HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-12-27 07-053 ORDERItexn No, 07 053
Date: 12-27-06
hun/Subjeet ORDER, Adopting Certain Recommendations Presented by Human Resource Partners, LLC
Regarding Non -Union Pay Scales and Ringe Benefits and Authorizing the Cry
Manager to Implement the Recommendations
Responsible Department: Executive
Commentary:
In late 2005, the City engaged the Independent consulting firm Human Resource Partners, LLC of
Scarborough, ME to undertake a pay scale and fringe benefit study covering non -unionized regular
full-time and part-time positions. The last study was completed in 1989, and the City Council
determined that another review was necessary in order to attract, retain, and fairly compensate
covered employees. The study was completed In August 2006, and a final report was delivered to
Council and shared with employees. The consultant made several recommendations regarding
both pay scale and fringe benefit revisions, and the attached Council Order would adopt these
recommendations and provide for their implementation.
The Study has been reviewed with Council In Executive Session on two occasions and was more
recently reviewed with the Government Operations Committee, which voted 2-1 (Hawes and
D'Errico in favor, Allen opposed) to recommend approval to the full Council. Councilor Allen
indicated a preference to consider this during the FY 08 budget process.
Department Head
Manager's Comments: Recommend approval.
City Manager
Associated Information: Summary Memorandum to Government Operations Committee, Consultant
RecommerMations including proposed Pay Scale and Fringe Benefit revisions.
Legal Approval:
Ci 6olirJtor
Introduced for
Passage
_ First Reading Page _ of
Referral
07 051
AssipxxlwCoaai naves December 37, 3006
CITY OF BANGOR
(TITLE.) ORDER, Adopting Certain Recommendations Presented by Human
Resource Partners, LLC Regarding Non -Union Pay Scales and Fringe Benefits and
Authorizing the City Manager W Implement the Recommendations
WHEREAS, the last comprehensive review of the CiWs pay plan for regular full-time and
part-time non -unionized employees occurred in 1989; and
WHEREAS, during the FY 2006 budget process, Ne City Council identified the need to
review the non-union pay scale and fringe benefit Package in order to attract,
retain, and fairly compensate covered regular full-time and part-time employees
and appropriated the funds necessary for an independent study, and
WHEREAS, in December 2005, the City engaged the firm of Human Resource Parbrers, LLC
to undertake a Pay Scale and Fringe Benefit Study far non -unionized employees;
and
WHEREAS, during calendar War' 2006, the Consultant performed and completed a number
of identified tasks including a comprehensive wrvey of comparable employers,
an analysis of survey rewlts, and development of a series of proposed
recommendations for the Coundl's consideration; and
WHEREAS, the Consultant completed Ne study in August 2006 and prepared a final report
outlining the study results, findings, and recommendations; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has had an opportunity to review the study results and
recommendations and has indicated its intent to formally consider certain
recommendations prepared by Human Resource Partners, LLC;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE R ORDERED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BANGOR
THAT: certain recommendations prepared by Human Resource Partners, LLC, as summarized
belay, are hereby adopted and the City Manager is hereby authorized to Implemnt them in
acoordance with the following and subject to such non -material modifications and changes as
may be necessary for their appropriate adminetratlon:
1. The revised Pay Sales as presented In the final report prepared by Human
Resource Partrers, LLC, dated August 28, 2006, are hereby implemented
effective the first full pay period for Feburary 2007. In order to transition to the
new pay sales from the existing pay sales, employees will be placed on the
rent nearest highest pay step within the assigned pay range which provides a
minimum one percent (1%) revision to the employee's current pay rate. (The
current 11 -step system will continue).
U CITY COm IG
December 27, 20M
Motion Made and Seconded
for Psage
eass5�
�Ir CLQ CLQ
P e1�g�eMopting Certain YecaOendat5o
CW
C
Regarding Non -Onion Pay nScales rand rPriage
ng too r y ger
to Impleaat the Aeco®evda[io�
07 053
2. The hinge benefit recommencations #2 through #5 inclusive, as presented in
the final report prepared by Human Resource Partners, LLC dated August 28,
2006, are hereby implemented effective January 1, 2006. To effectuate Bald
recommendations, the following actions are hereby approved:
A. Amending the City's Revised Personnel Rules and Regulations,
Section 7.2. Vacation, by adding a new vacation accumulation
rate of three and one-half (3 Y) weeks following completion of
the eleventh (11th) year of continuous service as follows:
7.2.1 Accumulation of Annual Leave
All regular, full-time Ery emldoyees who are working the standard work
week of the City shall be entitled to accumulate two (2) "work weeks" of
annual leave per year paid at the employee's straight time rate. All
employees shall begin to accumulate three (3) weeks of annual leave per
War after the completion of six (6) years of contnuous service with the
City,(31h) weeks of annual leave par War after th
completion of eleven (11) years of continuous service with the CN four
(4) weeks of annual leave per year after the completion of fifteen (157
years of continuous service with the City, and five (5) weeks of annual
leave ager Nrenty, (20) years of continuous service with the City.
B. Amending Ne City's Revised Personnel Rules and Regulations,
Section 7.10.1, Sick Leave, by deleting the requirement to work
six (6) months before becoming eligible to use accumulated sick
time, as follows:
7.10.1 Sick Leave
b. Eligibility
Full-time employees of the City shall be entitled to same sick leave at a
rate of fifteen (15) days per year accrued on a prorated weekly basis. No
employee shall be eligible for paid sick leave unless accrued. 6iekleave
w 11 some but Y 11 net be paid unfil a regular, lid" t me employee has
C. Amending the City's Revised Personnel Rules and Regulations
Section 5.6.2, Exempt Pay Plan, by adjusting the maximum
accrual amount and accrual rate for administrative leave time as
Follows;
5.6.2 Exempt Pay Plan
b. In lieu of overtime compensation, however, such exempt employees
may acme a maximum of twenty -(2B) forty (40) hours of adminiomtiw
leave time (compernabon time) in accordance with the following:
Accrual Rate for Administrative Leave: Exempt employees in the C NI
Execubw Level Pay Classification Plan may earn one (1) hour for each
07 053
hour worked in excess of five (5) hours above and beyond their regularly
sdmduled work week. All oMer ezennot employees in various pay
Class flut on olan levels may earn one f 11 hwr for each hour worked n
forces of tavot andone-half 2.5) hours above and beyondi rl
scheduled work week There shall be no payment for accumulated
compensatory time upon termination, separation or retirement.
Accumulated time shall be used in increments of not more Man one (1)
work day at a time.
D. Amending the City's Revised personnel Rules and Regulations,
Section 9.5.3, personal Vehicle Use, W reflect annual
adjustments for the limited number of employees who receive
annual mileage stipends in lieu of a City vehicle or tracking
actual mileage as follows:
9.5.3 personal Vehicle Use
Effective pebmary 1, 2005, if an employee Is and prized to use his/her
pe canal vehicle on City business, reimbursement shall be made far any
tills plus" and one-halfcents (0.405) per mile. Effective 3anuary1,
2" and for subsequent years, the City will use the lntcnal Revenue
Service rate established each January 1^ as its established
reimbursement rate.
air±lamr�z.±.�raptIc:r:Lrmrz.J(�rt ,
OIL
11RL
PA QA�IMK 6� 11
NOTE: Additions are underlined and deletions are aldken.
07 05"s
MEMO
TO:
Govemment Operations Cmmmlttee
From:
Robert W. Farrar, Assistant City Manager/Human Resources Director
SubjeQ:
Non-Unlon Pay Scale and Fringe Benefit SO*
Date:
December 8, 2006
Included in the approved FY 06 City budget was funding to undertake a pay scale and hinge
benefit study for non -unionized employees. Following a competitive proposal process, the city
hired the consulting firm Human Resource Partners, LLC, of Scarborough, Maine for the project
in December 2005.
The Identified need to conduct the study was at least partially based on the length of elapsed
time since the last study was completed in 1989, some 17 years ago. Additional consideration
Included a need for the city W remain competitive In the work marketplace in order to attract,
retain and fairly compensate our non -unionized worMorce.
This report is presented in order W complement the Corpvltants 50 -page report by providing
background information, describing the spMy mefhodology, summarizing the Consultant's.
findings and recommendations, identifying costs assoclated with implementation, and
p esenting a mum of action and recommendation for the Committee's mnslderatian. As you
know, the results of the Consultants study and accompanying recommendations have been
Previously reviewed by the CRY Ooundl and have been presented in covered employees.
1. DackgMijad hrtormati
The city of Bangor employs nearly 580 regular full-time and regular part time employees. Of
this total, approximately 260 employees are not unionized and are covered "a City's
Personnel Rules and Regulations which includes the non-union pay plan and fringe benefit
offerings. There are some 180 separate job deoxiption1classifica@ans for the 260 employees.
The table below provides summary informston by full and part-time status and posidon to mon
by Fund
City of Bangor
Non -Unionized Employees (non -school)
Full nm- PA It In on Tgaj
General Fund
138
40
178
Enterprise and Grant Funds
�6
AA
_?y
W6
51
257
07 053
These employeas are compensated under the CWs established Pay Man and tlasificatic n
System which was developed In 1989 and subsequently adapted by the City Council. The
system Includes some 27 district pay ranges In sit separate job dassificadon areas: COMOT
(Clencal, OFgce Machine Operator and Technicians); LTC (tabor, Trade and Crafts); POLE
(Protective Oovpatlors and taw Enforcement); PAT (Professional Administrative and
Technological); SAM (Supervisory and Managerial); and EXEC (Executive).
Every separate position is assigned a pay range within one of the sbk classifications. All ranges
have eleven steps, and employees may move through the eleven steps based upon attainment
of a successful some on their annual performance evaluation review.
As part of the budget review and adoption process, the City Coundl determines annually
whether to make adjustments th the establethed pay sale. Fringe benefits for non-unlon
employees are established In the CRys Personnel Rules and Reguladons handbook This
document is periodically revised by the Council as mMitions/situ stlons warrant
H. Pay Scale and Rime Benefit Study Methodolmv
Once engaged "a City, the Consultant undertook a number of tasks over the proceeding
eight month time frame as specified in the Request for Proposal (W) document. Major tasks
and aitical components of the study Induced the following:
• Revievring and analyzing the Otys current pay plan sbudure
In addition to the atys fringe benefit package
• Holding Introductory meetings with all employees to explain the projects
scope, methodology, and components -
• Distributing an employee position questionnaire and meeting
individually with employees or small groups to discuss their job
position in the organization and elicit comments, suggestions and feedback
Developing a survey instrument to gather pay style and fringe benefit
data/information
• Identifying potential partidpating organizations and entities and
distributing survey instruments to selected partidi ants
• Collecting, compiling, and analyzing survey data from nearly
M respondents
• Meeting wall full Ory Council on two aaasions to review draft
survey results and accompanying moommpMatians
• Meeting with covered employees m review draft survey results and
recommendations
V
2
07 05"s
• Preparing final written report with study results and remmmendatons for the
cry
M. Summary of Ca Itz t' Findings d Recommendations
Based upon the survey results and analysis, the Consultant determined that on average, the
various non-union pay scales were below prevailing market rates by appmannately 11%.
The POLE pay scales were farthest from market rates at 83.75%, while the PAT pay scales
were closest to the prevailing market rales at 91.90%. The four other classifications of pay
scales (COMOT, LTC, SAM and EXEC) ranged from 88.70% to 90.60% when compared to
prevailing rates.
Regarding the fringe benefit survey results, the Consultant determined that from an overall
standpoint the City had a very Competitive program. But he also recommended adjustments
to five areas in order to maintain internal equityand to remain competitively positioned with
commonly Accepted marketplace practices. The Consultant's specific recommendations are
presented in summary form below. (The sectlon of the Consultant's Report detailing the
various recommendations; is attached to this Memorandum.)
PAY SCALE RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Adjust the various pay scales in accordance with the revisions
contained within the report to more accurately reflect prevailing
marketplace pay scales.
2. Establish one new PAT pay scale, reflecting the survey data
indicating a need to create an additional sale in this classification.
3. Continue the current Cry Council practice of malang annual
adjustments to the nonunion pay plan in order to keep pay scales
current and ro maintain marketplace competitiveness.
FRINGE BENEFIT RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Consider offering some type of pro -rated health Insurance benefit
to regular part-time employees.
2. Adjust the vacation accumulation sclhedule to Include three and
one half (3 K) weeks of vacation following the completion of
eleven years of service.
3. Adjust annual mileage stipends for the Unnited number (9) of
employees who receive stpends In lieu of a City vehicle or
tracking actual mileage.
3 Q
07 053
4. Allow the use of accumulated sick leave during the first
six months of employment
S. Revise the compensatory time program far RSA (Fair labor
Standards Act) exempt employees regarding required extra
hours of work and accumulation rates.
Based upon suggested effective dates of February 4, 2007 for the recommended pay sale
revisions and January 1, 2007 for the recommended Fringe benefit recommendations, staff
has developed the following root estimates associated with each.
Estimated Costs for Implementation of Recommended
Pay Sole Revisions
General Fund and General Fund Supported Enterprise Funds
waceSffits Rime Benefit Costs
H07
$99,740
$10,217
FY08
154,831
14,647
FY09
112,911
10,681
Self Supporting Biterprise Funds and Grant Funds
Wane Costs
Fringe Benefit Costs
FY 07 $ 46,103
$ 4,723
FY 08 72,738
6,881
H09 s4,Ws
5,156
In anticipation of the conclusion of the pay study and resulting rerommendatlons, $65,000
was appropriated in the FY 07 budget to help Pond Implementation costs In the General
Fund, With this amount, and the availability of other funds within the various General Fund
budgets due W verandas and other cost savings/reductions, it appears that the General
Fund will have the necessary resources W accommodate an early February implementation
data. Similarly, self supporting enterprise funds and gram funds should be In a po frim W
handle the proposed wage increases for the remainder of FY 07.
Regarding the proposed fringe benefit recommendations, with the exception of the proposal
to add a health Insurance benefit far part-time employees (which could range from $50,000
to $100,000 depending on City contribution level), the remalning four recommendations have
fairly minimal W no direct costs as mdated with Implementation. Given the size of the
potential health insurance benek staff recommends that this item be discussed further
during the FY M budget process.
(b
i
07 0533
Given the study results and the recommendations of the Consultant, we would propose the
following course N action for the Committee's mnslderation:
1. Recommend that the City Council adopt the various Pay Scale
R nnmendatons outlined in the report prepared by Human
Resource Partners dated August 28, 2006. This would Include
an effective implementaton data of the first NII pay period in
February 2007, with employees transitioning W the next nearest
highest step in the assigned pay range that would provide a
minimum revision tn the employee's pay rate of one percent
2. Recommend that the City Council adopt Fringe Benefit Recommendations #2
through #5 outlined In the report prepared by Human Resource Partners dated
August 28, 2006. This would include an effective implementation data of
January 1, 2007 and may necessitate the preparation of required companion
Coundl orders.
VI. Conclusion
The pay scale and fringe benefit study has been lag anticipated and awairted by the City and
Its non-union employees. The study was a comprehensive and credible report regarding our
pay and hinge benefit practices. The results and accompanying recommendations have been
based upon the oblectve resew of an independent outside consultant. The report has been
reviewed in depth with the Council, and employees have parodpatetl in the study and been
updated as it progressed. We are hopeful that the Government Operations Committee and
ultmetely the Gty Council will approve rine various recommendations presented herein and in
the final Report of the Consultant.
Staff will be prepared to review this report and any aspects of the study needing further
clatficaton at Tuesdays meeting. In the meantime, should you have any questions, please
feel free to contact me at your convenience.
5 1I
07 053
Wage Survey Observations and Recommendations
Haman Rcomx ren Problem, LLC has had en oppoltanity to survey private, not for profit
and public sector organizations for the purpose of assessing the City of Bangor's pay
classification system (payscales). Our goal was ro determine how Bangor's payscales
mmpared m prevailing marketplace wage rtes, and to make recommendations, if
necessary for adjustment or modifications
Om firm surveyed nearly 50 organizations in order to obtain a sampling representative of
the tijeedth and diversity of Bangor's 27 establisbedpayscalm, Wesmmweyedova100of
the City's 180 non -radon positions in order to insure that each payscale was fairly
represented in the survey. Based upon the scope of work, we are wnfident that the
survey data is representative and a fah comparison to the City of Bangor.
The survey work and resulting analysis has led as to conclude that Hangar's existing
payscales only needed adjusting, not a full-scale restructrving. That is we was able to
work within the existing structure, making adjushnents to the various steps with the
current payscales. The only exception to this is our recommendation to cresta a
Professional, Administrative, and Technological (PAT) 0 scale, as an addition to the
current fourPAT payscales.
The newly developed mul proposed payscales are derived from are midpoint survey dam
and there are tailored m the City's current eleven step pay classification system.
Typically, we recommend a forty prevent (40%) spread between entry pay and maximum
Pay levels. Given that the current City plan uses a thirty five percent (350%) spread from
minimum to maximum, (which is directly tied m the merit performance evaluation
system), ourproposed payscales continue the current 35% spread.
Om review determined that the current payscales within the existing six categories were
all below the prevailing market mass. Given that the City has Out undertaken a complete
payscale review since 1989, this finding was not mexpected. The analysis involved
comparing Use coconut Barmgor midpoint of each payscale to the midpoint of 003 survey
positions, which represented each of the various payscales. The POLE (Protective
Occupations act Law Enfrcement) payscale midpoints ware the farthest from the
current market ones at 83.75% While the PAT (Professioad, Admhdstrstive, and
Technological) payscale midpoints were the closest In the prevailing rake at 9I9%. The
reletiooship of anent midpoints In s ey midpoints for all job categories is detailed
below.
Comparison of Current Payscake Midpoints to Survey Midpoints by lob Category
Protective Occupations and Law Enforcement(POLE) 83.75%
Clerical, Office Machine Operation, Technician(COMOT) 88.70%
Executive(Exod 89.20%
Labor, Trades and Contra (LTC) 90.60%
Supervisory and Managerial (SW 90.6Wh
Professional, Administrative and Technological(PAT) .91.90%
Homo RpnumeFucn LW1E11eoo GoUIiebenJCondd l3. ryla, In F,indpba Eeeculbe Viee Rmidena 13
SI USRouw l.3We R3e5cvWewA Heine 04074
(2M 510,7033• Q(n) 5104032 Fix, Into(oy,wlneMpe cream
07 0533
With the paysedes that have been proposed, the comparison of the proposed midpoints k
stavey midlands would yield the knowing relationship.
Comparison of proposed Payscale Midpoint to Sarvey Midlands by job Category
Protective Occupations and law Enforcement (POLE) 99.75%
Clinical, Office Machine Operation, Technlclaa(COMOT) 98.50%
Executive (Exec) 97.90%
Labra, Trades and Crafts (LTC) 96.30%
SuPerissaY and Managerial (SAM) 98.50%
Professional, Administrative and Technological(PAT) 98.800/0
Based upon am analysis and review, we offer the following recommendations for the
City's consideration.
1. Adjust the various payscales in accordance with the revisions contained within
dds report to more closely reflect prevailing marketplacepayrams,
2. Establish a new PAT 0 payscale. This reflects the need In create a higher level
PAT scale for certain Positions identified by the survey where mount midpoint
rates wen inconsistent with the prevdling market mks and/or them were
identified internal Nutty issue, positions recommended kr inclusion in the uew
paysede include: Finance Manager at BIA, Assistant City Solicitor, Risk
Manager, Information Technology. Manager asW Labor Relations Otfrca, when
the position is filled on a full-time basis.
3. Continue the current practice of making anal adjudoundso dl paysalesThis
will greatly assist in keeping the payscda relatively aunt and in step with
Prevailing market rtes. Without the annual adjusunent which have been made
since 1990 (except two yeas when no adjustments were made due to budget
earnings), the City's PsYsales would have been dramatically lowaad a come
significant restructuring may have been necessary.
In conclusion, we believe that the recommendatious noted above should receive
coaideution by the City Council. We would describe these adjustments as necessary in
order to keep Bangor's pay plan competitive. B is our belief that these constitute mins
refinement in an existing pay classification plan that has worked well over the past 17
years. The plan is is need of a tuno-uq not a major overhaul, which is gad news far
Bangor and its employees.
xuman xemva PoMm,1.LC. eiii DU. cnmlI Mounce x'fyln, le. Rmelpab Rexav Vim Rmldma 14
51 US awn 1, San V - SmbnorO Maine 01074 3
001)510-70))•(207)510-M32 Far al Wnaln,ivmin n.cmn
07 053
Fringe Benefits Recommendations and Observations
Hmnen Resource furnace, LLC has had an opportunity to survey private, mot for profit,
and public sector organizations for the purpose of assessing the City of Bangm's fringe
benefit program. Our goal was to determine if Hangar's offerings were competitive with
Prevailing marketplace pocticae. That is, does Bangor offer a fringe benefit package than
serves In attract end retain qualified employees, while at the same time recognizing that
public sector funding has certain inherent limitations the may not be present is other
orgm izations?
Overall, our madysis showed that Bangor has a very competitive fringe benefit program
Art its tum-ru mnized employees. A key component in this deturementon is the overall
cost of fringe benefits prounum as a percentage of payroll. This factor can be used to
compere the relative strength or weakness of your fringe benefit program to other
organizations in the survey. The cost of fringe benefits for the other surveyed
organizations ranged from 11% to 56 °A, with the average at 30.9 %. The coal of
Bangor's fringe benefit Perlman was calcthded A 31.0 %. The similarity in these
percentages indicates that Bangor is neither trailing nor leading, but rather, is
competitively positioned in its overall fringe benefitpackage.
ffaving down Nat (Uncludon, however, there are several recommendations which should
be considered to maintain internal equity and In remain competitively positioned with
common marketplace munices. The list is not prioritized, nor have cost estimates been
determinM for each specific recommendation.
Rem unevdations
1.) A significant number of surveyed organizations offer health and dental insurance to
frust regular part time workforce. While the City offem an Earned Time-OH(BTO)
program to this group of employees, them is no provision for heahh or dental
benefits. The lack of this benefit causes considerable turnover, particularly
involving the position of bus drivers at BAT/Commlmity Connector. A majority of
surveyed entities assist this group of employeeswith a pro -rated or reduced
employer contribution, while other organizations make the programs available at
the employer's full coat. Human Resource Partners Would now that given the total
Own of these benefits, it is unlikely that part-time employees could afford or would
elect to participate without some meaningful level of City contribution. It is our
observation that the City is not competitive in this area.
2.) The cunevt vacation schedule provides for 3 weeks of vacation at the completion of
six years of service and 4 weeks of vacation at the completion of fifteen years of
service. The next increment is 5 weeks of vacation st twenty years of service. The
length of time to achieve the work week of vacation seems unusually long — nine
years. It is more customary to are the movement w the fourth week at the 12 -
13 year interval. This also more evenly spaces out the years of service necessary to
move from 3 to 4 to 5 weeks of vacation. I would also now that nearly all of the
Home ReeourtePeMtti LIC ,Men U. GzptiMenOCaneW H. ryleSlr.rPrwsipHlFkeeulire Vfae Preeitlmn 15 I�
51USPuule t, 510R2r Pax-huagamMunerema
(20'6310.]¢3 1 (Em35109032 iez • Intc�muma,gnnem.mm
07 053
City's current collective bargaining agreements recogrdze this issue, and it has been
addressed by adding a 3 A, weak acemal rate following the eleventh year of service.
Ether of these approaches would help remedy the curs nt situation, and would
make for a more equitable vacation schedule for non-union employees.
3') There are nine employees (primarily Department Heads or Division Directors) who
receive an annual mileage stipend in Gee of a city vehicle or having m keep tack of
Whad mileage. These rams were last adjusted in 2003 and we recommend Not the
City consider making appropriate modifications to these amounts, reflecting the -
ar"'h n d costs to operate personal vehicles since that time. One possible approach
would be to use the percentage change in the IBS approved mileage rate bum
January 1, 2003 to laniary 1, 2006.
4.) The City's concent sick leave policy allows employees to accrue sick leave time, but
prohibits it use, during the first six months ofemploymeat. This policy encourages
employees to come to work sick (and spread illness to healthy employees) m risk
not being paid for the days) of absent& 'Ibis is an older practice that has moved
out of style ova the years. Additionally, with both parents working in the majority
Of households, when a child is sick, one or the other of the parents typically must
stay home. Eliminating this provision in the toren policy would be a minor
change, but would be an attractive and appreciMN benefit by newly bbed
employees.
5.) Bangor bas a rather unique roamer of handling additional hours worked by its
Department Heads, Division Directors, Supervisors and Managers Recognising
that these positions typically require more hours thm the standard workweek
(primarily due to the number and fsaquency of beforelafter hours mestingsf the
City allows this group Of Exempt employees to accumulate non -paid compensatory
time off on an hour for hear basis after they have worked more than 5 hours above
the pomml workweek up to a maximum of 20 hours. For example, if as
employee's normal workweek was 40 hours, than he/she would have to work to 45
horns, before compemsatery time would begin to accumulate. All compensatory
time is recorded sed appears on employees' paycheck stub. This s,amm was
developed in the 1990's in order to back employees' time and to provide for
accountability. Many comments ware received from exempt employees who believe
this system is unfair, particularly given that hourly employees cans either oveuime
(pay at time and oneo-haf) or compemamry time (at have and one halo. immediately
alter the 40 hour work week has been achieved. And it is not uncommon for these
employees who are treated differently m work in the same department, division or
side by side, in carbon instances. Evempt(or selasied) employees in Bangor receive
an additional nor better benefits than hourly employees, and based upon the
interviews conducted, the curets system appears to create a terrain level of
dissatisfaction in this level of the organization. We would recommend the
following for consldualmse Executive level employees (the City Manager and 13
key Department heads) would continue to be required to work 5 hours beyond the
normally scheduled workweek. The maximum accumulation of compensatory time
Homrn Acro ii :i In. LLCcpllen U. GobLeb anti 1:111N.Tyler, k - Pnnelgly a.Eveeunw via PmMOO 16
SIIA4AWk1h510-t2•Snt-mfo@MeaeO e
f20'n 510.]033 • (2PG 3104032 Pu • mfo®muneM1pmnners.rnm
07 053
would increase from 20 to 40 boors. All (0nr exempt employees would be required
to work an additional 2 %hours beyond their normally scheduled workweek, before
compensatory time would begin b accrue. Maximum accumulation for this group
of employees would be adjusted in 40 hours as well. We believe Nese proposed
changes would improve morale and create a fairer system for these employees.
Observations
6.) While it is typical for organizations to provide at least I times the employees salary
in life insurance as a benefit, given the count system in place under the Maine
State Retirement System which allows employees to purchase different levels of
insurance through payroll deduction, we do not see the need for the City to add Use
bendflucast to the current £doge benefit package. Also, upon retirement, the City
pays for a portion of the retiree's G& insurance coverage. This is a five year
declining schedule, beginning at 100% and ending at 40 %of the retiree's average
final compensation (AFC) with the City. -
7.) Regarding health insurance benclus, a majority of the organizations surveyed are
moving away or have moved away from the Full Service (Traditional) and older
Style MAO plans and are moving toward plans such as Preferred Provider Option
(PPG's) or other plans which may involve higher deductibles, w-pays'and oubof-
packet expenses, including reduced benefit levels in some cirnumalances. Bangor
has recently introduced a PPO plan to its offering, which we believe is appropriate.
While expervsive her both the City and its employees, employees clearly joy and
appreciate the two older style plans. Given the high costs of the Full Service and
HMO plans, Bangor's approach to having employees contribute mode through a
Abased in sharing of firma cost increases (fend to Percentage limit; established
under LD #I u this cam), appears to be reasonable. Longer term, we believe the
City's direction of allowing newly hired employees to participate only in the Pp0
Plan is also a positive step.
In conclusion, we believe that these recommevdztions (I through 5) should receive
consideration by the City CounciL We would characterize these as fine cooing as, farm
on puspective, the City's overall package is in good shape. But, them few items
would clearly enhance the City's image as an employer of choice in the greater Bangor
region mid would address several key issues identified by our analysis, employees, and
Hunan Resources division staff.
Hum®Reuurce Palnm, LLC�61kn D.GWiS Rune 1. SUINryleS]r.r Plletlpome 54074 mVeePreslEmu 17 IO
3r U00)' (], Sulrcp2 • Sw,Azwi@rnSn a wmee
120"n J10.]mJ•(Em)91o�]mlPurinfo�nJnNeunnenwm
07 053"
Cler-Iml, Office Machine OperatorTechnklan (COMOT)
Rouge Am Min Hr Min Aon Mid Hr Mid Ano Max HrM
I
Clment
proposed
27,963
28,447
14.34
14.59
32,760
34,008
16.80
17.44
37,557
38,477
1926.
1973
2
Cuu t
Proposed
25,085
26,914
12.86
13.80
29,386
32,175
15.07
16.50
33,696
36,403
17.28
1867
3
Current
ProposM
22,194
7x1,500
11.38
12.56
26,013
29,289
13.34
15.02
29,806
33,139
15.29
1699
4
Current
Prop
19,386
21,613
9.95
11.08
22,737
25,838
11.66
13.25
26,083
29,233
13.36
1499
5
Cement
PropmM
16,453
19,003.
8.43
9.75
19,246
22,718-
9.87
1165
22,069
25,703
tl.Jl
1316
19 t�
,i7. 053
Labor, Trades and Crafts (LTC)
Range _ Aon Min Hr Mm Ann Mid Hr Mid Ann Max Hr Max
I
Current
Proposed
31,262
32,936
15.03
15.83
36,629
39,374
17.61
18.93
42,016
44,548
20.20
21A2
2
Current
Proposed
28,038
30,953
13.48
14.88
32,832
37,003
15.78
17.79
37,627
41,865
18.09
20.13
3
Current
Proposed
24,T13
28,238
11.91
13.58
29,026
33,758
13.95
16.23
33,280
38,194
16.00
18.36
4
Current
Proposed
21,507
25,055
10.34
12.05
25,199
29,952
12.11
14.40
28,891
33,888
13.89
1629
5
Ganem
Proposed
18,325
20,757
8.81
9.96
21,465
24,814
10.32
11.93
24,606
28,075
11.83
13.50
LTC (S)
.Current
Proposed
43,493
44,767
20.91
21.52
52,915
53,518
25.44
25.73
58,448
60,551
28.10
29.11
LTC (BD)
Catsent
Proposed
23,130
25,055
11.12
12.05
27,102
29,952
13.03
14.40
31,075
33,888
14.94
16.29
LTC (LD)
Current
Pm sed
24,773
27,144
11.91
13.05
29,026
32,032
13.95
15.40
33,280
35,963
16.00
17.29
20 I O
07 053
Protective Occupations, Law Enforcement (POLE)
Range
Am Mfn
Rr Min
Ann Mid
Ar Mid
Ann Max
HrMax
I
Cu t
Proposed45,585
43,920
20.11
20.87
50,123
54,496
22.95
2495
56,347
61,657
25.80
2823
2
Current
Proposed
32,968
36,473
16.92
18.7
38,649
43,602
19.82
2236
44,304
49,332
2272
2530
3
C=ent
Proposed
25,126
34,043
12.88
17.46
29,425
40,697
15.09
2087
33,758
46,045
.17.31
2361
21 14
07 053
Professional, Administrative and Technological (PAT)
Range _ Ann Min Hr Min Am Mid Hr Mid Ano Max Hr Max
0
Cunent
Propose
0
48,674
0-
24.96
0
58,188
0
29.84
0
65,834
0
33.76
- 1
Current
Proposed
43,118
44,776
22.09
22.96
50,512
53,528
25.90
27.45
57,907
60,562
29.69
31.06
2
CL t
Proposed
36,379
37,745
18.66
19.36
42,619
45,123
21.86
23.14
48,859
51,053
25.06
26.18
3
Caveat
Proposed
29,640
31,726
15.21
16.27
34,746
37,928
17.82
19.45
39,853
42,912
20.43
22.01
4
Current
Proposed
22,942
28,382
11.77
14.55
26,884
33,930
13.79
17.40 .
30,826
38,389
15.81
19.69
m ZD
07 os°3
Supervisory and Managerial (SAM)
%age Ann Min Hr Min Ann Mid Hr Mid .Ana Max Hr Max
1
Current
Proposed
49,504 -
52,556
25.39
26.95
57,990
62,829
29.73
3222
66,477
71,085
34.10
3645
T
(}rent
Proposed
39,749
41,415
2038
2124
46,561
49,511
23.88
25.39
53,373
56017
27.38
29.73
3
Cuuent
Proposed
31,762
33,993
1628
17.43
37,201
40,638
19.08
2084
42,640
45,978
21.87
2358
4
LUrten[
Proposed
25,126
31,726
12.88
1627
29;442
37,928
15.09
1945
33;758
42,912
17.31
2201
23
2(
07 053
&ecuttve (EXEC)
Range Ann Min Hr Min Aon Mid Hr Mid Ann Max Hr Max
I
Cm t
Proposed
81,140
.84,935
41 b1
43.56
95,063
101,537
48.75
52.07
108,986
114,880
- 55.89
58.91
2
Current
Proposed
68,211
]2,032
34.98
36.94
79,911
86,112
40.98
44.16
91,611
97,428
46.98
4996
3
Current
Proposed
57,213
65,083
29.34
33.38
67,021
77,805
34.3]
39.90
76,830
88,029 -
39.40
4514
4
Uu
Proposed
52,962
54,644
27.16
28.02
62,049
65,325
31.82
33.50
71,136
73,909
36.48
3790