Loading...
01/23/2024 - Meeting Minutes Minutes Meeting Citizens’ Compensation Advisory Committee January 23, 2024 Members Present: Brandon Dew (Chair) Jeff Herring Jana Bake J. Clair Baldwin Mike Terry Members Excused: Casey Lund Staff Present: David Salazar, Compensation Manager Michael Jenson, Senior Compensation Analyst Penny Lopez, Human Resources Technician Guests: Harrison Long, Fireflghters’ Local 81 (IAFF) A recording of these proceedings is on flle 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. Review & adopt January 9, 2024, meeting minutes: Casey Lund motioned to approve the minutes of the meeting held October 3, 2023; Mike Terry second the motion. Members Jana Bake and Jeff Herring both abstained since neither was present for the October 3 meeting. The minutes were approved by all the other members present. Public Comment: Harrison Long, speaking on behalf of the Fireflghters (IAFF) Local 81, asked for clariflcation on the city’s compensation philosophy. He noted there’s been debate about whether language in the MOU signed with the city stipulates compensation for Fireflghters should be based on a comparison of “top of median” or “top of market” in the state of Utah. June 7, 2021, the city deflned its compensation philosophy as top of market for the State of Utah and was quantifled in the MOU signed by the city. Since adoption of the Fireflghter’s MOU on June 7, 2021, Harrison stated flreflghters’ pay has fallen behind the market by most metrics and is currently at or below the market and near bottom of market in the State of Utah. Citing language included in the city council’s resolution 20 passed on June 13, 2023, Harrison noted the question about whether the city intends to provide compensation at or near the top of market remains unclear. As a flnal question, Harrison asked the Committee to consider reasoning why the city is conducting national pay comparisons for the mayor and others when pay comparisons for Fireflghters are made locally or regionally. Asked by Chair Brandon Dew what if any response the Committee should provide, David Salazar explained the Committee may at its discretion consider the Fireflghters’ union statement when formulating recommendations in their annual report. Jeff Herring stated he believes that as an advisory committee, members cannot state the city’s position on Resolution #20 but can provide the Committee’s own recommended position in this year’s annual report. Clair Baldwin pointed to language in the city council’s Resolution #20, which includes speciflc mention that compensation should be at “top of market for the state of Utah” and no indication of a comparison based on market median. He contends reference to t he top of market for the state of Utah expands beyond the four agencies used in the comparison given to the Committee to consider. Clair suggested the Committee provide a recommendation which is in concert with the resolution, then added the Committee’s aim is to promote content employees while also looking at data . Brandon Dew concurred and thanked Local 81’s Harrison Long for coming forward and bringing this matter to the Committee’s attention. Review of 2023 public safety recruitment statistics and employee turnover - David Salazar David Salazar reported the following recruitment statistics and employee turnover information obtained for Police Officers and Fireflghters in the 2023 calendar year. 2023 SLCPD SWORN PUBLIC SAFETY TURNOVER DATA FIRE 2023 TOTAL SLCFD SWORN EMPLOYEES VOLUNTARY INVOLUNTARY 331 22 5 TOTAL SWORN TURNOVER % 6.65% 1.51% Voluntary Turnover includes : 12 Resignations • 1 Fireflghter – Hazardous Materials Technician II • 1 Fireflghter/Paramedic I • 1 Fireflghter/Paramedic II • 3 Fireflghter/Paramedic III’s • 6 Fireflghter I’s 10 Retirements • 2 Battalion Chief’s • 1 Fire Captain • 1 Deputy Chief • 3 Fireflghter/Paramedic III • 3 Fireflghter Engineer III Involuntary Turnover Includes: 5 Probationary Releases • 5 Fireflghter I’s 25 Firefighter New Hires in 2023 • 1 Rehire o 1 With less than 1 year of experience 24 New hires with no experience 1 Firefighter Paramedic New Hire in 2023 1 with 8+ years of experience 2023 SLC PD SWORN PUBLIC SAFETY TURNOVER DATA POLICE 2023 Total SLCPD Sworn Employees Voluntary Involuntary 564 33 9 TOTAL SWORN TURNOVER % 5.85 % 1.60% Voluntary Turnover includes: 27 Resignations • 1 Police Lieutenant • 1 Police Sergeant • 25 Police Officer 6 Retirements • 0 Deputy Chief • 0 Police Captains • 1 Police Lieutenants • 1 Police Sergeant • 4 Police Officers Involuntary Turnover includes: 7 Probationary Releases • 7 Police Officers 2 Dismissals • 2 Police Officers 56 Total Hires in 20 23: • 8 Lateral (experienced LEO) Officer New Hires o Former agency listed below: • 2 came from Utah Highway Patrol • 1 came from Drug Enforcement Administration • 1 came from South Jordan Police Department • 1 came from Lone Peak Police Department • 1 came from Gwinnett County Police Department • 1 came from Granite School District Police Department • 1 came from Unified Police Department o Number of years in law enforcement when hired by SLCPD : • 2 laterals had less than 2 years of experience • 6 laterals more than 5 years of experience • 41 Entry Level Police Officer New Hires o 1 new hire moved from California o 1 new hire moved from Idaho o 1 new hire moved from South Carolina • 2 POST-Certified Entry Level Police Officer New Hires • 1 Deputy Chief o Former agency: Summit County Sheriff’s o Number of years in law enforcement when hired by SLCPD : More than 15 years • 4 Rehire Police Officer: o 2 came back after being gone for more than 1 year o 2 came back after being gone for less than 1 year Location Statistics Of the 830 candidates who submitted applications for the police officer position : • 692 (83%) were from Utah • 138 (17%) were from out of state o We received applications from 38 states and 4 countries (other than the USA). o The states we received the highest number of applicants from (excluding Utah) were California (20), Texas (14), Idaho (10), Nevada (9), and Florida (9). David explained the intent for providing this information historically has been to inform the Committee and demonstrate where the largest number of applicants and new hires come from . This data shows applicants and new hires continue to come predominantly from the local area and throughout the state of Utah. Committee discussion of topics and/or recommendations to be included in the Committee’s 2024 annual report (Local area market pay comparison ) David highlighted and summarized key sections and information included in last year’s report. For consistency, Brandon Dew recommended the Committee mirror the format of the 2023 Annual Report when drafting the Committee’s Annual Report for 2024. Clair Baldwin asked if committee members were concerned with the city’s pay practices, or more speciflcally how employee pay is administered for non-represented employees who are slotted into jobs with open salary ranges. During his tenure with the city, he noted concern about potential employee discontent with published salary range maximums perceived as being unat tainable. David clarifled the city’s pay practices have been updated and changed in recent year s primarily to ensure employee pay stays competitive. Following recommendations received from the compensation consulting flrm NFP, the city adopted a new compensation philosophy to ensure pay ranges remain no less than two percent below market. Michael Jenson presented and outlined the speciflc pay guidelines and process established by the city’s Human Resources department to speciflcally counter this concern. Since granti ng authorization to department heads to advance non-represented employee pay up to 15% above midpoint, the city has seen a gradual shift and overall improvement in competitive pay for non-represented employees. To address concerns about past range adjustment practices that adversely impact overall range penetration, David suggested the Committee consider framing a recommendation based on results reported in WorldatWork’s 2023-24 salary budget survey report, which forecasts a 2.6% average and 3% median adjustment to range structures compared to a 3.8% general increase and 4.1% merit pay increase for employees. For this year’s report, David suggested formatting Section One of the annual report to include 2023 - 24 to include information similar to last year’s report on salary budget forecasts, along with the latest labor and economic trends presented in the Committee’s flrst winter meeting. Section Two of annual report will be updated to refiect the latest market pay analysis for benchmark jobs. Relative to the special survey and data collected from other U.S. cities to compare pay for elected officials, department heads and other key city leaders, Brandon recommended reporting and highlighting results of this special survey in a separate section in the annual report. Michael Jenson reviewed the format of last year’s market pay analysis reported for each of the city’s core employee groups including: • AFSCME • Public Safety (including Fireflghters, Police Officers, and Public Safety Dispatcher) • Non-Represented Employees Similar to last year, a summary of the results for each workgroup will sort and report jobs as either lagging, competitive, or leading relative to the market. Lagging benchmarks will be distinguished as those jobs where the city’s comparative pay information is more than two percent less than market. Relative to the comparative market data shown for Fireflghters, Clair Baldwin asked whether the Committee’s recommendation should follow last year’s approach to evaluating Fireflghter and Police Office pay or be based on the top of market criteria outlined in the city council’s Resolution #20 (of 2023). David Salazar clarifled the language in the resolution more speciflcally states, “…the City’s flreflghters and police officers are paid wages commensurate with or close to top of the market wages paid by public entities for such occupations in the State of Utah, especially among the State’s largest public safety agencies.” Based on the city council’s intent, Clair expressed concern with the group of cities used in the current pay comparison among Fireflghters because they don’t include the top paying agencies , including those in neighboring cities such as South Salt Lake, who pays $97,000 to their Fireflghters. David suggested the Committee rely on a pay analysis and ultimately make a recommendation that refiects the intent of the city council resolution. He explained further that market pay comparisons for all union jobs, including AFSCME, Fireflghters and Police Officers are based on a top pay comparison since the city’s MOU’s for union employees guarantees they will progress to the top pay step of their respective range. In addition to wanting to ensure consideration is given to a true “top pay” comparison (not the 50 th percentile, or median), Clair also expressed concern with accuracy of the pay information reported for competing flre agencies used in the current pay comparison. David responded affirming the pay information reported for each entity was collected directly from the HR staff from each competing agency. David reassured the Committee he and Michael Jenson would review and validate the pay information reported for each agency to ensure it is correct and accurate, especially as compared to the pay data collected by Clair. Clair Baldwin motioned the Committee compare top pay including the following surrounding agencies: • Park City • South Davis • South Salt Lake • Unifled Fire Authority • West Valley Brandon Dew asked for clariflcation on Clair’s motion. Brandon expressed concern with narrowing the scope and limiting the Committee’s comparison to surrounding city agencies; he has greater concern with accuracy of the pay data is it isn’t correct. Jeff Herring echoed Brandon’s concern with accuracy of the data. Brandon stressed the importance of ensuring an accurate comparison for both flreflghters and police officers. The Committee reviewed a similar pay comparison compiled for Police Officers compared to the largest police agencies in the state. David noted the mix of entities is different than those included in the Fireflghters pay comparison. The Committee reviewed language in the city council’s resolution trying to make sense of the references to “top pay” and emphasis on comparison to the state’s largest agencies. Brandon noted there was no second to t he motion made by Clair, so the motion did not pass. Unflnished Business – None Meeting adjourned at 5:10 p.m.