Loading...
1974-09-189-1,8-74 An adjourned meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held on September 18, 1974, at 7:30 P.M. in the Albemarle County Courthouse, Charlottesville, Virginia, said meeting being adjourned from September 11, 1974. Present: Messrs. Stuart F. Carwile, Gerald E. Fisher, J. T. Henley, Jr., William C. Thacker, Jr., Gordon L. Wheeler and Lloyd F. Wood, Jr. Absent; None. Officer present: County Executive, T. M. Batchelor, Jr. The meeting was called to order by the Chairman. Mr. Wheeler said several months ago the Board authorized the employment of Friez, Schroeder and Lowe, Consultants, to draft a pay and classification plan for Albemarle County employees. This plan was received by the Board ten days ago and this meeting is being held to review the recommendations of the consultants. Mr. Rolfe Schroeder was present. In mid-June, his firm submitted a proposal for this project. The County Executive and his staff then discussed with them the scope of the project, what work would be performed and how it would be handled. They also discussed the basic principles involved in doing an objective, professional classi- fication and pay study. They determined that there was a need to insure that jobs bore a proper relationship, one to another, in terms of classification, so that employees are paid competitive salaries. In this way, Albemarle County can attract the best qualified employees for the amount of money available. The study was also to eliminate inequities where they existed and provide a degree of promotional opportunities. As the consultants discussed these various aspects with the staff, they recognized that there is a need for a formal personnel system for Albemarle County employees. This is particularly true in light of State legislation which became effective on July 1. This new law requires that all localities in Virginia which employ 15 or more persons have a personnel system, including a classification plan, and a grievance procedure. Mr. Schroeder said that the day after his firm's proposal for this study was accepted by the Board, members of his firm met with several members of the Board to review the concept of a classification/pay plan, the procedures and the time table to be followed. The c6nsultants began work on July 17 and, as originally agreed in the contract, presented their report on August 27. At the initial meeting with the Board, Mr. Wheeler had said he felt the consultants were a group of experts and he would rely on their judgment in making some of the difficult decisions that must be made in a project of this magnitude. The consultants started with a statement of duties written by each employee, a statement of duties written by the employee's supervisor and from those statements employees were classified so that people who are doing essentially the same kind of work are paid at essentially the same level. The~consultants made no attem-pt to reorganize any department, function, duty or responsibility, and did not make any recommendations on this in their report. They attempted only to provide a systematic 160 9-18-74 system for classification and pay of employees by studying positions, not the people filling those positions. They did not care whether the position was filled or vacant, whether it was new or an established position. They attempted to keep their report as objective and impartial as possible. An orientation for all county employees was held. Each employee was requested to fill out a position/description questionnaire. The consultants then came to the County offices and interviewed about 100 of the 130 employees to make sure the information on the descriptions was accurate. From this they were able to establish a series of about 40 different classes. These are general classes representing a specific type of work. These were then grouped into classes by occupational series. From these were selected benchmark classes which simply represent a large number of positions in a particular type of work. For example: they took the clerical series from the planning series, the real estate series, and the social service series. This represented about 90% of the work force. Then, they conducted a pay survey through the area with both public and private employers. The results of this survey were compared with the existing structure in the County and each class was assigned a pay range. (A pay range is a series of salaries starting at a beginning point and ending with a maximum point, about six steps higher, each pay range being separated by five percent and the steps within the pay range being separated by five percent.) Following that, each individual position was allocated. Then the salaries of the existing encumbents was used to allocate that person to a step within the pay grade. Any employee whose salary was beyond the pay scale was not given a salary increase unless he had worked for the County for ten years and been in the same job for at least five years and had not received any type of merit increase within three years. In that case, the consultants recommended that those employees receive a five percent increase in recognition of longivity. The con- sultants also recommend in their report that this system be used when an employee has reached the top of his salary range. After completion of this work, each employee was notified of his/her proposed classification with a notation that this was the position classification and salary which would be recommended to the Board. Each employee was then given an opportunity to review and appeal the findings if he/she felt an error had been made in judgment. There w-~e about 20 appeals; some brought about by employees, some by their supervisors. The consultants then prepared their report which is divided into a number of sections, including a section which describes the pay system and the philosophy used to arrive at the recommendations; the classification system and the philosophy used to arrive at the recommendations; as well as the technical material regarding specific positions. This report was then presented to the Board of Supervisors. In reviewing the present system, or lack of a system, the consultants found that the County has class specifications which have been misused in the sense that people were allocated to classes so that they could be paid a certain amount of money. They 9-18-74 were not doing the type of work described in the class specification. The County had pay ranges, but had no guidelines as to where an employee should be placed on the pay range. A true classification/pay system is a series of relationships between duties responsibilities, and people should be paid according to these differences recognizing performance and length of service. With the County's "half" system, there is no recognization for management responsibilities. In the County Executive's Office there is a position allocated as Assistant to the County Executive which is way below the proper level. The same is true of the administrative~position in the County Executive's Office. The assistant who is currently titled assistant director of finance is really a deputy. In the finance department there is an accountant performing professional accounting work who is titled an accounts supervisor. Also in the finance department are two office assistants who are really office managers. In the parks department there is a maintenance foreman who in fact is a parks manager. There was a position allocated to a Secretary III level in the real estate department which is actually an office manager. These are just a few of the examples that were found throughout the County°structure. The consultants also found that there is essentially no pay system. There is a salary range with a minimum and a maximum. People are hired in and assigned to a salary range sometimes separated by as little as $100; sometimes by as much as $500. Someone entering County service this year might receive a cost-of-living adjustment, that being a uniform adjustment for all employees, and a person hired six months from now might receive exactly the same salary. No recognition is given the person who has had on-the-job-training. This is completely ignored. There are no merit increases. There is no recognition of quality of work or length of service. People are being paid salaries without any regard to the relationship of one salary to another. Mr. Schr~er said he has heard it mentioned that no employee was downgraded. No one lost any money. He said when they made their original proposal, they had indicated to the Board that they would specifically not recommend, under any circumstances, that any employee lose money as a result of this study. They did not promise an increase, but did say they would recommend in those cases where an employee was off the scale that that employee not receive an increase unless the formula previously described was used. There were a lot of people who were overclassified according to the work they were performing. However, it was found that the class to which they were classified was underpaid. Consequently, through this study those people are put at the very top of their range and while they may get an increase now if this report is adopted, in coming years they will not get an increase as frequently as other employees who were properly classified. The most important part of any classification/pay study is the pay survey because this means dollars and cents to ~the employees. The pay survey is conducted by looking 162 9-18-74 at public and private employers within an area. Also by looking at the labor market and the pool from which people are recruited. It would do no good to compare salaries in Albemarle County with those in Fairfax County or New York City. The cost of living is different, the requirements for housing are different and Albemarle County does not hire people from those localities. In doing this pay survey, the consultants tried for a middle-of-the-road approach so Albemarle County would not be the highest or the lowest paying employer in the area. They wanted to give the County a system by which the County could attract qualified, capable employees with a salary that is sufficient to make the employees want to work in the County and more importantly to remain with the County. The importance of having employees remain with the County cannot be overstated. Each time a new employee is hired, that employee must be trained and training costs money. The consultants also tried to give the County a system which removes some of the inequities of the past and puts people in an equitable salary structure. There are several ways of allocating an employee's salary to a step within the pay scale. The simplest is to move the employee to the next higher step in his/her range. Another is to give the employee a full-step increase. This is the procedure which the consultants used and which is being recommended to the Board. This gives the employee recognition for service (the amount of time he/she has spent in learing his/her job), and is a way to compensate for the fact that employees have been underpaid. This "catchup" factor is a concept in classification and pay principles which is becoming more and more popular every day. Many jurisdictions are adopting this as a general rule on reclassification of positions. Pay is a difficult area because a decision must be made based on philosophy. The consultants are recommending this approach, but the final decision is the Board's. Mr. Schroeder said there was one final point he would like to make. There is a need for a personnel system in the County. The County has 130 employees at this time and the Board now has a study which took 30 days to complete. ?Every organization changes from time to time. Positions change and the study will have to be updated. The County now has a record keeping system which is inadequate. It does not reflect any history of the County or of the people or positions within the County government. A proper record keeping system is necessary when the annual budget is being prepared. Forget the person who holds a certain position. Information is needed when a positio~ starts with a particular set of needs and responsibilities and changes to another part of the organization. This is part of position control and is part of the reason for a personnel system. The other problem is the hiring pattern. As far as the consultants 9-18-7~t- 163 could detemmine~ people weme himed because of a specific need to fill a position. No meEamd was given to any melationship with any othem aEency. It is vemy impomtant that these melationships be considemed, if a clemk is himed at a hiEheP salamy than a cumment employee and that employee becomes awame of this: the County has a momale pmoblem if the new employee is himed in at the wPonE salaPy. The study showed the consultants that theme ame a Emeat numbem of people involved in pePsonnel administmation. The Boamd is involved~ as they should be~ fmom a policy makinE standpoint. People in the County Executive's office amc involved. Each aEency head is involved and yet the whole thine is not tied toEethem. The County now has an employee: althouEh he does not hold the title~ who spends 85% of his time doinE pemsonnel womk. But~ theme is mope womk that needs to be done in temms of developinE an application fomm which will pass "mustem"o The fomm pmesently in use does meet Fedemal mequimements undeP the Civil RiEhts Act: om the Equal 0ppomtunity law which passed in 1972 makinE equal oppomtunity applicable to local Eovemnments. Theme ate a numbem of FedePat laws which impact and point out the need rom a pemsonnel system: such as: ~the Faim Labom StandaPds Act which mequimes the payment of ovemtime fop houms womked in excess of 40~ the Occupational Safety and Health Act which on JanuaPy 1: 1975~ will be extended to local Eovemnment employees~ and theme is money available rom pemsonnel meseamch: pemsonnel development~ and pemsonnel systems and methods. This position would cost the County less than one pemcent of the paymoll. Mm. Schmoedem said that he and his colleaEues feel eomfoPtable with the plan~ but it is not up to them to implement same~ that is the Pesponsibility of the Boamd. He closed by sayinE that if this plan: om something close to it~ is not implemented~ the BoaPd will again be himing consultants in anothem yeam om so to do the same thinE aEain. Nm. Fishem asked if the Boamd adopts this plan~ if they will need to hime consultants to keep it updated. Nm. SchPoedem said the plan will have to be updated. One way to do this is by cmeating a pePsonnel position. The otheP would be to have someone in the County Executive's Office~ om a sePies of people: do this woPk. If this plan is adopted and maintained~ the Boamd should not need a consultant rom pemhaps ten yeams. Nm. Wood said he was impmessed with the pPesentation and the amount of woPk that has been done. He said this is what the BoaPd has been seekinE fop some seven yeams. It is difficult at budEet time to look at salamies and detemmine what a pamticulam pemson does since the Boamd membems ame Pea!ly only pamt-time. NP. Wood also approved of hirinE a personnel pePson. He said this could only 9-18-74 improve the entire system. Mr. Carwile said Mr. Schroeder and his associates had done a commendable job. There are some small areas about which he has questions, but basically he is satisfied with the work they did. Mr. Henley said the Pay plan presented appears to be what Mr. Schroeder had said, at the beginning, would be presented. He said there are a few things which need to be discussed but in the overall the plan looks good. Mr. Thacker said he favors a classification plan. Mr. Wheeler said before he made any comments he would like to discuss the plan with the department heads. Since they would probably be discussing individuals, he requested that this be in executive session. At 8:19 P.M., Mr. Carwile offered motion to adjourn into executive session to discuss personnel matters. The motion was seconded by Mr. Thacker and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. NAYS: None. At 10:30 P.M. the Board reconvened and upon proper motion, the meeting was adjourned. Chairman