Personnel/Administrative Affairs Committee

JOINT PERSONNEL/ADMINISTRATIVE AFFAIRS COMMITTEE AND BUDGET REVIEW COMMITTEE December 2, 2010 A meeting 7:05 p.m. inofthe the Aldermanic Personnel/Administrative Chamber. Affairs Committee was held on Thursday, December 02, 2010, at Alderman-at-Large David W. Deane, Chair of the Budget Review Committee presided, Members of the Personnel/Administrative Affairs Committee present: Alderman-at-Large Ben Clemons, Chair Alderman Kathy Vitale, Vice Chair Alderman Arthur T. Craffey, Jr. (7:06 p.m.) Alderman Richard P. Flynn Members Not in Attendance: Alderman Paul M, Chasse, Jr. Members of the Budget Review Committee present: Alderman-at-Large David W. Deane, Chair Alderman-at-Large Mark S, Cookson, Vice Chair Alderman-at-Large Lori Wilshire Alderman Richard P. Flynn Alderman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja Alderman Jeffrey T. Cox Alderman Diane Sheehan Members Not in Attendance: Also in Attendance: Mayor Donnalee Lozeau Alderman-at-Large Barbara Pressly Chairman Deane Alderman Craffey and Alderman Chasse may be here. They both had some sort of different work commitments. If they show up it is probably going to be a little bit later. UNFINISHED BUSINESS - None NEW BUSINESS - RESOLUTIONS R-10-60 Endorsers:Mayor Donnalee Lozeau Alderman-at-Large David W. Deane Alderman-at-Large Mark S. Cookson Alderman Richard P. Flynn Alderman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja Alderman Kathy Vitale PROVIDING FOR A REVIEW AND UPDATE OF THE MERIT PLAN MOTION BY ALDERMAN DEANE TO RECOMMEND FINAL PASSAGE Personnel - 12/02/10 Page 2 ON THE QUESTION Chairman Deane Mayor would you like to come up and join us? Alderman Wilshire Point of Order, do we have to take it from the table? MOTION BY ALDERMAN DEANE TO TAKE FROM THE TABLE R-10-60 MOTION CARRIED R-10-60 Endorsers:Mayor Donnalee Lozeau Alderman-at-Large David W. Deane Alderman-at-Large Mark S. Cookson Alderman Richard P. Flynn Alderman Mary Ann Melizzi-Golja Alderman Kathy Vitale PROVIDING FOR A REVIEW AND UPDATE OF THE MERIT PLAN Chairman Deane We spent a lot of time on this before. I didn't know if anyone had any questions or how you wanted to go about going through this. This is the merit employee rules and manual. This is division directors, department heads, etc. These are the on-unionized employees. Alderman Sheehan I was wondering if we had a redlined copy or a list of what the substantive changes are because I didn't see one. Chairman Deane There have been no changes made to this as of yet. What was given to us, that original R-10-42, basically had some subsequent changes such as the date and things of that nature. Mayor would you like to comment please? Mavor Lozeau Yes. If you are taking up R-10-42, which is the one that has the changes, I thought I would walk you through what the changes are if the committee is willing to let me present that. Chairman Deane Absolutely. MOTION BY ALDERMAN DEANE TO TABLE R-10-60 MOTION CARRIED Personnel - 12/02/10 Page 3 NEW BUSINESS - ORDINANCES 0-10-42 Endorser: Mayor Donnalee Lozeau ADOPTION OF AMENDMENTS TO MERIT EMPLOYEE RULES AND REGULATIONS EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2011 MOTION BY ALDERMAN DEANE TO RECOMMEND FINAL PASSAGE ON THE QUESTION Mavor Lozeau Thank you. I appreciate it. I'm not certain, is your copy numbers? Chairman Deane No. Mavor Lozeau If you wouldn't mind before we begin if we number it I think it would be very helpful. When I went through it to note the changes I numbered it. I just think it is a little bit easier. I think you are going to land on number 12. That first page you will see a change in the Introduction language. That change only relates to updating the correct NRO numbers because when our code book changed the numbers changed. The second change is on that same page under Performance Evaluations. There has been a lot of discussion with myself and staff about the anniversary date language. The language that is presented here under performance evaluations brings it in compliance under NRO 50-17, which requires that those evaluations be done on their anniversary date. Chairman Deane What did staff have to say about this? Mavor Lozeau Actually staff doesn't have a problem with changing the performance evaluation to anniversary dates. The concerns that came related to changing their pay increase to coincide with the anniversary date, which is proposed in here as well. I am going to offer a change on that when we get to it. Chairman Deane What does that do with other insurances though does that change all of that too like life insurance? How is the life insurance figured if there is any? Mavor Lozeau I don't know that that matters when we talk about performance evaluations being done on the anniversary date. That is pretty typical. When you talk about employee pay increases following the anniversary date Personnel - 12/02/10 Page 4 versus the fiscal year, in industry it is generally with the anniversary date. The City, for whatever reason, has been doing it on the fiscal year Chairman Deane Probably because of budget purposes. Isn't it a lot easier to budget like that? Mayor Lozeau Some might think it is easier to budget, but the way that we have been budgeting goes along with the same work that we are doing with the modeling for employees so I would know as a manager where my employee's anniversary dates were and what they should be budgeting accordingly assuming that they were going to have a positive performance evaluation so I don't think that is a problem, I think where the problem comes in is making that change right now could put some people in a waiting period that they are not in right now, and so I am going to recommend that we don't change that when we get to that section, and I do have language to distribute when we get to talk about that. Alderman demons If I could ask before we get through maybe some of the changes, Mayor I know that you mentioned to me that you had a group of people looking at this. Maybe you could just explain who was looking at it and whether these recommendations came from them or was it a collaboration between your office and... Mayor Lozeau Thank you for asking because I probably should have started with that. Actually the look at this started because of some of the changes that I made when I came in as Mayor with the staff in the Mayor's Office. Some of you recall that in that very first budget because the staff got hired in January, I didn't want them to have to wait 18 months to get an increase if they should. Plus I think the staff at least the direct administrative support staff in the Mayor's Office is likely to follow whoever the Mayor might be. So I think that they are in a different situation. I also changed the insurance and a couple of other things like that and legal counsel as well because they came in with me as a new Mayor. When I made those changes I had said to the Board of Aldermen that I would be looking at the merit plan to bring that before you so that we weren't out of compliance with it. We started talking with division directors and my senior staff pretty much right away. Then over the last couple of years we have been talking about it, and then things, as you know, got in the way and we didn't complete the task. In the last 6 months we have been talking more about it, and the group that has been working on it was the former CFO, Dorey Clarke from the Legal Office, Attorney McNamee, the two folks that are filling in in the H,R, Department right now, we did have discussions with the former H.R. Director, but I don't have one right now as you know, Lisa Fauteux and Susan Valaitis have been acting Director, sharing that job right now so they participated, and of course the entire cabinet has been involved. When you talk on and off over a couple of years and you discuss changes that is a little bit different than when you get sent one that says okay now here it is in writing, what do you think. When Attorney Clarke sent that out to the department heads and the senior management team we received 6 responses and they all focused on being concerned around if we change when people get their increase. I don't think that would be a reason to change performance evaluations. I think it is very difficult for managers to do all of their evaluations at the same time. I just think it is really hard, they are doing year end and boom they have all of the evaluations to do. I think spreading those out to the anniversary date throughout the year is a solid idea. I think there is a legitimate concern; about if you change the pay and when they get their increases that that could be a problem. Personnel - 12/02/10 Page 5 I wouldn't agree that it is a budget problem, but I would agree it is a problem that might seem like so why do you have to change that now, and you really don't have to you can still leave that on the fiscal year. When I propose the new language I am going to talk about the staff in my office and making an exception for that. That is overall what started this process. Alderman Clemons Thank you. Mayor Lozeau You are welcome. Alderman Wilshire Can you remind me how many merit employees we have? Mavor Lozeau We have about 120, Alderman Wilshire Thank you, Mavor Lozeau You are welcome. Alderman Cookson Thank you. I think I have just got a slightly different opinion about performance evaluations. Industry standard performance evaluations, and it may be different in municipal governments, but typically the way it is done is just that it is done at a particular time during the year at a single point, and the individual meets with the manager and establishes goals and so forth and then over the course of the year he is evaluated on those and has standard checkups and things like that, and then at the end of that performance management cycle is evaluated. I'm not sure I comprehend the benefit of spreading the performance management out over 120 different employees with different dates. Mavor Lozeau I guess that the industry that I have been involved with, which is my own business and assorted different companies I have worked for over the years, from my perspective and my experience that is the industry standard that an employee's anniversary date is their performance period, and you do set the goals, I agree with all of that, and at the end of that time you sit down one-on-one with them. That doesn't preclude goals for different departments or like employees sharing a same goal that might be repeated on different performance evaluations so depending on the measurements there are measurements that you would have for an individual employee based on their skill set or lack of skills that you may determine, and then there are broader goals that would be encompassed in their evaluation that relate to a department. Personnel - 12/02/10 Page 6 I think it is easier for a manager, and I can tell you with the employees that I have to do evaluations for, which are more than a dozen, it is a significant amount of work and I do a very thorough evaluation. The form I use is 4-5 pages long. It is not just doing the evaluation and putting it on paper it is also then the time with the employee to sit down and go through it. To fit that in in the month of June because the fiscal year starts July 1st, I think is a challenge. I can tell you I have read a fair number, random numbers of employee evaluations from different departments to see how they conduct those evaluations and we have been training staff now on how to do that more effectively or as I like to say a little more meat on the bones. But you can tell that most of the evaluations they are running out of time and they are checking boxes and they are not setting the kind of goals that I think we would all like them to set. I have been working with the division directors about that and about their managers and again training them for that. That is what I would put on the table. The ordinance says anniversary date. The merit plan doesn't. So whatever you choose to do we will need to either change the ordinance or change the merit plan. My position is it makes sense to change the merit plan for that. Alderman Cookson Thank you. Alderman Sheehan I have had similar experience with both; having to do an anniversary date and having to do a yearly. This specifically changing to a yearly in a very large company was very onerous because it became review weeks so you had a couple of weeks where you basically were not in the field and that was your sole responsibility, and if you are a working manager and I think many of our people are, it is very difficult to do that. However, we did run into there is no way to make it go forward in a whole number when you do have that jump. We could not find a way to do a pro-ration of an increase to get it to a 6 month jump as opposed to an 18 month jump. Mayor Lozeau You mean an increase in pay? Alderman Sheehan Right because what happens is you get a lower percentage because it was a shorter time period, but then your next one is done off of that base rate as well so 4 years later you have been building off of that because it is an accumulative build. I see both sides and if we have working management who have day-to-day responsibilities other than pushing paper and reviewing staff and doing H.R, work, I do think that it makes sense to spread it out over the year. It is very different when it is a very large company and everybody has the same goal for the same widget and everybody gets sat down at once and told what their goals are and then everybody is the same. It is not really like that in this application so I do see the value in spreading it out and having that work spread out, but I do see the pain of that year where you have the jump, it is either we eat it or they eat it. Mavor Lozeau Which is why you will see as it was proposed I had the raises coincide with the anniversary dates, but when we get to that tonight on page 4, I'm going to provide new language to change that back so that performance evaluations happen on anniversary date, but the increases happen with the fiscal year. I think that probably strikes the right balance. Personnel - 12/02/10 Page 7 It Is also worth saying and Alderman Cookson you might be interested in this as well, that each of our divisions now meet on a regular basis to set their goals for the coming year. We do it as part of our budget process. It still makes it very easy if we took the route on anniversary dates. I haven't had any supervisors that had a problem with the performance evaluation being done on the anniversary date, but the angst was the increases. Alderman Wilshire Thank you. I would agree with the performance evaluations on the anniversary date as well. I know I have 9 employees that work for me and to get them all in at one time would do them an injustice. Certainly to sit down to meet with employees to do the meat on the bones type of evaluation that you own them I think as employees and to yourself as a business. I think that makes a lot of sense. Alderman Clemons Thank you. I will be interested to see what the language is as far as the change to having the pay increase jump at the beginning of the fiscal year instead of on the anniversary date because I am wondering how many folks are going to have to wait a year for that, Mavor Lozeau Actually if I didn't make it clear, in this, as it was presented to you, it does have that language. When we get to that section I am going to propose language to leave it the way it is with the exception of my staff in the office. So it won't change if you agree with that. It will be what it is right now. Alderman Clemons Right so as of... Chairman Deane Why don't we wait until we get to page #4? Alderman Clemons Okay. Alderman Craffey Thank you Mr. Chairman. I too agree that the performance should be done on anniversary date. Having been on both sides of the issues both as a manager and an employee through the various industries I have worked in, it has always been that way. We get to spend the time one-on-one, and I do with my staff that I do, that I have always done is spend the time one-on-one to get the meat on the bones, to get to know the person. You did answer my question on the money part when the raise kicks in. Thank you for that. I do agree that the performance evaluation should be on the anniversary date. It is easier for managers. Chairman Deane Is there anything else on page #1? Okay so we are on to page #2. Personnel - 12/02/10 Page 8 Mavor Lozeau There are no changes on page #2. The change on page #3 is under termination. I have put in language that says "Direct administrative support staff in the Mayor's office will serve an indefinite term at the pleasure of the Mayor." That is the reality of the office. Chairman Deane Isn't that basically how it has been done? Mavor Lozeau Absolutely. I just thought we owed it to people to make it clear. Chairman Deane That would create quite a strange situation wouldn't it? Mavor Lozeau I did have one of the staff from Mayor Streeter's office in for the first few months. It worked out okay. Chairman Deane Well they are a direct report to you right? Mavor Lozeau Right. Chairman Deane So the language kind of makes sense. Mayor Lozeau On page #4 is where I have mentioned to provide you with some language. I have made ten copies, I thought I was going to be good, but there are 11 of you here. What you will see in what I have just handed out to you I'm recommending the current language and the only difference would be...you will see there is a strikeout where it reads in the very first sentence "from step 1 through step 12" and it is actually if you looked at the salary grid that is the last page of the document, the steps are actually up to 20, We have just struck that and just said "on the attached Merit Salary Schedule". That seemed to make sense. Then substantively if you look down to the fourth paragraph, the underlined language is the new language that I have put in where I say "However the direct administrative support staff in the Mayor's Office will be eligible for a 1 step advancement within their job classification on their annual anniversary of their date of hire provided that they attain a satisfactory performance evaluation." Now one could argue that other city staff also gets hired in January as the Mayor's staff would. I think that the Mayor's staff to have some employees that randomly end up getting hired in January is one thing, to have other employees that deliberately get hired in January with a new administration that comes in and to know that they are potentially here for 4 years maybe 8 years, but certainly not like some of our employees that give us 20 or 25 years, I think it is reasonable to put Personnel - 12/02/10 Page 9 their step increases in a yearly cycle that they can count on and that they are not in a position to wait potentially 18 months to get their first increase, and that is what this line... Chairman Deane The rate of increase after 6 months in July is that what you are saying? Mavor Lozeau Right so they wouldn't wait,.. Chairman Deane So they get a percentage increase in July and then another one again in January? Mayor Lozeau So you could do a half and half or what is proposed here is that they would get their full increase in January of each year. It has to be a full calendar year. Chairman Deane So what would that do on the grid? How would that move them on the grid? They are getting a full step in 6 months instead of 18 months? Mavor Lozeau No. I'm proposing that they are the only ones that get it on their anniversary date so they would get it in 12 months. Alderman Clemons Thank you. I can see this benefiting some people and being a detriment to others. I guess this is the scenario that I see playing out and I don't know when the hire dates are so I don't know how many people this would affect or anything, but I am going on a hypothetical. I assume that because this takes affect on July 1, 2011 that all of the performance evaluations the normal practice if you will of having them at the fiscal year would occur prior to July 1st because this ordinance isn't going to take affect until... Chairman Deane No January. Mavor Lozeau January. Alderman Clemons January 18t? Personnel - 12/02/10 Page 10 Mavor Lozeau It only relates to my direct administrators,., Alderman demons I am talking about in general, I actually think the language you added for your office makes sense. What I am talking about is if you go back to page 1 it says starting on July 1, 2011 employees will receive an annual evaluation on the anniversary of their date of hire. So what I am asking is typically the evaluations get done in June right so I assume that will still be the practice this June that everybody's evaluation is going to get done in June? Mavor Lozeau For where we are in this year yes. Alderman Clemons Okay. So my question is if you were hired in July or if you were hired in August or September you are going to get another evaluation 1-3 months later and get that increase the following July is that how...I know we have to start somewhere, but that is a long gap, Mavor Lozeau If you look at paragraph 2, I'm proposing that current language stay in place, which has them if they were hired after July 1st but before December 31$f, they are eligible for their increase on July 1st. Alderman Clemons Right. Mavor Lozeau And then the next one talks about but if they are hired between January 1st and June 30th they are not eligible until they have completed an entire fiscal year. That is the group that is typically at a disadvantage depending on how you look at it, I don't know how that language was arrived at. That is where the concern came from the supervisors was if I turn it to the anniversary date everybody that has already settled in and knows this system and has for however many years it has been in place, I don't know Alderman Deane if this was a change in '07 or if it had been what it was prior to that... Chairman Deane I don't remember changing any of that. In fact, I think we did discuss the Mayor's office but at that point in time there really wasn't a lot of discussion about that 18 months. The major point of discussion was about the compression with the fire department and all of the different little bonuses and bumps and double bumps. The biggest issue was the grid. There were people that were in grades that were way off the grid, and then by the time you brought in all of the stipends and this and that it was out of control. We spent an inordinate amount of time dealing with that along with the $750 because of the healthcare change, but we spent a lot of time expanding the grid and getting people back on the grid in the grades that they were in because they were in grades where their pay exceeded the grid. Personnel - 12/02/10 Page 11 Mayor Lozeau I understand Alderman Clemons that you would be concerned that they would have to skip a year or things like that. We have run the list of merit employees by month and by department and so we know where folks are. We won't violate the agreement here on when they will receive their pay. We can make it work. It is not as hard as it may seem. It would be harder if we changed their pay to be commensurate with their anniversary date, but if we leave this in place it shouldn't be a problem, and they are supposed to have an evaluation after their first 90 days anyway. Alderman Clemons It is not necessarily new hires, it is folks that have been here and their anniversary date happens to be the summer months right after the...I guess it will work itself out, but it just seems like there are a few folks who are going to always be a step ahead and a few folks who are going to be a step behind and I guess there is really no way to...unless you were to do the actual anniversary date as originally proposed in this, there is no way to get around that. However, if the employees want it that way then who am I to say that shouldn't be that way? I just kind of wanted to get a better understanding of what it was. Chairman Deane Mayor can you go back to your prior comment about we can make this work with the language? What isn't right here that is being done that we could correct with some language? Mavor Lozeau I'm just saying that if we found an employee who was going to miss an increase because their performance evaluation fell on July 15m and instead of June 15th their evaluation would happen and their increase would be retroactive to July 1 . We do that now with some of these. It seemed to me that it made a lot of sense to have the pay increases and the performance evaluations ride together on the anniversary date, which is why I proposed it the way I did in the beginning. When some of the supervisors saw it in paper and really took a close look at it they said you know all of the angst that we went through before on who was hired when and the fiscal year and however that all happened, they saw that happening again, and all of a sudden it is going to shuffle the deck again. That really concerned them. I said to them well I am willing to leave that that way. I took a run at as I said the merit employees printed them all out and looked at their hire dates and where everybody fell and it is really pretty much spread out. There is no real heavier months than others. I thought this way there would probably be less angst. Frankly when we did the fiscal note run there would be about a $90,000 savings if we switched their increases to their anniversary date. Now you are not going to save $90,000 without somebody going without their increase. That is when it was very clear to me that would probably be a problem that would be unfair to at least set it up that way the first time. And not that I am not game for any savings, but that wasn't the goal of the change it was really more about good management. Alderman Wilshire Thank you. I guess the way I look at it the Mayor's Office hires an admin on January 1st, we hire an admin on January 1st your admin is going to get an increase the next January 1fil, ours isn't going to get one for a year and a half. Personnel - 12/02/10 Page 12 Mayor Lozeau Your admin is going to stay. Alderman Wilshire But still not going to get an increase for a year and a half. That is the difference, that is what I am seeing, and I think that is where some angst is going to come in. Mavor Lozeau But that is already how it is. I have been treating my staff this way from the beginning and I told you that at the budget cycles that that is what I have been doing. Your staff has already not had a problem. Your staff isn't looking at a turnover every 4 years of their job. As you know the history of the legislative staff and most admin staff throughout the City they survive different administrations, they are working for the director of public works or whatever, they stay through 2 or 3 directors. It is very clear that when a Mayor leaves that office changes, I can in the past 25 years recall a receptionist in the Mayor's office that stayed through some administrations, but with that exception, they leave. You want to attract good help in there and so they are coming in knowing that they are already at some disadvantage about their long-term employment in their job, I think the least we can do is say we are going to bring you in in January, you are going to get your increase every year in January, and you know if the Mayor is only here for one term so are you. No other admin has to look at that same consequence. Alderman Wilshire I just wanted to make sure I was clear in understanding that. Mavor Lozeau You are. Alderman Wilshire Thank you. Alderman Vitale And I think what I am hearing you say is that if there is a situation where an anniversary year evaluation is taking place that it will be adjusted if they would get their pay first. Is there anyplace where they would actually get the raise before they get their evaluation? Mavor Lozeau No. Alderman Vitale Okay I just wanted to double check. Personnel - 12/02/10 Page 13 Mavor Lozeau We make sure ...and that is what I mean by we could work,,. Alderman Vitale During the switch over part right. Alderman Sheehan Do you know what percentage is currently getting their reviews on time? Mavor Lozeau Well in the last year or two we have managed to make sure that everybody gets their review on time. Alderman Sheehan Okay. Mayor Lozeau They chase them down to make sure that they are done. H.R. sends things out. We have really made an effort. That has not been how it always has been. Alderman Sheehan Okay. Thank you. Mavor Lozeau You are welcome. Alderman Flynn I'm just trying to read what is changing on this particular one. Really nothing is changing, it doesn't have anything to do with performance evaluation dates, the only thing it is changing is the way that your staff is being handled, and I think at least you and I have spoken kind of offline about this several times, and I think it was an oversight on this committee and on the Aldermen's part not to give some consideration to people who come on by nature of the election after January 1st. I don't really have a problem with that one. Again, even though I hear a lot of conversations around me sometimes I don't concentrate as well as I should. This has nothing to do with changes in evaluation on this page for merit pay program right? Mavor Lozeau No that is correct. Alderman Flvnn There are no changes in tying into evaluations. The other part is the first paragraph that you are changing, I am not sure what is driving this exactly. Is this something that is really a problem for the Mayor's staff or for Personnel - 12/02/10 Page 14 hiring of all employees? I think we have a pretty generous pay at grades 10, 11, and 12 for different steps, but grades 10, 11, and 12. Today you can hire someone at I guess you can hire someone at $57,000 or if they are at grade 20 you can hire them at $98,000. Is that a problem to find people that will take those jobs that we have to drop that restriction? Mavor Lozeau It depends on the job. If you look for instance the latest grid let's just take the CFO position. Alderman Flvnn There is one grid isn't there? What do you mean by the latest grid? Mavor Lozeau This is the latest grid, on page 12 of the document is the latest grid. It has been effective since January of 2008. Alderman Flvnn Oh yeah that is the one I have. That is the only grid really. Mavor Lozeau One could argue that we brought the new CFO in grade 20, step 12, $98,000. That was a very big challenge. In 2008 maybe not, but in 2010 it is a challenge to bring somebody in at that rate for that kind of a position, Alderman Flvnn I suppose the worst case is if you left this in here it would mean that the Mayor would have to come to us with an exception on the merit plan rather than opening up the policy to be other than maybe a CFO, but as a general policy it would seem like we could contain people to somehow be in in the first 12 squares rather than...it seems like over the years when we really got into this especially 3 and 4 years ago we saw a lot of people who were actually over the end of the grid, they were rushing off the grid, and at that time we kind of corrected the grid, and there are already two people or three people who are already at level 16 somehow. They were moving right across the grid too quickly. It seems like we could as a consideration we could do what we do now is let's say that the Mayor has to come through the Board of Aldermen or advise the Board of Aldermen when she feels it is necessary to not follow the merit plan, but leave it as grade 12 is the highest level. What is that level 12 or grade 12? I get mixed up with which is which now. Mavor Lozeau It is step 12. Alderman Flvnn Step 12 would be the highest that we would be able to bring someone in. That still seems for most jobs to be very acceptable compensations. Could I ask a different question maybe to either one of the Chairmen? Our intention tonight, we have two pieces of legislation in front of us; one of them is the one that we are looking at now is a lot of housekeeping on the Mayor's part. I am kind of glad to see what she brought forward. I think there are some things that we had overlooked in the previous review of this especially referring to personnel Personnel - 12/02/10 Page 15 that report directly to the Mayor. This does do a lot of cleaning. But beyond that, on my part, I think I kind of have an expectation that we are going to spend some time understanding the cost associated with this plan and discussing if there are other things that we should be reviewing to change this plan. Is that kind of what the two Chairmen think we are going to do with this legislation? Alderman Clemons Yes. Chairman Deane Yes. Alderman Flvnn So are we going to pass the Mayor's or are we going to try to amend the Mayor's as ...I guess we will have to see what the individual committees want to do. Chairman Deane , Right. There is no real sense or urgency with any of this. I think we had discussed that before. My idea was to have some open discussion about the Mayor's proposals and then if we care to make any amendments to the merit plan using the Mayor's proposals then we can do that, and then what I would like to do is to table it with it as amended and then schedule another meeting after that to go through the whole thing and spend a couple of hours going through it. This is a once in every 3 years that we go through this. I don't believe it is going to be as painful as it was last time. Alderman Flvnn I agree with that. What I would like to do is have some maybe when we leave here tonight I don't know or how we are going to do that, but it seems to me that we should be able to have some dialogue as to whether it really makes sense to have 20 levels any longer. Maybe there should be some just as I think everybody is asked to take on added responsibilities in their jobs and that is how really productivity happens I think. Maybe we could compress this grid somehow we could have somebody come in and we could do some dialogue on that, we could do some dialogue on how we go about making promotions or the policy on how we pay people for promotions. I think there are a lot of things that we could talk about that aren't necessarily covered in the Mayor's suggestions tonight although I think I support almost all of the Mayor's suggestions. I don't think they are the full scope of what we are going to do with this merit plan in terms of at least having a full dialogue. Chairman Deane If you would like once we go through this and look at the amendments if you would like and if the Mayor would care to if we have some requests to look at perhaps compressing the grid or whatever the rest of the folks want to have a look at then we could ask the Mayor if she would be willing to have somebody look at that. Alderman Flvnn So for now we will stick with the Mayor's suggestions. Personnel - 12/02/10 Page 16 Chairman Deane We are going to stick with what the Mayor had brought in. Alderman Flvnn I think that is fine with me too. Thank you. Chairman Deane Then we can make the amendments and then we can have some discussion on perhaps the future of some of the language in this. Mavor Lozeau Mr. Chairman if I could I wanted to respond Alderman Flynn to your question surrounding the steps. When I arrived here there were a lot of different things that surprised me, some of which were, and let's stick with the administrative assistant theme because we have spent a lot of time talking about that, we had ranges of pay for administrative assistants that were up to $17,000 apart. Some of it had to do with maybe how long they were here, but a significant amount of it was based on what they were hired in at versus what they weren't. I thought that was a problem and Mr. Guerrette and I worked on looking at if you are an administrative assistant for the City and you share the same PDF your pay range and your hire in amount should be basically the same no matter whether you are working at the fire department or public works or anywhere else in the city. You should be in this range that makes sense. It shouldn't just be oh you work at that division oh they pay the admins really weli and that division doesn't pay them so well. We spent a lot of time looking at all of that. Part of that even was I couldn't understand why division directors ended up with pretty significant salaries that seemed to be based only on the fact that they were division directors like you had reached this level in your career and here was your pay, and there was no accounting for the staff that you had oversight on, how large your budget might be, and things like that. We have some division directors that have less responsibility than others that are making a good deal more than others. I think at some point somebody just all of a sudden swept them all on to grade 20 and kind of sprinkled them in there somewhere between $80,000 and $90,000 at the time is my best recollection of that. When I hired at public health the former director I think was making somewhere in the $90s and I looked at the Local Government Center does a salary and wage report and I looked at other things, and so I looked around at public health departments and number of employees and size of budget, and hired in our new director there at $75,000, significantly less than most of our directors, but very commensurate with the responsibilities and the going wage. There was not an objection to that new hire, and frankly we had that discussion before I hired the new director to say do you think it is a fair salary, and it was. I think there are some opportunities here where we can look at the same thing. Also, I think there are some situations where we have division directors that are underpaid for where they are. Having some flexibility I think is important. If that flexibility means that I come in and request from the Board an exception I guess I don't have a huge concern with that, but depending on where you end up in your discussion on the grid and whether it is smaller or larger or that sort of thing I can understand that, I know that we shouldn't base decisions, and I pay attention to this every day in the work I do that it is not about Donnalee Lozeau the Mayor and how I do this job, it should be something that can outlive whoever is there because it made sense for whatever reason. But I do feel that it is difficult right now to be put in the situation where it is a number 12, The example I gave was a CFO, but you also see it when you are looking at the superintendent of streets when we were looking at that position. There are just other positions that all of a sudden you look at Personnel - 12/02/10 Page 17 step 12 and it is just kind of outdated based on where we are now, and I am not sure I could right now tell you the best way to look at that. I proposed a little bit of flexibility. There are 17 steps so I thought you know they have to be on this grid and I also think that when I come in with my budget you see the salaries that I am asking to pay staff and the reasoning behind it. I thought that was a good check and balance too. That is my response to that and that is what I have proposed there with the merit pay program. Alderman Flvnn But we do have people who really aren't on the grid. I think we have agreed with your suggestions within the Budget Committee, but we do have people that are kind of like at the half point because they are Mayoral staff right? Mavor Lozeau Right. Alderman Flvnn Not everybody gets paid on the grid. There are people who are getting paid like... Mavor Lozeau Less. Alderman Flynn ... half of the year here and half of the year there or something like that. I think your staff does not fit on the grid properly. Mavor Lozeau Legal counsel is the only one that was I think a half and a half. Alderman Flvnn Maybe it was just him, but I know we found at least some exceptions. Maybe it was just a single one. Mavor Lozeau I think the single exception that was found at the time that we discussed it was the receptionist position. When I first hired the receptionist when I came in that position only did receptionist responsibilities and then when I hired CitiStat and Economic Development it made sense to ask that receptionist to take on administrative support for those two departments that don't have administrative staff. Because of that those departments contributed a certain amount to the pay and so there was a period where they were on the grid but it didn't seem to make a lot of sense on where they landed based on I think we had $1,500 coming from one of those departments and maybe $500 from the other or something like that making up the numbers. I am not exactly sure about them. Alderman Flvnn So it wouldn't fit on the grid? Personnel - 12/02/10 Page 18 Mavor Lozeau Right. So it didn't really fit on the grid. Alderman Flvnn Two different job descriptions that they were being paid under as a percentage. Mavor Lozeau Correct, We now have redone that PDF because that seems to be a solid permanent decision at least for me, and so we have redone the PDF and that person now fits on the grid. Alderman Flvnn So we just have one exception now? Mavor Lozeau The only exception that I am aware of is legal counsel. Mr. Gilbar explained it to me 2 or 3 times and I am not sure that I have a mental block or not, but I think that he ended up getting half of his raise in July and the other half in January instead of a full anniversary date of January. But other than that I am not aware of any. Alderman Flvnn Thank you. Mavor Lozeau You are welcome. Alderman Wilshire I just have a question about this whole process and where we are with our H.R. Department. There is no manager in there and this process seems like it would go a lot better if we had someone. Did you say someone was acting in that capacity? Mavor Lozeau What has happened is we have actually had more than 30 interviews and I have had a team that has been working on it. I think you have all heard me say before I really work hard not to settle for somebody just to fill a position. It has got to be somebody with the skill set and that is a good fit as well. We had one candidate out of those 30 that we offered the position to, and then they didn't take the position. It actually was salary related. I thought I was offering a fair salary so I wouldn't argue before the committee that I should have been able to give him more. It is incredibly difficult to find somebody with municipal experience and union experience. Now as I have said to the interview team; I am perfectly willing to have somebody come in with municipal experience and teach them the union piece or have them come in with the union piece and teach them the municipal piece, but they have got to be solid in at least one of them, and we are really having a difficult time finding that. The department for the first little while I think was working fine and because Mr. Gilbar was still Personnel - 12/02/10 Page 19 here he was able to provide additional support. As the time grew longer and one of our more seasoned employees down there retired it became very clear to me that we really needed some management in the H.R. Department. I worked with the division directors to look at who do we have that are really strong managers that could go in and offer a couple of things to the department; 1) some help with organization; how they are doing things, how they are processing things because without a leader it is very challenging. Susan Valaitis, CitiStat, who is my very probably most organized person and has done as I have mentioned before all of the process mapping for ERP was just the natural person to look at for that, and, of course, could not take it on at the same time as the rest of her responsibilities especially with ERP right now, and then Lisa Fauteux who is our Superintendent of Solid Waste, is a very strong manager. The two of them are sharing responsibility in that office and putting about 30 hours a week together in the office, and it has made a huge difference. It is not the same as having an H.R. Director and we are still doing that work. I even have talked to recruiting companies, but I am hard pressed to pay 20% of the salary to a recruiter to find us somebody. It continues to be a challenge, and I can assure you that not only would it be better for the employees, but boy my life would be very different if I wasn't worrying about some of that day to day. Alderman Wilshire Thank you. Mavor Lozeau You are welcome. Chairman Deane So we have your proposed amendment on page #4 right? Mavor Lozeau Yes and I put the date on it so you would know it came in tonight. Chairman Deane That is wonderful. Is that page #4 or #5? That is page #4 and #5. Mavor Lozeau Yes, it goes over onto 5. Chairman Deane Now we are down to the Workers' Compensation piece. Mavor Lozeau Yes that is the next change on page #5. The existing language conflicted with NRO 50-34 A and B. 50-34 A and B spoke about disability and workers comp. and what the law says. This language brings it in compliance with the ordinance. Essentially what it does is it says that the City covers as the State law requires, 60% of the Personnel - 12/02/10 Page 20 employee's pay and then the City will make up the difference between what their pay is and what the workers' comp. isr but no longer than 26 weeks. Chairman Deane Does anyone have any questions on that? Okay. Mavor Lozeau The next change is on page #7. It is under Vacation. The first one technically isn't a change it is just a repeat of the language that is up in the beginning just to make it clear that it goes with the schedule, which is vacation leave is accumulated per the vacation schedule below provided the employee is on payroll for the first fifteen (15) calendar days of any given month. Then it lays out how vacation is accumulated. You will see that same language in the very first sentence under Vacation. We just again tied it to the schedule. Then the second change under Vacation is that "Employees on Long Term Disability will not accrue vacation leave." Then the next change on that page is under Sick Leave... Chairman Deane The accumulation of sick leave is 15 days? I'm sorry does anybody have any questions on the Vacation part? Mavor Lozeau Then the only change under Sick Leave is the same thing, "Employees on Long Term Disability will not accrue sick leave," I didn't change anything else. Chairman Deane Does anyone have any questions on that? Mavor Lozeau I have no changes on page 8. The next change is on page 9. That change is under City Contributions. You will see under HMO and Point of Service currently as you know the city health insurance works on a the City covers 90% and the employees cover 10%. When I took my position as Mayor I thought that the reasonable amount at that time was for the City to pay 80% and the employee to pay 20%. Each employee that I hired understood that was my position. At the time to be perfectly frank I had no idea that there was an ordinance that prevented me from changing that. I changed it. I changed it for myself as well as my office staff. Since January of 2008 that is how it has been if you are staff in the Mayor's Office or the Mayor. When I discovered that I was in violation of the merit plan I thought I should make sure that we correct that. Chairman Deane What an unbelievable benefit ha? Do you know what insurance rate went up this year so far, between 30% and 50%. Personnel - 12/02/10 Page 21 Mavor Lozeau I had an agency today talk to me today because they weren't sure what they were going to do their medical insurance just went up 65%. I can't imagine 65%. We're looking for the City; right now our best estimate is 12%, 2% - 3% of which we can attribute to federal changes and the rest just to increased cost in health insurance. It is pretty significant for us too. Chairman Deane Something has to give. Mavor Lozeau Something does. The next change is on page #10. It is repetitive again. Under Long Term Disability it just reiterates what we just did, which says "Employees on Long Term Disability will not accrue either vacation or sick leave." Chairman Deane And that redundancy was covered under each of the headings for Sick Leave and Vacation, Mavor Lozeau Correct. That is what I have for the committee's consideration tonight. My understanding Mr. Chairman is the first item that you tabled so we could take the ordinance up was a resolution that was basically saying it is time to review the plan and take a look at it. Chairman Deane Correct. Mavor Lozeau And then the second one was okay let me bring you in some changes in that plan to bring it before you, Chairman Deane That is how I understand it. Mavor Lozeau If there are other things, as you were discussing earlier, other items that you would like to look at further or have some financial evaluation done on, I didn't bring you in the fiscal note tonight because as I mentioned earlier when we were talking about the merit plan, that was really what was driving any of the costs, not the merit plan but the merit pay increases, that section was what is really driving whether or not there is a fiscal note, and as I mentioned if we tied the anniversary increase there it would have been a $90,000 reduction in costs. I will have the CFO run it now with this change if the committee would like to see it, which I imagine that you would. I would imagine it is going to be neutral because we are not changing that. I think the other changes I don't really think will have a fiscal ramification, but if we are going to look at the grade and the step and if you want to look at that I would be happy to provide the committee with some of the information from the Personnel - 12/02/10 Page 22 Local Government Center on salaries and wages if you wanted to take a look and see if that is something you are interested in. I can tell you you have seen In some of the contracts over the last few years that we have compressed grids and that we have made some changes there while working with people, I think a grid tends to be a living thing and you kind of have to move it along as the years go by... Chairman Deane But that was the problem before Mayor it was a living thing, it was really alive, and there were a lot of people... Mavor Lozeau Had a life of its own. Chairman Deane ...it was insane because you would have your operating budget and you would look at the salaries and then you couldn't figure out when you went through the compensation, a lot of it you couldn't trace back especially in the fire department which was the one that had the most stipends that were added on and then they were way outside of the grid where we made some concession, we compromised somewhat with the fire department on that in some of the areas. Some of the members at the time weren't that happy and others were, but just to try to get everybody back on to the grid. And they weren't the only ones. There were other situations where people were getting double bumps, and it just didn't make a lot of sense what was going on that is why we had a lot of discussion about the grid when we extended it and then we had more discussion about the $750 for the stipend for the health insurance, which was another compromise that we did, Mavor Lozeau And that was in 2007 right? Chairman Deane Yeah, Mavor Lozeau Took affect in January. I remember I had heard some of it before I got here and then when I arrived I...I think that it is certainly worth looking at. I guess the approach that I have put in has really tightened up the ship. You will see that when we post for positions I post them with a not to exceed salary, which is not how it has been ordinarily done. Ordinarily they take it from step 10 maybe and they get the whole range so you would have somebody coming in applying for a job and they saw that the pay range was from $72,000 to $103,000 and they are certainly a $103,000 candidate. That was causing I think a lot of problems. I have requested that nothing get posted without a not to exceed hire amount so that people know before they even apply for the job that is where it is. I think that has made a difference. Getting people of like salary with similar PDFs in the same pay range I think has really made a difference. The changes I have offered here tonight I think can outlive me or any number of Mayors because there is the flexibility even with the health insurance. What I say for the language is that the Mayor can decrease the city's contribution, but not increase it so some Mayors might leave it at the 90/10 and some might do 80/20 and some might do 50/50 I don't know. I think that would be awfully tough for staff to be that far apart, which is Personnel - 12/02/10 Page 23 why I didn't go too far, but I think that when you look at the administrative things I have done with KR. that doesn't necessarily outlive me because somebody else could come in and say we're not putting not to exceeds in we are putting the range in. I think it is probably worthwhile to take a look at the grid for what it is worth. Chairman Deane What I would like to do would be to table 0-10-42 and then take R-10-60 from the table and then make the amendments to R^10-60 from 0-10-42, Mavor Lozeau But R-10-60 is a resolution and 0-10-42 is the ordinance. Once says review it and do something and the other one says... Chairman Deane Well if we review and do something we can amend it that is doing something is it not? Alderman Clemons Nope. Mavor Lozeau But you still have a resolution and not an ordinance. You can't amend a resolution to become an ordinance. Chairman Deane You can take the amendments from the resolution, which are almost one in the same with what I have here and make those amendments to the resolution with your language could you not? Mavor Lozeau You are saying that in ...I want to make sure I understand what you are asking. Chairman Deane What I have... Mavor Lozeau Resolution 10-60 provides for a review and an update of the merit plan, and I think that is just a policy to say we are going to take a look at it. Alderman Clemons Correct. Personnel - 12/02/10 Page 24 Alderman Wilshire Right. Chairman Deane Okay. I'm sorry. Mavor Lozeau 0-10-42 says... Chairman Deane I'm sorry that is my oversight. So we will take and we can adopt the amendments if the committees choose to do so, and then what I would like to do would be to get a running list of perhaps some areas where people would like to see some focus on where we could get them to the Mayor for whomever could provide whatever information may be requested from the members. Does that sound alright to everyone? Is that how you want to handle it? Nobody seems to be saying no. Alderman Clemons That is fine. I just have one other thing. Going back to the health insurance, the city contributions was that discussed? The HMO 90%? Mavor Lozeau Was that discussed with my staff and that sort of thing? Alderman Clemons Correct. There are no changes to it and you wanted to change it, Mavor Lozeau Let me make sure I am very clear. The 90/10 happened I think that has been negotiated before I got here. Alderman Clemons Right. Mavor Lozeau That is how it is; I am not proposing to change that. The 80/20 is just for myself and the staff in the office. They have been hired at that amount so they have since January of 2008 their benefit has been 80/20. Would they like 90/10 I am sure they would be happy to have it, but... Alderman Clemons That is not what I meant. Personnel - 12/02/10 Page 25 Mavor Lozeau Okay, Alderman Clemons I guess I meant have we discussed perhaps reducing the 90% to something else. Mavor Lozeau I would suggest that although I think that we should have a contribution from the city of less than 90% I would not support the merit employees going below 90% as long as the 15 contracts carry the 90%. That is just not right in my opinion. That is why I didn't propose a change there. Alderman Cox I agree. Alderman Clemons Okay. Chairman Deane We have to find one union that we can bring down with our city's contribution. Mavor Lozeau If I had the time and the staff I would love to take a look at whether or not the city was better off moving from the 95% to the 90% than it would have been if it left it alone considering the concessions that were made that got us to that 90% and how long it took and the $750 and all of those things. I just don't have the time or the staff to be able to really take a good look at that. But I can't help but wonder about that. If I am going to come in at some point whether it is asking the negotiators of contracts to look at going to 85% or 80%, I would really like to be able to do the math and figure out because we are told that you impact bargain that and so there will be an expectation that there is some compensation for that change in their plans, and I am not sure how that math will work out in the end. I just think the idea of being less than the 90% I think is the right thing to do. At what cost becomes the real discussion. Alderman Clemons I think there are two sides to every story when it comes to that. Mavor Lozeau It is a gift if there are only two. Alderman Clemons You know what I mean I just think that when an opportunity presents itself, someone has to be the first to do it, and I guess I would tend to agree with you that if we are not going to be changing the grid, if we are not going to be changing the salaries or anything like that we probably shouldn't change the contribution, however, I Personnel - 12/02/10 Page 26 think that it needs to be looked at in the future because I think this is something that, I agree with you Mayor that the 90% is very generous and I think that we're at a point where we need to look at that and see if maybe it goes down to 85% or something because somebody has got to make the first step, Mavor Lozeau I agree, but I would argue Alderman Clemons for what it is worth, the 120 merit employees that don't have some of the similar benefits that the employees covered by a union contract have would not be the fair place to start. I do think, I agree with you wholeheartedly that that 90% is more than generous, and I think that in order for it to really change some of the bigger unions have to be the ones willing to have that first discussion and make those first changes. Chairman Deane Maybe the teachers will do it. Mavor Lozeau I would hate to do that in this instance. The whole reason that I went with 80/20 and had the staff do it was because I just thought that was more in keeping with where we should be in 2008 with where the healthcare costs were, and I was maybe a bit naive thinking well we are going to set this example and we are going to start working on this. When you get in the midst of some of those negotiations and you see what those costs are and how that negotiation plays out, it is one thing for me to have 5 or 6 staff in my office doing that, it is another thing to be... Alderman Clemons I completely understand... Mavor Lozeau .. .but I think the discussion probably is going to... Alderman Clemons ...I just think the discussion... Mavor Lozeau ... new hires are where I think you are going to start to see some of that. Alderman Clemons And that I think is a good place to start. Mavor Lozeau Will know coming in. Exactly. Personnel - 12/02/10 Page 27 Chairman Deane With the merit are you saying that Mayor? Mayor Lozeau I guess I would have to consider whether new hires with the merit would be fair, I think that is a whole discussion because sometimes it is hard for you know Mary Ann is new and I have been here a while and she comes in and she is doing the same job as me, but she is not getting paid as much as me because her contribution is greater. You have to start somewhere so where we start that and how we do it...I am okay with that, and that is like I said in my office I think most of you know that I have office staff that works just as hard as every employee and in some instance, I mean I think Patty should be up for sainthood. If you saw what came across her desk in the course of a day I can't pay her enough. They know and they are working in a building side by side with people that are getting a bigger benefit than they are, but they knew that coming in and I laid it out that is how it was going to be and they accepted the job under those conditions. I think that is probably the most likely place to get started with it. But I don't think if we are going to get started with it that we do it at a small increment at a time of 5%. I think you make a statement with the new hires and you really start to make a change. We share that loss ratio, and that is pretty remarkable that we do that so they get a benefit at the end. Alderman Clemons Well perhaps maybe that is something we should look into with this change then because I agree with you on that. Alderman Wilshire I agree with the Mayor when she says that taking 120 employees and starting there is probably not the way to implement this. It just doesn't seem the right place, 120 employees when you have how many 2,000 employees citywide and you start with just a small group of employees who like you say work hard every day and everybody works hard in this city. I don't know where do you start? It has to start somewhere, and I think probably at the negotiation table is where it has to start with our union contracts. Ninety percent is a very generous benefit, but I think starting with this small group of employees is not the way to go either. Mayor Lozeau And this small group of employees that doesn't enjoy some of the same benefits as the other, if we started with them we might have union #16 right? Alderman Wilshire Right. Mavor Lozeau Because they may feel that they are at a significant disadvantage based on other benefits not just healthcare. Chairman Deane That is what the principals did. Personnel - 12/02/10 Page 28 Alderman Wilshire It could well happen. Chairman Deane The principals had a union. They weren't happy with what we had to offer them and they disbanded and the Board of Education gave them their pay raises. Remember that Mary Ann? And then when they got their pay raises they weren't happy again and they unionized. It is a wonderful world is it not? Mavor Lozeau At public works with page or pay. That is how we started, new employees that doesn't happen anymore, and I think you are right we start someplace. With this new company that is working with us with employee health benefits who I hope to bring in to meet with you soon to talk about some strategies, we are looking at what are some other things that we can do besides just cutting the benefit, what else could we do, are there other plans that we could offer that might have incentives that employees might be interested in doing, are there other opportunities where if they shop for certain services, if they make the call to find out if the CAT Scan is cheaper at this location versus that location is there an incentive for them to do that, is there benefit for all of us in the long run. After the prescription drug carve out fiasco.., here is a situation where we had the group that had been set up in the prior administration for the management and employee task force or group I can't remember the title right now off the top of my head, they came together and worked management and union together and they came up with recommendations and said these are the things that we should do, and the first one that was going to have the best return of over $600,000 based on our best calculations was to go to a prescription carve out. Out of that there were 3 unions that had to agree to it and the rest just had to be notified. We brought the group together and said you all signed this document these are the things you agreed to, we're going to move forward with this prescription carve out, nobody objected, we went through the process, we went through an RFP, we did a huge amount of homework. The staff worked 6-7 months on it. They brought it back in and offered the company, brought the unions and others back to the table, presented with the company there what the plan is and what it meant and all of that from beginning to end, and at the end two of the unions said no and one didn't even bother to get back to us and so it didn't happen. And the same people that had signed off on the agreement were the same people that then said no. Chairman Deane I think everyone in this room remembers this. Mavor Lozeau So when you have that happen it is very disheartening to be able to look at other changes that you think make sense because I just cannot for the life of me understand why there was not a real motivation because again they benefited from that as well not only in dollar savings but in the actual service being provided. We brought in local pharmacists and all kinds of people to work on this team to make sure that we didn't like leave out the small pharmacy, it was a great offer that was made. Chairman Deane It sounds to me Mayor like it turned out to be a tragedy. Personnel - 12/02/10 Page 29 Mavor Lozeau You know it really was. Frankly I am still not over it. Chairman Deane But that is okay. Things always come full circle right isn't that what they say? Mavor Lozeau The world is round. Chairman Deane Yeah it certainly is. Mavor Lozeau I hope they see the light. There is an opportunity I think to revisit it. Alderman Clemons Especially when it is new hires. I think you are right I think that is the smart approach. If you are getting hired into a job then the expectation is set when you get hired. I would hope that would be the approach going forward with all employees. But we will see what comes down the pike I guess. Chairman Deane But once you get outside of government you don't see these types of contributions by an employer. You haven't seen these type of contributions by an employer in probably 20 years. Alderman Clemons That is not necessarily true. Alderman Sheehan That is not true, big companies. Alderman Wilshire I know that the State just went to mandatory mail in prescriptions for their employees, and it is a big learning curve for employees. People say I don't trust the mail my prescription is not going to get here on time. I have been doing it for years. My prescriptions come right to our locked mailbox. It is a significant savings. I know the City, if we could move in that direction, would save significant money just on prescriptions. Mavor Lozeau More than a half a million dollars. Personnel - 12/02/10 Page 30 Alderman Wilshire When you talk about new hires coming in, you are still affecting just a small group of people. If you are talking about all new hires in all of the unions... Alderman Clemons All the new hires. Alderman Wilshire That is a whole different thing, but if you are just talking about this small slice of employees I don't know that I can support that, but I certainly think the benefit is really generous and there has to be someplace to start looking, I think the prescription is huge. Mavor Lozeau To me that was just an easy. Alderman Sheehan I agree, and I think that with new hires coming in is the way to go and generally without giving too much away by honoring a grandfather clause for existing ones is often a good way to leverage that and even stagger the drop over a few years because not just looking at it right now, but 20 years from now; all of the people that are grandfathered now will be gone and that is the cost that we are looking at long-term, and changing the game on someone is usually what gets the unions worked up, and they are not going to give in in that way. But if we are protecting the ones that have been there for a while they tend to be more open to a go forward. The other thing that I don't think I have ever seen anything is we have a lot of people who are married and the other spouse has a job that also offers insurance and often times in private companies if you choose your spouse's insurance versus your own company's there is a financial incentive there, and I don't know if that is something we have ever looked at doing, but it saves huge money. If I had to take a wild guess how many of our city employees are married I'm going to guess it is up there. I think there are a lot of things we haven't looked at in the past that are good opportunities to say what are we doing differently. The other thing is I think we do need to look at compensation and what the benefits are in other cities and also in similar sized companies. We are a how many number of employee company and that is where we need to also do some comparisons for reality checks as far as if a company has 3,000 employees what does their benefit package look like and do some comparisons both on a government level and...we can't compare ourselves to 100 employee company or a 50 employee company that is irrelevant and apples and oranges, but I think looking at those things and looking at some of the private industry things like spousal buyouts is an opportunity to save a lot of money. Mavor Lozeau Those are strategies that we are looking at with our you remember the contract that came through with workplace benefit solutions they are working with us now and our benefits people in H.R. to look at what are some of the strategies. That is one that has been on the table. There are things that we are looking at there that you will hear more about. It is hard to compare us to...we have 2,807 active employees plus we have our re tj r ees and their benefits, but unlike private industry you will see more employees staying hitting their Personnel - 12/02/10 Page 31 retirement years, and so you have an older pool of employees and that changes your healthcare costs as well,.. Alderman Sheehan Significantly, Mavor Lozeau We don't have that kind of turnover. That has an impact as well. Then when you look as the contracts come through this year to you, hopefully some will be coming in they all expire this year, I think that you will see that each of them have different caveats in them that limit our ability to do things, and certainly we are not in the position to negotiate with these groups, but we can certainly make it clear to the employer boards what we would like to see them talk about and I have been doing that. In addition, I have started to talk to them about some of the numbers that are coming in for us. If we did nothing, if we weren't event talking about any salary increases, what are our increases for the FY12 budget and things like what is the cost of the healthcare increase that I just talked about, what is the cost of the pension increase because our share has now increased that the State just changed, what about the utilities which ones are going to go up, and how big is that number, and then be able to say to the employer boards and the employees here is what the company is challenged with right now, here is our budget, here is the increase if we do nothing, is there anything left and if there is what does that mean? In my perfect world they would be like okay here is the money that might be left, here is the table, all 15 of you come in and divvy it up amongst yourselves and let us know how it works out, but I can't seem to get that to happen. I don't know that there will be anything left. I am very concerned. So far the numbers that I have looked at health insurance and pensions, we are butting up against $5 million just there. Five million dollars and that is not taking anything else into account. It is going to be a real challenge. And I think some of the employees say oh we hear that all the time it is always a challenge, but I think from the time I came in I have talked about 11 and 12 are going to be tough years. I don't see the State giving us back revenue sharing this year. If they did we could probably breathe a little easier, but I don't see that happening. If you really think about it, since 2008 we have cumulatively lost $16 million between the State and local revenue, $16 million, and when you figure every $1.7 million equals about 1% on the tax rate, we still held our own pretty well. Chairman Deane I think we are kind of drifting away from the merit plan. Mavor Lozeau It kind of all goes together you know because we spend most of our money this way. Chairman Deane Although I always appreciate listening to the doom and gloom. The motion on the floor is to recommend final passage of 0-10-42. Alderman Wilshire I don't believe there is a motion on the floor. Personnel - 12/02/10 Page 32 Chairman Deane I thought I made that motion. Alderman Clemons I have it written down. Alderman Wilshire Okay. Chairman Deane Thank you for my backup. I appreciate it. MOTION BY ALDERMAN CLEMONS TO AMEND 0-10-42 BY STRIKING THE SECTION ENTITLED "MERIT PAY PROGRAM" AND REPLACING IT WITH THE HANDOUT THAT WAS GIVEN TO US THIS EVENING BY THE MAYOR DATED 2 SEPTEMBER 2010 MOTION CARRIED MOTION BY ALDERMAN DEANE TO RECOMMEND FINAL PASSAGE OF 0-10-42 AS AMENDED ON THE QUESTION Chairman Deane Why don't we table it? MOTION BY ALDERMAN CLEMONS TO TABLE 0-10^2 IN THE PERSONNEL/ADEMINISTRATIVE AFFAIRS COMMITTEE ON THE QUESTION Alderman Flvnn Can we have a discussion? Chairman Deane We can take up R-10-60 afterwards and pull this back off if you want. What I was thinking of doing was having Sue go through it and give us a copy. I think Alderman Sheehan had requested a redlined copy of everything, and then at our next meeting, before that get some of the requests that some of you folks might have and get those to the Mayor and then schedule another meeting and have a discussion on it at that point in time. Alderman Flvnn I can agree with that. I think we said we don't want to start here it is only 110 people. If we are not going to start here we at least have to have some genuine dialogue here. Usually what happens is we are either talking about this at budget time and we have 4 other departments sitting in the back of the room and we really Personnel - 12/02/10 Page 33 don't get an awful lot of chance to talk about why we really are paying $3 million for dental insurance or we are faced with a contract and we have a 30 day deadline to kind of somehow move forward somehow come to some consensus what we can or can't afford to do, but we never have a real opportunity to really talk about what some of these costs are and what maybe the Mayor or some of the other department heads have for some suggestions as to what we should at least begin to familiarize ourselves with as considerations or opportunities or changes that either other people are making or something that we might want to do on our own. I think this is at least an opportunity for us to do that without these rigid deadlines behind us either because the street department still hasn't gone yet tonight or the next Aldermanic meeting is our last chance to move on particular legislation. I don't really want to come up with what the rules are for passing contracts, but I think we should start to understand a little bit more why the costs are what they are and what would be the changes in the cost for example of dental, what would the changes be if we didn't pay for the spouse. I think we need to somehow use this for an opportunity in front of us to at least grow as some section of the Board of Aldermen at least grow to understand what are some of the considerations that we could make on these types of issues whether they are merit employees or other contracts that come forward at least some of the considerations that we should be aware of, what are driving these costs and what we could do, what will be the changes in these costs if other things were to be proposed. That is kind of what I am hoping this turns into a good opportunity for us to get there, Mavor Lozeau l just wanted to let you know that we are working on putting something together relative to health and dental insurance and the other insurance benefits that we offer our employees within the next couple of months. My goal is to have a couple of these times with you whichever group whether it is the Budget Review Committee or a combination of this committee or the Full Board with our consultants on health insurance to have a better understanding of what does that 10% mean. We have done some analysis of kind of where our dollars are being spent and so what are we doing about that. Property & Casualty was brought up before, which is off topic of employees, but that was another one that it was difficult during the budget cycle to understand the property & casualty and when we took some money out of there to use towards the tax rate what was left in there and how did we figure that. We have talked to the consultants that work with us on property & casualty about coming in and doing a presentation on that. I have I think it is 2 or 3 different things that I would like to be able to come in and give you a chance to have more opportunity to know what it is about a little bit better and how we make those decisions when we put the budget together to bring to you. Chairman Deane I will gladly schedule a meeting for those presentations. Mavor Lozeau Okay great. Chairman Deane Let me know when those people are available to come in. It would be really helpful if we got whatever handout of information that would be provided that evening so that we could spend some time reviewing it prior to hopefully get a better understanding of the subject matter. I for one am always concerned that we never see an analysis on anything. We will see a financial analysis if you have 100 and you take 50 away Personnel - 12/02/10 Page 34 then you have 50 left. I always want to understand why; why is this happening, why was this decision made, what is the possible ramifications, what are the long-term effects of doing this, why is it like this to begin with, not just for the sake of... Mavor Lozeau Not just the dollars and cents. Chairman Deane Right. There has to be something driving that decision other than whatever is on the ledger for a number. There has to be something that is driving it. Alderman Clemons had made a motion to his Personnel/Administrative Affairs Committee to table 0-10-42. MOTION CARRIED MOTION BY ALDERMAN DEANE TO TABLE 0-10-42 IN THE BUDGET REVIEW COMMITTEE MOTION CARRIED Chairman Deane R-10-60 is on the table. What I would like to do and I don't know if you want to just do this under the Personnel/Administrative Affairs Committee or under the Budget Review Committee for merit or however you want to do it. Do you want to just have one committee or do you want to take the lead on this or do you want to have another joint meeting? Alderman Clemons I think we should have another joint meeting because I think we are going to get the financial analysis and we probably want to also discuss some of the other topics. Mavor Lozeau I think because, as we talked about earlier, R-10-60 is a resolution and the resolution says you are going to review this, I think it is perfectly fine to just pass it and send it on because we are reviewing it. And then I think if you keep the ordinance on the table or bring in a new ordinance that incorporates changes that you want to make as a committee or collective group, I think that might be the cleaner way to proceed because you are going to want an ordinance for those changes not a resolution. Alderman Clemons Both resolutions are tabled in both committees so it doesn't really make a difference. We might as well just leave them on the table in my opinion, and schedule another joint meeting. Chairman Deane In the meantime if anyone has any requests for anything if they want to get them to... do you want to take them, do you want me to take them? Alderman Clemons It can come to either one of us or both. That is fine. Personnel - 12/02/10 Page 35 Chairman Deane Pertaining to this or any changes that you might have or recommendations or any other requests associated with the merit plan and then we can say if we give a week or ten days or whatever and then we will get them to Sue and then Sue can get them to the Mayor's Office and then the Mayor can distribute them to whomever is going to be tasked to... Alderman Clemons Mayor when would be a good, probably after the new year? Mavor Lozeau I think getting the information to me before the new year of the things that you would like us to look at would be fine and then I can give you a timeline of when we think we could have some response back to you probably is fine, either way. Alderman Clemons Okay. Mavor Lozeau We are going to be full blown into the budget with the departments come January or so. They are going to be putting their budgets together in January/February. DISCUSSION - None ADJOURNMENT MOTION BY ALDERMAN WILSHIRE TO ADJOURN MOTION CARRIED The meeting was declared closed at 8:48 p.m. Alderman-at-Large Ben Clemons Committee Clerk, Pro Tem December 2, 2010 Merit Pay Program Newly hired employees may receive a starling salary within the job classification grade from step-4 through step 12 on the attached Merit Salary Schedule (Appendix A), Recruitment should be based on the documented education and/or experience he/she brings to the job. Employees who are hired or promoted after July 1st but before December 31st of each calendar year will be eligible for a one step advancement within their job classification on July 1st of the next year provided he/she attains a satisfactory performance evaluation. Employees who are hired or promoted between January 1st and JuneSO^ will not be eligible until they have completed an entire fiscal year. However, the direct administrative support staff in the mayor's office will be eligible for a one step advancement within their job classification on their annual anniversary of their date of hire provided he/she attains a satisfactory performance evaluation. An employee who has reached the maximum step within his/her designated grade and has attained a satisfactory performance evaluation shall be eligible for a salary increase equal to the three (3) year average of the CPI-U.