Classification & Compensation Study

Transcription

1 Classification & Compensation Study A presentation for: City Council By: Consultant, Ann Antonsen Springsted Inc.

2 Agenda Roseville s Current Practices 2012 Study Objectives Survey Methodology Benchmarks & Comparables Benchmark Outcomes Council Pay Comparison Discussion 2

3 Roseville s Current Practices Roseville has six different employee groups for compensation purposes. Three of those groups are represented by labor unions and their compensation is negotiated as part of a collective bargaining agreement and hence cannot completely be set into a formal pay plan. Compensation is set using the principles of internal equity, external market competitiveness, as well as policy objectives as established by the City Council. The last full study was conducted in 2002 by Employer s Association. The work resulted in the development of the current job evaluation system and the partial implementation of a new pay plan structure in This structure set Roseville s compensation at 97% of the markets average, however; the plan was also designed to have a merit pay component that would allow top performers to achieve up to 115% of the average, but this piece was never fully funded nor implemented. 3

4 2012 Study Objectives Best compensation administration practices indicate that systems should be completely reviewed, validated, and updated based on internal and external changes that have occurred every five to seven years. However, compensation is not static and should be reviewed annually to ensure market competitiveness. Since the last study there have been changes in some position classifications, some new position additions, job combinations and eliminations; and compensation schedule adjustments creating a need to have the job evaluation and compensation system reviewed by an outside consultant to validate and update the system, as well as to assess internal equity and external market comparisons. The City believes that the current job evaluation system and pay structure is fair and equitable but in need of some updates to achieve the Council s strategic directive of developing an even compensation structure for union and nonunion employees. 4

5 Survey Methodology 20 Cities were initially selected and invited to participate in the study based on their location, population, taxable tax capacity, tax rate, tax levy and taxable sales. This represents communities and organizations most like Roseville as comparisons for our market. Roseville has 67 job classifications. The survey requested data for 47 position classifications currently utilized in Roseville thought to be similar and comparable in the marketplace. The information for 42 positions was utilized in the initial data analysis. Data was gathered in the fall of 2012 and in January another push for more data occurred to strengthen overall results for missing positions or city responses. The survey information was analyzed and narrowed to 13 benchmark positions and 10 Cities most similar to Roseville. 5

6 Benchmarks & Comparables The 13 benchmark positions below were selected for having the most similarity within comparable cities as well as for being an internal benchmark within Roseville s pay system for their grade. City Manager City Planner Community Development Director Computer Support Specialist Human Resources Manager Maintenance Worker Streets Maintenance Supervisor Streets Office Assistant Parks Superintendent Public Works Director Records Tech Recreation Program Supervisor Utility Billing Clerk The 10 Comparison Cities below were selected as being most similar to Roseville with like position classifications: 1. Eagan 6. Woodbury 2. Maple Grove 7. Edina 3. Richfield 8. Golden Valley 4. Lakeville 9. Minnetonka 5. Blaine 10. Fridley 6

7 Benchmarks Outcomes Benchmark Cities and positions indicate Roseville pay at 4.6% below average. 7

8 Council Pay Comparison City Council Organization Annual Wages Eagan $10,004 Maple Grove $12,500 Richfield $7,901 Lakeville $8,664 Blaine $10,000 Woodbury $6,540 Edina $7,758 Golden Valley $8,696 Minnetonka $9,000 Fridley $7,647 Average $8, % Roseville $7,020 Mayor Organization Annual Wages Eagan $13,624 Maple Grove $14,500 Richfield $10,179 Lakeville $9,996 Blaine $13,632 Woodbury $8,520 Edina $10,348 Golden Valley $11,619 Minnetonka $ 12,000 Fridley $10,530 Average $11, % Roseville $9,300 Survey responses indicate Council pay at 20.9% below average. Survey responses indicate Mayor pay at 19.1% below average. 8

9 Discussion Pay Philosophy & Policy: Service organization, exceptional service, quality, culture, industry and market best practices, image Ongoing Strategy: Vision, goals, policy, commitment, follow through, consistent methodology Recommendations: Abandon the non union exempt and non union non exempt pay plans set at 97% of the average with merit pay component that was never fully implemented. This practice is very unusual in the public sector. This does not include union or paid on call fire pay plans. Implement pay plans for non union exempt and non union non exempt at 100% of the 10 City average as shown by the study, resulting in a 4.6% increase to the pay plans with an implementation cost of $195,000. Adjustment could be phased in over the next year such as 2% 7/1/13 and 1.5% +COLA 1/1/14 and the final 1.1% on 7/1/14. Positions found to be more than 6% under the market average after plan adjustments are completed would be reviewed for potential reclassification. It is expected there will not be more than 8 of these with a total cost not to exceed $15,000. Adjust City Council pay to 100% of the market average. Implement an Ordinance to provide an annual COLA to City Council pay at the same percentage as provided to non union staff. 9