Minutes 02/13/1979 (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

J6 TUESDAY FEBRUARY 13, 1979 For example, in next year's projections, it is anticipated that 153 employees will get training and longevity increases and only 10 employees will receive true merit increases. Thus, only 6% of pay raises over-and-above cost-of-living will be given on the basis of meritorious performance; and, only 4% of total City Hall employees will receive true merit increases. As the years go on, these percentages will change -- for example, in nine years, 26% of pay increases over-and-above cost-of-living will be awarded on the basis of meritorious performance -- but, still, only 11% of total City Hall employees will receive true merit increases. When I met privately with Mr. Brown and Mr. Noland, and listened to their explanations and reasons for the plan, I conceded that there is logic behind the inclusion of training steps in the plan, although I questioned why the training step increases should continue through step six. I did not agree with the arguments for longevity step increases, as I feel that all step increases beyond training steps should be based solely on meritorious performance. Mr. Grubbs and Mr. Noland told me that they had checked pay plans of surrounding cities, but that they had not conferred with any pay plan consultants. I suggested that the City call Municipal Advisors Incorporated in Virginia Beach and Hay Associates in Philadelphia and ask them if a plan has been developed anywhere in the country, or if a plan can be developed, that meets the objectives of Council and the City Administration. To my knowledge, this has not been done. For years, I have stated my dissatisfaction with the City's pay policy of awarding across-the-board cost-of-living increases because I feel the practice does not encourage productivity. For years, I hoped, and it was my understanding that City Council felt the same, that the City could develop a pay plan that rewards larger percentage pay increases to those employees who work harder and perform better than others. I do not feel that this plan accomplishes these objectives, and I feel that if this plan is accepted, it should be recognized for what it is -- it is not a merit pay plan -- it is a training/longevity pay plan with a very small provision for true merit increases. Council took no action on the U. S. Department of Housing & Urban Development's invitation (dated January 30, 1979) to file an application to develop a Public Housing Program in Martinsville under the jurisdiction of a local Public Housing Agency (or Authority) .