Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Statement 1980/12/09 Item 14 ., '. COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item ,14' Meeting Date12/9/80 ITEM" TITLE: Resolution I'~r~ Amending Resolution 10184 (Compensation Plan for Middle Management Employees) BACKGROUND: Director of personne~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes No_) SUBMITTED BY: vJhen Arthur Young & Company submitted their final report on the classification and salary study, several middle management positions were not addressed. These classifica- tions were: Personnel Assistant, Park Superintendent, Recreation Superintendent, all of which were vacant; and three classifications in the Community Development Department which were being studied by the PAPE unit. In such cases, it is impossible for an outside consulting firm to make a classification recommendation. These.middle management positions have been reviewed by the Personnel Department using a salary survey of twenty-two comparable cities and an analysis of the job duties and responsibilities of the positions. The analysis is complete and the recommendations have been reviewed vlith the effected departments. Therefore, it is my RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the resolution. BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: N/A DISCUSSION: It was determined, based on an analysis of the job specifications and salary data, that no change was necessary in the salary range assigned to the classifications of: Principal Community Development Specialist, Housing Coordinator, Park Superintendent, Recreation Superintendent, and'Redevelopment Coordinator. It should be noted that the.salary for Housing Coordinator is 6.5% over the median of ' the maximums for the comparison cities.' Because of the emphasis we are placing on the importance of the Housing Coordinator position at this time, it would be appropr.iate that our 'compensa- tion would be higher than that in other cities. Until such time as the emphasis on this function is reduced, it would be my recommendation that we leave the salary at its current level. The Personnel Assistant classification is being recommended for an 11% increase. This is due to internal alignment factors. Two years ago, the Personnel Assistant and Administrative Assistant, positions which are similar in difficulty and responsibility, were at the same pay range. At that time, the title of Administrative Assistant was changed to Principal Administrative Analyst to bring it in line with the typical titling used in other agencies. No changes ~n duties, responsibil ities or pay wer.e made. Hhen this titling change occurred, the classification of Personnel Assistant was vacant and therefore overlooked for a similar title change. It is recommended at this time that the Personnel Assistant title be changed to Principal Personnel Analyst, and the sala'ry range be increased to 42.8 to bring this classification in line with the Principal Administrative Analyst. ! 0313 , . Form A-113 (Rev. 11/79) EXHIBITS Agreement_____ Resolution_____ Ordinance_____ Plat_____ Notification List Other Recommendation ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT: Attached Submitted on ^ , ' f Pa ge 2 Item 14 Date 12/9/80 The duties and responsibilities of the two positions remain substantially the same with the only differences relating to the specialized nature of the Principal Personnel Analyst's duties. If this change is not made, the spread between Senior Personnel Analyst (equivalent to Senior Administrative Analyst) and Principal Personnel Analyst would be only 1.9%, which is not a sufficient increase to recognize the difference in duties or encourage an individual to promote to a higher level of responsibility. The recommended range would increase the spread to 15%, which is the amount recommended by Arthur Young and Company for use between levels in the administrative and personnel series. Another cl ass ifi cati on whi ch has been scheduled for a rev i ew by the PAPE un it is Principal Librarian. This classification was surveyed by the Personnel Department since it had not been addressed by Arthur Young & Co. Arthur Young did, however, survey and make recommendations on the classifications of Librarian and Senior Librarian. It was determined on the basis of the salary survey that Chula Vista's compensation for this classification is 6.6% below the median of the maximums. No change in salary is recommended at this time pending completion of the management audit. This information is provided for information only. Currently, the spread between Senior Librarian and Principal Librarian is approximately 8%. This spread is adequate although a change may be recommended after the PAPE study. These recommended changes are summarized below: CLASS I FICA TI ON CURRENT SALARY RECm~MENDED r-l0NTHL Y SURVEY RANGE & SALARY SALARY '~EDIAN EFFECTIVE 12-12-80 $2400 $2254 42.9 $2400 (No Change) 2332 2350 42.3 2332 (No Change) 2146 * 42.8 2390 (+11%) Housing Coordinator Park Superintendent Personnel Assistant (change to Principal Personnel Analyst) Principal Librarian 2146 None . 40.6, 2146 (No Change) Comparabl e 1946 2075 38,6 1946 (No Change) 2198 2301 42.0 , 2298 (+4.5%) 2520 2542 43.9 2520 (No Change) "~" .,,'....... Princi pal Community Development Specialist Recreation Superintendent Redevelopment Coordinator * Internal alignment factors analyzed for recommendation. The recommendations have been reviewed with the department-heads_ai~~ they support the recommended salary ranges. Please see Exhibits "A" and "B" in Agenda Item d'~1 ~...; --7.-fI:;-:-: -,.. - h',~ by', ',8 City Council of , Chula Vista, California '")o,tc:l _/tl - ~--;Fd . -- SAT/bb /6313 . , . . -Q fJJ - b- ~/ p<qeO Il!UJOme:) 'e.S!A e11l4:) lO 1!:JUIlO:) Ii.!:) 34. liq " . '.