Calendar

Category All Art Classes Classical Music Concerts DANCE Etc Exhibits Families Farmers Markets Film Happenings Holiday Holiday Lectures Music (non-classical) Theater

Submit events

Council examines pay scales

By John Larson

Tacoma Weekly
jlarson@tacomaweekly.com
Published on: November 27, 2008

According to preliminary results of a study of the pay and benefits for city of Tacoma employees, more than half of the non-union jobs have pay scales that top out below market levels.

The comparison of pay and benefits has been underway for quite some time, with Tacoma City Council’s Government Performance and Finance Committee receiving regular updates. Human Resources Director Joy St. Germain gave another Nov. 19. While it is not finished, it is close enough to give council members a fairly clear idea what it would cost to bring the city’s pay scale to its goal of paying the 70th percentile of the market average – $2.91 million.

That figure includes general government and Tacoma Public Utilities. Both have set aside funds for anticipated pay increases. City departments have budgeted for 2.4 percent increases in 2009 and 2.5 percent in 2010.

The highest point on the scale for 97 non-union job classifications is below the goal, St. Germain explained. Of those, 53 top out at 15 percent or more under the goal.

The study used data from published reports and custom salary surveys.

St. Germain noted there was input from leaders of unions that represent city employees, as well as department heads. Some union positions were studied, although council members do not expect to address those figures until next year.

St. Germain said the study looked at employers that hire away city workers, as well as those that Tacoma draws people from.

“There was a lot of intensive work, up front, to look at each job in the city,” she remarked.

Longevity pay could be eliminated, at least for some positions, as a result of the study. Department heads do not receive this, but some other positions have it. For some of them, longevity pay “would put the base pay over the target,” St. Germain said. “That is the conflict of the market philosophy.”

“If the future had to do with an effort to do away with longevity pay, where it is present for represented (union workers), we have heard there is a strong resistance to that,” said Councilmember Mike Lonergan. That is especially true, he noted, among the “uniformed service.”

A full report is expected to be presented to the council Dec. 2.

Story Tools

This Week's
Front Page