My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09-09-24-R
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
2020-2029
>
2024
>
09-09-24-R
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/9/2024 11:13:01 AM
Creation date
9/9/2024 10:58:04 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
274
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — AUGUST 12, 2024 5 <br />Councilmember Monson stated the recommendation from Tessia Melvin is to do a market <br />review every three years. Councilmember Monson clarified she believes the market review <br />should be completed every three years as well. She believes increasing the cost of living <br />adjustment is a budget issue. Between Options 1 and 2, there is a five thousand dollar difference <br />and believes it would be worth the five thousand dollars to be that much more competitive in the <br />market. <br />Councilmember Holden reminded that figure is wages only. It doesn't include PERA, Social <br />Security, or Medicare. It's more than six thousand. <br />Councilmember Fabel stated if someone was maxed out now and we went with Option 1, they <br />would continue to get raises for three years. With Option 2, after two years, they would be maxed <br />out before getting to another adjustment. He believes Option 1 is the better choice so as long as <br />this current writ remains in place employees will continue to see raises. <br />Mayor Grant asked if Option 1 would put everyone 8% above the average. <br />Tessia Melvin replied the pay grid is calibrated at 8% above average. Some employees will be <br />slightly under and some will be slightly over. This is 8% average overall, not individually. <br />Councilmember Holden asked if Option 1 is chosen and someone new comes in, would it be <br />more likely to start them at entry level. Because starting someone at step 3 on the grid would be at <br />step 5 now. <br />Tessia Melvin stated most individuals aren't going to know the steps on the grid, they will know <br />the wage that is posted. Negotiation is usually based off of where they are. <br />Councilmember Holden said its public information. People know the grids. <br />Councilmember Fabel wondered if there is a reason for nine steps. He asked if we increase the <br />max by three steps, do we have to eliminate the three minimums. <br />Tessia Melvin replied the average is eight to ten steps so having nine falls into line. <br />Councilmember Monson thinks it's important to add the three steps and remove the bottom <br />three because that raises the entry level wage which is more attractive for recruiting. Adding the <br />three at the top end helps with retention. The minimums are already at 5% below market. Not <br />eliminating the bottom three steps will stall that at 5% or more below. She thinks the adding and <br />subtracting of steps is needed to stay competitive in the market. <br />Councilmember Holden added that there used to be twelve steps but went to nine in an effort to <br />give larger increases. <br />Councilmember Fabel asked if there was data for total cost on year two and year three. <br />Mayor Grant said Option 1 would cost $124,546 in 2025. Would the cost be $124,546 in 2026, <br />as well? <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.