The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSS1 2014 Benchmark Compensation Study PPP1 2014 Benchmark Compensation Study August 19, 2014 Mun[ca [runs, Director of Human Resources INicko[e Sutter, Human Resources Analyst "!' I�IIII � is 2014 2014 Benchmark Compensation Study August 19, 2014 Monica Irons, director of Human Resources Nickole Sutter, Human Resources Analyst 2014 Benchmark f Compensation Study August 19, 2014 Monica Irons, Director of Human Resources Nickole Sutter, Human Resources Analyst a 0 2014 Benchmark Compensation Study Purpose: The purpose of the 2014 Benchmark Compensation Deport is to provide objective, verifiable, total compensation data to help inform Council's development of labor relations objectives that will guide negotiations with City employee groups. • Major City Coal: To Sustain Essential Services, Infrastructure, and Fiscal Health • Fulfills contractual obligation with SLCCEA Key Players Totol Compensation Componernaof ToUlrompensaflon Geoffrey Rothman Compensation Committee Personnel Board ""40 Methodology The Relevant Labor Market (Survey Universe) • S.urvey Benchmark Classifications • Data Points r Y • r '� ations objectives that will guide negotiations with City employee groups. �r City Goal: To Sustain Essential Services, Infrastructure, and Fiscal Heall Is contractual obligation with SLOCEA Key Players Geoffrey Rothman Compensation Committee . Personnel Board S Tatar Compensation Components of Total Compensation IRSIIRANC!• .lij '..� ' ,I•: � [MVICitdVIICn to I Wn pin PPO RET�PEEIEN nean T .,seance RI emp.. crrnnslmrd e!remem =ucOg EPM2. u_'"M camp. S:J Y ^_[181 SALARY methodology • The Relevant Labor Market Survey Universe) • Survey Benchmark Classifications. Data Points Key Players • Geoffrey Rothman •Compensation Committee • Personnel Board Total Compensation Components of Total Compensation HEALTH INSURANCE: Employer contribution to family plan PPD health insurance SALARY I'vlax month! salary OTHER RAY. _ _ _ _ _Uniform paw or paramedic incentive RETIREMENT All employer contributions to retirement +including EPMC. deferred comp and social security) twetnoaoiogy • The Relevant Labor Market (Survey Universe), • Survey Benchmark Classifications • Data Points The Three Survey Universes The General Survey Universe The Police Survey Universe The Fire Survey Universe The General Survey Universe � �" '.m San Luis Obispo 45,878 $ 46,651 $ 525,000 26.5 93.3% 47.8 °% 359 Clovis 98,632 $ 63,983 $ 255,000 34.1 88.6% 29.5%- 482 County of SLO 274,804 $ 58,630 $ 415,000 39.4 88.9 %4 30.8% 2,509 Davis 65,993 $ 61,535 $ 455,000 25.2 96.0% 69.5% � 376 - Monterey 29,003 $ 63,072 $ 520,000 36.9 93.3% 48.3% 462 Napa 78,340 $ 62,505 $ 421,500 37.4 79.2% 27.4% 450 Paso Robles 30,556 $ 57,977 $ 358,000 35.3 85.0% 20.9% 185 Petaluma 58,921 $ 76,909 $ 447,500 40.3 89.6% 36.8% 308 Santa Barbara 89,639 $ 63,758 880,000 36.8 664.8% 41.9% 1,006 Santa Cruz 62,041 $ 62,755 _ $ 610,000 29.9 92.5% 50.8% 775 Santa Maria 101,459 $ 51,675 $ 263,500 28.6 60.6% 13.7 % 472 Santa Monica 91,812 $ 72,271 $ 978,500 40.4 95.2% 64.5% 1,996 Ventura 107734 $ 66,586 $ 411,000 39 88.4% 32.4 %4 600 The Police Survey Universe r San Loris Obispo 45,878 ' $ 46,651 $ 525,000 L 26.5 93.3% 478% Gilroy T 50,660 $ 78,842 $ 495,000 32.4 77.1% T 23.8% Monterey 29,003 $ 63,072 $ $ $ 520,000 421,500 447,500 35.9 37.4 40.3 93.3% 79.2% 89.6% 48.3% 27.4% 36.8% Napa 78,340 $ 52,505 Petaluma 58,921 $ 76,909 Pleasanton 72,338 $ 1183129 $ 750,000 40.5 95.1% 55.5% Salinas 154,484 $ $ 285,000 28.8 60.0 % 13.1% Santa Barbara 89,639 $ _50,587 63,758 $ $ $ 880,000 610,000 263,500 36.8 29.9 28.61 84.8% 92.5°! 60.6 %j 41.9% 50.8 %Q 13.7 % Santa Cruz _ 62,041 $ 62,755 Santa Maria 101,459 $ 51,675 859 2,76 462 450 308 522 545 1,005 775 472 The Fire Survey Universe ---No,. _ OF San Luis Chico Davis Napa Petaluma Pleasanton Salinas Santa Cruz Santa Maria moon daA 4 4 4 T 45,878 $ 46,651 $ 525,000 26.5 93.3% 478% 359 87,714 $ 42,896 $ 254:500 28.6 94.5% 33.2% 398 65,993 $ 61,535 $ 455,000 25.2 96.0% 69.5% 375 29,003 $ 63,072 $ 520,000 36.9 93.3% 48.3% 462 78,340 $ 62,505 $ 421,500 37.4 79.2% 27.4 %' 450 58,921 $ 76,909 $ 447,500 40.3 89.6% 36.8% 308 72,338 $ 118,129 $ 750,000 40.5 95.1% 55.5% 522 154,484 $ 50,587 $ 285,000 28.8 60.0% 13.1% 545 62,041 $ 62,755 $ 610,000 29.9 92.5% 50.8% 775 101,459 $ 51,675 $ 263,500 28.6 60.6%1 13.78/, 472 Ben. lassf*ficati"ons SLOCEA BENCHMARKS POLICE BENCHMARKS FIRE UVWCHMARKS .ana— g— In .l - .1):lwy:1[�Pl comrraclicaziarrs recmician .Fire Caplain Pmnr•.w— bc 11 - AWrxr' — Ill.— •PdfC amcer pi1p8) - FlrOwjhtef BUrERIny!eticr llumm�l ALmneumm Imnce Recency raurp• .FikE ILSGec[a - @r9 rrrr ll eAUn CpnpA 159F'1 -Ik�ry Lpipnrnl lkd�ne -WpM lrpymeM= Lrt Gyeialpl ["u9F) Management Police Management 5LOCEA Police MANAGEMENT SENCHMARRS LICE MANAGEMENT BENCHMARK rdmini> Ii -ArWrl r Pdice Sergeant • Cher Bul0ing QMCIel '� Dr.-p2 Oir... n, PiiNic lV'nrlu - DI. Cmr u1 Puhlic VV&ks Fi.. -r. clr-. k x Maragr -r - H — Rtaau svzrag& - Re[reingll Superusor . � -.cnnr Punncr Fire SLOCEA BENCHMARKS Accounting Assistant I I Administrative Assistant II Building Inspector II Code Enforcement Officer Engineer II Heavy Equipment Mechanic Laboratory Analyst (SBP) • Maintenance Worker III - streets • Network Administrator • Water Resource Recovery Facility Operator (SBP) • Water Treatment Plant Operator *(SBP) indicates Skills Baud Pay Classifications MANAGEMENT BENCHMARKS • Administrative Analyst • Chief Building Official • Deputy Director - Public Works • Director of Public Works • Finance Operations Manager • Human Resources Manager • Police Chief • Recreation Supervisor • Senior Planner POLICE BENCHMARKS • Communications Technician • Police Officer (Step 8) POLICE MANAGEMENT BENCHMARK • Police Sergeant FIRE BENCHMARKS • Fire Captain • Firefighter • Fire Inspector II SUMMARY OF THE RESULTS �I Results organized by employee group: - s LOC EA • Management • Public Safety (Police, Police Management, Fire) • Total Compensation and salary • Employer Contribution to Health •Employer Contribution to Retirement (Normal and Total Cost) • All data gathered in January 2014 SALARY AND TOTAL COMPENSATION SLQICEA $alery ns. T Mal Compansntgn P--, hom M..- ELOCE4 Clauifr=cetians X010. � t Irn � MANAGEMENT Belery +rs. Total rompenseoon Pereeni from Mee•en� Managemam Classifications IOR • uw� as o� P • • .ia,�5'Wr LOCAL PRIVATE SECTOR L1111?,I,U sr:.arsac+y: rA... umt PUBLIC SAFETY Salary vs. Toiai Compensanon Percent Prom Meelan_ pAl.. Sa lety C1. -1ic t, µas r a ni roa+ + aoaa - =,oya�a�l ��, =w��., �n,•�r�r ,� .�.so,a� 10 0% 5 0% Median -5-0% -10-0% -15-0% -K0% -25 0% Salary vs. Total Compensation Percent from Median: SLOCEA Classifications H a w - Oq 4A 41 VIC, 09 K* 1 '0 .0P XN Jb •Total Comp N Monthly Salary *Includes Special Districts Cie �'` 9 10,0% 5.0% -5.0% -10 0% -15.0% -20.0% Salary vs. Total Compensation Percent from Median: Management Classifications K CO �r ` 04 Q-P aZ9 Ii *Total Comp ■ 1,ionthly Salary 14. ■ ■ • *Total Comp ■ 1,ionthly Salary 14. ■ 01, c.� ■ • ■ 01, c.� 15.0% 10.0% 50% trledian -5.0% -10 0% -15 0% -20.0% Salary vs. Total Compensation Percent from Median: Public safety classifications Fire Inspector II i Firefighter • Fire Captain Police Officer *Total Comp ■ I.- Ionth1v Slalary 9 I Comn1LIniUitians Police Sergeant Tedinician Ieo *Total Comp m Monthly Salary LOCAL PRIVATE SECTOR Local Private Sector Salary! SLOCEA 3,0,000 - -E:D eRc., S6.000 Sarno - SO Local Private Sector Salary: Management 0 EDD H SB om 35.0W S4 IDW - S2 NO so $12000 510,000 - $6.000 - $4,000 s0 Local Private Sector Salary: SLOCEA I FFID ■HRCC -:� .. m .�P 11� R'N 0 4 1 �b 9", _q I\ 01, Z" 41 '0 1q, 09 09 A Ns 9�A ell, Cj S12000 - S10000 SO 000 - S6000 S4000 S2 000 S0 Pfi Local Private Sector Salary: Management ell fi 09 1§ •EDD HRCC -- SLO HEALTH INSURANCE Health Insurance Employer Contribution Percent .0% from Median (Family Coverage) .0% han — .0% ■ lB% l0% 10% ■ ..ox SLOCEA Mana —nr Police P.1k. fire Management HM, . PPt LOCAL PRIVATE SECTOR HEALTH Employee Only Health Coverage: • 48% of respondents contribute 100% • 47% of respondents contribute 50 -99 % • 5% of respondents contribute less than 5011/b Family Health Coverage: • 14% of respondents contribute 100% • 5511/o of respondents contribute 50 -99% • 41% of respondents contribute less than 510/b Health Insurance Employer Contribution Percent 20.0% 1 from Median (Family Coverage) 0.0% Median ■ - 10.0% ■ _20.0% - 30.0° 40.0% -50.0% SLOCEA Management Police Police Management ■ Fire HMO ■ PPO LOCAL PRIVATE SECTOR HEALTH Employee only Health Coverage: • 480/D of respondents contribute 100 % 47 % of respondents contribute 50- 99°x'0 5 % of respondents contribute less than 50 % Family Health Coverage: • 14% of respondents contribute 100 % 55 % of respondents contribute 50 -99 % 41 % of respondents contribute less than 50 % NORMAL & TOTAL COST Retirement Employer Contribution: Percent from Median a u'a ■ .wear, cos - =nns S.Ok }n n4 Petite W., Tkr 1 RETIRE RETIREE MEDICAL Employer Contribution to Retiree Medical= Percent from Median KN- a.e4 mnti aU]2n mrpmn rwn LOCAL PRIMATE SECTOR RETIREMENT 64% of respondents offer a defined contribution retirement plan 69% provide a match to a retirement plan 52% match 3% to 5% to a retirement plan 10.E% 5 -iO% -5.0 % - 1X0.0% _15 0% -20.0% Retirement Employer Contribution: Percent from Median Police Safety Tier 1 Miscellaneous Tier 1 Normal Cost ■ Total Cast Fire Safety Tier 1 15.0% 5.Oi'% Median -5.0% - 15.0 % -35.0% Employer Contribution to Retiree Medical: Percent from Median SLOCEA Management F1 :1110 Police Fire Management LOCAL PRIVATE SECTOR RETIREMENT • 54% of respondents offer a defined contribution retirement plan • 69% provide a match to a retirement plan • 52% match 3% to 5% to a retirement plan SUMMARY OF THE RESULTS • Total Compensation and salary: 50% benchmark classifications surveyed lag the market, 42% are at market, and 8% lead the market in total compensation. • Salary appears to be the primary contributor to benchmarks lagging the market. • Health and Retirement Contributions: Employer Contributions to Health and Retirement as a percent of total costs are at market depending upon health plan type. • Paid Time Off and Other Pay and Benefit Practices: Detail is available in Appendices F and G. NEXT STEPS The Compensation Philosopy Mates that the City is committed to providing competitive compensation. In determining "competitive" Council will consider: • Financial sustainabilit • Community acceptability • Relevant labor market • Internal relationships • other relevant factors •Labor Relations Objectives (September 23, 2014) - Data is a 'flashlight` that can be used by all interested parties to illuminate discussions about compensation. 2014 Benchmark f Compensation Study August 19, 2014 Monica Irons, Director of Human Resources Nickole Sutter, Human Resources Analyst a 0