Agenda - Council - 03/08/1994 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

I I I I I I .I I 1994 EXEMPT WAGES AND BENEFITS BY: Ryan Schroeder, City Administrator CASE # 5' Backgrout!d: The A SCM employees. 2.55% incre same at a Given the al personnel us! average incre E labor agreement resulted in an average 4.03% increase in payroll for affected Assuming that LELS approves the management offer, they will receive a ~e plus steps for certain individuals. The benefits for both groups are the per month increase effective August I, 1994. ove I have attached two exhibits. The first is a wage table for Exempt ag the same format and cost as with AFSCME personnel. It shows a 4.03% .se with variances similar to the AFSCME package. The second e: :hibit is more interesting. If it was assumed that the same package existed for exempt perse reel as exists (in 1994) for police patrol, I computed the resultant wage for each positio~. The result is fairly dramatic. It shows that if ~ parity with LELS/exempl was a goal, a few exempt positions would be at a much greater rate of pay than at curren: levels. It should be noted, however, that a similar analysis between LELS and AFSCIVI~ would have a similar result. The intent of~the above is two-fold. First, when granting wage increases based upon mathematical formulas the base data certainly has an impact (i.e. compensation plan wage scales, tenuretin position, and position classification). Second, if Council intent is to provide equit~ between employee groups the term equity can be shown to be defined in several differem ways. Committee Aation: No action is requested at this time. meeting. Wage recommendations will be at a subsequent Review Check'list: Also distributed to: City Administrator Personnel Coordinator Finance Officer Police Chief City Engineer PC:3/8/94 //7