9/20/1988 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

SALARY SURVEY IMPLEMENTATION Acting Administrator Collins reviewed his memo, as follows: oar o County ep em er 14. 1983 T�: Commissioners DATE: FILE: SUBJECT: SALARY STUDY IMPLEMENTATION FROM: William G. Collins, 11 REFERENCES: Acting County Administrator BACKGROUND The highest priority matter assigned to me as I stepped into the position of Acting County Administrator was the implementation of the salary study prepared by Towers,. Perrin, Forster 6 Crosby ( TPF E C) . The study evaluated each job classification in the County in terms of a number of different factors, each of which was given a different weight. The intent apparently was to quantify the relative worth of different job classifications within the County system. The results of this objective quantification were necessarily. affected by the level of detail which each employee put into their job description and was without qualitative *,checks as to self-aggrandizement and puffery. Because the- outcome . was totally numerical based on the formula into which. the weighted- factors were inputted, some curious results occurred in terms of relative classifications. In my opinion the salary study is useful (although it clearly has some imperfections) for the vast majority of our non-exempt employees and laborers, that is, hourly rate employees. The study has serious shortcomings with respect to its evaluation of exempt and administrative employees,- especially mployees,especially in the top 30 to 50 positions in the County. The results of `the salary survey for the top administrative and professional employees within the County system were checked against the market -by sending salary surveys to nearby local governments. We received -responses in varying degrees of completeness from Brevard County,. Palm -Bay;, St. Lucie County, Martin County, Palm Beach County, and Port St. Lucie. The high, Mow and average salaries for each of these jurisdictions was averaged in order to determine a market range for administrative and professional salaries in this vicinity. Once this market information was determined, it was compared to our existing salary structure for top administrative and professional employees. The greatest disparities from our market survey were for the Community Development Director, who was substantially underpaid according to the market, and the Personnel Director and Emergency Management Services Director whose market salary range was � substantially lower than that indicated in the salary survey. The top administrative and professional positions in the County organizational chart were plugged into salary ranges based on market results, and the bulk of the approximately 500 County employees were given salary adjustments to reflect full implementation of the salary survey recommendations. Some necessary adjustments were ( that is department head to de and vertically ( that is wi organizational framework) . Al proposed ranges for each job c employee's placement within the I determined to allow each emp 9% for each year of service up employees who had 9 years s employee had 4 years of service 9% credit for each year of ser their proposed salary range. 1 in the Florida Retirement Sys because I believe it is psycho) your proposed range, with made to remove inequities horizontally )artment head, division head to division head) hin the hierarchy of each department's ;o, since the salary survey only indicated lassification it was necessary to calculate each proposed range based on the seniority factor. oyee to receive seniority credit at the rate of to a maximum seniority credit of 81% for those :rvice. This means for example, that if an with the County, the employee would receive vice and thus be placed 36% of the way into his method was chosen because employees vest .em on their 10th year of service and also )gically demoralizing to be at the maximum of no prospects of future advancement. 32 f 00f4 f'" ;c. E P ® 198J