01/09/2024 - Meeting Minutes
Minutes Meeting
Citizens’ Compensation Advisory Committee
January 9, 2024
Members Present: Brandon Dew (Chair)
Jeff Worthington
Casey Lund
J. Clair Baldwin
Mike Terry
Members Excused:
Staff Present: David Salazar, Compensation Manager
Michael Jenson, Senior Compensation Analyst
Lori Gaitin, Benefits Program Manager
Penny Lopez, Human Resources Technician
Aubrey Garduno, Human Resources Business Partner
David Lee, Human Resources Business Partner
Guests: Zac Jeppson, Firefighters’ Local 81 (IAFF)
Dean Mellott, AFSCME Representative
A recording of these proceedings is on file and available by request from the SLC- HR
department.
Meeting Open & Welcome: Chair Brandon Dew called the meeting to order and established a
full quorum of members present.
New committee member introduction: Brandon Dew introduced J. Clair Baldwin.
• Clair Baldwin introduced himself as a retired Salt Lake City firefighter with 34 years of
experience. He expressed enthusiasm for the opportunity to contribute as a committee
member.
Brandon acknowledged and thanked Mike Terry for his service as the previous term as
committee chair and complimented the work and efforts of the Human Resources staff who
support the committee.
Review & adopt October 3, 2023, meeting minutes: Casey Lund motioned to approve the
minutes of the meeting held October 3, 2023; Mike Terry second the motion. The minutes were
unanimously approved by the members present.
Public Comment: None
Review of 2023-24 labor market, economic, and related salary budget forecast reports, and
information – David Salazar
David presented 2023-24 salary budget forecasts and results as reported in the Worldspan
article, “Inflation, Labor Market Drive Merit Pay Increases for 2024” dated 12/22/2023. Results
come from surveys conducted by global compensation consulting firms including WorldatWork,
Mercer, and Willis Towers Watson. Highlights from each of these firms included the following:
• WorldatWork’s 50th Annual Salary Budget Survey for 2023-2024
o U.S employers forecast raising their total salary budgets between 3.8% and 4.1%
for 2024.
o Among 2,146 participating organizations, WorldatWork found U.S. employers
are projecting 4.1% pay increase budgets in 2024 and 3.6% merit increases on
average.
o Projecting a salary budget increase of 4.0% for all employee types (e.g. non-
exempt, exempt, executive), region (i.e. Western states), and Utah is 2024. Of
note, a slightly higher increase equal to 5.0% is projected on the whole by public
sector employers.
o Salary structure (or range) adjustments are forecast to be lower, including an
increase by 3.0% only by WorldatWork and Mercer.
• Mercer’s U.S. Compensation Planning Survey, November 2023 edition
o U.S. employers forecast raising their merit increase budgets by 3.5% and total
salary increase budgets by 3.8% for 2024.
• Willis Towers Watson (WTW)’s Salary Budget Planning Survey
o Reports U.S. employers surveyed are projecting an overall 4.0% pay increase
budget for 2024.
Next, David summarized economic indicators for Utah and the United States included in a report
issued by the Utah Department of Workforce Services (DWS). The statistics shared reflect the
department’s latest quarterly forecast as of October 2023.
• David noted the trend in actual, estimated, and forecasted increases for U.S. and Utah
average wages is decreasing slightly over time as inflation and labor market pressure
begin to cool down. Specific indicators for the years including 2022-2024 are reported as
follows:
U.S. Average Annual Pay
o 2022 actual - 3.3%
o 2023 estimated - 4.0%
o 2024 forecast - 4.1%
Utah Average Annual Pay
o 2022 actual – 6.1%
o 2023 estimated – 4.5%
o 2024 forecast – 3.5%
Finally, David referred committee members to a Department of Workforce Services' blog, titled
“The Utah Job Demand Buffer” (dated December 26, 2023), which focuses on the overall impact
rising interest rates, inflation, and a tight labor market had on Utah’s labor market and local
economy.
While this blog reports Utah’s growth numbers look good, Utah continues to be affected by
labor shortages leading to an elevation in wages. David referred to the following graphic
included in the blog, which shows despite significant decreases in demand for labor in fields
including professional, scientific, and technical services; transportation and warehousing;
manufacturing; and, retail trade, the demand for labor (as reflected in unique job postings)
among public sector employers increased by 11.6% from September 2022 – August 2023.
Referring to the previously mentioned Worldspan article, David noted most experts agree the
economic trends are calming and inflation is slowly trending downward. Cost of labor rather
than inflation continues to the primary factor among U.S. employers when setting salary
budgets and driving pay increases (especially among lower wage workers).
Presentation & review of results of 2023-2024 Elected Officials, Department Directors & Other
Key City Leaders Salary Survey
David Salazar noted it has been some time since the city last conducted a special survey to
assess pay for elected officials, department heads and other key city leaders. The last time the
Committee evaluated pay for this group was back in 2016. With input from participating cities
we were regularly surveying it was determined that we didn’t need to conduct the survey every
year, but rather every three to four years. The timing of this survey being conducted this year, is
to be able to share applicable salary data with any incoming administration.
Michael Jenson reported on the survey methodology and results, as follows:
• Participants
o 92 entities surveyed
o 32 participants (35% response rate)
▪ Incentives for participation included limited the number of jobs
surveyed so it isn’t as cumbersome and also providing complimentary
summary of findings for all participants.
• Requested Data
o For each matching job we gathered their title, incumbent years of service, actual
wage.
▪ For elected officials we gathered whether Full Time or Part Time for
similar types of government structure.
• Methodology
o Minimum of five participants in order to draw any type of conclusion
▪ Of the 40 jobs surveyed, only one had an insufficient number of
responses where no conclusion could be made.
o Normalize the wage information to Salt Lake City, utilizing a Geographical
Factoring as provided by the Economic Research Institute (ERI).
o Compared Salt Lake City’s actual wage for the given job against the normalized
median of participants
▪ Other data elements gathered/calculated can help frame the final
results.
• Average years of service, actual low, actual high, and average.
• Summary Findings
o As highlighted in the summary table and following the Committee’s prior year
guidelines for determining competitive position relative to the market, we can
see of the 40 jobs surveyed there are 13 jobs which would be considered lagging
the market when looking solely at actual wage.
▪ 5 jobs significantly lagging (Less than or equal to 90% of market)
▪ 8 jobs slightly lagging (Between 90.1% and 98% of market)
▪ 15 jobs competitive (Between 98.1% and 109.9% of market)
▪ 11 jobs significantly leading the market (Greater than or equal to 110%
of market)
• Discussion
o David Salazar pointed out that there are nuances that exist when determining
recommendations/action to take. An example being that these jobs being
surveyed are typically the top-level jobs. Specifically, the Director of
Transportation at SLC is a division director while in the market it may be the
department head. As the results indicate we are significantly lagging the market,
it doesn’t necessarily mean a drastic change needs to be made such that the
division director ends up being paid more than the department head here at the
City. These results should be used as a guide while taking into account these
types of nuances.
Clair Baldwin asked to have shared with the committee the list of cities who participated in the
survey to ensure an appropriate scope was surveyed/included.
Presentation on results of 2024 local area benchmark market pay analysis – Michael
As has been done in prior years, the local area benchmark market analysis is broken down into
three separate groups based on the comparison methodology and subsequent market position
following the Committee’s established guidelines.
AFSCME Summary – This group comprises jobs that are part of the American Federation of
State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME). These jobs comprise Crafts/Trades,
Clerical/Administrative, and Paraprofessionals and make up about one-third of the City’s
workforce. In this breakout the evaluation is based on Salt Lake City’s top rate, of the job’s
negotiated wage schedule, compared to the market’s fiftieth percentile/median wage.
Below is the breakout summary following the Committee’s established guidelines and a look at
how it compares to the previous year’s summary:
• Current Year Summary
o 2 Jobs Significantly Lagging (Less than or equal to 90% of market)
o 6 Jobs Slightly Lagging (Between 90.1% and 98% of market)
o 18 Jobs Competitive (Between 98.1% and 109.9% of market)
o 10 Jobs Significantly Leading (Greater than or equal to 110% of market)
• Prior Year Summary
o 0 Jobs Significantly Lagging (Less than or equal to 90% of market)
o 5 Jobs Slightly Lagging (Between 90.1% and 98% of market)
o 19 Jobs Competitive (Between 98.1% and 109.9% of market)
o 10 Jobs Significantly Leading (Greater than or equal to 110% of market)
Public Safety Summary - This group comprises Police, Fire, and Public Safety Dispatchers. While
Public Safety Dispatchers are technically part of the AFSCME union, the methodology used for
comparison against the market is the same as is used for Police and Fire. That methodology is to
compare Salt Lake City’s top rate, of the job’s negotiated wage schedule, compared to the
market median top rate taken from selected entities that were determined to be Salt Lake City’s
targeted competitors.
Below is the breakout summary following the Committee’s established guidelines and a look at
how it compares to the previous year’s summary:
• Current Year Summary
o 0 Jobs Significantly Lagging (Less than or equal to 90% of market)
o 2 Jobs Slightly Lagging (Between 90.1% and 98% of market)
o 8 Jobs Competitive (Between 98.1% and 109.9% of market)
o 0 Jobs Significantly Leading (Greater than or equal to 110% of market)
• Prior Year Summary
o 0 Jobs Significantly Lagging (Less than or equal to 90% of market)
o 3 Jobs Slightly Lagging (Between 90.1% and 98% of market)
o 7 Jobs Competitive (Between 98.1% and 109.9% of market)
o 0 Jobs Significantly Leading (Greater than or equal to 110% of market)
The following is a breakdown of the entities selected as the “Competitors” for Public Safety jobs:
Fire Competitors:
o Ogden
o Park City Fire Department
o Unified Fire Authority
o West Valley
Police Public Safety Dispatcher Competitors:
o Ogden
o State of Utah
o Unified Police Department
o West Valley
Non-Represented – This group incorporates all remaining jobs at the City that do not fall into
AFSCME or Public Safety. These jobs’ market position is determined by comparing the City’s
median wage against the market’s median wage. For select instances where the City’s job is
currently vacant, the compensation grade midpoint is used in lieu of the actual median wage.
Below is the breakout summary following the Committee’s established guidelines and a look at
how it compares to the previous year’s summary:
• Current Year Summary
o 2 Jobs Significantly Lagging (Less than or equal to 90% of market)
o 15 Jobs Slightly Lagging (Between 90.1% and 98% of market)
o 16 Jobs Competitive (Between 98.1% and 109.9% of market)
o 10 Jobs Significantly Leading (Greater than or equal to 110% of market)
• Prior Year Summary
o 8 Jobs Significantly Lagging (Less than or equal to 90% of market)
o 7 Jobs Slightly Lagging (Between 90.1% and 98% of market)
o 14 Jobs Competitive (Between 98.1% and 109.9% of market)
o 11 Jobs Significantly Leading (Greater than or equal to 110% of market)
An additional step taken this year, as part of our overall evaluation, was that we did a year-over-
year review. This review looked at the difference in market position and extra scrutiny was
placed on jobs whose market position differed from the prior year by five percent or more. In
these instances, further research was performed to try to understand why and whether we are
able to explain why. Specific examples of this evaluation and steps taken were reviewed.
Confirmed next meeting date:
❖ Tuesday, January 23, 2024, 3:30 PM - 5:00 PM
Unfinished business: None
The meeting was adjourned at approximately 5:00 PM.