My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2013_0617
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2013
>
CC_Minutes_2013_0617
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/16/2013 10:12:53 AM
Creation date
7/16/2013 10:04:29 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
6/17/2013
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
44
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
Regular City Council Meeting <br /> Monday,June 17, 2013 <br /> Page 31 <br /> Ms. Bacon, in an effort to not mislead anyone, advised that there were other more <br /> substantial under-market positions beyond those eight (8) positions presented; and <br /> if the City Council chose not to take into consideration the recommended 4.6% <br /> increase to pay plans, without the merit pay component, those listed were only af- <br /> ter implementation of the 4.6%; and there may be other positions currently 20% <br /> under market. <br /> Councilmember McGehee asked what dollar amount would be required to make <br /> at least equity among classifications for current non-exempt staff at 95.4%. <br /> Mr. Bacon advised that those had not been calculated and it was not in line with <br /> current City policy; with Mr. Trudgeon clarifying that the information was not <br /> immediately available tonight. <br /> Councilmember McGehee advocated to bring those positions in line comparable <br /> to everyone else. <br /> Councilmember Etten opined that the 97% number meant something; and he sup- <br /> ported getting rid of that as the City policy, even while recognizing that the City <br /> didn't currently, and may not in the near future, have funds to fund it. Coun- <br /> cilmember Etten opined that it sent a poor message to staff to retain that 97% as a <br /> policy and not achieve it, even though it should be the goal for the City Council in <br /> the next few years. Councilmember Etten acknowledged that the City could not <br /> fix this in 2013, or probably the next two (2) years, in addition to COLA; and <br /> while not yet ready to fix this in the short-term, he could not support the policy of <br /> 97%. <br /> Councilmember McGehee concurred. <br /> Councilmember Willmus advised that he didn't look at from a perspective of <br /> whether it was insulting or not; opining that this was an organization, and there <br /> was a pay range in place for this particular organization. Councilmember <br /> Willmus noted that different cities had different circumstances and compensation <br /> packages for their employees. Councilmember Willmus advised that he was real- <br /> ly struggling with this, since every time it came forward, there was a different <br /> number. However, Councilmember Willmus acknowledged that while he didn't <br /> have an answer, he agreed with Councilmember Etten that this is certainly some- <br /> thing difficult to say; but questioned how a 100% policy could or would be im- <br /> plemented. <br /> Councilmember Laliberte admitted that she was struggling with this as well; and <br /> the original intent had been to achieve equity between union and non-union em- <br /> ployees, which was setting the City up for failure, since they would always be <br /> chasing union negotiations and waiting for the next compensation study to con- <br /> firm that the City wasn't at 100%. Councilmember Laliberte stated that she <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.