FIN 2019-10-28 Item 2B - Discussion - Non-Represented Employees' Compensation

Browse Search

INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 7 UPDATE: October 23, 2019 After the meeting on October 14, 2019, the Finance Committee wanted a historical look back as to why the DMB system and potentially the AWC survey are no longer valid solutions for classification and compensation. The DBM system is a good system for internal equity with our labor partners, as well as, in determining job specifications in relation to other job classes, i.e. in the case of reclassifications, it maintains equity amongst the other bands and generally maintains stability within the non - represented staff, based on decision authority and responsibility. However, there is also the negative approach to external equity and performing a true market analysis. As discussed in the previous committee meeting, the DBM pay scale is determined using a proprietary regression analysis which determines the band average top wage to market on a linear line. If the whole of the non -represented staff were at market, the analysis would show an average at +/- 0.00%. Obviously not all of are jobs are the same within market, so the regression analysis has variations that try and determine market. Resolution #1951 addresses the changes to salary in a market year, but I want to point out that the regression analysis and market has a distinct variation: • The B23 band market, based on the regression, has that band over market by 15.60%, however in a true market, the Deputy City Clerk is only 1% over market based on our comparators within our AV. • On the other end of the spectrum, the F102 band (City Administrator position) according to the regression analysis is under market by 4.44%, but according to our AV comps the position is under market 6.60%. To further exemplify this side of the analysis, the Police Chief position, according to regression, is 0.88% under market in the E91 Band, but in comparison with AV is 5.27% under market. Since 2009, there have been changes made to the DBM non -represented pay table that has not kept the regression analysis moving together. As discussed on October 14, 2019, the DBM system bands should move in conjunction with each other based on the market. If the system is changed from the recommended number increases, it can and has changed the regression analysis with no regard for market. The difference in regression can first be linked back to the market survey staff conducted in 2009 for application in even numbered year 2010. Below is an excerpt from resolution #1700 which was ultimately adopted for 2010 Non -represented compensation: 11/16/09 Regular Council Action: MOTION CARRIED 7 0 TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NUMBER 1700. • Ranges Al 1 -D61 wages for 2010 are based on the outcome of the trendline analysis. Wage increases for these Decision Bands shall be as shown on the attached Salary Schedule, Attachment A, pages 1 and 8. • Ranges D62 -F102 wages for 2010 will be on a "Cost -of- Living Holiday" (COLA Holiday), meaning there will be no wage increases on January 1, 2010 for positions in these Decision Bands. Any consideration for wage increases during 2010 for positions in these Decision Bands will be based on the ability of the City of Tukwila to pay such increases through improved budget and economic factors. The Finance Department, Z:\Council Agenda Items\Human Resources12019 NonRep FC Oct 28\2019 Non Rep Memo Final_Oct 28.docx 17