04/21/92 @ 4:17 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

NEGOTIATING COMMITTEE CITY OF RAMSEY ANOKA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA The City o~Rarrk3~ ey Negotiating Committee conducted a meeting on Tuesday, April 21, 1992 at the Ramsey~Munjcipal~ Center, 15153 Nowthen Boulevard N.W., Ramsey, Minnesota. Members P~eSent: Also Present: CALL TO ;ORDER Councilmember S heila Beyer Councilmember Glen Hardin Councilmember Kenneth Peterson City Administrator Ryan Schroeder Personnel Coordinator Kay McAloney AFSCME Steward Gayle Rogers AFSCME Steward Grant Reimer AFSCME Business Agent Matt Nelson Future AFSCME Business Agent Nola Profant The meeting was called to order at 4:17 p.m. CITIZEN tNPUT None APPROVI AGENDA Consensus Was t° approve the agenda as presented. COMMITTEE~ BUSINESS Case #1: 19~2 Wages and Benefits for AFSCME Bargaining Unit The meeting~'opened by City Administrator Schroeder addressing the rationale for the rejection, by the City Cot~'ncil ~ts a whole, of the latest AFSCME proposal. He stated this proposal was rej,e_cted because it d~d nc~t include any consideration for performance pay which was the Council s top priority for !his contract. He added that the AFSCME proposal was market driven without the principal co~ sideration being internal comparison which is not in conformance with the State mandated c ~.ompm ~ble worth law. Mr. Schroeder stated that the AFSCME proposal has a 15.11% cost in an a~ount of $89,650 over the two-year period as opposed to an estimated two-year cost of the management i~roposal of 10.27% for $60,935 using the same assumptions for market and class as used in th~ AF~iCME proposal. He stated Council directed the management plan be resubmitted for several rO. ason s. First, management is of the opinion that the earlier management proposal was voted down!due ito confusion regarding several aspects of the proposal which has now been cleared up. :;Sec0pd, the management proposal provides for the AFSCME requests for market comparison,!~movCment through the class and recognition of tenure in position. Third, it provides for a perforfftance pay system as required by the City Council and fourth, it provides for a system which reactsiposit~vely to the State mandated comparable worth law. Mr. Schroeder stated that the managemen~ proposal allows for pay equity appeals and market appeals. Further direction from the City Council tO the City Administrator that a reduction in reviewer bias within the performance system occu[. Finally, Mr. Schroeder suggested that for display purposes, should AFSCME so desire, the 1992 point sheets could be reformatted by renumbering the class column using a one Negotiating Committee/April 21, 1992 Page 1 of 2