HomeMy WebLinkAboutFIN 2018-09-18 Item 2A - Resolution - Compensation Policy for City Employees 7' It
Cityof Tukwila
a i o Allan Ekberg, Mayor
290a INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
TO: Finance Committee
FROM: David Cline, City Administrator
Rachel Bianchi,Deputy City Administrator
Erika Eddins,Human Resources Analyst
CC: Mayor Allan Ekberg
DATE: September 12,2018
SUBJECT: Review of Compensation Policy Resolution No. 1796
Update from September 5,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.
1
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).
2
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 3
Assessed valuation changes annually as reported by the Department of Revenue, Taxing District Levy
Table 30.
City 2017 Assessed Assessed Value 2018 Assessed Assessed Value
Value % of Tukwila 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 Tukwila'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.
3
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.
Follow Up from the August 21,Finance Committee Meeting
At the August 21,Finance Committee Meeting, Administration reviewed the following recommendations
with the Committee members:
• Reviewed results of the 2018 External Market Study for Non-Represented Employees;
• Recommendations and options for consideration on above and below market adjustments;
• Recommendations regarding how to address compression;
• Recommendations and options for consideration on comparability; and
• Recommendation on new recruitment incentives and the process for review of Non-represented
compensation.
The Committee reviewed the recommendations, provided input, and asked these recommendations be
discussed further at the Sept 5 Finance Committee meeting. In addition, based upon the results from both
the 2017 and 2018 external market studies,the regression shows that we are competitive with the market.
It was requested that Administration continue the current policy of conducting the external market study.
The Finance Committee asked for Administration to supplement the tables in Exhibits A.1 and A.2 to
show the 2018 market study regression results based upon+60 of Assessed Valuation to include the two
cities that were excluded from the original study based upon the+/-50%Assessed Valuation criteria.
Those cities are Issaquah and Shoreline and the Committee can see the impact of this change now
reflected in Exhibits A.1.1 and A.2.1. This analysis shows that the City remains competitive within the
market averages.
It was also requested that the table in Exhibit B be updated to include columns showing City populations
as a percentage of Tukwila's. Exhibit B.1 includes the population information as well as a column
showing the 2018 Assessed Values by County data. The County data provides the most current assessed
valuation figures available for cities and is included for comparison to the State Department of Revenue
which lags a year behind.
4
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 5
Follow Up from the September 5th,Finance Committee Meeting
Following the September 5th, Finance Committee meeting, staff updated the resolution to reflect the
following changes from Committee members:
• Increase timeliness of information—edits to A.2 and addition ofA.3
• Update comparability definitions—edits to B.1
o Use most current data from the County Assessors
o Update the policy to+75% in order to maintain stability in the comparable cities year
after year to mitigate changes in assessed valuation
o Include a secondary criteria of FTE count as a refining factor to provide a manageable
number of comparable jurisdictions
• Include policy direction on what makes a position considered to be in market—addition of B.3
• Include policy direction on what would happen if positions are found to be above the market
during a market survey year—addition of B.3
• Provide policy language on internal equity between non-represented and represented employees
during COLA years—edits to B.4
After the September 5`h, meeting, staff learned that effective January 2018,the Bureau of Labor Statistics
introduced the first changes to CPI since 1998. The former Seattle-Tacoma-Bremerton index,which
included King, Pierce, Island, Kitsap and Thurston Counties, is now the Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue index,
which includes King,Pierce and Snohomish Counties only. Staff recommends that the policy be updated
to reflect this new index and use this definition for"Puget Sound jurisdictions"referenced in section B.1.
This change would remove Bainbridge Island as a comparable jurisdiction. Edits to B.4.
Staff was asked to provide information on the market effect of these changes on non-represented
employees. Analysis shows that raising the assessed value to+75%keeps all City employees consistent
with the market. There is no significant variance between what was presented when just Issaquah and
Shoreline were added. The attached tables provide this analysis for non-represented employees.
The remainder of the schedule for review of the City Council Resolution No. 1796 is as follows:
September 18—Finalize recommendations for City Council consideration
September 24- Bring recommendation to the City Council for review and discussion
October 1 —Adoption of changes to Resolution No. 1796 for implementation
5
6
City of Tukwila, WA
Market Data Regression
16000
y=1.1162x+3376
R2=0.9851
14000
12000
10000
8000
6000
4000
C 2000
0
0 2000 4000 6000
8000 10000 12000
Max Avg Max Median Linear(Max Median)
00
City of Tukwila, WA
Market Data Regression - Revised Analysis
18000
16000
y=1.179x+3178.3
R2=0.9836 .•
14000 •
12000
10000 ..
•
8000
6000
• s M
C, X.
4000 c
2000 .
U
0
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000
• Max Median Tukwilla Linear(Max Median) ---
New Exhibit 9/12/18 +75/-50%AV EXHIBIT A.1.2
City of Tukwila, WA
Market Data Regression
16000
14000
y= 1.1758x +3171.4
R2=0.9816 " ..
12000
r-.
10000 iJ° C ..
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000
• Max Ave Max Median Linear(Max Median)
EXHIBIT A.2
ill Structure Comparison:Max Comparisons
Market Market Max Based on
Median Current Max Regression %Diff
Median
Hrly Results
All N/A N/A $27.12 $23.77 -12%
Al2 N/A N/A $29.30 $25.92 -12%
A13 N/A N/A $31.47 $28.06 -11%
B21 N/A N/A $33.65 $30.21 -10%
B22 N/A N/A $35.83 $32.36 -10%
B23 $5,975 $34.47 $38.00 $34.50 -9%
C41 N/A N/A $46.26 $43.09 -7%
C42 $7,276 $41.97 $48.89 $45.24 -7%
C43 N/A N/A $51.06 $47.38 -7%
C51 N/A N/A $53.79 $50.07 -7%
C52 N/A N/A $57.06 $53.28 -7%
D61 $10,071 $58.10 $58.04 $55.97 -4%
D62 N/A N/A $59.07 $58.11 -2%
D63 $10,639 $61.38 $61.15 $60.26 -1%
D71 N/A N/A $63.77 $62.94 -1%
D72 $11,453 $66.08 $66.88 $66.16 -1%
E81 N/A N/A $69.48 $68.85 -1%
E82 $12,416 $71.63 $71.58 $70.99 -1%
E83 $12,932 $74.61 $73.66 $73.14 -1%
E91 $13,302 $76.74 $76.23 $75.82 -1%
E92 N/A N/A $79.40 $79.04 0%
F101 N/A N/A $82.56 $82.26 0%
F102 $14,163 $81.71 $83.65 $85.48 2%
Negative%= leading market Positive%=lagging market
Average%Difference -4.8%
There are no current Non-Represented positions in Bands All,Al2,A13
Observations:
Current maximums for DBM ranges All-C52 currently lead the market
Beginning with D61,the ranges are aligned with market in a highly competitive manner
10
EXHIBIT A.2.1
1 .
Structure Comparison:Max Comparisons-Revised
Analysis w/Issaquah&Shoreline
Market Max Based on
Regression
Median Current Max %Diff
Results:
Hrly
Original
All N/A $27.12 $22.87 -16%
Al2 N/A $29.30 $25.14 -14%
A13 N/A $31.47 $27.40 -13%
B21 N/A $33.65 $29.68 -12%
B22 N/A $35.83 $31.94 -11%
B23 $36.61 $38.00 $34.21 -10%
C41 N/A $46.26 $43.28 -6%
C42 $43.19 $48.89 $45.54 -7%
C43 N/A $51.06 $47.81 -6%
C51 N/A $53.79 $50.65 -6%
C52 N/A $57.06 $54.05 -5%
D61 $57.89 $58.04 $56.88 -2%
D62 N/A $59.07 $59.15 0%
D63 $60.26 $61.15 $61.41 0%
D71 N/A $63.77 $64.25 1%
D72 $66.77 $66.88 $67.65 1%
E81 N/A $69.48 $70.49 1%
E82 $74.26 $71.58 $72.75 2%
E83 $76.31 $73.66 $75.02 2%
E91 $77.08 $76.23 $77.85 2%
E92 N/A $79.40 $81.25 2%
F101 N/A $82.56 $84.66 3%
F102 $84.25 $83.65 $88.06 5%
Average%Difference -3.9%
There are no current Non-Represented positions in Bands All,Al2,A13
Negative%=leading market
Positive%lagging market
Observations: Pay structure better aligned with market with inclusion of Issaquah
and Shoreline
11
New Exhibit 9/12/18 EXHIBIT A.2.2
Structure Comparison:Max Comparisons+75%/-50%
Market Max Based on
Median Current Max Regression %Diff
Hrly Results
All N/A $27.12 $22.82 -16%
Al2 N/A $29.30 $25.08 -14%
A13 N/A $31.47 $27.34 -13%
B21 N/A $33.65 $29.60 -12%
B22 N/A $35.83 $31.86 -11%
B23 $36.61 $38.00 $34.12 -10%
C41 N/A $46.26 $43.17 -7%
C42 $42.61 $48.89 $45.43 -7%
C43 N/A $51.06 $47.69 -7%
C51 N/A $53.79 $50.52 -6%
C52 N/A $57.06 $53.91 -6%
D61 $56.94 $58.04 $56.74 -2%
D62 N/A $59.07 $59.00 0%
D63 $61.38 $61.15 $61.26 0%
D71 N/A $63.77 $64.08 0%
D72 $66.83 $66.88 $67.48 1%
E81 N/A $69.48 $70.31 1%
E82 $75.43 $71.58 $72.56 1%
E83 $75.54 $73.66 $74.82 2%
E91 $75.54 $76.23 $77.65 2%
E92 N/A $79.40 $81.04 2%
F101 N/A $82.56 $84.44 2%
F102 $84.25 $83.65 $87.83 5%
Negative%= leading market Positive%=lagging market
Average%Difference -4.09%
There are no current Non-Represented positions in Bands All,Al2,A13
Observations:
Current maximums for DBM ranges All-C52 currently lead the market
Beginning with D61,the ranges are aligned with market in a highly competitive manner
12
Assessed Valuation Comparisons
EXHIBIT B
Puget Sound City
' y AssessedAssessed City
Comparisons within �
+75%/-50%AV City Co . ., . Value Value% FTE Fire 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
IPuyallup Pierce $ 5,148,032,791 0.89 269
ISeaTac King $ 5,405,585,665 0.94 112
Lakewood 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 $ 6,425,149,097 1.12 277
Bainbridge Island Kitsap $ 6,898,602,203 1.20 122
Edmonds Snohomish $ 8,177,283,180 1.42 220
Bothell King/Snohomish $ 8,760,887,474 1.52 328 X
Shoreline Snohomish $ 8,848,561,852 1.54 176
Issaquah King $ 8,989,557,112 1.56 248
Federal Way King $ 9,420,224,291 1.64 323
Auburn King/Pierce $ 9,555,039,113 1.66 437
13
REVISED 9/12/18 Assessed Valuation Comparisons EXHIBIT B.1
2017 AV 2018 AV %of Tukwila
Cities for Cities for Proposed %°f
P %of Tukwila 2017 FTE Tukwila FTE County Has Has
Market Market Comp MI
*2017 State DOR DOR Assessed %of Tukwila 2018 County Assessed Assessed Fire Police
Survey Survey Cities City MIPCounty Assessed Value Value Population Population Values Value Dept Dept
X X x Maple Valley King $ 3,268,616,351 56% 46 14% 24,900 127% $ 3,680,189,655 60%
X X x Lake Stevens Snohomish $ 3,324,196,683 57% 93 29% 31,740 161% $ 3,784,529,975 61% X
132 41% 30,860 157%
X X x Des Moines King $ 3,194,299,789 55% $ 3,823,309,451 62% X _
X x Mukilteo Snohomish $ 4,354,213,237 75% 124 39% 21,240 108% $ 4,745,542,557 77% X X
X X x Puyallup Pierce $ 5,148,032,791 89% 269 84% 40,500 206% $ 5,666,549,214 92% X
x Lakewood Pierce $ 5,410,414,843 94% 209 65% 59,280 302% $ 6,002,783,089 97% X
X X x SeaTac King $ _ 5,405,585,665 94% 112 35% 28,850 147% $ 6,165,328,557 100%
Tukwila King $ 5,736,568,228 100% 321 100% _ 19,660 100% $ 6,184,943,263 100% X X
X X x Lynnwood Snohomish $ 5,654,422,666 98% 300 109% _ 36,950 188% $ 6,272,081,312 101% X
X X x Burien King $ 5,608,165,807 97% 78 24% 50,680 258% $ 6,385,711,481 103%
X X x Marysville Snohomish $ 6,425,149,097 112% 277 86% 65,900 335% $ 7,144,089,843 116% X
X Bainbridge Island Kitsap $ 6,898,602,203 120% 122 38% 23,950 122% $ 7,542,154,879 122% X
X X x Edmonds Snohomish $ 8,177,283,180 143% 220 69% 41,260 210% $ 9,107,284,679 147% X
x Bothell King/Snohomish $ 8,760,887,474 153% 328 102% 44,370 226% $ 9,900,884,044 160% X X
X x Issaquah King $ 8,989,557,112 157% 248 77% 36,030 183% $ 10,152,241,433 164% _ X
X x Shoreline King $ 8,848,561,852 154% 176 55% 55,060 280% $ 10,228,874,349 165%
x Federal Way King $ 9,420,224,291 164% 323 101% 96,350 490% $ 10,301,293,691 167% X
x Auburn King/Pierce $ 9,555,039,113 167% 437 136% 78,960 402% $ 10,600,014,202 171% X
Mercer Island King $ 12,083,477,559 211% 205 64% 24,210 123% $ 13,326,314,672 215% X X
Renton King $ 15,035,333,726 262% 540 168% 102,700 522% $ 16,909,050,051 273% X
Kent King $ 16,335,686,545 285% 691 215% 127,100 646% $ 18,597,339,729 301%
Redmond King $ 18,631,080,894 325% _ 642 200% 62,110 316% $ 20,770,064,850 336% X X
*WA State Department of Revenue(DOR)data was used for the 2018 Market Survey.The most recent DOR data available at the time of survey is 2017 figures(data lags by one year.)
FTE=Full Time Equivalent Employees
County Assessed Values from County Assessor Data current 2018 values
Sorted by 2018 County Assessed Values
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
Hiring bonus offered to lateral police officers;Director level positions receive 40 hours vac upon hire;have
Federal Way paid up to$5k in relocation expenses when applicable
Issaquah None
Can offer vacation immediately upon hire;signing bonuses for PD;may advance to next salary step after 6
Kent 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
Management level non-reps may receive initial leave upon hire,and an on occasion a higher vacation accrual
Lakewood rate
Lynnwood None
Maple Valley Managers&Directors may negotiate for additional vacation M
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
Hiring bonus to lateral police officers;on occasion have given lump sum vacation or accelerated vacation
Renton accrual rate.
SeaTac None
0 n
16
nR.AcT
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. 1796.
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,
long-range City budget forecasts, and position rates for comparable jurisdictions, as
well as internal equity considerations, should assist in guiding 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 strike-thru 9-11-18 Page 1 of 3 1 7
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 of 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 by the end of the third quarter 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.
3. It is the responsibility of the City Council Finance Committee (or successor)
to ensure that the written presentations described above are delivered on schedule.
B. Compensation Policy.
1. All Puget Sound jurisdictions with +75/-50% of Tukwila's annual assessed
valuation,based upon the Departmcnt of Revenue data using the most current data
from County Assessors, will be used to create the list of comparable jurisdictions for
evaluation of salary information. A second criteria to be used to refine comparable
jurisdictions is employee population. 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. Positions that are 5% or more below the market and up to 10% above the
market are considered competitive with the market and will receive a market adjustment
the year the study is to occur. Those positions more than 10% above the market will
1 8 W:\Word Processing\Resolutions\Compensation policy for City employees strike-thru 9-11-18 Page 2 of 3
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.
43. The cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) in odd-numbered years for non-
represented employees shall be based upon 90% of the Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue
BrcmcrtonConsumer 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. Considerations for cost-of-living adjustment 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.
54. 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.
6-5. 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.
74. 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. 1796 is hereby repealed.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON,
at a Regular Meeting thereof this day of , 2018.
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
Christy O'Flaherty, MMC, City Clerk Verna Seal, Council President
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY:
Filed with the City Clerk:
Passed by the City Council:
Resolution Number:
Rachel B. Turpin, City Attorney
W:\Word Processing\Resolutions\Compensation policy for City employees strike-thru 9-11-18 Page 3 of 3 1 9
20
,..i.
�/i i_ s..
••,..
•
aN, rid ' 0
,
2905
C •
1 of Tkwil
Washington
Resolution No. 19 9h
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,
long-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 5-29-1.3 final
SB:bjs Page 1 of 3 21
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.
22 W:\Word 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 f,�F THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON,
at a Regular Meeting thereof this 3 day of ,� t^AJ , 2013.
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
C/1/11 Q r�� ��Christy O'Fla , MMC, City Cler Kathy Hod rd Co it Presi ent
APPROVED AS TO FORM M BY:
Filed with the City Clerk: 6/ --9—/3
Passed by the City Council:
Resolution Number: 1 'r]Yb
Shell . ersla , C rney
W:\Word Processing\Resolutions\Compensation policy for City employees 5-29-13 final
SB:bjs Page 3 of 3 23