HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Statement 1980/12/09 Item 13
,
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
Meeting Date 12/9/80
1.3
ITEM TITLE:
Resolution 1't)J'~~ Amending Resolution 10182
plan for classifications represented by'the
Association
Director of personne~
relating to the compensation
Chula Vista Employees'
SUBMITTED BY:
(4/5ths Vote: Yes
No_)
BACKGROUND:
When Arthur Young and Company submitted their final report on the classification and
salary study, several positions represented by the Chula Vista Employees' Association
were not addressed. This was because the consultants were unable to make a recommenda-
tion when the position was vacant and/or the incumbent in the position failed to submit
a classification questionnaire. These types of omissions are usual in a city-wide
classification study conducted by an outside firm. At the close of any outside survey,
the Personnel Department must review those classifications which were omitted and make
recommendations.
As in any classification study, there also will be a certain number of appeals. In
our case, there were three appeals that the Council directed the Personnel Department
to restudy. The department also collected survey data on the Zoning Enforcement
Officer since Arthur Young had recommended that the position be restudied in six
months. The final appeals and the omitted CVEA classifications have been analyzed
and recommendations made. Therefore, it is my
RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the resolution.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: N/A
DISCUSSION:
The analysis of the three final appeals has lead to a recommendation that one position
be reclassified and a new salary set, while two of the positions should remain at the
classification and salary originally recommended by Arthur Young & Co. These recommenda-
tions are:
CLASSIFICATION
ARTHUR YOUNG
RECOMMENDATION
FINAL APPEAL
RECOMMENDATION
Secretary I I
City Attorney's Office
Secretary I I
Legal Secretary (Increase 10.3%)
Secretary I I
Planning Department
Secretary I I
Secretary II (No Change)
Clerk III
Police Department
Cl erk II
Clerk II (No Change)
The'other classifications which required Personnel Department analysis are listed below
with recommendations. Most of the classifications did not require salary adjustments
since internal alignment and salary survey figures supported the ranges currently applied.
/0312-
Form A-113 (Rev. 11/79)
EXHIBITS
Agreement_ Resolution X Ordinance Plat
Notification List
Other RecommendationENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT: Attached
Memo
Submitted on
I'
'.
,
* Internal alignment factors analyzed for recommendation
1 Retroactive to 5-7-S0, when incumbent was hired
2 Position is also scheduled for reclassification review in 4-6 months
In the analysis of these classifications and the salary survey figures, the Personnel
Department used the same comparison cities and methodology as were used by Arthur
Young and Co. This was done to ensure as much uniformity as possible in the develop-
ment of our salary plan. Hhile many of the above positions still are vacant or unused,
the maintenance of the sa 1 a ry plan is an important part of the Personnel Department
function and we believe that with these changes the salary plan will be up to date for
1980-81. The representatives of the CVEA and the effected department heads have been
contacted about the recommendations. They support all the recommendations except in
the case of the two appeals as discussed in the memo of 11-1S-80. .
SATjbb
by the City Council of
Chula Vista, California
Dated /.:2- 9'- .f 0_.--.:.)
) 0 ,L/,"Z-