3B, Non-Union Wage Adjustment - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

# o# Ernployees zoa.a zo�s zaa.� zo�.3 At top of range 3 3 6 9 Receiving steps 13 �.4 11 8 If �v� us�d the Shoreview �ne�had, only those ernployees at the top of the range would received the COLA inczease, the others aniy received step increases. In 2007, the City did a ma�ket s�udy and reevaluated its pay ranges, however, due to budget constraints did not set thern to the benchrnark th�y wanted to, compared to the comparative cities used in the study. The Cauncil had planned an doing it over a few years, but due to the economic events of 2005 and forward, this has not been done. An advantage af approving a 1% COLA effective on July I, 2011 is that it provides a 1.5% increase for the employee overall for 201 i, but raises the City's salary scale 2% overall far the year, This, in effect helps to achieve the goal of the City Council in 2008 to increase the salary scale to the desired benchmark compared to athers cities while minimizing the effect on the operating budget. There is no change from the previously reportecl impact of $3,548 to the General Fund Budget as found in the merna frorn Sue Iverson dated March 17, 2011 which is attached. $20,211 was put into contingency for 2011 and only $6,1 a8 I�as been allocated so far in 2011. Recommendation After evaluating our internal relationships and hearing about COLA adjustrr�ents in a few of our neighboring comrn�nities, we recommend that the Council approve a 1% COLA increase effective Ju�y 1 st for atl regular non-unian City emplayees. Requested Action Siaff is looking for direction from the Council in order to put this topic on ihe August 29th City Co�ncil agenda. Attachments Part of the March 21, 2011, Council Work Ses�ion minutes Part of the Augusi 16, 2014, Council Work Session minutes Memo from Sue iverson, daied March 17, 201 l, on COLA impact on the General Fund