Loading...
2/24/2020 - Meeting MinutesPage 1 of 3 Minutes Meeting Citizens’ Compensation Advisory Committee February 24, 2020 Members Present: Frances Hume Marlene Sloan Jeff Worthington Jeff Herring Ray Schelble Mike Terry Brandon Dew Members Excused: Staff Present: David Salazar, City Compensation Administrator Carolyn Campbell, Benefits Program Manager Guests: Ben Luedtke, City Council Staff Jaysen Oldroyd, City Attorney’s Office Tony Allred, Firefighters Local 81 A recording of these proceedings is on file and available by request from the SLC- HR Department. Meeting Open & Welcome: Chair Frances Hume called the meeting to order and established a quorum, including all members of the committee, were present. Review and adopt February 20, 2020 meeting minutes: These minutes were not yet ready for presentation or review for the Committee, so this agenda item will be pushed to the next committee meeting. Public Comment: None. Discussion of topics and recommendations to be included in 2020 annual report: Frances began the meeting with a reminder to members about the Committee’s purpose and charge as outlined in city ordinance, which is to “[evaluate] the total compensation levels of the city's elected officials, executives and employees and making recommendations to the human resources department, mayor and the city council…” (City Code Title 2, Chapter 2.35.060). With that, Frances asked David Salazar to review a draft copy of the 2020 annual report by section for member input. David noted the format, layout, and recommendations included in the 2020 report closely mirror last year’s report as a starting point and will be updated based on Committee input. - (Section I) Corrections were made to ensure accuracy of the projected and actual salary budget figures shown in Charts 1 and 2 of this section. - (Section II) David noted the recruitment statistics and turnover statistics reported in this section were verified and are correct as shown. Brandon Dew suggested adding percentage increase/decrease along with recruitment statistics. - (Section III) As of the date of this meeting, still no update had been posted for the estimated Living Wage for Salt Lake County. (David committed to continuing to monitor and check for an update; if one is available before the report is finalized, David will add it.) - (Section IV) The committee established new pay guidelines, which incorporate data and information obtained analysis and a report issued by NFP to assess and evaluate the overall competitiveness of the city’s pay and benefits offerings compared to market. Benchmarks are now considered to be: Page 2 of 3 o Competitive when data indicates actual median employee pay rates plus the overall additional economic value of (public sector) benefits equals 100% compared to market; o Slightly leading (or lagging) when data indicates actual median employee pay rates plus the overall additional economic value of (public sector) benefits are +/- 6% to +/- 9.9% compared to market; and, finally, o Significantly leading (or lagging) when data indicates actual median employee pay rates plus the overall additional economic value of (public sector) benefits are +/- 10% or more compared to market. - (Section V) The Committee opted to note they reviewed three different surveys engaged by the city to compare wages and benefits paid to employees, including: a national survey was conducted by Mercer, including 42 AFSCME benchmark jobs; local area median pay information; and, results of a comprehensive benefits survey conducted by NFP. Furthermore, the committee recommended: o The mayor and city council place more weight on the local area survey comparisons, recognizing that the vast majority of individuals filling the selected jobs come from the local market. o The mayor and city council continue to conduct national market surveys every three to five years to keep ahead of possible changes or shifts in the source of qualified applicants. o Whether or not the mayor and city council make wage adjustments based on either the Local Salary Survey or Mercer, the committee recommends working with departments and unions to ensure lower level pay rates successfully attract candidates and retain employees with the skills needed, even for jobs with top out rates already above the median of the market. o Jeff Herring and Ray Schelble were asked to draft language highlighting the comparison between the Mercer national survey and local area market survey results. - (Section VII) The Committee discussed at great length proposed responses to the City Council to the Committee dated 2/7/2019. o Relative to the council’s question, “What scenarios does the committee recommend for compensation of public safety professionals compared to market?”, the Committee recommended the City maintain a relative pay position including actual median employee pay rates plus the overall additional economic value of (public sector) benefits between 105-120% compared to the local area market. o Relative to the council’s question, “What scenarios might raise compensation just above market rate to reflect hiring competition and retention challenges?” The Committee recommends continuing to conduct a national survey of wages once every three years enables the city to keep abreast of how pay for Salt Lake City’s public safety personnel, including Firefighters and Police Officers, compares to their counterparts in similar U.S. municipalities. Similarly, monitoring potential shifts in trends and tracking the source of applicants and candidates hired should also allow Salt Lake City to note if and when more weight should be given to national rather than local area market pay comparisons. o Relative to the council’s question, “What pros and cons does the committee see to adjusting the city’s compensation policy so that sworn public safety employees lead the market?” The Committee believes advantages to adhering to the compensation philosophy described in 1(a), above, will continue to allow the City to preserve its ability to successfully attract and retain qualified candidates and employees in positions critical for the city to ensure public safety. Disadvantages might include the need to hold wages and salaries for employees if and when pay rates exceed market comparison by 120%. o Marlene Sloan was asked to draft a response to council’s request for insight on balancing the value of and cost of retaining current employees (not just public safety) versus hiring and training new employees. o Finally, relative to the request for an assessment of the city’s long-standing salary practice of identifying no less than 95% of market as the preferred range for setting employee compensation and the city’s overall benefits offerings, the Committee aligned with the recommendation received in NFP’s benefit and compensation analysis and report, which is best practice is to review the city’s benefits with a maximum gap of 3-5 years. Furthermore, the Committee relied on the overall Page 3 of 3 assessment obtained from NFP’s benefits study report to determine the City’s benefits package is still sufficiently competitive in today’s market. - (Section VI) The Committee acknowledged past years assessments the City’s human resources staff have made to gauge internal pay equity based on gender and stressed the importance of continuing to do so going forward; however, they also recognize the need to also consider factors such as age and ethnicity. Considering the technical nature of such a task, the Committee expressed support for conducting a more comprehensive third-party audit and review of employee salaries to ensure that pay practices are equitable and not adversely impacting incumbents based on gender, age, and/or ethnicity. In addition to input received from committee members, Frances Hume also assigned various members to draft language intended to supplement sections of the report and appendices. Upon conclusion of the Committee’s review, Ray Schelble made a motion to approve the report in the form discussed by the Committee (including all proposed edits and supplemental written information to be provided by committee members), subject to review of a final electronic copy by all Committee members. The motion was seconded by Jeff Herring and approved unanimously by all members present. Unfinished business: None Confirmed meeting dates: - May 14, 2020, 4:00-5:00 PM - October 8, 2020, 4:00-5:00 PM Minutes approved at October 8, 2020 meeting.