Loading...
03-26-2024 WS City Council Agenda W O R K S E S S IO N R IC H F IE L D MU N IC IPAL C E N TE R, B AR TH O LO ME W R O O M AP R IL 9, 2024 6:00 P M C all to order 1.C onsider options to implement the B aker Tilly C ompensation and C lassification S tudy. A djournment Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. Requests must be made at least 96 hours in advance to the City Clerk at 612-861-9739. AGENDA SECTION:Work Session Items AGENDA ITEM #1. STAFF RE P ORT NO. 10 WORK SESSION 4/9/2024 RE P O RT P RE PA RE D B Y: S ack Thongvanh, A ssistant C ity Manager D E PA RTME NT D IRE C TO R RE V IE W: O THE R D E PA RTM E NT RE V IE W: J amie Haefner - HR K umud Verma - F inance K atie Rodriguez - E xecutive C ITY MA NA G E R RE V IE W: K atie Rodriguez, C ity Manager 4/4/2024 I T E M F O R WO RK S E S S IO N: Consider options to implement the Baker Tilly Compensation and Classification Study. E X E C UT IV E S UM M ARY: The compensation review process began last fall when staff completed the Position Analysis Questionnaires. Baker Tilly then collected compensation and benefit data from 11 peer cities, which was used by the consultant to recommend pay grades and a corresponding pay plan for each position. These recommendations underwent review by supervisors, department directors, and Human Resources. The questionnaires, market analysis and reviews did result in 35 positions being placed in higher grades. The overarching objective has been to place all positions in the appropriate pay grade based on job responsibilities and to align position pay ranges with market levels while establishing a consistent pay grade and step system to facilitate staff progression based on experience. Notably, all options being considered provide a greater increase for employees in lower pay grades compared to those at the higher end of the pay scale. Below are three options to implement the Baker Tilly findings, which staff have analyzed. Attached to this report are some examples of how various positions would be impacted by the different options under consideration. Option 1: This option brings all employees' salaries in line with market rates. Specifically, employees currently under the General Services Pay Plan would transition to the next highest step within their new pay grade. Most employees under the current Management Pay Plan would maintain their current wage until their anniversary under this option. Option 1 Plus: Option 1 Plus encompasses Option 1, with an additional provision of a 1% minimum increase for all staff under the General Pay Plan upon implementation. Specifically, this entails granting a 1% raise to 32 out of 40 staff in pay grades 13-21 who would otherwise receive a 0% increase. Additionally, 22 out of 87 staff in pay grades 6-12 would receive a lump sum payment to ensure their increase upon implementation reaches at least 1%, as their proposed increase under Option 1 is currently below this threshold. Option 2 (Years in Position): This option provides a 3% increase for each year in your current position, for up to 8 years in the General Pay Plan. After reviewing this option more carefully, it does not achieve the goal of better placing long-tenured staff at the appropriate starting salary. The vast majority of staff would still be placed as described above in Option 1. W hy? Because, due to C OLAs and merit increases over the past decade, most people with long tenure are already making more than they would if this scenario was to be implemented. This option benefits only 24 people in the General Pay Plan, and only half of those 24 employees have more than 2 years in their position. The City Manager sent a comprehensive email last week to all staff summarizing the proposed pay plans and implementation options. Staff then had time to submit comments to Human Resources. Three employees provided feedback which is summarized in the attached document. Staff can appeal their placement on the pay grades if they believe Baker Tilly made a mistake in assessing their questionnaire or if their job responsibilities have significantly changed since completing the questionnaire. Based on a thorough analysis of the options and alignment with City goals to recruit and retain a high-quality workforce, staff recommends Option 1 Plus for implementation. Since there is always some timing challenges and frustration in implementing a significant change to compensation, Option 1 Plus is the most fair transition since it provides a minimum of a 1% increase upon transition. Although it is more costly than Option 1, it is not a significant relative cost of maintaining competitive pay plans. We know we must be competitive and hope that our generous benefit package (which we believe is better than our peers’), and our strong culture will continue to recruit and retain excellent staff. D IRE C T I O N NE E D E D: Council should consider the three options presented and provide feedback on the staff recommendation to implement Option 1 Plus, including whether to present for approval at the April 23 City Council Meeting. B AC K G RO UND INF O RM AT I O N: A .H IS TOR IC AL C ON T E X T W hile the C ity has not conducted a comprehensive review of its entire compensation structure in over two decades, it has regularly conducted targeted market analyses for specific positions. Recent adjustments for liquor store associates and seasonal recreation staff demonstrate the C ity's responsiveness to evolving market conditions. In addition, negotiations with represented employees include compensation comparisons to peer cities which are then implemented via collective bargaining agreements. The C ity also regularly researches market comparisons when there is turnover in non-represented positions. B .E QU ITAB L E OR S T R AT E GIC C ON S ID E R AT ION S OR IMPAC T S T he compensation and class study plays an important role in ensuring that the City maintains competitiveness in the marketplace by aligning with the strategic priority for a high-quality workforce. T his study evaluates the compensation structure of positions within the organization to ensure that they are in line with industry standards and comparable to those offered by other peer employers in the market. The development of the proposed pay plan is based in S ystematic A nalysis and F actor E valuation (S A F E ) scores for each position. The S A F E scores provide a more objective and consistent method to evaluate how positions are assigned to pay grades. This ensures better pay equity and will allow the C ity a better system to use for future job evaluations so that pay equity is maintained. In sum, investing in a high-quality workforce through competitive and equitable compensation and classification practices is essential for the C ity to achieve its strategic priorities and deliver high-quality services to its residents. C .P OL IC IE S (resolutions, ordinances, regulations, statutes, exc): D .C R IT IC AL T IMIN G IS S U E S: If there are no significant concerns or changes following the A pril 9 discussion, the recommended P ay P lans and implementation plans will be presented for approval at the A pril 23 Regular C ity C ouncil Meeting. F ollowing approval, staff anticipate implementing changes in time for the May 5 to May 19 payroll, which will be paid on May 24. This schedule may change if there are unforeseen challenges in implementation. E .F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T: It is the historically tight labor market, especially for some positions like law enforcement, that is driving most of the projected financial impact. The upward wage pressure is also evident for our part-time and seasonal employees, and the lower pay grades in the General P lan. The average increase over the 3% C OL A for the S pecialized P lan is 4.2% compared to the General P lan at 1.6% for Option 1 and 2% for Options 1+ and 2. The dollar impact is less since we had already budgeted for some of these increases and the wages and hours are lower than for other groups. P lease note that we had already increased wages for L iquor store employees so this is an additional market adjustment. The proportional gains for lower paid staff is also evident in the General P ay P lan. S taff broke out the average increase in the General P ay P lan for grades 6-10 at 1.3%, versus a .9% increase for grades 11-22 for Option 1. The market adjustment for grades 11-22 increases to 1.3% for Option 1+ since it would provide a 1% increase to 32 higher level staff who will not receive anything upon implementation for Option 1. P resented below are the estimated costs of the 3 options which include P E RA and F IC A costs. Options Estimated Total Cost Over Budgeted Reserves Option 1 $766,000 $367,000 Option 1 P lus $801,000 $402,000 Option 2 (Years in P osition)$799,000 $400,000 A gain, the estimated cost to implement the new pay plans, including those being negotiated with our represented staff, is largely driven by the historic increase in average pay for law enforcement staff. We will recommend using P ublic S afety A id funding to close the gap in 2024 when those contracts are presented for approval. The levy impact for 2025 is expected to be 6-6.2% and this assumes a 3% C O L A . If we levied to cover the 40% fund balance reserve requirement it would be 8-8.2%. The impact on the levy for the following few years is estimated to be 7%. We are working with our financial advisors, E hlers, to refine these estimates as the next few years are complicated due to the decertification of tax increment finance (TIF ) districts which helps lessen the impact of levy increases on residents, the resulting loss in L ocal Government A id and the impact of the higher personnel costs. The review with E hlers will include the possibility of using the P ublic S afety A id funding to soften the impact of levy increases in the short-term, however it is a one-time source so we will need to cover the entire cost of the higher wages with the levy within the next few years. F.L E GAL C ON S ID E R AT ION: ALTE R N AT IV E(S): P R IN C IPAL PAR TIE S E X P E C TE D AT ME E TIN G: Sack Thongvanh, Assistant City Manager J amie Haefner, Human Resources Manager AT TAC H ME N T S: D escription Type P ay P lan_2024 (General)E xhibit P ay P lan_2024 (S pecialized)E xhibit P ay Grades_2024 (General)E xhibit P ay Grades_2024 (S pecialized)E xhibit C omp C lass Implementation S cenarios E xhibit S ummary of E mployee F eedback on C omp and C lass Options B ackup Material Pay Plan - General Minimum Midpoint Maximum 2.75%2.75%2.75%2.75%2.75%2.75%2.75%2.75%2.75%2.75% Grade 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1 $34,053.01 $34,989.46 $35,951.67 $36,940.34 $37,956.20 $39,000.00 $40,072.50 $41,174.49 $42,306.79 $43,470.23 $44,665.66 2 $36,436.72 $37,438.73 $38,468.29 $39,526.17 $40,613.14 $41,730.00 $42,877.58 $44,056.71 $45,268.27 $46,513.15 $47,792.26 3 $38,987.20 $40,059.35 $41,160.98 $42,292.91 $43,455.96 $44,651.00 $45,878.90 $47,140.57 $48,436.94 $49,768.95 $51,137.60 4 $41,716.68 $42,863.89 $44,042.64 $45,253.82 $46,498.30 $47,777.00 $49,090.87 $50,440.87 $51,827.99 $53,253.26 $54,717.72 5 $44,845.19 $46,078.43 $47,345.59 $48,647.59 $49,985.40 $51,360.00 $52,772.40 $54,223.64 $55,714.79 $57,246.95 $58,821.24 6 $48,208.58 $49,534.31 $50,896.51 $52,296.16 $53,734.31 $55,212.00 $56,730.33 $58,290.41 $59,893.40 $61,540.47 $63,232.83 7 $51,824.31 $53,249.48 $54,713.84 $56,218.47 $57,764.48 $59,353.00 $60,985.21 $62,662.30 $64,385.51 $66,156.12 $67,975.41 8 $55,710.72 $57,242.76 $58,816.94 $60,434.40 $62,096.35 $63,804.00 $65,558.61 $67,361.47 $69,213.91 $71,117.29 $73,073.02 9 $59,888.76 $61,535.70 $63,227.93 $64,966.70 $66,753.28 $68,589.00 $70,475.20 $72,413.27 $74,404.63 $76,450.76 $78,553.15 10 $64,380.26 $66,150.72 $67,969.87 $69,839.04 $71,759.61 $73,733.00 $75,760.66 $77,844.08 $79,984.79 $82,184.37 $84,444.44 11 $69,208.81 $71,112.05 $73,067.63 $75,076.99 $77,141.61 $79,263.00 $81,442.73 $83,682.41 $85,983.67 $88,348.22 $90,777.80 12 $74,399.71 $76,445.70 $78,547.95 $80,708.02 $82,927.49 $85,208.00 $87,551.22 $89,958.88 $92,432.75 $94,974.65 $97,586.45 13 $81,095.92 $92,877.00 $106,369.55 14 $88,394.62 $101,236.00 $115,942.89 15 $99,001.69 $113,384.00 $129,855.67 16 $107,912.23 $123,589.00 $141,543.19 17 $116,005.49 $132,858.00 $152,158.73 18 $121,805.86 $139,501.00 $159,766.78 19 $127,896.11 $146,476.00 $167,755.06 20 $134,291.09 $153,800.00 $176,143.04 21 $141,005.64 $161,490.00 $184,950.19 22 $148,056.36 $169,565.00 $194,198.27 City of Richfield, MN Pay Plan - Specialized Minimum Midpoint Maximum 2.75%2.75%2.75%2.75% Grade 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 101 $29,783.39 $30,602.43 $31,444.00 $32,308.71 $33,197.20 $14.32 $14.71 $15.12 $15.53 $15.96 102 $32,016.86 $32,897.32 $33,802.00 $34,731.56 $35,686.67 $15.39 $15.82 $16.25 $16.70 $17.16 103 $34,417.98 $35,364.48 $36,337.00 $37,336.27 $38,363.01 $16.55 $17.00 $17.47 $17.95 $18.44 104 $36,999.07 $38,016.55 $39,062.00 $40,136.21 $41,239.95 $17.79 $18.28 $18.78 $19.30 $19.83 105 $39,774.33 $40,868.13 $41,992.00 $43,146.78 $44,333.32 $19.12 $19.65 $20.19 $20.74 $21.31 City of Richfield, MN Department Division Title Proposed Title Grade EXECUTIVE City Manager CITY MANAGER 22 POLICE Police Operations PUBLIC SAFETY DIRECTOR 21 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Administration ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER 20 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Community Development COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR 20 FINANCE Finance FINANCE DIRECTOR 20 FIRE Fire FIRE SERVICES DIRECTOR 20 PUBLIC WORKS Public Works Admin PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR 20 RECREATION Recreation RECREATION SERVICES DIRECTOR 20 POLICE Police Operations DEPUTY PUBLIC SAFETY DIRECTOR 18 PUBLIC WORKS Street DEPUTY PW DIRECTOR 18 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Human Resources HUMAN RESOURCES MANAGER 17 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Community Development HOUSING/REDEVELOPMENT MANAGER/ ASSISTANT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR ASSISTANT CD DIRECTOR 17 FIRE Fire ASST FIRE CHIEF 17 PUBLIC WORKS Engineering CITY ENGINEER 17 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Building Services GOVERNMENT BLDGS SUPERINTENDNT 16 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Information Technology IT MANAGER 16 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Liquor Operations LIQUOR OPERATIONS MANAGER 16 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Community Development CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL 16 PUBLIC WORKS Water UTILITY SUPERINTENDENT 16 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Communication COMMUNICATIONS MANAGER 15 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Community Development CITY PLANNER 15 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Community Development ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MANAGER 15 FINANCE Finance ASSISTANT FINANCE DIRECTOR 15 PUBLIC WORKS Engineering TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER 15 PUBLIC WORKS Water ASSISTANT UTILITIES SUPERINTD 15 RECREATION Recreation FACILITY/PROGRAM MANAGER - POOL/ARENA 15 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES City Clerk CITY CLERK 14 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Information Technology ASST IT MANAGER/BUS ANALYST 14 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT HRA MULTI FAMILY HOUSING PRGM ADMN 14 FINANCE Finance PAYROLL ACCOUNTANT 14 POLICE Support Services SUPPORT SERVICES SUPERVISOR 14 PUBLIC WORKS Central Garage OPERATIONS SUPERVISOR 14 PUBLIC WORKS Engineering PROJECT ENGINEER 14 PUBLIC WORKS Water UTILITIES SUPERVISOR 14 2024 Proposed Pay Grades GENERAL PAY GRADE 2024 Proposed Pay Grades GENERAL PAY GRADE RECREATION Recreation FACILITY/PROGRAM MANAGER 14 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Community Development SENIOR BUILDING TRADE INSPECTOR 13 EXECUTIVE/PUBLIC WORKS City Manager/PW Admin MANAGEMENT ANALYST SENIOR ANALYST 13 PUBLIC WORKS Engineering CIVIL ENGINEER 13 PUBLIC WORKS Water WATER RESOURCE ENGINEER 13 RECREATION Recreation RECREATION SUPERVISOR - FACILITIES 13 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Deputy Registrar MOTOR VEHICLE/LIC SUPERVISOR 12 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Information Technology/Police Operations IT TECHNICIAN II 12 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Liquor Operations LIQUOR STORE MANAGER 12 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Community Development PLANNER II 12 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Community Development BUILDING/TRADE INSPECTOR 12 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Community Development MECHANICAL/PLUMBING INSPECTOR 12 EXECUTIVE City Manager EQUITY COORDINATOR 12 POLICE Police Operations RECORDS SUPERVISOR 12 POLICE/RECREATION Police Operations/Recreation EXECUTIVE AIDE/ANALYST ANALYST 12 PUBLIC WORKS Public Works Admin GIS COORDINATOR 12 RECREATION Recreation RECREATION SUPERVISOR 12 RECREATION Recreation SUSTAINABILITY SPECIALIST 12 RECREATION Wood Lake Nature Center NATURALIST 12 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Human Resources HUMAN RESOURCES SPECIALIST 11 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Information Technology IT TECHNICIAN I/HELP DESK 11 CD/FINANCE CD(HRA)/Finance CD ACCOUNTANT ACCOUNTANT 11 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Community Development HOUSING SPECIALIST 11 POLICE Support Services CODE COMPLIANCE OFFICER 11 PUBLIC WORKS Engineering ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN 11 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Communication COMMUNICATIONS SPECIALIST 10 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Community Development PLANNER I 10 POLICE Police Operations CRIME PREVENTION SPECIALIST 10 POLICE Police Operations POLICE DATA & MEDIA SPECIALIST 10 POLICE Police Operations RECORDS TECHNICIAN 10 PUBLIC WORKS Engineering ENGINEERING ASSISTANT 10 PUBLIC WORKS Street FORESTER 10 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Deputy Registrar LEAD LICENSING CLERK LEAD LICENSING TECHNICIAN 9 CD/EXECUTIVE CD/City Manager/Fire ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT 9 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Community Development ASSISTANT PLANNER PLANNING TECHNICIAN 9 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Community Development PERMIT TECHNICIAN 9 POLICE Support Services HEALTH/LICENSING SPECIALIST 9 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Deputy Registrar LICENSING CLERK LICENSING TECHNICIAN 8 2024 Proposed Pay Grades GENERAL PAY GRADE CD/Rec/WLNC/PW CD/Rec/WLNC/PW SENIOR OFFICE ASST 8 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Community Development HOUSING INSPECTIONS CLERK HOUSING INSPECTIONS TECHNICIAN 8 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT HRA MULTI FAMILY HOUSING ASST 8 FINANCE Finance ACCOUNTING CLERK ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN 8 FINANCE Finance UTILITY BILLING CLERK UTILITY BILLING TECHNICIAN 8 POLICE Police Operations SENIOR OFFICE ASST 8 POLICE Support Services COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICER 8 POLICE Support Services LICENSING CLERK BUSINESS LICENSING TECHNICIAN 8 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Liquor Operations LIQUOR OPERATIONS SHIFT LEADER 7 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT HRA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TECH 7 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Building Services CUSTODIAN - PT 6 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Deputy Registrar CITY SERVICES RECEPTIONIST - PT 6 Department Division Title Proposed Title Grade RECREATION Swimming Pool POOL SUPERVISOR 105 RECREATION Recreation PLAYGROUND COORDINATOR 105 RECREATION Recreation ADAPTIVE COORDINATOR 105 RECREATION Recreation FARMERS MARKET COORDINATOR 105 RECREATION Recreation TENNIS COORDINATOR 105 RECREATION Ice Arena ICE RESURFACER OPERATOR 104 RECREATION Swimming Pool HEAD LIFEGUARD 104 RECREATION Wood Lake Nature Center NATURALIST I SEASONAL NATURALIST 104 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Communication VIDEO PRODUCTION ASSISTANT 103 RECREATION Ice Arena AUDIO TECHNICIAN 103 RECREATION Wood Lake Nature Center CLERK TYPIST OFFICE ASSISTANT 103 RECREATION Wood Lake Nature Center OFFICE AIDE OFFICE ASSISTANT 103 PUBLIC WORKS Park Maintenance MAINTENANCE LABORER 103 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Liquor Operations LIQUOR SALES ASSOCIATE 103 RECREATION Recreation FARMERS MARKET CASHIER 103 RECREATION Recreation RECREATION ATTENDANT 103 RECREATION Recreation ADAPTIVE LEADER/SPECIALIST 103 RECREATION Swimming Pool LIFEGUARD 103 RECREATION Recreation PLAYGROUND LEADER 102 RECREATION Ice Arena ARENA EVENT ATTENDANT 102 RECREATION Recreation CONCESSION I 102 RECREATION Recreation INCLUSION FACILITATOR 102 RECREATION Swimming Pool POOL LEAD CASHIER/CONCESSION 102 RECREATION Recreation WINTER SPORTS ATTENDANT 102 RECREATION Ice Arena FACILITY CASHIER 101 2024 Proposed Pay Grades SPECIALIZED PAY GRADE Comp Class Implementa�on Scenarios Posi�on Examples Current Op�on 1 Op�on 1+ YIP EXAMPLE 1 Part-�me employee now at SP7-NE in the Specialized Pay Plan with 8 years in the posi�on. Moves to Pay Grade 103 Step 5 in the Specialized Pay Plan. $18.00/HR $18.44/HR $18.44/HR $18.44/HR EXAMPLE 2 Part-�me employee now at GS2 Step 3 in the General Services Pay Plan with 1 year in the posi�on. Moves to Pay Grade 8 and starts at Step 1 since currently below the Grade 8 range. $25.77/HR $26.78/HR $26.78/HR $26.78/HR EXAMPLE 3 Employee now at GS4 Step 6 in the General Services Pay Plan with 9 years in the posi�on (currently at max). Moves to Pay Grade 9 at Step 10. Op�on 1+: Would get a lump sum payment of $105.34 to bring up to a 1% increase when implemented and move to next step at their next anniversary date. $75,795.20 $76,450.76 Op�on 1 + lump payment of $105.34 $76,450.76 EXAMPLE 4 Employee now at GS6E at Step 2 in the General Services Pay Plan with 1 year in the posi�on. Moves to Pay Grade 12 at Step 7. $85,404.80 $87,551.22 $87,551.22 $87,551.22 EXAMPLE 5 Employee now at M-3 in the Management Pay Plan with 8 years in the posi�on. Moves to Pay Grade 16. $133,021.62 $133,021.62 $134,351.84 $133,811.17 Summary of Employee Feedback On March 29th, staff were provided details on the options being presented for implementation of our compensation and classification study. With that communication, they were also encouraged to provide any comments on any of the options under consideration. Three employees emailed feedback directly to Human Resources and are summarized below: • Some staff feel retention is an issue at the City and that higher pay would likely help resolve this issue, staff also shared while they appreciate our benefit offerings they would prefer higher pay over rich benefits. • Some individuals expressed we could not properly compare their position to other cities properly as they believe they have many unique nuances in their job responsibilities that other cities positions do not have. • There was concern over not considering “years in position” because individuals believe they would be placed higher in the new steps using this scenario versus the other two options. • All other employee feedback involved explaining in more detail how each option would affect them individually with no specific opinions.