HomeMy WebLinkAboutFIN 2018-08-21 Item 2C - Discussion - Compensation PolicyCity of Tukwila
Allan Ekberg, Mayor
2906
INFOR ATIONAL E ORANDU
TO: Finance Committee
FROM: Stephanie Brown, Human Resources Director
CC: Mayor Allan Ekberg
DATE: August 15, 2018
SUBJECT: Review of Compensation Policy Resolution No. 1796
Update from July 17 Finance Committee Meeting
Note: This is a new informational memorandum with the intent to capture the compensation policy
review and discussion outcomes in preparation for discussion with the full Council.
At the July 17, Finance Committee meeting, Administration sought committee direction to finalize the
scope of the review of the City Council compensation policy. The committee requested that
Administration bring back recommendations on the following proposed policy change considerations of
above and below market adjustments, comparable cities, compression, recruitment incentives, and the
process for non -represented compensation review.
In addition, as directed by the Council, Administration has conducted the external market study using the
Association of Washington Cities and County Employee Salary and Benefit Survey for 2018. Once the
regressions analysis was applied to the raw data, the results show we are still close to market and are
considered very competitive (Exhibit A.1 and A.2). This was also the case when we did the regression
analysis for 2017.
In future years, to address the potential for above and below market wage adjustments, it is recommended
that Council adopt the Market Competitiveness standard provided by our Mr. Lawson, our compensation
consultant as it provides an objective guide to address when positions are out of alignment with the
market.
Option 1
The Market Competitiveness Standard:
+/-5% to +/-10% - Competitive with market
+/-10% to +/-15% - Possibly Misaligned with market
+/-15% and above - Significantly Misaligned with market
For positions that are possibly and significantly misaligned with the market would require review of the
data to ensure the appropriateness of market data and review of job classifications to ensure appropriate
placement.
55
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 2
Below are three examples of a process Council could adopt using the Market Competitiveness Standard:
OPTION A — External Market Study
• During External Market Study (for even numbered years) — Positions that are 5% or more below
market and up to 10% above are considered competitive with the market and will receive a
market adjustment the year the market adjustment is to occur.
• Those positions 10% to 15% above the market will not receive an adjustment during the year the
market adjustment is to occur and will warrant further evaluation and possible reclassification. If
further analysis results in reclassification, any adjustments will be made in alignment with City
policy.
OPTION B — Internal Equity
• Considerations for cost of living adjustment (COLA) for odd numbered years will be based upon
internal equity with represented groups to determine if an adjustment is warranted.
Administration will inform City Council if an adjustment is warranted prior to implementation.
OPTION C — Written Justification for Misaligned Positions
The other option would be to update the current language in Resolution No. 1796 Section B.2. to state "If
the City's pay schedule for any classification that does not represent the average of comparable salary
ranges (+/-10%) written justification must be provided to the City Council."
2. Compression
As it relates to defining Compression, Council Resolution No. 1796, states, "The goal of the City is to
mitigate or avoid salary compression issues where possible. An example of salary compression would be
when a non -represented supervisor earns less or is projected to earn less than those that he/she supervises
due to contracted wage increase."
During the Council work session Mr. Lawson, our consultant expressed that compression cannot be
totally mitigated. Therefore, Administration recommends that Council retain the current definition
reflected in the resolution as it is referenced above. It is further recommended to review the salary
structure more frequently preferably in the year a market study is done to ensure that wage adjustments
that occur over time do not create compression between salary bands.
3. Comparability
During even numbered years when an external market study is conducted, the Administration uses
Council Resolution No. 1796 parameters for comparability which looks at "All Puget Sound jurisdictions
with +/-50% of Tukwila's annual assessed valuation, based upon the Department of Revenue data, will be
used to create the list of comparable jurisdictions for evaluation of salary information." The issue of
comparability has been discussed during the review of this resolution, specifically, do the parameters of
+/-50% reflect the market to which we compare, or should the Committee also consider other factors to
determine external market comparability.
Mr. Lawson, our compensation consultant shared with the Council at their work session on June 19, that
comparability factors could include employee population, assessed valuation double or half the size of
Tukwila, geography, and demographics. Whereas, Administration would not recommend considering
assessed valuation of double the size of Tukwila, consideration of going above +50% would provide more
consistency where jurisdictions come in and out for comparison. For example, in the 2017 Market Study
Issaquah and Shoreline were included since they were within +50% of A.V. In the 2018 Market Study,
these two cities increased to 54% and 57% of A.V. and therefore were excluded (see table below).
56
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 3
Assessed valuation changes annually as reported by the Department of Revenue, Taxing District Levy
Table 30.
City
2017 Assessed
Value
Assessed Value
% of Tukwila
2018 Assessed
Value
Assessed Value
% of Tukwila
Tukwila
$5.040
1.00%
$5.736
1.00%
Shoreline
$7.426
1.47%
$8.848
1.54%
Issaquah
$7.385
1.46%
$8.989
1.57%
Assessed Value represented in Billions
In addition, given that these concerns have been raised by the Non -Represented Employees group and in
previous discussions, the following are some suggested options for your consideration that will mitigate
the inconsistency the current policy parameters impose.
OPTION 1
"All Puget sound jurisdictions with +75/-50% of Tulcwila's annual assessed valuation, using the most
current data from County Assessors, will be used to create the list of comparable jurisdictions for
evaluation of salary information." As reflected in Exhibit B, the assessed valuation comparison table, this
would serve to eliminate the in and out annually of comparator jurisdictions. If consideration were given
to this option, Administration recommends a "second criteria to assessed valuation, to include employee
population of similar size". As Exhibit B also shows, by increasing to +75% of assessed valuation there
would be more similar employee populations to compare to Tukwila.
OPTION 2
Make no change and retain current policy statement of comparison to "All Puget Sound jurisdictions of
+/-50% of Tukwila's annual assessed valuation".
New Recruitment Incentives
The Finance Committee requested more information on what other cities do to recruit and retain
employees. Twenty- five (25) Puget Sound Cities were surveyed and responded to our request on the
attached Exhibit C. The data shows that some cities offer hiring bonuses specifically to law enforcement
positions, additional vacation hours, or the ability to use vacation sooner than the typical six months.
Several cities did not offer any recruitment incentives.
As has been discussed in previous committee meetings, Tukwila currently offers hiring bonuses to attract
applicants to highly competitive positions such as Building and Construction Inspector, or Law
Enforcement positions. Mr. Lawson, our compensation consultant, shared with the Council that a market
premium may be appropriate to implement specifically when you want to attract and retain jobs that are
competitive in the labor market.
Administration recommends the Committee define in its policy a statement that reflects its philosophy of
providing above average benefits, hiring incentives and competitive pay to attract, and retain a highly
skilled, qualified and trained workforce.
57
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 4
Non -Represented Compensation Review Process
The final item for discussion is should the process for non -represented compensation review change.
Currently Resolution No. 1796, provides that non -represented employee compensation be reviewed
annually to consider external market or a cost of living adjustment. Unlike represented groups, the non -
represented compensation review typically is presented in the fall prior to the year of implementation.
This is a more public process. Administration recommends adopting review of non -represented
compensation at the time the budget is being adopted so that external market and cola wage adjustments
are a more efficient and seamless transition covering a two-year period versus an annual review process.
The remainder of schedule for review of the City Council Resolution No. 1796 is as follows
September 5 — Finalize recommendations for City Council consideration
September 10- Bring recommendation to the City Council for review and discussion
September 17 — Adoption of changes to Resolution No. 1796 for implementation
We look forward to discussing these recommendations and options at the Finance Committee meeting on
August 21, 2018.
58
16000
14000
12000
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
0
City of Tukwila, WA
Market Data Regression
y = 1.1162x + 3376
132= 0.9851 ,.-••••
2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000
• Max Avg
Max Median Linear (Max Median)
Structure Comparison: Max Comparisons
All
Market
Median
Hrly
Current Max
Max Based on
Regression
Results
% Diff
N/A
$27.12
$23.77
-12%
Al2
N/A
$29.30
$25.92
-12%
A13
N/A
$31.47
$28.06
-11%
B21
N/A
$33.65
$30.21
-10%
B22
N/A
$35.83
$32.36
-10%
B23
$34.47
$38.00
$34.50
-9%
C41
N/A
$46.26
$43.09
-7%
C42
$41.97
$48.89
$45.24
-7%
C43
N/A
$51.06
$47.38
-7%
C51
N/A
$53.79
$50.07
-7%
C52
N/A
$57.06
$53.28
-7%
D61
$58.10
$58.04
$55.97
-4%
D62
N/A
$59.07
$58.11
-2%
D63
$61.38
$61.15
$60.26
-1%
D71
N/A
$63.77
$62.94
-1%
D72
$66.08
$66.88
$66.16
-1%
E81
N/A
$69.48
$68.85
-1%
E82
$71.63
$71.58
$70.99
-1%
E83
$74.61
$73.66
$73.14
-1%
E91
$76.74
$76.23
$75.82
-1%
E92
N/A
$79.40
$79.04
0%
F101
N/A
$82.56
$82.26
0%
F102
$81.71
$83.65
$85.48
2%
Negative % = leading market Positive % = lagging market
Average % Difference
Observations:
Current maximums for DBM ranges All - C52 currently lead the market
Beginning with 061, the ranges are aligned with market in a highly competitive manner
')(111;17
60
Puget Sound City
Comparisons within
+75%/-50% AV
EXHIBIT B
Assessed Valuation Comparisons
Assessed Italue Value E F Dept
Des Moines King 3,194,299,789 0.55 132
Maple Valley King 3,268,616,351 0.56 46
Lake Stevens Snohomish $ 3,324,196,683 0.57 93
Mukilteo Snohomish 4,354,213,237 0.75 124 X
Puyallup Pierce 5,148,032,791 0.89 269
SeaTac
Lakewood
King $ 5,405,585,665
0.94 112
Pierce $ 5,410,414,843 0.94 209
Burien
King $ 5,608,165,807 0.97 78
Lynnwood
Snohomish $ 5,654,422,666 0.98 350
Tukwila King $ 5,736,568,228 1.00 321 X
Marysville Snohomish
Bainbridge Island Kitsap
Edmonds
Bothell
Shoreline
$ 6,425,149,097
$ 6,898,602,203 1.20 122
Snohomish $ 8,177,283,180 1.42 220
King/Snohomish 8,760,887,474 1.52 328 X
1.12 277
Snohomish
Issaquah King
Federal Way King
Auburn King/Pierce
8,848,561,852 1.54 176
8,989,557,112 1.56 248
$ 9,420,224,291 1.64 323
9,555,039,113 1.66 437
61
62
Comparison on Recruiting Incentives
EXHIBIT C
Surveyed 25 Puget Sound Cities below are the responses received.
Puget Sound Cities
Recruiting Incentives Offered
Auburn
None
Bainbridge Island
None
Bremerton
Hiring Incentives Policy for difficult to fill positions. Bonus up to $5k
Burien
At times offer a bank of vacation hours (management positions)
Edmonds
None
Federal Way
Hiring bonus offered to lateral police officers; Director level positions receive 40 hours vac upon hire; have
paid up to $5k in relocation expenses when applicable
Issaquah
None
Kent
Can offer vacation immediately upon hire; signing bonuses for PD; may advance to next salary step after 6
months instead of one year. Have paid for travel to and from for final interviews
Kirkland
Hiring bonus for police officer
Lake Stevens
May provide more vacation to non -reps at hire
Lakewood
Management level non -reps may receive initial leave upon hire, and an on occasion a higher vacation accrual
rate
Lynnwood
None
Maple Valley
Managers & Directors may negotiate for additional vacation
Mt. Lake Terrace
Can offer higher vacation accruals and/or ability to use accrued vacation before 6 months
Mukilteo
On occasion have offered higher management positions vacation (2-3 weeks) upfront
Renton
Hiring bonus to lateral police officers; on occasion have given lump sum vacation or accelerated vacation
accrual rate.
SeaTac
None
64
Washington
Resolution No. J ' (3062
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, ESTABLISHING A COMPENSATION
POLICY FOR CITY OF TUKWILA EMPLOYEES AND
REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 1387.
WHEREAS, the City believes that the purpose of a compensation program is to
facilitate recruiting, retention, development and productivity of employees; and
WHEREAS, the City desires to utilize standardized policies, procedures and
processes, wherever possible, for compensating all employee groups, both represented
and non -represented; and
WHEREAS, the City recognizes that current economic conditions and forecasts,
Tong -range City budget forecasts, position rates for comparable jurisdictions, as well as
internal equity considerations should assist in guiding in the compensation of
employees; and
WHEREAS, the City has made a determination to, when economic conditions
allow, review and adjust non -represented employee salaries via a market analysis to
that of the average of comparable jurisdictions in even -numbered years, and to provide
a cost -of -living (COLA) allowance in odd -numbered years; and
WHEREAS, the City has made a determination to, when economic conditions and
negotiations allow, provide represented employees with salaries that reflect the average
of comparable jurisdictions; and
WHEREAS, the City has made a determination to, when economic conditions
allow, provide benefits to represented and non -represented employees that are slightly
above the average of comparable jurisdictions; and
WHEREAS, the City Council will participate in setting negotiation expectations and
reviewing and approving represented employee group contracts;
W:\Word Processing\Resolutions\Compensation policy for City employees 5-29-13 final
SB:bjs
Page 1 of 3
65
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA,
WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The following statements and processes are adopted for the purpose of
guiding compensation programs for employees of the City of Tukwila.
A. Information to be provided to the City Council.
1. For Represented Employees. A written presentation of current internal
and local external public agency salary and benefit trends, including a salary and
benefits market survey of comparable jurisdictions, as defined herein, will be provided
to the City Council. This presentation must be made to the Council prior to the
commencement of negotiations with the bargaining units regarding salary and benefits.
The City Council and Administration will discuss represented employee group
negotiation expectations, negotiating points, salary and benefit change floors and/or
ceilings prior to the beginning and at appropriate points during negotiation sessions.
2. For Non -Represented Employees. A written presentation of current
internal and local external public agency salary and benefit trends, including a salary
and benefits market survey of comparable jurisdictions, as defined herein, will be
provided to the City Council every year that a non -represented salary increase is due.
Relevant Association of Washington Cities (AWC) data from the previous year's
Washington City and County Employee Salary and Benefit Survey, for the comparable
jurisdictions, will be used in the salary market survey.
B. Compensation Policy.
1. All Puget Sound jurisdictions with +/-50% of Tukwila's annual assessed
valuation, based upon the Department of Revenue data, will be used to create the list of
comparable jurisdictions for evaluation of salary information. It is desirable to use the
same comparable jurisdictions for both represented and non -represented employee
groups.
2. For non -represented employees, the City desires to pay the average salary
for the particular pay scale, as derived from the comparable jurisdiction data described
in Section B.1. If the City's pay scale for , any classification does not represent the
average of comparable salary ranges (+/-5%), written justification must be provided to
the City Council. For represented employees, the City desires to pay salaries that are
competitive to the City's comparable jurisdictions.
3. The cost -of -living adjustment (COLA) in odd -numbered years for non -
represented employees shall be based upon 90% of the Seattle -Tacoma -Bremerton
Consumer Price Index (CPI-W) Average (June to June). It is desirable to calculate
represented cost -of -living adjustments the same way, unless a different method is
authorized by the Council.
66
W:IWord Processing\Resolutions\Compensation policy for City employees 5-29-13 strike-thru
SB:bjs
Page 2 of 3
4. The goal of the City is to establish parity between represented and non -
represented employees' benefits. The City desires to provide employee benefits that
are competitive to the comparable cities described herein. The City will endeavor to
keep increases to annual health care costs under market averages. If costs exceed
market averages, adjustments will be made to reduce benefit costs.
5. The goal of the City is to mitigate or avoid salary compression issues
where possible. An example of salary compression would be when a non -represented
supervisor earns less, or is projected to earn less than those that he/she supervises
due to contracted wage increases.
6. If the Administration determines that a deviation from the above process
(in its entirety or for individual positions) is necessary, it will provide justification to the
City Council for review and approval prior to the adoption of any process change.
Section 2. Resolution No. 1387 is hereby repealed.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL
at a Regular Meeting thereof this
ATTEST AUTHENTICATED:
Christy O'F ah y, MMCI City Cle
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY:
Shell
rney
F THE CITY OF TUK ILA, WASHINGTON,
day of `,..) tjP , 2013.
Filed with the City Clerk: -
Passed by the City Council: to —)2
Resolution Number: 1 'Vf
INe1Word ProcessingResolutions1Compensation policy for City employees 5-29-13 final
SB:bjs
Page 3 of 3
6 7