Loading...
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