My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 1990/07/02
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1990
>
Agenda Packets - 1990/07/02
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/28/2025 4:48:45 PM
Creation date
7/25/2018 6:07:20 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
7/2/1990
Supplemental fields
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
7/2/1990
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
36
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL <br /> 411 PAGE FIVE <br /> JUNE 12, 1990 <br /> make no commitment until our documentation was submitted. Due <br /> to the lack of commitment on the part of the representative, <br /> it would be my recommendation that as soon as we have <br /> completed revaluing the previously mentioned positions, the <br /> City begin the process of redoing the values on the Police <br /> Department positions as well as valuing the new positions for <br /> the Public Works Department should you approve the Labor <br /> Agreement. It is my hope that by redoing the values on these <br /> male dominated positions we might find that the values have <br /> increased thus justifying the current wages under the pay <br /> equity system and making our system consistent with the pay <br /> equity law requirements. <br /> Our other option for dealing with this situation would be to <br /> go to a totally new pay equity system such as the Hay System <br /> used by the State of Minnesota which would result in an <br /> expenditure of anywhere from $18,000 to $25,000. I would <br /> recommend against changing systems for several reasons but <br /> mainly that our employees are accustomed to and have willingly <br /> accepted the current pay and job valuing system. Any change <br /> to this system could cause great suspicion and insecurity. <br /> Other reasons for recommending against it are the simple cost <br /> of redoing our valuing system, the fact that we will not be <br /> part of a city-wide valuing system which protects us from <br /> challenges by the sheer numbers involved, and the fact that <br /> any change to our system has the potential for as many <br /> problems as the current system has for us. <br /> I look forward to discussing this matter with you in great <br /> detail and receiving your direction in order that we can do <br /> our best to bring our system into compliance with what the <br /> Department of Employee Relations is perceiving the structure <br /> should be as a result of the new pay equity law. <br /> DFP/MJS <br /> • <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.