Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View City Council August 8, 2005 <br />Regular Meeting Page 17 <br />Council Member Stigney agreed that this is a typical package based on industry standards and <br />noted that this is not a private industry. He stated that they have had layoffs in the Park and <br />Recreation department in addition to the displacement of a Building Inspector. He stated that the <br />Human Resources Committee is currently reviewing some of these items and he is surprised to <br />see some of this included in the package being recommended for approval. He stated that he <br />would prefer to see this more clearly defined before taking action on it. He stated that the listing <br />showing dollars amounts does not show the amount of flex time accumulated by these <br />individuals and he would like to know that number. He explained that the way he understands <br />the resolution the termination date for each employee would be established based on their flex <br />time balance, which means that the employee would not be terminated until all of their flex time <br />has been used. He expressed concerns stating that it is his belief that the termination date should <br />be the actual date that the employee is laid off. He stated that if the City wants to pay the <br />employee for their flex time then the City should consider that as a separate item but the <br />termination date should be reflected as the actual last date the employee worked. He stated that if <br />the City wants to ask someone to stay on to complete a certain amount of work then that could be <br />addressed at that time noting that their end date would be the actual date of termination. <br />Council Member Flaherty stated that he comes from the private sector and was very surprised at <br />all of this noting that he had no idea of the dollars involved in something like this. He stated that <br />this does not include the flextime. <br />City Administrator Ulrich stated that the numbers actually do include the flextime because it <br />carries the employees out to March 1St <br />Council Member Stigney stated that they should not carry anyone to March lst, the City should <br />only carry them to the day of termination noting that if the City wants to pay them for their flex- <br />time address it as a separate item. <br />City Administrator Ulrich referenced the accrual of vacations and confirmed that it is true that <br />the employees would continue to accrue vacation and sick leave during the period of time that <br />they would be kept on to complete the shutdown process. <br />Council Member Stigney stated that it would also continue to accrue time that would help to pay <br />their health insurance for a longer period of time. He stated that he firmly believes that an <br />employees' termination date should be the final date worked. <br />Golf Course Manager acknowledged Council's concerns noting that it does look like a large <br />number adding that Staff did put in all of the hours with the benefits attached to the hours they <br />worked for their health care insurance and if it is cutoff they would actually get less earning and <br />should get the time paid back to them as paid time off. She assured the Council that they did <br />work the hours and it is not like the Council is giving the employees something they haven't <br />earned. She stated that they have put in the effort and time adding that they would be paying <br />• them less for the time they have earned and to give them less that what they have earned would <br />not be right. <br />