Laserfiche WebLink
52O <br /> <br />than any other position under consideration here (with longer tenure in position than four other <br />Exempt positions). Therefore I am suggesting a market adjustment (similar to the Police Chief <br />adjustment in 1995) of $1,'727 beyond the spread sheet increase. <br /> <br />Council had also suggested that the Senior Accountant Exempt status should be reviewed. I have <br />included my earlier response to the Union on this same matter for your review. In any case, the <br />position deserves a consideration of a wage adjustment for 1996. Whether or not the position is in <br />the union, the adjustment proposed would be the same or similar (the formula is the same). <br />Further, I don't understand the perceived advantage of the Employer requiring that this position be <br />in the union. At the very least that matter should be taken up as a matter separate from the wage <br />consideration. Therefore, I am recommending that the wage, as proposed for that position, <br />continue forward. <br /> <br />You will find, within the attachments, wage comparisons for the Sergeant position as discussed. <br />After a review of that material ,internal pay relationships, and market pay relationships of other <br />exempt personnel, I believe the compensation level suggested earlier is appropriate. <br /> <br />As noted at the July meeting, 'all Exempt personnel had an opportunity to review the past <br />recommendation and discuss it with me. I'd ask for Committee and Council action to approve <br />upon the wages as noted above retroactive to January 1, 1996. <br /> <br />Council Action: <br /> <br />Motion to adopt the 1996 Exempt Wages as presented. <br /> <br />Reviewed by: <br /> <br />City Administrator <br />Administrative Services Manager <br />Exempt Personnel <br /> <br />Personnel: 08/13/96 <br /> <br />/jmt <br /> <br /> <br />