Presentation Transcript

1. General County Pay Plan Proposal

   FCGEU (SEIU VA 512) and Employees Advisory Council
2. OVERVIEW Chairman Bulova requested that the FCGEU/SEIU VA 512 and the EAC work together to propose an alternative compensation framework to what was proposed in the STRIVE initiative. The FCGEU and EAC partnered together to address their concerns regarding compensation for General County (S-Scale) employees.
3. General guidance County’s Compensation Philosophy “Attracting and retaining high performing employees who deliver exceptional services and programs to the public.” “Establish total compensation policies and procedures that are equitable to employees…” “Maintain competitiveness…” Market Thresholds Market ratio thresholds for all employee groups will be 95 percent to 105 percent of the midpoint of the surveyed classes.
4. General Guidance Comparator Organizations Referenced Arlington County, City of Alexandria, District of Columbia Fairfax County Public School System (non-instructional) Out of Scope – Changes to any of the following: Public Safety Pay Plans F – Uniformed Fire O – Uniformed Police P – Public Safety Communications & Animal Wardens C – Office of the Sheriff Uniformed Executive Service - “E” Scale Lawyers in County Attorneys Office -“L” Scale
5. Budget Guidance – FY 2015 Develop and refine an overall pay structure that: Provides compensation adjustments based on inflation and other economic factors Awards employees for satisfactory job performance Addresses longevity factors for long-tenured employees Develops a cohesive plan for conducting market studies and ensuring that County job classes maintain equity and competitiveness with the region.
6. Other considerations Flexibility for the Board of Supervisors Employee Feedback Lack of confidence of employees, senior management, agency directors and employee groups regarding compensation piece of STRIVE program. Pay Scale/Framework of other employee groups not on S-Scale – equity/consistency among systems Morale issues Flat-lined employee pay and pay compression Long term concern for the retirement systems. Employee contributions are based on salary increases and are not keeping pace with actuarial assumptions
7. Employee pay foundations Employee pay should be adjusted ANNUALLY to account for increases in the cost of living MRA formula is acceptable, but is a lag indicator Employees should be awarded ANNUALLY for satisfactory performance An additional indicator, a “Designated Salary Adjustment” should be created to maintain BOS flexibility This factor is solely at the discretion of the Board and provides another option for salary adjustments.
8. Perspective – pay – 20 years
9. Perspective – cost of living * Sample property located in Accotink Heights, Mason District
10. perspective Under the compensation piece proposed in STRIVE the County Executive calculated salary of an S18 Plumber hired at the starting salary, with a 25 year career: Beginning salary $41,132 FY2014 Ending salary $66,159 FY2038 Current Washington DC median salary for a Plumber I with 0-2 years of experience is $44,203 The ending salary under STRIVE is about 1.6 times the original starting salary. This rate of increase does not keep pace with cost of living
11. Recommendations for s-scale Place all S-Scale employees into a new, grade/step framework that provides varied percentages for performance awards (merit increments) based on the step. Target: effective first pay period January 2014. The new framework is modeled after those used by FCPS (Non-Instructional), City of Alexandria, and Arlington County Employees would be placed into a step making at least what they earn now (but not less).
12. Grade/step FRAMEWORK Larger performance awards are granted earlier in a career (assuming being brought in at entry level, Step 1). “front loading” larger salary increases earlier encouraging retention of “new” employees similar framework used by comparator scales similar philosophy of “frontloading salary” currently in place in public safety and FCPS non-instructional scales Performance Award percentages lower as one progresses through the scale, both in step and grade.
13. Longevity and tenure Performance Awards would be granted annually until reaching Step 17 Upon reaching Step 17 and having 20 years of service, a 2% longevity award would be granted Public safety has 5% longevity awards at 15 and 20 years FCPS longevity awards are granted for 15 years of service
14. sustainability Over a 25 year career, average performance based awards are significantly lower than the >5% average awarded under the old “PfP” system. (Assumes hiring at Step 1). S01-S20 average is 2.34% S21-S25 average is 2.24% S26-S32 average is 2.20% S33-S40 average is 2.08% Public safety average is approximately 2.5% over 25 years (calculated from Step 1) Employee hired at mid-point “Step 8/9” 25 year average would be approximately 1% per year for performance based awards.
15. Sustainability An employee at mid-point with 10 years of service, 15 years remaining until retirement average performance award would be approximately 1.5% PfPrange previously adopted by the Board was 1% - 3.5% PLUS the MRA. (This was adopted but never funded.) “Average” projected performance award under this system was 2.5% Previous County Executive “capped” increases at 6% per year (MRA plus average PfP award), citing 6% as sustainable
16. Sustainability The MRA would be applied to the grade/step scale (and to employee pay) annually The MRA cited by the County Executive in STRIVE compensation projections is 2.0% Average combined MRA and performance award would be 4.0 - 4.3% if an employee is brought in at Step 1 over 25 year career Average combined MRA and performance award would be approximately 2.8% - 3.0% if an employee is brought in at mid-point and stays for a 25 year career.
17. Market studies - Recommendations A market study of 25% of the job classes should be conducted ANNUALLY Market studies should still be conducted if pay is frozen All the job classes in the S-Scale should be studied every 4 years Job classes falling outside the 95% - 105% corridor should be re-graded to bring them into market. If routine hiring occurs at or above mid-point job classes should be flagged for special study by DHR to address recruitment issues.
18. conclusions All the points in FY2015 budget guidance have been addressed. Cost of living was researched during the course of developing this proposal. The framework was developed for a 25 year career. Employees will “see” advancement through the scale with satisfactory performance. Addresses morale issues Addresses in-grade compression issues Adoption of this framework will require additional changes to the Personnel Regulations.