HomeMy WebLinkAbout173-06 RESOLUTIONRESOLUTION NO. 173-06
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE COMPENSATION
COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATION TO IMPLEMENT THE
2007 COMPENSATION & CLASSIFICATION PLAN.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS:
Section 1. That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas
hereby adopts the Compensation Committee's recommendation to implement
the 2007 Compensation & Classification Plan.
PASSED and APPROVED this 17th day of October, 2006.
APPROVE
By
DAN COODY, Mayo
ATTEST:
By: as .a. ,,vu
SONDRA SMITH, City Clerk `,..`..ERFVTR.
1-aG il .-V%YSG;o
;S.
V.•�a
• ;.23
F. ;FAYETTEVILLE:
yi.ly ,QkANSPc .N:
,, 1, 1G ,QN,1G2.`
Michele Bechhold
Submitted By
City of Fayetteville
Staff Review Form
City Council Agenda Items
or
Contracts
/07/7/06
/73
apo 76inptns4.4ie n
Cis631 C1C4#IOfl
sw e66-- NOW /O//1/06
City Council Meeting Date
Human Resources
Division
Action Required:
Operations
Department
Approve a recommendation from Staff and the Compensation Committee to implement the 2007 Pay Plan.
Cost of this request
Various
Account Number
Project Number
Budgeted Item
Category / Project Budget
Funds Used to Date
Remaining Balance
Budget Adjustment Attached
Program Category / Project Name
Program / Project Category Name
Fund Name
Department Djfector
City Attorney
i
1
2
4'cui Vic,
Finance and Internal Service Director
Mayo
11
1
Date
9-19-0`
Date
Previous Ordinance or Resolution #
Original Contract Date:
Original Contract Number:
Received in C
Received in Mayor's Office
'Comments:
a e evi le
y Ars KANSAS
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
City Council Meeting October 3, 2006
TO: Mayor Dan Goody and the City Council
THRU: Gary Dumas, Operations Direc
FROM: Michele Bechhold, Human Resources
DATE: September 18, 2006
SUBJECT: 2007 Compensation & Classification Plan Implementation
On September 12, 2006, the Compensation Committee and representatives from City
Administration made a decision to extend the deadline for the final report from Management
Advisory Group from September 15, 2006 until 8:OOam September 19, 2006. This extension
allowed employees additional time to review and provide input for the final report as well as
provided MAG with the time needed to evaluate the information provided by employees.
At this time, the Compensation Committee and Staff are waiting to receive the final report to
develop recommendation(s) to be forwarded to Council. Budget staff is working to provide
funding information that was requested by the Committee.
The Compensation Committee will meet on September 21, 2006. Following that meeting, the
recommendation(s) from Staff and the Compensation Committee will be presented to Council at
the Agenda Session on September 26, 2006.
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE COMPENSATION
COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATION TO IMPLEMENT THE
2007 COMPENSATION & CLASSIFICATION PLAN.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS:
Section 1. That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas
hereby adopts the Compensation Committee's recommendation to implement
the 2007 Compensation & Classification Plan.
PASSED and APPROVED this 3rd day of October, 2006.
Management Advisory
Group, Inc.
Web -based
Classification and
Compensation Study
Final Report
City of Fayetteville
September 18, 2006
Management Advisory Group, /nc. (MAG)
Prepan'np for Tomorrow...
Today.
•
Classification and Compensation Plan
Final Report
September 18, 2006
By:
MANAGEMENT ADVISORY GROUP, INC.
15532 Yorktown Dr.
Montclair, Virginia 22025
(703) 590-7250
Virginia/DC Area Headquarters
1850 Buford Court
Tallahassee, Florida
(850)386-2711
Tallahassee/Regional Office
Virginia
September 18, 2006
Florida
North Carolina
To: The Honorable Bobby Ferrell, Chair Compensation Committee
The Honorable Robert Reynolds and Lioneld Jordan
Don Marr, Members of Compensation Committee
From: Carolyn Long, President and CEO; Alan Johnson, Senior Vice -President
Subject: Final Report — Classification and Compensation Phase of Study
Management Advisory Group is pleased to provide this Final Report of the
Compensation and Classification phase of the overall study. We have prepared a step-
by-step guide to reviewing the report, as well as this introduction.
Compensation Philosophy
The Council has adopted a compensation philosophy which provides the guiding
direction for the completion of the classification and compensation portion of this study.
The compensation philosophy address all aspects of employee compensation and
provides a comprehensive framework for the development and support of an excellent
workforce.
The City's proposed Compensation Philosophy is as follows:
"The City of Fayetteville is committed to recruiting, retaining and motivating an
excellent workforce by providing a high quality of work life to City employees
through a competitive compensation structure, competitive benefits program, and
a challenging and enriched work environment.
In order to deliver high quality municipal services, the City's workforce must possess key
attributes associated with excellence. Therefore, the following key characteristics for all
employees are desired:
1
Compensation Committee Letter
September 18, 2006
Page Two
• highly skilled;
• customer service oriented;
• possess personal integrity and exhibit ethical behavior;
• highly productive and focused on quality results;
• team players;
• seek opportunities to improve services;
• understand technology;
• value diversity; and,
• committed to the City's welfare.
The City will achieve this pay philosophy by implementing the following initiatives:
Hiring
• provide a base compensation structure that is competitive and strives to
be above average in market salaries as incorporated into the City's
compensation and classification plan;
• provide for flexibility in both hiring rates and providing compensation for
existing employees that is both flexible and internally equitable;
• provide an appropriate set of benchmark positions which establish the
foundation for the City's pay line and provide a consistent means for the
City to review the market every year and conduct a comprehensive
market survey every four years.
Retaining
• provide for a meaningful way for employees to move through the
compensation plan based on both experience and achievement so that
employees can anticipate rewards based on contributions, experience
and performance;
• provide that the annual review of the market and adjustments to the City's
overall compensation plan of not less than the cost of living increase
become a part of the budgeting process through periodic surveys and the
incorporation of the results into the City's proposed budget for personnel
costs;
• adopt a policy of regularly reviewing the City's benefits and rewards
programs to maintain competitiveness with the City's market.
2
Compensation Committee Letter
September 18, 2006
Page Three
Motivating
• provide for a performance and experience recognition program that
incorporates the following:
o the ability to review and rate performance for all employees and to
provide adjustments to employees based on their consistent level
of achievement and successful experience on the job;
o a bonus program to provide one-time, on -the -spot rewards for
meritorious service; and,
o a compensation program that recognizes incentives based on job
related professional or academic achievements."
The approved compensation philosophy will result in consistently positioning the
City's pay line above the market average if fiscal resources permit. Additionally, the
City has adopted a policy of regularly evaluating its benefits and performance
rewards program to ensure that the City's position relative to the market does not
erode.
Collecting Market Data
The survey targets for the market data were initially selected by the Compensation
Committee and then adjusted once we began our work. Over 90 positions were
selected for inclusion in the survey. The RFP specified that only those jobs that had five
(5) or more responses should be included in the final study. Sufficient data was collected
on over 80 positions, representing 36% of total city job titles, or slightly more than one
(1) out of three (3). While collecting data on such a large number of jobs may be
beneficial for this particular study, the number for regular review should probably be
reduced to approximately 30 to 35 positions that are true "benchmarks".
"Classic" benchmarks represent points along the pay line, represent different
occupational families, and are generic jobs where there is a reasonable expectation that
they will be fairly and sufficiently represented in the target organization population.
Unique positions or those with special requirements, while often of compelling interest,
do not make good "benchmarks" since finding adequate matches is often difficult and
results in poor or misleading matches. Even under ideal circumstances, a rule of thumb
in compensation work is that a job match will be about 70% equivalent. There are any
number of variations between and among organizations that suggest that "identical" job
matches are few and far between. "A benchmark job is a market job (or external job)
to which an actual employee's job (or internal job) is matched for pay comparison.
Your job should have similar content, as characterized in the job description, of the
3
Compensation Committee Letter
September 18, 2006
Page Four
benchmark job. Matching your job at least 70% to the benchmark job is a good rule
of thumb when trying to pick a match"- Salary.com
Salary com also conducted research on jobs where employees perceived themselves to
be underpaid compared to the market. Here are the data and findings of that study:
This analysis revealed that only 18.7% of the self-proclaimed underpaid
employees looking to leave their job were in reality underpaid. That means nearly
80% of these workers who felt that they were underpaid actually were not. The
majority of these workers, 34.2%, were paid fairly relative to the market, while
17.4% were overpaid."
Overall market findings for Fayetteville indicated that market data, unadjusted for
Geographic Compensation Differentials, resulted in the overall minimum salaries for
Fayetteville to lead the market by + 3.23% at the market minimum; at +.18% at the
market midpoint; and to lag the market by -2.28% at the market maximum. The overall
market has an average range width of approximately 52%, while the average range
width of Fayetteville is approximately 41%. These findings do not include the
Geographic Compensation Differentials (GCD). Using two independent sources, The
Salary Calculator and the results of economic research on wages by the Economic
Research Institute, MAG found the cost of labor in the peer and comparable
communities used in the market survey to be 4.37% and 4.55% higher, respectively. In
order to compare the survey results to the market average, MAG first compared the
results to the overall market, unadjusted by the GCD. MAG then adjusted the salary
structure generated from the survey to be compatible with 100% of the market average,
or a reduction of 4.37% (the lesser of the two cost sources). All of the final responding
public sector organizations, (other than published data sources), review and revise their
plans on an annual basis.
This places the overall pay structure for fire, police and merit positions in alignment with
100% of the market average, adjusted for the Geographic Compensation Differentials. A
percentage above the market average can then be determined by the Compensation
Committee to be consistent with the Council's desire, as expressed in the adopted
compensation philosophy, to pay above the market average.
Adjustments for the 2007 Fiscal Year
To assist the Compensation Committee in determining an appropriate reference point for
adjusting the market point relationship, MAG is including a review of the cost of labor
changes for state and local government, not seasonally adjusted. Generally speaking,
seasonal adjustments are considered when looking at monthly labor fluctuations and are
a statistical means of adjusting for the effects of seasonal differences on a monthly
basis. Seasonal adjustments are not needed when looking at annual averages. These
data are not seasonally adjusted because we are looking at annual averages.
4
Compensation Committee Letter
September 10, 2006
Page Five
Data extracted on: Se [ember 8 2006
4:08:02 PM
Em lo ment Cost Index
Series Id:
Not Seasonally
Compensation:
Sector:
Periodicity:
Industryocc:
CIU3020000000000A
Adjusted
Wages and salaries
State and local government
12 -month percent change
All workers
Year Qtrl Qtr2 Qtr3Qtr4'Annual
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
3.5 3.8 3.9 3.8 3.75
3.3 3.2 3.0 3.1 3.15
3.2 3.1 2.4 2.2 2.72
2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1
2.3 2.3 2.6 3.1 2.57
2.1
2.8
3.1
The annual average for the immediate past four quarters is +2.9%. Although past cost
of labor is not an exact model for predicting future market variations, the overall cost of
labor for the past five years has averaged 2.85%. Consequently, aging the data by a
factor of 2.9% is consistent with labor market performance over the past four quarters
and the past five years.
For purposes of considering the impact of this adjustment on the transition cost to the
new proposed plans, MAG has adjusted the pay line to reflect an increase of 2.9% over
the differentially adjusted market average. This places the current salary structure at an
adjusted 102.9%.
Market vs. Internal Relationships
In general MAG has tried to achieve a balance between the market data and the internal
relationships. For most positions, internal relationships are given slightly more
consideration than market data. Market data, while compelling, is not controlling.
However carefully the jobs are matched, it is very seldom that one finds a "perfect
match" in the external market. Therefore, in addition to the market information, each job
is analyzed and placed in relationship to every other position using a careful review of
over 150 compensable points of comparison
In addition, once MAG had completed a draft Class Comparison report, meetings were
held with key staff in a day long workshop meeting to review the results of the draft
report for their department and how their jobs "fit" into the overall organizational
hierarchy of work. Additional insight, comments and suggestions that were appropriate
to the completion of this report were incorporated following these meetings.
5
Compensation Committee Letter
September 10, 2006
Page Six.
It was important to have this final organizational review of our proposed
recommendations to ensure that the spirit of the compensation philosophy of the City is
tightly operationalized in the compensation structure designed to support it. While MAG
gave great weight to market forces, and full consideration to recommendations from key
City staff, the final assignment to proposed job classes reflected MAG's internal analysis
of the jobs.
At the upper levels of the City's compensation structure, the City has used titles that
have created some "titling compression" that may have impacted on making exact
comparisons to the external market. Specifically, because of organizational preferences,
some positions that are called Directors in other organizations are titled Supervisors,
Managers, or Superintendents. This makes cross -comparisons more difficult and has
resulted in some organizations possibly reporting on lower level positions. Although the
jobs were carefully described in the survey document, it is only human nature to review
the title first and then determine the "match". As a result, MAG, based on many years of
experience in doing compensation and classification plans for cities all across the
country, has deviated in some cases from the suggested market placement for higher
level positions. Other divergences from the suggested market placement have occurred
because of difficulty in recruitment or retention, or to ensure market equity with other
substantially equivalent positions. This is not unusual, but merely confirms that while
market data is an important element in determining job placement, it is only one factor.
Proposed Structures
The internal placements for all positions are set to the market control line, which is
based on the regression of the external market data with the internal organizational
value for all benchmark positions. As a result, all positions, regardless of assignment to
a pay plan, are in substantially equivalent pay plans. The Compensation Committee
concluded that one element of the City's compensation design would be overlapping
structures. While the Merit plan has fully overlapping structures, care was taken with the
Fire and Police structures to create plans that did not overlap on the entry levels, based
on promotion to a higher level position at the earliest possible point.
Merit Plan
The proposed pay structure for the Merit compensation plan is currently set at a range
width of approximately 52%. This is consistent with the average for the market, which is
approximately 52%. There are 34 pay grades in the proposed plan, down from a total of
65 pay grades in the current merit structure. As a result of the reduction of grades and
broader ranges, there is a broader grouping of jobs which provides more flexibility in
hiring rates and supports a more comprehensive career performance plan (the next
phase of the City's review and revision of its compensation design.)
6
Compensation Committee Letter
September 10, 2006
Page Seven
Fire and Police Structure
The following tables show graphically the Step structures proposed for the Fire and
Police positions. These structures incorporate a competitive posture with the external
market. Additionally, these structures recognize shorter ranges, truncated at the entry
level so that employees who are promoted at the first opportunity in their careers, would
not overlap salaries with employees already in the higher range. The structures for Fire
and Police each have ten steps, with four steps to the market control point (which is
substantially equivalent to the midpoint average of the external market) and an additional
six steps to the maximum of the range. The market comparisons for fire and police
positions included both longevity and holiday pay. The City should ensure that if this
plan is adopted that employees in sworn fire and police positions realize that there is no
opportunity for additional compensation once the maximum of the range has been
reached beyond that which would be provided when the overall structure is adjusted.
Longevity steps are included in this proposed structure. If this structure is adopted, it
should be recognized that "topping out" or reaching the top step of the range was the
desired goal of fire and police personnel and the driving factor behind creating a 10 year
plan. "Topping out" should not, in the future, be viewed as an undesirable situation that
requires "fixing" through additional steps, longevity, or other payment beyond the market
maximum.
Compensation Committee Letter
September 10, 2006
Page Eight
Fire Structure Table:
After 3 years, a Firefighter can
be promoted to Driver
After 1 year as Driver / Operator
and 5 years In Fayetteville, a
Driver can be promoted to
Captain
After 1 year as Captain and 7 in
Fayetteville, a Captain can be
promoted to Battalion Chief
232
31,037
32,320 2'
235
33,656 a
35,0411 41
36,496 51
38,005 61
39,576' 71
41,212!
42,916
.. 44,690'4_ 10
37,1791 1
40,011 31
41,507
43,059^
44,669_ 6!
46.339
48,072
49,869
51,734
46,316'
48,050; 4
49,8461 5
51,710 6
53.64' 7
55,649; 5
57,730;
59.889 10
241 Battalion Chief
1
51,686 2,
53,619 3
55,624 4
57,703 5
59,861 6
62,099 7
64,421 8
66,830 9
69.329 10
Firefighter - EMT Certified
Fire Driver
Fire Captain
8
Compensation Committee Letter
September 10, 2006
Page Nine
Police Structure Table:
After 5 years of service, en
officer may be promoted to
Police Sergeant
No requirement specified for
Police Corporal
After 2 years as a Sergeant and
7 years with Fayetteville, a
Sergeant may be promoted to
Police Lieutenant
After 3 years as a Lieutenant
and 8 years with Fayetteville, a
Lieutenant may be promoted to
Police Captain
330 Police Officer
33,306 1
34,627 2
36,000 3
37,428 4
38,913 5
40,456 6
42061 7
1 43,729 8
45,46E
I 472671 10
332 - j Pollee Corporal
37,4811 1
3351
38,961( 2
40,4991 3
42,097 4
43,759 5
45,486 6
47,282
49,148 8
51,088 9
53,105 10
Police Sergeant
43,389
45,102 2
3
48,733! 4
50657 5
52,656 6
54,735 7
56,895 8
59,141 9
61,478 10
Police Lieutenant
1
49,725 2
337
51.688
58.053
60,345
62,727
65,203
67,777
57 563.
59.835
62.19T
64,652
67,204
69,857
72,614
75,481
78,460
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Police Captain
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Compensation Committee Letter
September 10, 2006
Page Ten
Implementation Assumptions
The Economic Cost Indicator (the labor market cost for state and local government) for
the last four quarters is 2.9%. This was the factor used to advance the pay line for the
2007 calendar year. No flat adjustment is included in the calculation for salaries in the
coming year. Rather, a general schedule adjustment is recommended along with an
implementation formula that ensures that all employees are fairly placed within the new
proposed ranges. The overall base market line has been adjusted to 100% of the market
midpoint average, adjusted for the Geographic Compensation Differential between
Fayetteville and its peer/competitor organizations.
If there is no cost calculated for an employee, under any of the proposed implementation
options, the target salary for the employee is less than the current salary. If this is the
case, no further adjustment is recommended.
The market control point becomes the frame of reference for range structure
development. The market control point is the trend line or pay line resulting from
regressing the average of the ranges of the labor market comparables with the internal
value of the benchmarked positions. The ranges are then built around the market
control point, or market averages. In the instance of truncated ranges, such as those
proposed for Fire and Police personnel, the market control point is a constant, while the
range "midpoint" will change when entry level steps are dropped. The market control
point is the "true North" in the pay structure and is the control point for movement of
employees within the ranges.
Detailed summary reports by department or pay plan are included in Section 5 of this •
report. Dollar costs are summarized by pay plan in the Review Guide to these reports.
Implementation Costs — Fire and Police
Implementation costs for the Fire and Police pay plans are based on a ten step/ten year
plan which moves each sworn employee to the market control point of the proposed
range based on approximately four years (or equivalent) in the range, and moves the
employee to the maximum of the range within ten years. The migration from the current
structure to the proposed structure is based solely on longevity.
Implementation Costs — Merit Employees
Because the City currently has an employee appraisal system which accounts for
differences in pay, employees who are in the Merit plan are being recommended for
placement using a formula based on percentage of range penetration. Each employee
is placed in the proposed range at the same percentage of the market control point as
they are currently placed in their present range.
The benefit of this approach is that it recognizes the differences in current pay
progression which employees have earned through meritorious performance.
10
Compensation Committee Letter
September 10, 2006
Page Eleven
Future Considerations
The City needs to consider, in Phase III of this effort, a strong performance based
program for merit employee progression within the range, based on the foundation of
normal progression for satisfactory performance. If the employee's performance
exceeds "satisfactory" (which would be desirable), the employee could progress more
rapidly through the ranges. The software system, Classification Manager®, provided
by MAG as a part of this study, provides the City with the tools for implementing and
maintaining a progressive compensation plan. The compensation structures developed
for the City's consideration provide the foundation and framework for a sound
performance based program.
Policies for Implementing the Proposed Plans
The following language is recommended for consideration by the Compensation
Committee to the Council with respect to handling changes resulting from the study.
Implementation of the Pay Study
The pay study conducted by Management Advisory Group, Inc., presents
recommendations related to positions and pay ranges, as differentiated from individual
employees and their salaries. The specific one-time adjustments for individual employees
will vary based on a number of factors including their current placement in the range,
current actual salaries, and the specific implementation formula and strategy adopted by
the City of Fayetteville.
During the implementation of the comprehensive pay study, in which all positions have
been evaluated for appropriate pay grade assignment, reclassification requests will not be
processed.
Implementing changes in pay grade assignments recommended in the proposed report are
outside the regular policies of the City. Any changes in employee salary resulting from the
implementation of this study will be done by a formula which will be applied equitably and
fairly to all employees. Policies related to reclassification and promotion do not apply to the
changes resulting from the implementation of the recommended plans.
Next Steps
Benefits Overview
The City provided a broad overview of questions to be considered with respect to
benefits provided. It should be noted that this is not an actuarial review of benefits (the
City has a benefits consultant who handles that detailed type of review), but a broad
review to simply verify that the City's overall benefits package is substantially
comparable to essentially the same labor market included in the labor market survey.
The questions that are included in the benefits review were approved in advance by the
City.
11
Compensation Committee Letter
September 10, 2006
Page Twelve
MAG will complete the benefits review shortly and forward that to the Compensation
Committee for review and consideration. This will allow the Compensation Committee to
determine if there are any adjustments in benefits that are needed to ensure that the City
is offering an overall compensation package that is consistent with the adopted
compensation philosophy of striving to provide an "above average" compensation
package to City employees. Early results of the benefits survey indicate that the City is
fully competitive with the market. If any recommendation results from the finalization of
this part of the study, it is anticipated that it would only result in minor "tweaking" to the
benefits package.
Employee Review
Employees who feel their job was not given full consideration in the classification
process will have an opportunity for review beginning in October and concluding in late
November or early December. The review process will include a simple one page
review questionnaire completed by the employee. This will be reviewed by the
immediate supervisor and the department head with appropriate comment. The review
will consider the following three items:
1. Job Placement: the employee feels the position should be placed at a different
pay grade level.
2. Job Title: the employee feels the job title is inappropriate and recommends a
different title.
3. Employee Placement: the employee feels he or she belongs in a different job
title.
Dissatisfaction with the amount of pay or salary adjustment resulting from the City's
implementation of MAG's recommendations is not grounds for review. Dissatisfaction
with the results of the labor market survey is not grounds for review. (Employees have
had an opportunity for input into the external market survey at numerous points along
the way. MAG has welcomed the input and included appropriate changes in this final
report).
Pay Ordinance for Elected Officials
MAG was asked to specifically review the compensation levels for elected officials
(Mayor, City Attorney and City Clerk) and make appropriate recommendations.
The Mayor, City Attorney, District (Municipal) Judge and the City Clerk were included in
the market survey and the City Attorney and City Clerk were recommended for
placement within the proposed compensation plan. Insufficient data was received for
the Mayor's and Judge's position to make a definitive recommendation in the proposed
plan based on external market comparisons. MAG will make a recommendation on the
pay ordinance for the Mayor along with the provision of the benefits review.
The City Clerk and City Attorney are included in the proposed classification plan.
12
Compensation Committee Letter
September 10, 2006
Page Thirteen
After discussion with the District Judge, it was determined that this position should not
be included in the proposed compensation plan at this time.
Review of Compensation Policies
Following adoption of a compensation and classification plan, MAG will review the
policies regarding structure adjustment; pay rates; new hire offers; step increases; merit
increases; promotional increases; position reclassifications and the concept of intemal
pay compression for alignment with both the structure of the adopted compensation and
classification plan and the Council's Compensation Philosophy.
It should be noted that some of the items listed above are included in Phase III —
Performance Evaluation Review - of the City's overall review and would be more
appropriately included in that part of the study process.
Administration and Maintenance of the New Plan
MAG is providing our Classification Managete software along with appropriate training
for the City staff. MAG provides two levels of service permitting the City to select a fully
maintained in-house system, if staffing permits. As an option, MAG provides for out-
sourcing key elements of system maintenance to provide on-going hands-on support to
the City for the implementation and maintenance of the system for a modest monthly
fee.
Recommendations for the on-going administration of the plan will also include frequency
review of other elements of the program such as job classification review and update of
descriptions.
On Going Employee Communications
MAG will prepare a concise PowerPoint presentation that will permit the City to
effectively communicate to employees the results of the Council's decision to implement
the proposed classification and compensation portion of the plan. This presentation will
also provide the employees with steps to request additional review of their positions if
appropriate.
Council Meeting October 3, 2006
MAG will provide a senior representative at the October 3rd Council Meeting to present
the proposed report and to answer any questions concerning implementation options.
13