My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2013_0819
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2013
>
CC_Minutes_2013_0819
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/9/2013 10:12:48 AM
Creation date
9/9/2013 10:12:30 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
8/19/2013
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
31
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,August 19,2013 <br /> Page 22 <br /> are basic and the same for all benchmarks; with the difference being that some of <br /> the City of Roseville jobs combining several positions (City Engineer serving as <br /> Assistant Public Works Director) which may not be comparable to other cities <br /> having two positions performing those functions versus the one position in Rose- <br /> ville. Ms. Bacon advised the difference was found in the range of those responsi- <br /> bilities, even though the core job description and range were similar. <br /> Regarding turnover, Ms. Bacon advised that she performed voluntary exit inter- <br /> views for employees; and information provided by those willing to do so were <br /> kept on file, with her performing an evaluation on where and why an employee <br /> was leaving. With no formal method in place, Ms. Bacon advised that her com- <br /> parisons with other cities indicated that Roseville was pretty average with the ex- <br /> periences in turnover with other communities. Ms. Bacon advised that the market <br /> was opening up and loosening up, and would probably create more turnover ver- <br /> sus that seen in the last few years when it had been low with the economic uncer- <br /> tainties. <br /> Councilmember Laliberte recognized the move of employees in the public sector <br /> from one city to another depending on their position. However, Councilmember <br /> Laliberte questioned if total compensation attributed to that average to low turno- <br /> ver beyond wage,but considering total compensation. <br /> Ms. Bacon advised that the study considered the benefit package as well as wag- <br /> es, but noted that the information had not been detailed in reports. Ms. Bacon ad- <br /> vised that the City of Roseville had always been pretty consistent and comparable <br /> with its benefit package and time off with other cities on average. <br /> Councilmember Willmus clarified that the compensation study included benefits, <br /> opining that he had been told something different in the past. <br /> Ms. Bacon responded that the compensation study compared premiums versus <br /> contributions for life insurance and other rudimentary things and proved pretty <br /> average in that comparison. <br /> Councilmember Etten expressed his support for a review every four years versus <br /> ten years, even though he could support six years, but preferred four years. <br /> Councilmember Etten advised that he was concerned with line 51 (page 2) indict- <br /> ing that there would be not COLA considered for a budget year that provided a <br /> compensation adjustment; opining that this again put the City automatically be- <br /> hind, setting it up to fail, and continuing always being off somehow. Coun- <br /> cilmember Etten questioned if there were compensation policies available from <br /> other cities versus creating one, suggesting that it would be great to have policies <br /> from the ten peer cities or 3-4 surrounding cities. <br /> Ms. Bacon offered to ask for policies if and where available. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.