respectiv~i~fa~'~ ~ch~'~?~.,has announced an.~?~se for the City of
<br /> o "· '::" ': '~ ::!: -~'~;7(": :.' ::,~:~ ..... ~'-? ': ~,-"
<br />Rarnsey employees of 10 %. Thelffe insurance rafesmmmned v~rtually ~e same. On August 31,
<br />2000, the contract with PEIP will expir~ ~d staff is.~ki~g ~:authorization to enter into
<br />another two year contract w~th PEIP for'~j~cal an~lS;fe msurane~~: The nsmg costs of medmal
<br />insurance have been a major topic of'}~i~c~i¢i;i; among~i:~..~:ublic sector human resources
<br />managers. Contributing to higher p~'~ are the ~%osts of new technology and
<br />pharmaceutica!s;"(increasing'l.a, bor costs, pro¼:~[ increases and consolidation, population growth
<br />and aging, ~p~'emment coS~'S.'~fting, and Mi~}~o(~Yi~¢~equired coverage of mental and chemical
<br />dependenCy!J:~taff has leam:~ithat the average"~;~e for local units of government is between
<br />12°/3 and 1'7%. Some cit}~}:?~Vere reporting..~*~&"fiSses of even 25% or more. Wi& a goal of
<br />provi~lh~:~tity medic~l/'?'~verage ,wit~:}l~ited cost increases, the Labor Management
<br />Committee re;~d !t,s:.m'~tihgs";'a~d~ii~e times beginning on May 24, 2000, to evaluate the
<br />City's options an'd ~h~e a recommendation to Council. First, the Committee recognized the
<br />
<br />i ,,?!. li~.~ted .t~mehne under'which a dems~on about medmal ~nsurance had to be made. With a
<br /> . ,:?' -,.,~>: . _~ ~.~,,:. .-..~. '(,.~,'.!~, .~ ....
<br /> ,.~7;!!z,.3~:''~ Septemberl;,1., 2000 renew,~. &3?,i?EIP reqmres a 31-day written not, ce of group termination or
<br /> ~?iSii.? completi~31i 0~ the group h'r~pli~r~on form by August 1, 2000. If the City wanted to go out for
<br />I !:? bids, Mirm~;h~.Statue 471'J6:i~1 subdivision 2 requires a public notice of a request for proposal
<br />~. for 21 days in :.g newspaper' or trade journal. The Labor Management Committee was concerned
<br />~:i)5:~, that a request ::for proposals would take more time than the August deadline would allow·
<br />::~ ':~." ~:~ ~i" .3. '
<br />I~;?i3:!.,,: Because PEI? 'was created by special legislation for local units of government., municipalities
<br /> "%:';7,. who use PEIP :.are not required to post a request for proposals. Furthermore, staff felt the
<br /> ~%:'..timeline ~0Ul~i be prohibitive to ironing out the bargaining unit a~eements complicated by a
<br /> major .ch. ange in medical insurance at th/s time. The second reason the Labor Management
<br /> Committee is recommending a renewal with PEIP is the limitations of insuring a ~oup of less
<br /> tlxan '50 lives. The City of Ramsey is not yet at 50 eligible full-time employees, and only 49% of
<br />
<br />Personnel Committee/July 11, 2000
<br /> Page 3 of 4
<br />
<br />-37-
<br />
<br />
<br />
|