HomeMy WebLinkAbout7.b. Comparable Worth Appeals Process Approval , ��►n-i.: � ,�,
' �
P�. BC)X St0
(�il� 0 2875-145TH ST W.
Ocn�Ou�1 ROSEMOUNT. MINNESOTA 550fi$
�7G L 612-423-4A11
TO:Mayor Hoke
Councilmembers Napper '
Oxborough
Walsh .
WiPPerrnan
FROM:Stephan Jilk
Administrator
RE:COMPARABLE WORTH
APPEALS PROCESS
Please find attached a proposed Appeals Process for handling
appeals submitted to the comparable worth plan adopted and
directed to be implemented. This Appeals Process, if approved by
you, will become part of the comparable worth plan for the city.
I am recommending that the appeals review committee be made up of
myself, the employees department head and one city councilmember.
I have asked Councilmember Wipperman to serve on this committee
as �he council representative and he has accepted. This committee
will make recommendations to the eity council for changes, if
any, to the plans' job values. I have suggestion a time frame for
filing of appeals such • that we can settle all appeals priar to
January 1st, 1989 so that implementation can commence. At this
time I would suggest that those positions being appealed should
have no ad�ustments made until appe�ls are decided.
� I am not expecting a great number of appeals ta the plan,. i feel
; that, although not everyone will be happy with the results, mast
everyone will be understanding and few problems will arise. I am
expecting a few requests for reconsiderations and this appeals
process must in plaee to handle them.
I would be pleased to answer any questions you might have on this
f matter and I recornmend your approval of it.
; The action to be considered would be to accept the appeals
; process for the City of Rasemoun�s comparable worth plan as
proposed and to include it the citys' comparable worth plan for
implementation.
�
,
�
,
;
,
�
�
i
a � �
�
TO:ALL CITY EMPLOYEES
FROM:STEPHAN JILK
CITY ADMINISTRATOR -
DATE:OCTOBER 15, 1988
RE:COMPARABLE WORTH
PLAN CONSIDERATION / APPEALS PROCESS
� Job evaluations have been completed and reviewed by the Mayor and
w rth lan for
Cit m arable o
y Council for the completion of the co p p
the city of Rosemount. Results of this action are attached for
your review. I will be holding information sessions ta explain
the process to you. A schedule of these meetings is attached.
Any questions you have, upon reviewing the information, should be
held until those meetings.
You should individually review these results reported for your
position. Upon your review and upon discussion on the reported
information some of you may consider adjustments to job values
necessary. You may appeal the point value for your �ob position
by following the procedure outlined below. ALL APPEALS MUST BE
FILED NO LATER THAN ( ) .
APPEAL PROCES5
The appeal committee, consisting of the CaLty Administrator, the
, Department Head of the appealing employee and one member of the
City council will review the results of a particular �ob
, < evaluation if an employee files a formal appeal for his or her
job. Requests for review must be submitted on forms available
from me. Cvmplete the form and attach any clarifications or
, corrections that pertain to the job as it existed when �ob
� information was for the study. (New jobs or ` job changes which
began after that date are not part of this study. )
Job values, as a result of this appeal process may go up ar down
or stay the same. Results o£ the appeal process will be final.
Please note : Any changes ta your job description which may
influence the job value should be submitted as an
addendum to tfie job description. Please do not
make changes to the existing job description. Job
descriptions may be obtained from your supervisar
i . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
i\� . . � . � � . . � . � � .. � � . . � . . �
..i . . . . . . . . . � .. . .
J � CITY OF ROS�+IOUNT �
RE�UEST FOR.`P(�SITION RE-EVALUATION
This request must be filed with the City Administrator on or before ,
i988.
Position Title:
Name:
Date:
Department•
i _
i TU: Appeal Committee
; 1. I hereby request 're-evaluation of the above-referenced position.
{ 2. I am aware that the job evaluation process was not based on an evaluation
of the performance of individuals currently holding specific positions, but
; rather,on an evaluation of the ,job content of the positions themselves.
! 3. I feel that the above-stated position should be re-evaluated because: `
' (check apglicable ehoicets) )
' Job content information in the current job description was omitted;
Job content i.nformation in the current job description was unclear; .
Job cantent information in the current job description was incorrect.
� I have provided below the additional information the Appeals Committee
; needs as an addendum to r�y existing job description {please provide
;'
detailed inforraation; you may use an attached sheet):
� understand that �y results may go'up or down or stay the same.
Results of the appeal are final.
{
_ _ _ ._ _ .__��,____e_�.,_.exe,�.o+,�y.o_ __:_ Date __ ___- _