CC_Minutes_2013_0603 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday,June 03,2013 Page 6 non-union employee groups. Ms. Bacon advised that those unions had therefore averaged 1-3% higher than non-union employees over a number of years. Ms. Bacon noted that those internal inconsistencies, sooner or later, could result in non-supervisory, union employees making close to what their non-union supervi- sors were making, often creating equity and morale concerns. Pertinent to a discussion for police officers and a desire for comparisons with communities in the same geographic area, Ms. Bacon clarified that those commu- nities may not have their own police department (e.g. City of Shoreview); and making it difficult for the City of Roseville to make a similar comparison, as the police union could then use that in arbitration. At the request of Mayor Roe, Ms. Bacon advised that both a comparison of actual wage rates and percent of annual increases were both factors during negotiations; with comparisons of actual and desired 100% compensation used compared with other communities; with the obvious desire of those union employees to seek the top percentage of comparison cities. Further discussion included clarification that most union employees were at ap- proximately 100% when measured across the board and according to this study, the City's non-union and exempt employees were currently at approximately 97% compared with other metropolitan communities, with this study proving that the latter group of employees were actually even less, or 4.6% below the 100% fig- ure. Mayor Roe polled individual Councilmembers as to their preference to have this compensation discussion as part of the budget discussion or as a separate policy discussion. Councilmember Willmus expressed his preference to have it as part of the budget discussion; clarifying for Mayor Roe that the adjustments needed to remain in context as part of the annual budget and as a policy for how Roseville chose to place its compensation compared to other communities and the market. Mr. Trudgeon noted that obviously the financial impact was part of the budget discussion; and suggested one way to implement the recommendations was not necessarily to do so in its entirety for the 2014 budget cycle. Mr. Trudgeon sug- gested the discussion be continued in the near future. As part of the next discussion, Mayor Roe asked that staff provide information on the effect on levy-supported versus non-levy-supported funds, and a breakdown for phase-ins and an annual dollar amount for the levy during that phase-in as well.