HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.b. Non-Union Wage Adjustments for 2007AGENDA ITEM: Non -Union Wage Adjustments for 2007
AGENDA SECTION:
Discussion
PREPARED BY: Jamie Verbrugge, City Administrator
Emmy Foster, Assistant City
Administrator
AGENDA NO. 2B
ATTACHMENTS: None
APPROVED BY: -c
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Give staff direction on non -union wage adjustments for 2007.
4 ROSEMOUNT
CITY COUNCIL
City Council Work Session: December 13, 2006
ISSUE
Discussion of Non Union Position Salary Ranges for 2007.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
BACKGROUND
The City of Rosemount follows a compensation structure that consists of six steps (common practice of
other municipalities). Depending on level of experience, new employees typically begun at a lower step.
Employees with satisfactory work performance progress through the pay range until the top step is
achieved. Once at the top step, employees typically receive cost of living increases thereafter. It has only
been m tunes of budget cnsis when a few cities have not given cost of living increases.
Regular, full -tune employees fall into one of five groups. LELS Union (police patrol), LELS Supervisory
Umon (police sergeants), Teamsters Umon (public works), AFSCME Umon (general services) or non-
union employees (supervisory or confidential positions).
Pay recommendations are typically based on three factors: pay equity compliance, comparability with
other Stanton VI cities (population 10,000 25,000), and market rate adjustment.
Prior to negotiators of the most recent union agreements, staff and Council discussed a compensation
philosophy that would gradually move the City's compensation schedule toward the upper tier of Stanton
VI cities and eventually toward comparability with lower tier Stanton V cores This approach is in
recognition that Rosemount will be moving into Stanton V in the next several years.
LELS received a 3% increase for January 1, with an additional .5% on July 1 LELS Supervisors requested
a slightly different adjustment of 2% on January 1 plus 2% on July 1. The effect of the Supervisors
approach meant fewer actual dollars but a slightly higher finishing hourly rate at the end of 2007. The net
effect is consistent with the Council Administration target.
Union Group
January 1, 2007 Settlement July 1, 2007 Settlement
LELS
3
.5
LELS Supervisory
2
2
Teamsters
2
1
AFSCME
2
1
For reasons related to other negotiated issues, AFSCME and Teamsters settled for increases of 2%
effective January 1, plus 1% on July 1. The table below shows what all union groups ultimately settled on:
City staff has budgeted the same amount for non -union employees as was agreed to by LELS 3%
effective on January 1 and .5% effective on July 1.
SUMMARY
The proposed non -union adjustments are consistent with the settled agreements with LELS and LELS
Supervisors, as well as being consistent with the agreed upon compensation philosophy that slowly and
gradually moves the City toward comparability with the lower tier (lesser population) Stanton V
communities.
2