Gilroy
– When employees make nearly as much as the boss, it’s time for
a raise, say city managers angling to substantially boost their
earning potential.
Gilroy – When employees make nearly as much as the boss, it’s time for a raise, say city managers angling to substantially boost their earning potential.
On Monday, city council will review a proposed shift in “salary schedules” that would ensure non-union managers always earn 15 percent more than their subordinates, and 10 percent more than peers in surrounding cities.
One city councilman calls the proposal “ludicrous,” but city officials say better pay ranges are the only way to ensure Gilroy can recruit and retain talented finance directors, police captains and other top administrators.
“There are police sergeants making more than captains with a little bit of overtime involved,” said Human Resources Director LeeAnn McPhillips, who stands to get a $13,788 raise under the new system. “That does affect the morale of the captains and our ability to recruit to that position, and that was one of the driving forces in getting this started in the first place. But we wanted to look at the whole picture – not just an isolated situation.”
Police captains, who are among roughly 40 so-called “exempt” employees, would receive an immediate 10 percent raise under the new system. About half the exempt employees would receive instant raises retroactive to January, at a combined cost this fiscal year of $102,000.
Annually, the city would be on the hook for an additional $206,000 in salary and benefit payments, with the potential for up to $383,000 in yearly costs once all managers max out their earning potential.
The new system would align pay for department heads so that the city’s community development director, fire chief and human resources director would all have a salary cap of $174,000. They would work toward that figure based on annual performance and, under the new system, raises linked to union pay bumps.
Under the so-called “best of the best” formula, city managers would be entitled to pay hikes in step with the highest raise negotiated by any of the city’s three labor unions. The wage increase, which would be subject to council approval, aims to prevent a narrowing of the salary gap between managers and subordinates.
“To say you should have an arbitrary 15 percent (more) because you’re the brass is ludicrous,” said City Councilman Craig Gartman. “People should be paid based on merit and what they contribute to the community.”
The proposed pay range increases were presented to council in recent weeks and were inserted in the council’s “consent calendar,” a roster of items that elected leaders approve en masse without public debate.
Gartman said he plans to pull the pay range proposal out of the consent calendar and oppose it in a separate vote. He questioned why a matter of such import would appear on the consent calendar, given the “many closed sessions we had and the length and number of questions that were asked by council members.”
It remains unclear who decided to place the pay increases on the consent calendar. Normally, Mayor Al Pinheiro is responsible for placing items on that portion of the council’s meeting agenda, Gartman said. The mayor was out of town Friday and unavailable for comment, and City Administrator Jay Baksa was out of the office.
Salary range increases are normally handled as part of the consent calendar, said Assistant City Administrator Anna Jatczak, whose salary cap would rise from $156,000 to $174,000 under the new pay scale.
Jatczak, who joined the city late last year, would be “undervalued” and entitled to an immediate raise under the new pay formula.
“However, it’s recommended that I get a zero increase because I’m brand new,” she explained.
But she and about 20 other “exempt” managers who miss out on initial raises could see pay bumps within a matter of months.
The city is currently negotiating with the 135-member union that covers the majority of City Hall employees, and will begin negotiations with the 40-member fire union this summer. Negotiations with the 62-member police union are scheduled for 2008.
In Gilroy, it is standard for police chiefs, fire division heads and other top managers to represent the city in negotiations with labor unions. Jatczak dismissed the suggestion that linking managers’ pay to that of subordinates would compromise the judgment of department heads during negotiations.
“I could see where there might be that perception,” she said, “but when we go into negotiations, it’s in good faith and not for any sort of personal gain.”
